I’ve never had a this problem (and hope I never do). Pills do exactly nothing to me dependence wise, and the rational part of me can’t fathom why it would be attractive since it basically amounts to being a zombie. Obviously rationality isn’t the dominant factor, but it still baffles me somewhat. Perhaps that is due to my physical innate resistance to the effects of opiate painkillers.
1 Like
Yup! Very much. Was your question about the compound?
1 Like
Alcohol does nothing for me either, which is the only reason why I don’t drink. Seriously, I can’t even fathom how people can enjoy alcohol. All it does is make me slower until I’m nauseous. Then it’s either puke or stop drinking and feel like shit. Must be lacking some enzyme or something.
@unreal24278 was asking me about it. I didn’t know so I told him you probably would. I thought it was the same compound in Androsol. Could be wrong.
EDIT:
“You’ve probably seen it marketed as 1-andro after androstenedione/androstenediol and associated analogues were banned.”
Oh, yeah. I’ve heard this one many many times. In the step programs, that’s a 12th step thing, “carrying the message to other alcoholics/addicts who still suffer”. Those are best done in pairs. Me and a buddy, me with 18 years, and him with like 30+, still get each other’s backs when someone calls either of us for help.
He sounds pretty determined, and if there’s one thing I’ve learned in these years it’s Never underestimate the will to live.
1 Like
Aware in vitro models don’t account for environmental variables and/or protective mechansisms. But how can we discount the newly emerging data conducted on human subjects indicative anabolic steroids may be implicated with subclinical cognitive decline, esp visuospacial cogntive function. Upon analysis these alterations in comparison to controls remain significant (P value greater than 0.05) when accounting for variables like education, socioeconomic status, concurrent drug use etc.
Given there is a small, shitty body of data (referring to rodent models, in vitro models) in conjunction with preliminary data conducted on humans, is this not something perhaps we should be concerned about.
Perhaps that’s the point? Allows one to shut themselves off from the depressing confines of reality.
Opiates don’t give me that euphoria people talk of either, but they do allow me to “not care” about anything.
Negative side effects like itching and nausea outweigh any recreational benefit I could ever possibly perceive though.
I always found alcohol was fantastic for “smoothening the edges” and making otherwise irritating/depressing aspects of life just a little bit more bearable (acutely). Drinking like that is a really slippery slope though. I rarely consume alcohol nowadays
1 Like
Yes, though many of these designer compounds do have a/a ratios as listed on paper as they were candidates for pharmacuetical drug development back during the era of steroid development. These ratios are flawed as a/a ratios on paper merely pertain to the ability for a drug to stimulate hypertrophy within the levator ani muscle (anabolic) and prostate (androgenic)… within rats.
As rats have different metabolic pathways/antioxidant profiles and what what occurs within a rodent doesn’t always correlate with human data (i.e mesterolone being a potent anabolic in rats, but being subject to inactivation via 3b-hsd in humans).
As to site specific binding, are we referring to like… selective site specificity? Because I don’t think we have data regarding this even with modern anabolics. Sure, we know some compounds don’t have affinity for the 5a reductase enzyme, aromatase etc and we can still go on this with designer compounds (if it’s a DHT derivitave won’t form a 5a reduced metabolite and won’t have affinity for the ER etc). Some are less potent 11b hsd inhibitors and whatnot, but to say “hey testosterone has less affinity for binding to AR within cardiac myocytes in comparison to drostanolone”… I don’t think we have that kind of (reliable, not in vitro models exposed to absurd concentrations) data yet.
As to HPTA recovery
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/add.12850
Many were still hypogonadal following AAS abstinence for 3-26 months. Sure, recovery can take longer than that (appears to be, on average around 3-6 months)
But what about 2.5 years abstinence? Nearly 30% of former users had clinically low testosterone, I don’t believe this is a casual correlation.
#yeet
#floop
#roidz=smalldik (I hear that a lot, so it must be true)
1 Like
Too tired to read science today. Had to wake up at 4am and speak to tech guys with all their coding jargon and shit. Brain’s about to explode lol.
I trust your ability to interpret these studies. Break it down for me please:
What was the median recovery time or did 30% take 2.5 years to recover?
Were they secondary or primary?
Neither, rather hormonal concentrations procured from former users were substantially lower than controls. Avg time from last use was 2.5 years. 30% were hypogonadal
I’d assume the hypogonadism was secondary in nature, as is the case the vast majority of the time with ASIH
1 Like
Absolutely. I think that is without doubt the best. Solo exposes you to danger that you wouldn’t encounter with a battle buddy.
It was difficult for him, and before the relapse I counseled him to take someone along (I felt I couldn’t do it at the time because I had no real idea how to handle it). But you are correct, he is determined. And appreciate the wishes. I’m pretty libertarian when it comes to “light” drugs, but I can’t stand to see what the hard shit does to people.
1 Like
Wow. That makes me so sad. It was such a cool place.
The only place that compares to what you’re talking about is Michigan. NYC and San Francisco are a close second. And the U.S. has 10 times the population of Australia, so we’re going to have more cases. Where I live we’re mostly open. There are still some limitations, but over all not bad. Given that even the WHO changed it’s tune and ‘said don’t lock down’. That lock downs are a last resort and should only be implemented as such.
This is my problem with the whole thing. Authoritarianism never happens for no reason. It’s when the authoritarians take a reason and run wild with it. And that’s what seems to be happening in Australia.
Is there any back lash? Are there elections coming up with more liberty minded people running or is it just a state of massive group think? If so, is there any vibe that people will vote out this class of politicians? Because it sounds like to me, they all need to go.
Even when adjusted for populace the USA has a far higher caseload/death rate. The reason the USA has failed to contain covid-19 directly pertains to failure on the behalf of the federal government to set up adequate policies regarding testing, public restrictions and whatnot. Brazil and much of Europe are now enduring similar outcomes, though the USA has probably had the worst/most inadequate response out of all first world, secular states
As much as I hate to admit it, Australia recorded zero cases nationwide yesterday. If it goes to show a brief/semi-prolonged period of intensive lockdown can eliminate the spread for prolonged periods of time, perhaps Victoria will have set a precedent as opposed to going down in history as the laughing stock of the world.
Regardless of the eventual outcome,
I am firm on my belief that Victoria went too far regarding police conduct during lockdown.
Australia isn’t under an authoritarian regime. Our government currently caters towards authoritative rule, but we are by no means tyrannical/under the threat of dictatorship (despite what’s been going on with the unfair trials revolving around journalists/whistleblowers).
If we were a dictatorship/hardline tyriannical police state I wouldn’t be able to talk about my disdain towards the Aussie government on here without getting arrested.
What is different between Aus and the USA however is that we don’t have a right to “freedom of speech”. I disagree with many policies/suspicious legislature enacted by the Australian government and I think it’s pathetic we don’t have a federal ICAC. I also find it worrying that we are slipping rapidly regarding our corruption ranking, however we remain one of the most developed, secular civilised countries this world has to offer.
I might be pissed off about our nanny state madness, excessive policing over individualistic actions etc but our government isn’t an authoritarian, China type regime.
Is there any backlash? Towards the end of the lockdown riots broke out. The Victorian premieres office windows were broken, death threats were sent to numerous politicians/health ministers over our border restrictions.
Unfortunately, due the “laid back” nature of the Australian populace (NOT the government), we tend to just shrug and do as we’re told. I suppose it’s a byproduct of once being a convict colony? Australians tend to blindly believe the government knows what’s best and thus bends over whenever our government decides to instate punitive/unfair policy under the pretence “well it’s the government, what can I do”.
Both major parties differ in certain ideological beliefs but are similar regarding slightly catering towards authoritative rule as opposed to libertarianism. You’d have to vote for a centre right, libertarian party like the liberal democrats or a left leaning libertarianistic party like the reason party if you were more liberty focused.
Admittedly at times our strict policies have worked out for the better. Our strict gun policy has largely kept rates of gun violence down. Guns are primarily owned by law abaiding citizens and to a smaller extent, criminals. God forbid criminals actually use the firearms in their possession for the purpose of violence however. When this occurs LE cracks down very hard, and firearm related offences are very steep here. Even airsoft guns are classified as firearms
A loophole exists wherein (VIC and QLD) pre 1899 muzzloading revolvers don’t require a license (and in QLD they don’t require registration either). I find it interesting that in VIC owning a sword, throwing knives, a baton, nunchucks etc is illegal/a felony… but a muzzle loading revolver is perfectly fine if manufacturer prior to 1899. Are you kidding me? As if the government thinks nunchucks are more dangerous than an actual firearm, or an airsoft gun for that matter.
It’s not as if you can’t use guns btw. Going skeet shooting/to a shooting range is perfectly acceptable. It’s not common though as shooting guns isn’t considered a popular pastime. If you are semi rural like I am (or outright rural) a lot of people own guns to keep foxes from maiming/murdering livestock. With adequate reasoning it’s not difficult to procure a firearm so long as mental health status is adequate.
Elsewhere/everywhere firearms are exempt to licensing/registration if they’re pre 1899 single shot muzzleloading rifles/shotguns.
You got that right. However, it doesn’t even have to be this. It can just be a lot more authoritarian in certain areas. You notice how many posts I deleted in the other thread when I felt I was too close to revealing my identity or even location, right?
China’s not that authoritarian anymore. The media is only focusing on the extremes. You have to look at the kinds of laws. The law pertaining to national security are very strict, but NOT much more strict than other countries in Asia. So far the media is only reporting on the stuff that happens when the national security law is invoked.
Lots of them are pretty lax, even more lax than Australia. For others, no one bothers to enforce them like prostitution. There are less regulations and less welfare than most Western countries. My wife’s province didn’t even get government handouts during the lockdowns. Cigarettes and alcohol are dirt cheap. Business regulations are less strict in some aspects than even the US.
If you go to China, you’ll realize people don’t even stop their cars when the lights turn red in some provinces. It’s a fucking free for all when it comes to traffic. No one cares about the traffic lights. I have nightmares of crossing the road there sometimes lol.
However, this is in a time of peace and relative prosperity even despite the COVID outbreak. If shit really fucks up economically, for example, and the strict laws are enforced, then people will be really fucked. You’ve seen the videos of people being locked up in their houses in Wuhan at the start of this pandemic. It was just a small proportion of the the entire population, though, but the media was acting like it was happening everywhere in a country of 1.3 billion people.
Again, however, this is what can happen on a national scale if something worse happens or a REALLY tyrannical regime takes control one day so freedom of the individual in the law has to be treasured and never be taken for granted.
Victoria’s restrictions weren’t that far off from this.
You were ordered to stay at home, but could leave home for one of three reasons
- food/groceries
- doctors appointments
- work
You had to have proof you were going to work/to the doctors. Many workplaces mandated employees worked from home, and checkpoints were set up everywhere to ensure you weren’t leaving without merit.
With groceries, the store had to be the closest one to home (or within a 5km radius). If you were caught outside the radius/leaving without merit or doing anything wrong it was an immediate 2000$ (or something like that) fine. Having guests over incurred a 20,000$ fine. Police didn’t use discretion administering fines (i.e threatening two tired old ladies sitting on a bench with massive fines if they didn’t move, as sitting on a bench didn’t count as exercise)
Outdoor exercise was allowed at 1hr/day within 5km from home. Police would stop and question people, administer fines whenever possible. There were also numerous cases of police assaulting people who broke laws, including one guy (non-aggressive, though mentally ill) who had his head smashed (back of his head stomped on, while down and out for the count by police… it’s on video) in and is now in a vegetative state. The police got off Scott free, with the Victorian MP refusing to scold such actions.
The police have made millions in covid fines, though many are now being taken to court given the exorbitant costs associated with paying these fines.
Door to door spot checks were conducted, as was drone surveillance. I fear the drones will now be a commonplace tactic. All the fears about VIC becoming a police state weren’t exactly unjustified, though these measures appear to have been temporary.
Edit: doctors offices largely switched over to Telehealth, so one had to prove a doctors apptment was in person too
Then the state government in power drafted the omnibus bill, which allowed police to indefinitely detain anyone deemed a threat, and the definition of threat was left up to police interpretation. People were being arrested and having their homes raided over Facebook posts… it was chaos
The opposing party got our current premier to drop the police detainment powers from the bill, but the bill passed with amendments. Public servants can now be granted the powers of a police officer as needed despite not having the required training.
There was also a curfew. No one allowed out the house after 8pm/before 5am
1 Like
It was the same everywhere in South Asia, even stricter. No curfews in most places, however. In some places, they deployed the military to surround high density living areas with large amounts of cases with barb wire. Singapore locked up their 200,000 migrant workers in their worker dorms for months while locking down the rest of it’s citizens.
The reason why some of the bigger countries in Asia were more lax was because they don’t have the funds to fully shut down and give people handouts or their economies would crash, nor did they have the manpower to enforce the law when it came to breaking the rules. India, Indonesia and Malaysia’s economies would have crashed if they further prolonged their lockdowns.
Being able to lockdown may be shitty, but looking at it from another perspective, it’s a luxury for richer countries. The poor countries simply can’t afford it and even more people die because of the standard of their healthcare. Perhaps we should focus on looking on the “bright” side.
Wuhan, however, was a lot WORSE. Some people literally had their doors welded shut so they couldn’t come out by military personnel. You could only get 1 representative per apartment block or something to go get necessities once a week.
The rest of China was like Asia, but they also used tech to monitor movement. I think only Singapore and HK tried to implement this but they did not have the same kind of app that most of the population uses to do it effectively.
Some shit was pretty funny, though.
It’s would have been done here if we had the tech and the expertise.
Relax. It will never happen to you guys. Remember I told you at the start of the pandemic that all these were the government temporarily invoking emergency powers already afforded to them in such times of crisis in your Constitution, like all Commonwealth/ex-Commonwealth Countries?
Lots of people in the media obviously don’t understand this so they spread fear out of ignorance. Some just deliberately omit it. I even had Brit friends shocked that the government could lock them down even when I explained that all this power the government had to lockdown MY country came from THEIR’S lol.
Your Constitution will also prevent this from ever happening.
1 Like
Same story in East Germany
East Germany was a country, Victoria is a state. At times the federal government can use executive power to override state legislature.
If Victoria became truly tyrannical the federal government would theoretically intervene. The federal government very rarely interferes with state/territory based legislature. Last time they intervened over state/territory passed legislature was when the ACT tried to make gay marriage legal. Then the federal government legalised it a few years later regardless.
Another time I can think of was when the NT passed a bill legalising euthanasia in 1995. Euthanasia still isn’t legal in the NT as a result, but it is in VIC and should be soon in WA.
I believe the federal government is also thinking of intervening with Victoria’s pledge to join the belt and road initiative.
Currently the federal government is putting immense pressure on states to open up intrastate travel. Whilst Australia doesn’t appear to be a country steeped in nationalism, state relationships appear to be of a highly nationalistic nature. As a result covid-19 has been highly politicised l, with states appearing to repeatedly one up another regarding covid statistics, border agreements/closures and more.
What’s worse, during covid hospital capacities/medical resource availability dwindled dramatically despite an abysmally low case load (being cautious). As a result there was a case of which I don’t remember the specifics wherein a patient from one state required urgent care that was only available at a hospital interstate. Both states from what I recall had very low case loads. To be granted access to a hospital/rooms the process is arduous, tiring and perhaps excessively cautious. A permit was applied to grant this patient interstate travel and a room at the hospital over state lines. Said permit was refused and the patient died… Case load was minimal to none in both states, as was communicable transmission yet access to interstate medical resources for a CRITICALLY ill patient was withheld. Because the states currently harbour an “all for one and one for all” motto. Screw people across state lines…
1 Like
Not theoretically. It’s a given.