Anabolic Steroids and Growth

[lylemcd]

Originally Posted by MrRippedZilla

My father is an endocrinologist also, but is very much in the minority in his field in that he believes in AAS-induced hypogonadism.
I've seen enough bloodwork, something factual enough for me to not argue with, to be convinced that recovery isn't as smooth as most say it is. And even if the damage isn't necessarily "permanent", who wants to spend years hypogonadal in the hope that 1 day everything will be fine?

So you have a father at odds with the majority of medicine and you follow this up with a dumb anecdote.

And consider that this might be an age issue. If someone uses drugs for a decade+ from age 25 to 35, did it occur to you that their lowered testosterone might be AGE related?

To use a current example, I know someone who is currently 2 weeks post pct and is LOSING weight on 6,000 cals a day despite his maintenance only being around 4,000. And yes, cals/macros have been tracked meticulously - he's lost 4 pounds in 2 weeks since ending pct.

Two weeks is meaningless. This anecdote is meaningless. The fact that you don't understand why 2 weeks is meaningless makes your post meaningless. Nobody is saying the recovery is INSTANTANEOUS for god's sake. But there is a difference between DELAYED and NEVER.

But hey, one guy. At the two week mark. And a father who is at odds with everyone in the field. I'm convinced.

Adding, did it occur to you that there is a HUGE selection bias here? That the guys going to your father are having a specific problem?

It's like forums like this: reading them you get the idea that 100% of peope have trouble with their diet. No. Because only the people having trouble generally go looking. The majority who are having no issues aren't asking questions. Diet research studies are often the same: the folks with the worst issues are the ones who join. And you get screwed results becuase they are, by definition, the hardest cases.

SAme thing here: consider that your father is seeing the small %age of guys having problems. And that they do not represent the majority but rather a carefully self-selected group.

or don't. Doesn't really matter. The majority of the world says that you and your father are wrong. A handful of anecdotes and your original claim don't change that.

[MrRippedZilla]

Originally Posted by lylemcd

So you have a father at odds with the majority of medicine and you follow this up with a dumb anecdote.

And consider that this might be an age issue. If someone uses drugs for a decade+ from age 25 to 35, did it occur to you that their lowered testosterone might be AGE related?

Two weeks is meaningless. This anecdote is meaningless. The fact that you don't understand why 2 weeks is meaningless makes your post meaningless. Nobody is saying the recovery is INSTANTANEOUS for god's sake. But there is a difference between DELAYED and NEVER.

But hey, one guy. At the two week mark. And a father who is at odds with everyone in the field. I'm convinced.

Adding, did it occur to you that there is a HUGE selection bias here? That the guys going to your father are having a specific problem?

It's like forums like this: reading them you get the idea that 100% of peope have trouble with their diet. No. Because only the people having trouble generally go looking. The majority who are having no issues aren't asking questions. Diet research studies are often the same: the folks with the worst issues are the ones who join. And you get screwed results because they are, by definition, the hardest cases.

SAme thing here: consider that your father is seeing the small %age of guys having problems. And that they do not represent the majority but rather a carefully self-selected group.

or don't. Doesn't really matter. The majority of the world says that you and your father are wrong. A handful of anecdotes and your original claim don't change that.

I'll concede that my original comment of "most people" not recovering was wrong (my father doesn't say this LOL), "some" would have been more appropriate. Your right that the selection bias influenced my train of thought on the matter.
I should also say that I CLEARLY admitted that the research is against me on this - I was simply expressing my view based on the bloodwork I've seen.

Forget my anecdotal stuff for a moment and look at one of the studies I linked (Anabolic steroid–induced hypogonadism: diagnosis and treatment) - it clearly discusses the risk of recovery never occurring at all without treatment (clomid, hcg, trt, etc) and the risk of not recovering even with treatment (primary testicular failure, etc).

Here is another case report of a 40yr old man who failed to recover even 30+ months post-AAS use:
http://www.fertstert.org/article/S00...640-6/fulltext

Now you can say that this is simply another example of delayed recovery - since the only way to prove otherwise would be to not treat patients like this and hope that recovery, as the studies show, does occur (no self respecting doctor is going to do this).

Again, IMO, recovery doesn't ALWAYS occur and, IMO, the studies are wrong and future research will shed more light onto this issue.

[squat]

I guess we'll just have to wait for future research for you to make a real argument.

[Benson]

Originally Posted by MrRippedZilla

Here is another case report of a 40yr old man who failed to recover even 30+ months post-AAS use:

You selectively ignored the question from Lyle about the role age plays in all this and then proceeds to provide another example of a case study of a40 year old man to back up your point.

wow you really cant make these things up. the lack of critical thinking and reasoning I see on forums is astonishing.

[MrRippedZilla]

Originally Posted by Benson

You selectively ignored the question from Lyle about the role age plays in all this and then proceeds to provide another example of a case study of a40 year old man to back up your point.

wow you really cant make these things up. the lack of critical thinking and reasoning I see on forums is astonishing.

I know exactly the role age plays in all of this, if you read the case report and saw what sort of of hormonal levels we were talking about you would know that it wasn't exclusively age related.
I suggest actually looking at the evidence someone provides before attempting personal insults in the future

Age also doesn't explain the anecdotal evidence since some of the examples included guys aged in their early 20s.

A lack of critical thinking & reasoning would be to IGNORE bloodwork from people in their 20s/30s showing hypogonadism levels YEARS after AAS use.
Which is exactly what most of you seem to want me to do.

I actually agree with Squat, until the research catches up there is no point even making an argument about this.

[NOAMattD]

Originally Posted by lylemcd

Doctors will not prescribe testosterone unless you are hypogonadal in most countries. So no it will not be 'easy' to get despite being a low dose relative to what athlete are taking.

So...

Cut to like 5-6%
Make afternoon appointment with doctor
Make herculean effort to have some manner of sex morning of appointment
Eat rice or something to get bloated & mask shredded state
Complain about low libido/loss of strength, get T
Make gains

[Bacfa]

Originally Posted by NOAMattD

So...

Cut to like 5-6%
Make afternoon appointment with doctor
Make herculean effort to have some manner of sex morning of appointment
Eat rice or something to get bloated & mask shredded state
Complain about low libido/loss of strength, get T
Make gains

This what I figured as well, if I ever want trt it'll be a breeze getting it.

Aren't the doses too small? I guess you could save it up for a while and do a cycle though. I'll go for it in my forties, perhaps fifties.

[lylemcd]

I stand corrected

***
Addiction. 2015 May;110(5):823-31. doi: 10.1111/add.12850. Epub 2015 Feb 25.
Prolonged hypogonadism in males following withdrawal from anabolic-androgenic steroids: an under-recognized problem.

Kanayama G1, Hudson JI, DeLuca J, Isaacs S, Baggish A, Weiner R, Bhasin S, Pope HG Jr.
Author information


Abstract

AIMS:

To assess the frequency and severity of hypogonadal symptoms in male long-term anabolic-androgenic steroid (AAS) misusers who have discontinued AAS use.
DESIGN:

Cross-sectional, naturalistic.
SETTING:

Out-patient facility.
PARTICIPANTS:

Twenty-four male former long-term AAS users and 36 non-AAS-using weightlifters, recruited by advertisement in Massachusetts, USA. Five of the former users were currently receiving treatment with physiological testosterone replacement, leaving 19 untreated users for the numerical comparisons below.
MEASUREMENTS:

The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV, questions regarding history of AAS use, physical examination, serum hormone determinations and the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF).
FINDINGS:

Compared with the 36 non-AAS-using weightlifters, the 19 untreated former AAS users displayed significantly smaller testicular volumes [estimated difference, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.3 (0.1, 4.5) ml; P = 0.042] and lower serum testosterone levels [estimated difference: 95% CI = 131 (25, 227) dl; P = 0.009], with five users showing testosterone levels below 200 ng/dl despite abstinence from AAS for 3-26 months. Untreated former users also displayed significantly lower scores on the IIEF sexual desire subscale [estimated difference: 95% CI = 2.4 (1.3, 3.4) points on a 10-point scale; P < 0.001]. In the overall group of 24 treated plus untreated former users, seven (29%) had experienced major depressive episodes during AAS withdrawal; four of these had not experienced major depressive episodes at any other time. Two men (8%) had failed to regain normal libidinal or erectile function despite adequate replacement testosterone treatment.
CONCLUSIONS:

Among long-term anabolic-androgenic steroid misusers, anabolic-androgenic steroid-withdrawal hypogonadism appears to be common, frequently prolonged and associated with substantial morbidity.

[Bacfa]

Do you have access to the full article? Did it list their ages, types pct they did, duration of their cycles etc. additional interesting data?

[kc2010]

Originally Posted by Bacfa

This what I figured as well, if I ever want trt it'll be a breeze getting it.

Aren't the doses too small? I guess you could save it up for a while and do a cycle though. I'll go for it in my forties, perhaps fifties.

Generally, yes, the doses are much smaller than this (the 600 mg/wk mentioned above). Now, the following is only my N=1 experience, but from what I gather I'm not unusual. For my TRT, I'm currently on 100 mg a week. This keeps me in a range of around 800-825 early to mid-300's, low-400s by the end of the period (lab = LabCorp, reference interval 348-1197 ng/dL). My doc knows this and prescribes just the amount I need. If I used any more than that, I'd run out early.

As as aside, we started at 200 mg every two weeks, which made for a peak of 1309 two days post injection, a reading of 540 seven days in at the halfway mark, and a trough of 132 the day before the next shot (same lab and reference range as above). Perhaps oddly, I didn't 'feel' any different subjectively across that timeframe, but the doc didn't like that wide of a range. 600 mg every week would be, interesting, heh.