Anabolic-androgenic steroids: medical assessment of present, past and potential users

[Trauma1]

Here's an interesting little study to look over, but it's not really a good random and unbiased demonstration of statistical analysis. I hope to eventually have a science-related weekly blog here on AM to discuss everything ranging from anatomy; to pathophysiology; to AAS use.

If you guys have any questions about the blood work here, I'll gladly help.

Invalid Link Removed​

 

[flightposite]

awesome post Trauma.

 

[Libertarian]

Gynaecomastia was found in 10 past users (37%; P < 0.01 v. potential users), two present users (12%) and no potential users.

From reports I've seen on various AAS forum online, it seems to me like a much smaller minority of AAS users report problems with gyno. But, I guess it does make sense, since 84% of the past/present users in the study got their gear from either a friend or a gym. People who haven't put in the necessary research to establish a good "source" are probably also the type of guys who haven't done the necessary research to learn how to avoid things like gyno. The guys who get their gear and relevant information from "bros" are the ones who don't know what they're doing.

EDIT:

The AAS clinic was conducted from 1 September 1994 to 31 August 1997 in the Department of Alcohol and Drug Services, St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney.

Makes even more sense considering the study was done before the "internet age" related AAS use, and good information was a lot harder to come by during that time. Just goes to show how valuable internet discussion forums are to AAS users.

 

[jakellpet]

subbed

 

[Trauma1]

From reports I've seen on various AAS forum online, it seems to me like a much smaller minority of AAS users report problems with gyno. But, I guess it does make sense, since 84% of the past/present users in the study got their gear from either a friend or a gym. People who haven't put in the necessary research to establish a good "source" are probably also the type of guys who haven't done the necessary research to learn how to avoid things like gyno. The guys who get their gear and relevant information from "bros" are the ones who don't know what they're doing.

EDIT:Makes even more sense considering the study was done before the "internet age" related AAS use, and good information was a lot harder to come by during that time. Just goes to show how valuable internet discussion forums are to AAS users.

Very true. These forums really can be quite a good supplemental educational tool, but it can be tough weeding out the facts from the heralded "broscience" at times; especially the newer guys. Research with AAS use is without-a-doubt a very important brick in the foundation of success. I like the motto here on AM: Learn - Teach - Lead

The problem with many of these type of studies (or even a given anecdotal situation in general) is that there are so many unknown factors that can be playing a part in the overall pathology (be it hepatic, renal, or endocrine in nature).

From my own experience in the clinical setting, I can tell you that a good majority of people either aren't very good historians, or they only give you part of the big picture; or there can be underlying issues not yet discovered or manifested. That's what makes the history and physical of a medical exam so vital. Any doctor needs both a detailed history and physical to correlate the results and formulate a diagnosis, differential diagnosis, and/or best educated guess based on what they've uncovered with the clinical exam and diagnostic testing intervetions.

There were guys that refused some of the lab tests in this study; that alone makes this nothing more than a good read, imo. To get really good data there needs to be random sampling, and those that are involved need to fully submit to the parameters of the study.

The gynecomastia issue has so many myths and false information floating around bodybuilding boards that it's ridiculous; broscience has taken over in some instances.....scary sh*t.

- John