Discuss: AAS and your lipid profile
02-05-2006 03:08 AM
02-05-2006 03:36 AM
I ran 1000mg of test for 14 weeks and this was my lipid panel at the end
Cholesterol, Total 146 (100-199)
HDL 54 (40-59)
VLDL 17 (5-40)
LDL 75 (0-99)
02-05-2006 08:10 AM
This is the point of why so many people are so angrily opposed the scheduling of AAS. Look for the thread in general chat titled something like: I wish everyone could see this video about ASS. (His mistake not mine; ass/aas
Originally Posted by logan
Like you said, it is the methyls that really cause lipid problems.
02-05-2006 09:10 AM
dead sexy wino
Correct Beo.....Just remember that lipid health is only ONE of the things to be concerned with Logan. You seem very smart and are doing your research and for that I will rep you. Just keep in mind that you are still young and may want kids someday. You do not want "grape nuts" (phrase coined by our own Ageless) and find yourself without the ability to have children later in life. If you maintain your current attitude of researching and logical approach, then you will be fine. Be sure to follow proper PCT protocol and don't get the "more is better" attitude as so many of us get in this world. Diet and training will be paramount anyway adn at your age you can make pretty good gains as a natty, but if you enter the AAS world, keep your wits about you and you'll be fine.
One more thing....bloodwork..bloodwork. ..bloodwork
02-05-2006 09:13 AM
i watched the video yesterday..
showing the bad side not being so bad and only proving the fact that if over 21 and dosage is correct and not screwing around, it is not as bad as they say...they use deaths from various things and knowing they took aas, they try to just blame that - hah
i took ergomax, a legal for now PH - now 2 months out from pct:
cholesterol - 207 -
Trigyycerides - 72 -
HDL - 38 -
LDL - 155 -
Ratio - 5.4 -
with above said and out of range for standard lipids, this is the range that my family is in - for us it is normal. genetics my friend can be a funny thing...
02-05-2006 01:15 PM
Thanks for the kind words and advice(and reps ). I agree that PCT is just as important or even more so than the actual cycle. You have to bring your body back to balance and a state of harmony as efficiently as you can. Especially if you want to be in this thing for the long run.
Just wanted to keep the focus of this thread on the negatives to lipid profiles and the cardiovascular system.
02-05-2006 01:24 PM
Thanks for that bit of info!! no wonder I couldn't find the damn article.
Originally Posted by Klaus
Now I was able to find it! some good charts and information in that study. For those who are interested here is the link:
02-05-2006 01:31 PM
anyone got any studies on either Dianabol or other c17 alpha alkylated substances and how it affects lipid profiles and things?
I've seen one on Anadrol, but the study is done with men around the age of 60. I wanted to find something with a broader range of age groups and younger like the test. study.
02-05-2006 04:53 PM
Logan, you seem like a good guy.
Nandi discussed all of this in one of his articles a few years before he passed on. You'll see he also cites some information on winstrol. Its effect on HDL is disasterous. I looked up the studies a long time ago, but if I can recall correctly you can still find the stanozolol one in full text.
Start at "Why has testosterone been suggested as the "safest" drug to use?"
02-06-2006 12:15 AM
I wrote an article about this for avants magazine mind and muscle. Atherosclerosis is a long term, self perpetuating illness. Even kids will show preliminary atherosclerotic change at autopsy. Not everyone will die of a heart attack or stroke though...Seeing as cardiovascular disease is such a debilitating and common disease I'm of the mindset that I will avoid all possible insults, even if they are seemingly insignificant. For me, someone that isn't a competitive athlete and enjoys the proccess of bodybuilding as much as the pay off, steroids just aren't that great an option. You can get really big with out steroids, its gonna take a while, but you can do it. Ultimately everyone has to make the risk eval on their own. I imagine a lot of young, over zealous people make hasty decisions (about lots of things, not just steroids), but thats part of life.
Hypothetically, say you have a 1% chance of having your 1 cycle of steroids give you a heart attack or a stroke 20 years down the road. To make it interesting, say if you don't use steroids you'll have the same outcome but instead 30 years down the road. Is it worth it? Just fun questions to ponder.
02-06-2006 12:36 PM
This article right:
I had also read that as part of my research into the side effects of AAS when it comes to long term use and health.
I do agree on many points. Especially for anyone thinkng of doing AAS to get bloodwork done first and to avoid a cycle if they are already subject to poor cholestoral balance or high blood pressure. As the use of certain AAS will not help their cause.
However, as shown in the study I mentioned. There are certain AAS that can be used without causing significant change to you lipd profile. For example test e at moderate dosages can be used without any change in you LDL and only a slight drop in HDL. A drop that may very well still leave you within the normal range. I highly doubt such a minimal drop would pose that much of a threat.
I'm still new at this. So I have yet to read any studies on AAS and hemodynamic change. This being the other possible risk factor. If you know of any studies that I can look at that would be great.
I would still argue that as long as someone gets there bloodwork done first to make sure things are well within normal range. Then using using certain AAS in moderate amounts and with long off periods in between cycles would result in a very minimal risk of any future cardiovascular problems.
I am by far an expert on any of this. I'm just asking questions, reading and learning.
I'm stressing cautious and intellectual use here and not abuse. There is a big difference between the two of them.
02-06-2006 09:31 PM
Studies on the effects of steroids are few and far between. You'll find some odd things in mice and stuff but its not always easy to draw real world conclusions. One thing you can think about is the difference between the incidence of CVD in men and women of the same age. Its likely mostly due to the protective effects of estrogen, but the damaging effects of testosterone can't be ignored.
Originally Posted by logan
It sounds like you're one of the ones that will do things right . Doesn't mean you wont get burned but you'll be a lot better off than most folks. I wish I could point you to and give you a definitive answer but they just don't exist in my opinion.
Similar Forum Threads
By MattD1 in forum Anabolics
Last Post: 09-15-2009, 09:09 AM
By CEDeoudes59 in forum Cycle Info
Last Post: 06-08-2009, 09:12 AM
By RocketFan in forum Anabolics
Last Post: 04-16-2009, 06:56 PM
By athlete20 in forum Supplements
Last Post: 02-26-2007, 01:12 AM
By CEDeoudes59 in forum Anabolics
Last Post: 03-09-2005, 04:25 PM