Guest guest Posted July 16, 2001 Report Share Posted July 16, 2001 > From: " Matt " <mlevy@...> > > Matt asks: > > ***Are these products safe? I have read (anecdotally) that > prohormones have all the side-effects of steroids (i.e., gyno and > suppressed T levels) without anywhere near the positive effects... > seems like a bad trade off if true. Prohormones that end in " dione " , which are 5-androstenedione and 19-nor-4-androstenedione can directly aromatize to estrogen. Thus, the risk of gyno is higher with these prohormones than with others. However, gyno is a condition that takes a long time to develop, so unless you are on one of these prohormones for months (which is too long to be on one anyway), you most likely won't get gyno from them. 4-androstenediol, 19-nor-4-androstenediol, and 1-AD cannot aromatize directly to estrogen, so the risk of gyno is minimal to none. 4-androstenediol can convert to testosterone, which can then convert to estrogen, so there is a minimal risk of gyno here. Again, though, it takes a long time for a condition like this to develop. Suppression of endogenous testosterone synthesis will occur with any type of exogenous androgen use. However, this suppression will also take time to develop. Short cycles of prohormones (2-4 weeks) will probably result in minimal suppression. Basically, when it comes to prohormones, steroids, and many other drugs, side effects are more the result of abuse. There is a difference between drug *use* and drug *abuse*. Anabolic steroids can be relatively safe (minimal side effects) when used *properly* in short cycles. OTC drugs like Tylenol can have serious side effects, but again these effects stem more from abuse and not proper use. The same holds true with prohormones. I have tried Biotest's topical 19-nor-4-diol spray. I had no side effects at all, but it's because I *used* it properly and did not abuse it. I was on it for 3 weeks and then went off. My body weight went from 174 to 182 in that time period, and all of my lifts went up by 20 lbs in those 3 weeks. I maintained the gains after coming off. Now, my gains may not have been due to the spray. It may have just been a placebo effect. Knowing I was on the stuff, I had jacked up my calories to 4000 calories a day, and was much more focused in the gym. My gains may have been due to those factors and not due to the nordiol spray. Also, I do not know how much of that weight was fat, water, or muscle, since I was not tracking my body composition. I'm sure some of it was fat, judging by the amount of food I was eating, and also judging by the fact I look a bit more tubby in the mirror. However, some was muscle judging by my strength gains. So, again, I'm not saying my gains were due to the spray. I really don't know. Only controlled studies can determine whether something is simply a placebo effect. Normally I'm the type of person who waits for such scientific research to emerge before I try products. However, with prohormones, companies are afraid to fund research because if they show that it's anabolic, the FDA will come in and take it off the market. So, I'm limited to anecdotal evidence, animal studies, and in vitro studies. The anecdotal evidence on the 19-nor-diol seemed good, so that's why I decided to try it. As someone who cares about my own health and safety as well, I stuck with a short cycle. These products should not be taken by teenagers since they are hormonal products. Also, they shouldn't be taken by athletes who compete in organizations where these products are not allowed. To do so would constitute cheating. An athlete who tries the 19-nor products is especially playing with fire, because the resulting nandrolone metabolites will remain in the urine for months after the product has been stopped. Krieger Graduate Assistant, Exercise Science Washington State University Webmaster, WSU Strength and Conditioning http://www.wsu.edu/~strength Science Editor, Pure Power Magazine http://www.purepowermag.com jkrieger@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2001 Report Share Posted July 16, 2001 --- Krieger <jkrieger@...> wrote: > Prohormones that end in " dione " , which are 5-androstenedione and > 19-nor-4-androstenedione can directly aromatize to estrogen. Thus, > the risk > of gyno is higher with these prohormones than with others. To my knowledge there is no such thing as 5-androstenedione being produced at this point in time, nor is there a need to since 4-androstenedione, known as andro, has been a plague in terms of estrogen and androgen related side-effects. 5-andro would have these same inherent flaws but would require the 5,4-isomerase enzyme to convert to 4-andro first and then to testosterone and would hence yield an even lower result. Diol versions do not possess these properties as they are incapable of interacting with aromatase or androgen receptors, but there respective target hormones testosterone and nandrolone both converse with aromatase to some point, test more than nandrolone, and can in high doses lead to side-effects related to this. But since this requires previous conversion that would make the risk correlate with the gains. Dione prohormones are : 4-androstene-3, 17-dione (andro) 19-Nor-4-androstene-3,17-dione (19Nor) 19-Nor-5-androstene-3,17-dione (19Nor5) 1,4-androstadiene-3,17-dione (1,4-andro, boldenone precursor) Diol prohormones include 1AD 5-alpha-androstane-3beta,17beta-diol (5AA, DHT precursor) 4-androstene-3beta,17beta-diol (4AD or 4-diol) 5-androstene-3beta,17beta-diol (5AD or 5-diol) 19-Nor-4-androstene-3beta,17beta-diol (Nor-diol or Nor4AD) The difference being that the latter use the 3 beta hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase enzyme to convert to the target hormone and the diones use the 17 hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase enzyme for the same purpose. Diols also convert at a 3 time higher rate. Raven Gobi .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2001 Report Share Posted July 17, 2001 Out of curiosity, those who have used prohormones, specifically Androsol from biotest, I would like to hear your experiences with it. i have read at least one from the board, but sure there are more. I am currently using it, and am on my 4th day of a 2 week 'cycle'. Did you notice any physical/emotional differences? Did you noticibaly feel any different while on it? Thanks! Birchfield Ironmax maximizing your construction equipment assets 5 Corporate Center 9960 Corporate Campus Drive, Suite 2000 Louisville, KY 40223 Big Cat <raven1008@ya Supertraining hoo.com> cc: Subject: Re: Re: Prohormones 07/16/01 10:46 PM Please respond to Supertraining --- Krieger <jkrieger@...> wrote: > Prohormones that end in " dione " , which are 5-androstenedione and > 19-nor-4-androstenedione can directly aromatize to estrogen. Thus, > the risk > of gyno is higher with these prohormones than with others. To my knowledge there is no such thing as 5-androstenedione being produced at this point in time, nor is there a need to since 4-androstenedione, known as andro, has been a plague in terms of estrogen and androgen related side-effects. 5-andro would have these same inherent flaws but would require the 5,4-isomerase enzyme to convert to 4-andro first and then to testosterone and would hence yield an even lower result. Diol versions do not possess these properties as they are incapable of interacting with aromatase or androgen receptors, but there respective target hormones testosterone and nandrolone both converse with aromatase to some point, test more than nandrolone, and can in high doses lead to side-effects related to this. But since this requires previous conversion that would make the risk correlate with the gains. Dione prohormones are : 4-androstene-3, 17-dione (andro) 19-Nor-4-androstene-3,17-dione (19Nor) 19-Nor-5-androstene-3,17-dione (19Nor5) 1,4-androstadiene-3,17-dione (1,4-andro, boldenone precursor) Diol prohormones include 1AD 5-alpha-androstane-3beta,17beta-diol (5AA, DHT precursor) 4-androstene-3beta,17beta-diol (4AD or 4-diol) 5-androstene-3beta,17beta-diol (5AD or 5-diol) 19-Nor-4-androstene-3beta,17beta-diol (Nor-diol or Nor4AD) The difference being that the latter use the 3 beta hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase enzyme to convert to the target hormone and the diones use the 17 hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase enzyme for the same purpose. Diols also convert at a 3 time higher rate. Raven Gobi .... Modify or cancel your subscription here: mygroups Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2001 Report Share Posted July 17, 2001 From: Big Cat <raven1008@...> <To my knowledge there is no such thing as 5-androstenedione being produced at this point in time, ...> It is being produced. You can find it as an ingredient in Bodyonic's Androstat Poppers. The ingredients are as follows: 4-Androstene-3, 17-Diol 125MG, 4-Androstene-3, 17-Dione 5MG, 5-Androstene-3, 17; Dione 5MG, 5-Androstene-3, 17-Diol 5MG, 19-Nor-4-Androstene-3, 17-Dione 5MG, 19-Nor-5-Androstene-3, 17-Diol 5MG. Krieger Graduate Assistant, Exercise Science Washington State University Webmaster, WSU Strength and Conditioning http://www.wsu.edu/~strength Science Editor, Pure Power Magazine http://www.purepowermag.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2001 Report Share Posted July 17, 2001 Out of curiosity, those who have used prohormones, specifically Androsol from biotest, I would like to hear your experiences with it. i have read at least one from the board, but sure there are more. I am currently using it, and am on my 4th day of a 2 week 'cycle'. Did you notice any physical/emotional differences? Did you noticibaly feel any different while on it? This isn't exactly what you want because I'm using the ErgoPharm brand of 4-diol spray and stacking it with 1-AD, but here it is for whatever it's worth. I'm on the second day of a cycle that will be as long as the 2 bottles will last at 20 sprays twice a day. I'm a 400 pound guy and want the dose high enough to where I can actually tell if something is happening. As for your questions, I don't notice any physical or emotional differences that I'm sure about. Emotional differences are probably best judged by others that you interact with. I sorta feel a little more psyched up and aggressive, and I didn't feel that when all I was taking was 1-AD, so that could be something. Also, I notice an increase in libido that is similar to and more consistent than when I was taking 4-diol power-- and that I'm sure of. And again, this is something that wasn't there with just the 1-AD. That's all I can tell you. It's too early to tell if anything is happening with body composition, performance in the gym or recovery time; however, the libido increase is encouraging--and it's strong and consistent enough to where I really don't believe it to be a placebo effect. So, if there's a connection between increased libido and increased gains, this should prove to be a pretty satis- fying cycle. Thanks! You're welcome. Birchfield Bill Eitner Menlo-Park, CA NetZero Platinum No Banner Ads and Unlimited Access Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month! http://www.netzero.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2001 Report Share Posted July 17, 2001 " Krieger " <jkrieger@w...> wrote: > > From: Big Cat <raven1008@y...> > > > > To my knowledge there is no such thing as 5-androstenedione being > > produced at this point in time, ...> > > It is being produced. You can find it as an ingredient in > Bodyonic's Androstat Poppers. The ingredients are as follows: > > 4-Androstene-3, 17-Diol 125MG, > 4-Androstene-3, 17-Dione 5MG, > 5-Androstene-3, 17; Dione 5MG, > 5-Androstene-3, 17-Diol 5MG, > 19-Nor-4-Androstene-3, 17-Dione 5MG, > 19-Nor-5-Androstene-3, 17-Diol 5MG. This ingredient list gives me a chuckle. A modest, generally sub-effective quantity of 4-AD, combined with miniscule " perceived value " quantities of the others. It demonstrates how gullible supplement consumers can be. I'm sure there are some who think this is a " super stack " because of the nominal amounts of nearly all the major prohormones. The fact is that these " poppers " are probably worthless until the user eats about ten per day. The good part is that, after checking prices, they don't seem to cost more than plain 4-AD in the same amount. However, the consumer needs to realize that, essentially, that's all it really is. -- M. Wooster, Ohio Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2001 Report Share Posted July 17, 2001 Regarding 5-adione supplements being manufactured, this appears to be true today as Kreiger pointed out. If my memory serves me correctly, there was a company in the London, UK selling 5-adione caps or tablets back in the late 1990's. The company, LA Muscle, promoted 5-adione as the most anabolic formula in the world. The company is still in existence but is no longer selling a 5-adione supplement. They do have one supplement with 5-adiol as an ingredient. Jim Vernon Venice, CA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2001 Report Share Posted July 18, 2001 Here is another anonymous letter which was sent to me. -------------------------- A wrote: <To my knowledge there is no such thing as 5-androstenedione being produced at this point in time, ...> B replied: It is being produced. You can find it as an ingredient in Bodyonic's Androstat Poppers. The ingredients are as follows: 4-Androstene-3, 17-Diol 125MG, 4-Androstene-3, 17-Dione 5MG, 5-Androstene-3, 17; Dione 5MG, 5-Androstene-3, 17-Diol 5MG, 19-Nor-4-Androstene-3, 17-Dione 5MG, 19-Nor-5-Androstene-3, 17-Diol 5MG. C wrote: <This ingredient list gives me a chuckle. A modest, generally sub-effective quantity of 4-AD, combined with miniscule " perceived value " quantities of the others. It demonstrates how gullible supplement consumers can be. I'm sure there are some who think this is a " super stack " because of the nominal amounts of nearly all the major prohormones. The fact is that these " poppers " are probably worthless until the user eats about ten per day. The good part is that, after checking prices, they don't seem to cost more than plain 4-AD in the same amount. However, the consumer needs to realize that, essentially, that's all it really is. > Anon wrote: Now I was not aware that any company had really sunk that low, but I usually avoid Pinnacle. But thanks for the information. The really funny thing your forgot to notice about this is that androstat poppers are a sublingual product. Now this shows about 150 mg worth a pop, whilst a study conducted by Ergopharm conducted at Eastern Michigan showed a ceiling of 25 mg for sublingual cyclodextrin based delivery. So the stuff probably isn't as bad since it will never get in your system and you are getting mostly 4AD. But yes, you'd actually have to swallow the bottle to get a good effect orally. ---------------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2001 Report Share Posted July 18, 2001 Yet another anonymous letter that was sent to me. --------------------- Rosemary Wedderburn-Vernon <CookieMagic@...> wrote: <Regarding 5-adione supplements being manufactured, this appears to be true today as Kreiger pointed out. If my memory serves me correctly, there was a company in the London, UK selling 5-adione caps or tablets back in the late 1990's. The company, LA Muscle, promoted 5-adione as the most anabolic formula in the world. The company is still in existence but is no longer selling a 5-adione supplement. They do have one supplement with 5-adiol as an ingredient. > Anon wrote: Again, thank you for this information. Its very odd that after demonstrating the low efficacy, structurally, of the 5AD, that someone actually ever had a 5-andro. 5AD has a low oral delivery and a conversion rate in the body of of 0.19%, where exactly does that leave 5-andro ? The only thing anabolic about 5Andro would be that it produces massive quantities of estrogen and acts as and estrogen agonist and could possibly be sold as " gyno-bol " . --------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 5, 2001 Report Share Posted August 5, 2001 Damon wrote: So as to why some prohormone users are averse to using steroids is beyond me. *** I'm not sure they really are. The problems aren't the steroids themselves, but the fact that in the U.S. they are a Schedule 3 drug amd are illegal. If you get caught you can land in jail for a long while, not to mention the cost of your defense. Conviction is a felony, not a slap on the hand. Even assuming you don't see using from a moral standpoint, most people are not willing to take that chance. It's not worth it. Secondly, even if you do purchase black market gear, you never know what you're getting. Most of the time it's not what you think and you can't count on the dose being correct either. Also, how is this stuff packaged? There are too many horror stories about infected injection sites. Third, who wants to deal with pushers? When steroids were first sold, it was usually some guy in the gym and that's all they sold. Now you're dealing with people to whom steroids and other black market physique enhancing substances are only a small part of their offerings. These are not the kind of people anyone with any sense wants to mess with. There's a fantastic interview in this month's IronMan with Batcheldor about this very thing. Personally, I think the media scare about steroids is stupid and incorrect. However, steroids are very powerful drugs and you can't just go taking them willy nilly. People say prohormones are the same, but this is also incorrect. They are similar in some respects but using 19-Norandrostenediol is not the same as using Decadurabolin other than you can test positive. If it were, it would not be on the market. If the government were really smart, it would legalize steroids for any patient a medical doctor considers needs them. There would still be people abusing them, just like they do any kind of drug, but most would be properly monitored health wise (another reason a lot of people don't use steroids -- no way to monitor the internal goings on). People talk about taking steroids to enhance one's muscle mass as something promulgated by the Devil. But these same individuals seem not to care a whit about breast enlargements, face lifts, tummy tucks, butt lifts, calf implants, liposuction and all the other plastic surgical procedures that are done solely to enhance one's looks. What it all boils down to is that the choice should be left up to the individual. And while we're on the subject, it would be nice if one could get a doctor to monitor one's vitals when using prohormones, too. But just try to talk one into it. Or at least one that not involved in anti-ageing. I find it unfortunate that this whole situation is made so difficult. Rosemary Wedderburn-Vernon Venice, CA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 5, 2001 Report Share Posted August 5, 2001 From: " Rosemary Wedderburn-Vernon " <CookieMagic@...> > Damon wrote: So as to why some prohormone users are averse to using steroids is beyond me. Rosemary Wedderburn-Vernon: <I'm not sure they really are. The problems aren't the steroids themselves, but the fact that in the U.S. they are a Schedule 3 drug amd are illegal. If you get caught you can land in jail for a long while, not to mention the cost of your defense. Conviction is a felony, not a slap on the hand.> The ignorence regarding sterois usage works in your favour here. It is very hard to prove what quantities an athlete will take. People usually go down for supply/intention to supply, but will get off with a fine for personal quantities. <Even assuming you don't see using from a moral standpoint, most people are not willing to take that chance. " Just because something is illegal, does not mean that it is immoral " Plato. It's not worth it. > In your opinion. <Secondly, even if you do purchase black market gear, you never know what you're getting.> A little research will tell you that there are numerous legitimate overseas pharmacies that will quite happily post you legitimate products. You can even check the batch numbers on certain companies websites. <Most of the time it's not what you think and you can't count on the dose being correct either. > $#* - what magazines have you been reading. Maybe if bought from an underground lab or Brovel. To doubt the dose contained in a legitimate amp of test. purchased from a legitimate pharmacy is to doubt the dosage of acetaminophen in your next tylenol. Also, how is this stuff packaged? Steroids are not a law unto themselves. They are pharmacuetical products, and the best way to detect a steroid counterfiet is to familiarise yourself with particular manufacturers packaging of things you already have in the house, like painkillers. Many different tell tale signs, if you are purchasing from a dealer. The printing of the lot number and expiry date being the most obvious. <There are too many horror stories about infected injection sites.> Never happened to me. Maybe thats because I know how to inject correctly. A little research about injection protocol and volume, combined with a little cleanliness, goes a long way. <Third, who wants to deal with pushers? Quite. Buy from an overseas pharmacy, and get it cheaper, and get a decent range of legitimate products. Youd be amazed at how much this stuff really costs. <When steroids were first sold, it was usually some guy in the gym and that's all they sold.> Keep generalising, it makes interesting reading. <Now you're dealing with people to whom steroids and other black market physique enhancing substances are only a small part of their offerings. These are not the kind of people anyone with any sense wants to mess with.> Do you want to mess with them, or just buy some drugs with a polite tone of voice and a smile? <There's a fantastic interview in this month's IronMan with Batcheldor about this very thing. Personally, I think the media scare about steroids is stupid and incorrect. > Really?! After " horror stories about infected injection sites " and your other sweeping statements. <However, steroids are very powerful drugs and you can't just go taking them willy nilly. > Intelligent people don't. They spend a year or so researching them before they do. And some steroids are very powerfull drugs. Others will not have any perceptable impact on anything. But again, dependent upon the individual and dose range. <People say prohormones are the same, but this is also incorrect. They are similar in some respects but using 19-Norandrostenediol is not the same as using Decadurabolin other than you can test positive. If it were, it would not be on the market. > Of course. Recall that morphine used to be " on the market " <If the government were really smart, it would legalize steroids for any patient a medical doctor considers needs them. There would still be people abusing them, just like they do any kind of drug, ...> What do you define as abuse? A drug is produced and sold to be taken. As for under the guidence of a GP, there are so many innacuracies in medical texts regarding the subject, and doctors know less than most athletes. Same principle as a firearm. What constitutes abuse? It is made and sold with the full knowladge that it will be used to maim people. So who do you trust to say " you can shoot these people, but not these " Your government, but remember the inference of " If the government was really smart " is that, they are not. Consequently intelligent people make informed choices. Others rely on the herd instinct, and settle for mediocraty. <...but most would be properly monitored health wise (another reason a lot of people don't use steroids -- no way to monitor the internal goings on) > " No way to monitor intrnal goings on " Like what? So tests for serum: estraidol/dht/T3T4/testosterone/LH/FSH/progesterone/SHBG/HDL-blood pressure tests, platlet counts and liver enzyme function are all redundent, are they? Im seriously beginning to doubt your knowladge on this subject. <People talk about taking steroids to enhance one's muscle mass as something promulgated by the Devil. But these same individuals seem not to care a whit about breast enlargements, face lifts, tummy tucks, butt lifts, calf implants, liposuction and all the other plastic surgical procedures that are done solely to enhance one's looks. What it all boils down to is that the choice should be left up to the individual. > I fully agree. " It is OK for a women to take a steroid (contraceptive pill) to enable her to have frivolous sex, but not to make her more 'healthy' and more attractive..? " <And while we're on the subject, it would be nice if one could get a doctor to monitor one's vitals when using prohormones, too. > I thought you 'said' that there was " No way to monitor internal goings on? " <But just try to talk one into it.> Mine is more than happy to. She recognized the fact that my knowlagde exceeds hers and since then has been very accomadting in this regard. I pay her back with eductaing her about use of Finasteride and anastrozole, tamoxifen and the like.An admirable arrangement. <Or at least one that not involved in anti-ageing. I find it unfortunate that this whole situation is made so difficult.> Yes, Rosemary, in the main by 'well intentioned' people like you. [This sort of letter normally would be regarded as being of rather dubious merit to the tenor of this group, but its wording tells a story that editing of this letter would not. It is up to other readers to draw their own conclusions. Mel Siff] Sammuel Damon Birmingham, UK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 5, 2001 Report Share Posted August 5, 2001 " Rosemary Wedderburn-Vernon " <CookieMagic@m...> wrote: > People talk about taking steroids to > enhance one's muscle mass as something promulgated by the Devil. > But these same individuals seem not to care a whit about breast > enlargements, face lifts, tummy tucks, butt lifts, calf implants, > liposuction and all the other plastic surgical procedures that > are done solely to enhance one's looks. What it all boils down > to is that the choice should be left up to the individual. If you would like to consider some of the other paradoxes, including references describing their comparative risks, you might want to review my Mesormorphosis (now Meso-RX) article on the demonization of anabolic steroids: <http://www.meso-rx.com/articles/williams/demonization-of-anabolic-steroids-01.h\ tm> M. Wooster, Ohio, USA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 6, 2001 Report Share Posted August 6, 2001 " Rosemary Wedderburn-Vernon " <CookieMagic@m...> wrote: <People say prohormones are the same, but this is also incorrect. They are similar in some respects but using 19-Norandrostenediol is not the same as using Deca durabolin other than you can test positive. If it were, it would not be on the market.> Someone (Mr X) anonymously commented: An interesting note here is that 19-norandrostenediol was long ago patented by Searle and sold as an anabolic steroid in some countries (Japan among them). It was sold as the dipropionate ester. Look it up in the Merck Index under the name Bolandiol if you don't believe me. I doubt it was as strong as deca, like you say, but on the other hand it certainly was not ineffective (as Inceldon says) The legal status of prohormones has nothing to do with their potency Rosemary. There are prohormones out there right now that are stronger than some of the weaker CIII anabolics Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 6, 2001 Report Share Posted August 6, 2001 > If the government were really smart, it would legalize steroids for any > patient a medical doctor considers needs them. > > Rosemary Wedderburn-Vernon > Venice, CA Actually being as they are a schedule 3 controlled substance, they are available by Rx to those who have a medical need. The Steroid Act (or whatever its name was) eliminated the previous clause that said they could be administered *recreationally*. I do agree it would be better though in a free-er market where people have clean roids and clean needles, but that is just another part of the many problems of the WoD. Boyle, San Diego, CA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2001 Report Share Posted August 7, 2001 > Rosemary Wedderburn-Vernon: > > <I'm not sure they really are. The problems aren't the steroids > themselves, but the fact that in the U.S. they are a Schedule 3 drug amd are > illegal. If you get caught you can land in jail for a long while, not to > mention the cost of your defense. Conviction is a felony, not a slap on the hand. Good point, Rosemary. If I could have steroids legally prescribed by a board-certified endocrinologist for the purpose of enhancing sports performance, I'd consider it. Since it's illegal, I'm lifetime drug-free. > > The ignorence regarding sterois usage works in your favour here. It is very > hard to prove what quantities an athlete will take. People usually go down > for supply/intention to supply, but will get off with a fine for personal quantities. I'm not so worried about getting caught for using, though that is a concern. What concerns me is the underground nature of the drugs. If I can't get them legally prescribed from a qualified physician, then A) I may be sold adulterated crap and I don't know enough (read: any) biochemistry to get the right things for my physiology and goals. > > <Even assuming you don't see using from a moral standpoint, most people > are not willing to take that chance. I don't see steroid use as immoral, though using them and then competing in federations that ban them is unethical. > > " Just because something is illegal, does not mean that it is immoral " Plato. > It's not worth it. > > > In your opinion. Well, right, of course. > > <Secondly, even if you do purchase black market gear, you never know what you're getting. That's a major concern. > > A little research will tell you that there are numerous legitimate overseas > pharmacies that will quite happily post you legitimate products. You can > even check the batch numbers on certain companies websites. How do these packages get through customs? > > <Most of the time it's not what you think and you can't count > on the dose being correct either. > > > $#* - what magazines have you been reading. Maybe if bought from an > underground lab or Brovel. To doubt the dose contained in a legitimate amp > of test. purchased from a legitimate pharmacy is to doubt the dosage of > acetaminophen in your next tylenol. > > Also, how is this stuff packaged? > > Steroids are not a law unto themselves. They are pharmacuetical products, > and the best way to detect a steroid counterfiet is to familiarise yourself > with particular manufacturers packaging of things you already have in the > house, like painkillers. > > Many different tell tale signs, if you are purchasing from a dealer. The > printing of the lot number and expiry date being the most obvious. > > <There are too many horror stories about infected injection sites.> > > Never happened to me. Maybe thats because I know how to inject correctly. A > little research about injection protocol and volume, combined with a little > cleanliness, goes a long way. Never happened to my father, either; he was a two-shots-a-day diabetic. Of course, he could buy needles legally; how do steroid guys get needles? > > <Third, who wants to deal with pushers? > > Quite. Buy from an overseas pharmacy, and get it cheaper, and get a decent > range of legitimate products. Youd be amazed at how much this stuff really costs. > Intelligent people don't. They spend a year or so researching them before > they do. And some steroids are very powerfull drugs. Others will not have > any perceptable impact on anything. But again, dependent upon the individual and dose range. Researching the drugs, though, is only half the battle, maybe less. I don't even know what I'd look for in a blood test, for example, to tell me about how I'd react to steroids. > > <People say prohormones are the same, but this is also incorrect. > They are similar in some respects but using 19-Norandrostenediol is not the > same as using Decadurabolin other than you can test positive. If it were, > it would not be on the market. > > > Of course. Recall that morphine used to be " on the market " > > <If the government were really smart, it would legalize steroids for any > patient a medical doctor considers needs them. There would still be people > abusing them, just like they do any kind of drug, ...> > > What do you define as abuse? A drug is produced and sold to be taken. As for > under the guidence of a GP, there are so many innacuracies in medical texts > regarding the subject, and doctors know less than most athletes. Same > principle as a firearm. What constitutes abuse? It is made and sold with the > full knowladge that it will be used to maim people. So who do you trust to > say " you can shoot these people, but not these " Your government, but > remember the inference of " If the government was really smart " is that, they > are not. Consequently intelligent people make informed choices. Others rely > on the herd instinct, and settle for mediocraty. > > <...but most would be properly monitored health wise (another reason a lot of people don't use steroids -- > no way to monitor the internal goings on) > > > " No way to monitor intrnal goings on " > Like what? So tests for serum: > estraidol/dht/T3T4/testosterone/LH/FSH/progesterone/SHBG/HDL-blood pressure > tests, platlet counts and liver enzyme function are all redundent, are they? > Im seriously beginning to doubt your knowladge on this subject. I'm beginning to seriously doubt my knowledge of this subject, too. Did you just name TWELVE useful tests? Hmm. This is the sort of discussion I joined Supertraining to see. Not steroids per se! But points of view very different from my own held by intelligent, articulate people. Kurland Austin and Chicago Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2001 Report Share Posted August 7, 2001 > > If the government were really smart, it would legalize steroids for > any > > patient a medical doctor considers needs them. > > > Rosemary Wedderburn-Vernon > > Venice, CA > > > Actually being as they are a schedule 3 controlled substance, they > are available by Rx to those who have a medical need. The Steroid > Act (or whatever its name was) eliminated the previous clause that > said they could be administered *recreationally*. Where on earth did you get the idea that the FDA/medical community EVER explicitly or implicitly gave approval for the recreational use of anabolic steroids? Sure, it was easier for doctors to give them for recreational use before the control act, but the medical community always was adamantly negative towards this usage Arnold Hades, Illinois Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2001 Report Share Posted August 7, 2001 I don't know what the laws are in the UK, but in the US, someone who has a big stash of AAS can get into quite serious problems, even if they try to claim they're for personal use. Personal use is illegal except by a medical doctor's prescription. If the DEA busted into our house with a search warrant, they would find my husband's testosterone and syringes. But there is also a huge label on all of this stuff from the VA. I've never seen a medical facility with so many checks and controls in place, so there is no way (unless it's an inside heist) that you would ever get anything out of them illegally! BTW, I can't emphasize strongly enough the fact that when a person travels with something like testosterone and syringes that they better have a copy of their legal prescription with them or they could find themselves in very serious trouble with authorities. I've heard a couple of stories about folks having problems with prohormones in Australia in this regard. As far as injection site problems, this is not from improper technique by the individual, although you can certainly create a nasty sore spot if you hit a nerve or blood vessel. What I was talking about is unsterile, or contaminated product, which is very common on the black market. As far as being able to receive AAS in the packages from outside the country, all packages from outside the US has a customs declaration on it. If there is any suspected illegal contents, it can be opened and traced to you if you're not clever. The above two things have been mentioned over and over and over on Testosterone.net as well as other sites I don't remember right now. But this is no big secret. Even Greg Zulak in Muscle Mag has talked about it on occasion, mostly in smuggling gear in from Mexico because this is how a lot of people in the US get their stuff. As far as ordering from sites on the web, you must be kidding? Don't you think the DEA monitors all these? Not to mention that many are bogus and just rip you off. There used to be some guy in Guam who was on the Elite Fitness site (not Dave Tate's site) who used to post the names of the charlatans on a monthly basis. They came and went like flies. I'm not imagining these problems here in the U.S.; they are very real. From what I hear from folks in Europe and OZ, the consequences are just as bad. Rosemary Wedderburn-Vernon Venice, CA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2001 Report Share Posted August 21, 2001 Tom Incledon wrote: However recently, a paper was published showing that 7 out of 17 prohormone products contained substances other than indicated on the labels (1). Other prohormone products contained 15-52% of the label claim. My main question then is: how do you know what you are taking and/or what is causing the effects you observe? Without this basic information it is difficult to state what is causing an effect or what potential health risks there may or may not be. *** This is very scary information, and not only true of prohormones, but of many other supplements as well. Will Brink, at his site at www.brinkzone.com has an article up on the contamination of creatine. This is where the unregulated supplement industry hits the fan in my book. But if the FDA did regulate it, like they do with the pharmaceutical industry, we'd have a whole host of other problems. I really don't want to have to go to an unenlightened M.D. to try to explain why I want extra Vitamin C. Ridiculous as this sounds, it holds some truth, thus putting those of us who want to supplement with various compounds in a Catch 22 situation. All I can do with prohormones and other supplements is try to stick with more well-known brands. This doesn't mean I'm getting what I pay for, or that there isn't some hidden ingredient, but from everything I've read and been told, I stand a much better chance of getting what the label says is in the bottle. Rumor has it that the original Met-Rx contained clenbuterol, but this is only hearsay. More than likely the reason folks lost fat when using it is because they were better able to know the exact calorie count and macronutrient ratios. This is a difficult guess with whole, unprocessed foods. It probably also caused more people to count all calories and keep a food log. As far as selecting supplements, I try to find out who's behind the company. Everyone has to earn a living but some folks are just money grubbers while others try hard to produce good products. It still boils down to the consumer having faith in the product. <Additional references pasted in below (2-9), question the rational use of androstenedione supplementation in women as there are multiple factors that can influence the conversion of A to estrone as well as it's clearance.> *** Not being a scientist, possibly I am missing something here and I'd appreciate being straightened out if I'm incorrect. The studies in question were done with androstenedione. I can't believe anyone is still using this stuff. What about the current 4-diols and 4-diones and the new 1-AD? To my knowledge, these are chemically different than the original androstenedione. Do they still produce the same types of problems? Or are these questions still unanswered? From the information I've been able to gather (anectodal and printed magazine and Net articles), it appears that women stand much more of a chance of developing reproductive tract cancers from Premarin. Yet doctors tend to push this on women without batting an eye. Fortunately, this practice has stopped somewhat. In addition, many women are ill informed and if their doctor tells them to take it, they do. Now that doesn't make my use of prohormones any less dangerous and I'm not making any excuses for myself. As I wrote in an article on the subject, the first part of which is in the current issue of Irony Magazine (www.ironymag.com) you have to be willing to be a guinea pig. This was a statement made to me several years ago by a physician (who was also an avid ironhead) about vanadyl sulfate. Yet we were both trying it. But I'd rather be my own guinea pig than my primary care physician's GP. Can I sue myself if things go wrong? Rosemary Wedderburn-Vernon Venice, CA cookiemagic@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 9, 2003 Report Share Posted June 9, 2003 Alas, from what I have read, the only ones who derive any benefit from the sale of prohormones are those that manufacture and distribute them. There's nothing like the real thing... Sorry to disappoint.../Dale > Prohormones (aka Prosteroids) are legal supplements that allegedly > raise testosterone levels much milder, but similar to steroids. Has > anyone tried prohormones to raise testosterone levels and what > benefits or side effects did you experience? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.