I wrote a paper about steroids, I should have put more time into it. I’d have liked to research it more and gone deeply into the endocrinology on the subject. Read it, tell me what you think. Tell me if any of my information is wrong, or, poorly stated. Perhaps, one of you guys would like to coauthor it? If we get something actually worth reading I’d host it on my website, and I think it might make a good introductory piece.
You need to site this:most individuals are surprised at the actual definition and do not realize that perhaps as many of 40% of people they know are indeed on steroids.
Steroids are not terprenoids. They are cholesterol based and do not have isoprene units.
Your anabolic chain paragraphs are flawed. Look at the research article by Bhasin et all. Testosterone at 600mg weekly increased FFM WITHOUT any exercise.
This entire paragraph sucks [quote]
Phase 2 is the tissue gains increased sensitivity to anabolic hormones, through ‘growth factor expression.’ Growth factor expression is the exposition of cell receptors in order to prime themselves for oncoming hormonal binding. Without this priming of receptors, the hormones cannot take effect, for they will have nothing to bond to. This is accomplished by, changing the density of receptors in the specific muscle, where it needs to initiate repair. This includes, androgen, IGF-1, MGF, and insulin receptors. This receptor density regulation, also prevents anabolism from stimulating areas that don’t need it, for these receptors in those regions are not readily exposed. This density is as much of a regulator as the hormone serum levels themselves.
[/quote]
I am not sure if you just need to re-word it, or completely take it out. Nothing said in here seems correct, unless your wording is just bad.
What do you mean by this?: because synthetic testosterone provides more ‘growth factors’ around the cell,
[quote] Thus, the number of receptors it can bind with are the greatest determinant of how potent it may be. [/quote] That is not the definition of potent.
You did not cite your case against roid rage. YOU NEED TO CITE THAT.
[quote] Arguably, the least favorable side effects of exogenous anabolic steroid use is the effect it has on the HPTA, [/quote] You just mentioned all the REAL dangers of steroids yet, HPTA suppression is most serious? Really?
Aromatase, an enzyme is responsible for T–>E Conversion not the HPTA.
I had to stop reading. This paper was not very good. You cite Anabolics 2006 and Wikipedia, both of which are bogus. You are trying to hard to be scientific, without actually understanding the science yourself.
Hope that helped.
[quote]Detroitlionsbaby wrote:
You need to site this:most individuals are surprised at the actual definition and do not realize that perhaps as many of 40% of people they know are indeed on steroids.
Steroids are not terprenoids. They are cholesterol based and do not have isoprene units.
Your anabolic chain paragraphs are flawed. Look at the research article by Bhasin et all. Testosterone at 600mg weekly increased FFM WITHOUT any exercise.
This entire paragraph sucks
Phase 2 is the tissue gains increased sensitivity to anabolic hormones, through ‘growth factor expression.’ Growth factor expression is the exposition of cell receptors in order to prime themselves for oncoming hormonal binding. Without this priming of receptors, the hormones cannot take effect, for they will have nothing to bond to. This is accomplished by, changing the density of receptors in the specific muscle, where it needs to initiate repair. This includes, androgen, IGF-1, MGF, and insulin receptors. This receptor density regulation, also prevents anabolism from stimulating areas that don’t need it, for these receptors in those regions are not readily exposed. This density is as much of a regulator as the hormone serum levels themselves.
I am not sure if you just need to re-word it, or completely take it out. Nothing said in here seems correct, unless your wording is just bad.
What do you mean by this?: because synthetic testosterone provides more ‘growth factors’ around the cell,
Thus, the number of receptors it can bind with are the greatest determinant of how potent it may be. That is not the definition of potent.
You did not cite your case against roid rage. YOU NEED TO CITE THAT.
Arguably, the least favorable side effects of exogenous anabolic steroid use is the effect it has on the HPTA, You just mentioned all the REAL dangers of steroids yet, HPTA suppression is most serious? Really?
Aromatase, an enzyme is responsible for T–>E Conversion not the HPTA.
I had to stop reading. This paper was not very good. You cite Anabolics 2006 and Wikipedia, both of which are bogus. You are trying to hard to be scientific, without actually understanding the science yourself.
Hope that helped.
[/quote]
At least you were honest. What do you mean Anabolics 2006 was bogus? As a work of material, or a bogus citation?
I wrote this for a remedial biology class I’ve been needing to take to graduate. So, science isn’t my area of expertise, however, I’d like to learn about physiology, anabolism and the endocrinology of muscle growth. I read quite a bit on the subject, but perhaps didn’t take some of it in correctly or word it effectively.
“”“As delved into previously, anabolic steroids are steroid hormones that induce masculine effects. They provide heightened amounts of synthetic versions of the preexisting male sex hormones into the blood stream. Thus, the body goes into exaggerated creation of male processes and characteristics because of this deluge.”“”
Drop the deluge hype. You imply that all anabolic steroids are synthetic. That is simply not the case. Note that testosterone esters are not active hormones until the body strips the ester groups off of the testosterone esters. The result is testosterone, bio-identical testosterone. Some inject testosterone base in a water suspention, which is painful. Testosterone ester injections are a time release testosterone delivery system and the testosterone released is not a synthetic anabolic steroid.
“”“Increased virility comes about because of the augmented spermatogenesis effect that steroids have on the testicles.”“”
Absolute rubbish. The opposite is true. Do more research.
“”“occurs in some cases of steroid use, especially among adolescents”“”
do not go there
“”“highly oily skin due to increased hormonal production and excretion”“”
‘increased hormonal production’ is wrong, should be ‘increased hormone levels’
Who excretes hormones? You probably wanted to say secretes, but that is wrong in this context.
“”“An increase in cholesterol is the primary factor of this because of the creation of testosterone by means of introducing lipids into the blood stream in the form of oil.”“”
Are you sure or you found someone making that claim. When guys with low T start injecting TRT dose of testosterone esters in oil, they very often have major decreases in LDL and HDL does not go down. This fact pokes a big hole in that claim. One would have to take some subjects and have them inject vege oil to demonstrate the claim. Has that research been done? Injecting a couple of ml’s of [cholesterol free] vege oil per week is trivial compared to dietary fat intake.
“”“This means if a person raises their testosterone by exogenous means, the HPTA will increase estrogen production to match and then decrease domestic testosterone levels to counteract.”“”
Absolute rubbish.
As T levels are increased, the pituitary releases less gonadotrophins. This does not decrease testosterone levels… the injections are increasing testosterone levels. Do not confuse domestic/foreign with Endogeny (biology) - Wikipedia
“”““Hypo gonadism””" is one word
Mental illness from steroid use is not a fact. You seem to be trying to find supporting details for a hot topic. You are myth building. Depression and suicide in males also have a strong link to relationships with females and doing tax returns. If steroid use can lead to hypogonadism, you could discuss some of the common effects of hypogonadism. Otherwise your linkage bogus. If someone takes their life in a situation of this type, they have a lot of problems that have nothing to do with steroid use and some people with serious problems do try steroid use. They also probably drink beer. Are there any cases of people getting depressed and killing themselves, or others, who do not use steroids? Why should steroid users be immune to mental problems?
“”“The reasons for anabolic steroid induced baldness however are not fully understood and therefore cannot be prevented. However, some have postulated it to be to due to heightened oil excretion.”“”
Wrong.
I can’t go any further. Your wording is torturous.
If you actually read that section. I basically say, that it has been linked, but its not conclusive, nor is it directly related to.
Anabolic steroids themselves do not cause depression, quite the opposite, they increase confidence levels and hopefully, allow the user to achieve physical goals that heighten their self esteem.
The effect of comedown can be so acute, that this depression which comes on quickly and abruptly for some, may aid existing mental inequities in a prompt suicide shortly after discontinuation.
steroids themselves cannot be seen as the primary culprit [in the suicide of a user,] but rather the comedown from them as an aid to depression.
Many if not most users never have suicidal thoughts following steroid discontinuation, while some kill themselves, thus in the end suicide propensity truly depends on the individual.
[quote]“”“highly oily skin due to increased hormonal production and excretion”“”
‘increased hormonal production’ is wrong, should be ‘increased hormone levels’
Who excretes hormones? You probably wanted to say secretes, but that is wrong in this context.[/quote] Sweating IS excretion. Your hormones are produced, then passed thru, broken down, and the remainder is excreted as oil on your skin as sweat.
[quote]“”“This means if a person raises their testosterone by exogenous means, the HPTA will increase estrogen production to match and then decrease domestic testosterone levels to counteract.”“”
Absolute rubbish.
http://en.wikipedia.org/...ry-gonadal_axis
As T levels are increased, the pituitary releases less gonadotrophins. This does not decrease testosterone levels… the injections are increasing testosterone levels. Do not confuse domestic/foreign with E - Wikipedia… [/quote]
You’re being argumentative just to be argumentative.
You just said in your rebuttal what I said in my paper. Yes, perhaps, endogenous would have been a better term than domestic. I think that statement is pretty clear, that your body lowers its OWN production, because the user is augmenting the test levels exogenously. That snippet is fairly direct in expressing that. Where does the ‘absolute rubbish’ derive from?
[quote]3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
At least you were honest. What do you mean Anabolics 2006 was bogus? As a work of material, or a bogus citation?
I wrote this for a remedial biology class I’ve been needing to take to graduate. So, science isn’t my area of expertise, however, I’d like to learn about physiology, anabolism and the endocrinology of muscle growth. I read quite a bit on the subject, but perhaps didn’t take some of it in correctly or word it effectively.[/quote]
The author is a joke. No one in their right mind would consider that a quality tertiary source. If your prof doesn’t care than you might as well leave it in, but just so you know for your knowledge.
Sorry if my post came off as mean, but I was as you said, just trying to be honest. I think you should take out some of the “science” parts. If your teacher has any knowledge in physiology, he will mark you down. Good luck.
[quote]Detroitlionsbaby wrote:
3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
At least you were honest. What do you mean Anabolics 2006 was bogus? As a work of material, or a bogus citation?
I wrote this for a remedial biology class I’ve been needing to take to graduate. So, science isn’t my area of expertise, however, I’d like to learn about physiology, anabolism and the endocrinology of muscle growth. I read quite a bit on the subject, but perhaps didn’t take some of it in correctly or word it effectively.
The author is a joke. No one in their right mind would consider that a quality tertiary source. If your prof doesn’t care than you might as well leave it in, but just so you know for your knowledge.
Sorry if my post came off as mean, but I was as you said, just trying to be honest. I think you should take out some of the “science” parts. If your teacher has any knowledge in physiology, he will mark you down. Good luck.[/quote]
Where did you derive your knowledge base from on this subject? I just want to know, because I’m sure we’re reading the same sources…or…perhaps not. Maybe I should read what you read.
[quote]Steroids are not terprenoids. They are cholesterol based and do not have isoprene units.[/quote] A steroid is a terpenoid lipid. They are cholesterol based, that’s why they are a lipid.
What body part produces aromatase? The liver? Which body part tells the producer to produce when test levels are “too high”? I thought the HPTA controlled this. Where does the message come from? Or is it all just related to the liver processing the excess test?
Done.
[quote]3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
Where did you derive your knowledge base from on this subject? I just want to know, because I’m sure we’re reading the same sources, or perhaps not.
Steroids are not terprenoids. They are cholesterol based and do not have isoprene units. A steroid is a terpenoid lipid. They are cholesterol based, that’s why they are a lipid.[/quote]
A terprenoid is based of isoprene units. Look at cholesterol
that in no way, is an isoprene backbone.
This is an isoprene unit
Maybe you meant to say, is derived from a Terprenoid. But once it is reduced by HMG-CoA it is no longer a terpene.
[quote]3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
Detroitlionsbaby wrote:
3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
At least you were honest. What do you mean Anabolics 2006 was bogus? As a work of material, or a bogus citation?
I wrote this for a remedial biology class I’ve been needing to take to graduate. So, science isn’t my area of expertise, however, I’d like to learn about physiology, anabolism and the endocrinology of muscle growth. I read quite a bit on the subject, but perhaps didn’t take some of it in correctly or word it effectively.
The author is a joke. No one in their right mind would consider that a quality tertiary source. If your prof doesn’t care than you might as well leave it in, but just so you know for your knowledge.
Sorry if my post came off as mean, but I was as you said, just trying to be honest. I think you should take out some of the “science” parts. If your teacher has any knowledge in physiology, he will mark you down. Good luck.
Where did you derive your knowledge base from on this subject? I just want to know, because I’m sure we’re reading the same sources…or…perhaps not. Maybe I should read what you read.
Steroids are not terprenoids. They are cholesterol based and do not have isoprene units. A steroid is a terpenoid lipid. They are cholesterol based, that’s why they are a lipid.
Aromatase, an enzyme is responsible for T–>E Conversion not the HPTA.
What body part produces aromatase? The liver? Which body part tells the producer to produce when test levels are “too high”? I thought the HPTA controlled this. Where does the message come from? Or is it all just related to the liver processing the excess test?[/quote]
There is no “message”. Enzymes act off concentration of substrates.
DLB, what books do I need to read. Honestly, I’m not trying to be a sophomoric jackass. What should I read instead of Anabolics 2006. I want to learn this subject to a respectable level.
[quote]3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
DLB, what books do I need to read. Honestly, I’m not trying to be a sophomoric jackass. What should I read instead of Anabolics 2006. I want to learn this subject to a respectable level.[/quote]
Textbooks. Medicinal biochemistry by Smith, Marks, Lieberman is a great start. If you really want to get into the nitty gritty, an organic chemistry book and after that a med chem book. Also an advanced endocrine physiology textbook and a pathology textbook.
[quote]Detroitlionsbaby wrote:
3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
DLB, what books do I need to read. Honestly, I’m not trying to be a sophomoric jackass. What should I read instead of Anabolics 2006. I want to learn this subject to a respectable level.
Textbooks. Medicinal biochemistry by Smith, Marks, Lieberman is a great start. If you really want to get into the nitty gritty, an organic chemistry book and after that a med chem book. Also an advanced endocrine physiology textbook and a pathology textbook.
[/quote]
I was wondering, DLB, are you a bio/bio-chem major or something?
Just curious.
Luis Santiago Salinas III??
one of them fancy beaners, ey?
not xenophobic, just hilarious