In Defense of Ephedrine

Page 2 of 2 First 12
  1. YellowJacket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    0
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    37
    Lv. Percent
    95.44%
    Achievements Activity Pro

    Originally posted by John Benz

    My thoughts exactly. Unpublished and/or uncited pubmed articles are a joke. Pubmed publishes everything in sight, some good; some junk. Without being published in a journal and cited per source, they are worthless in an argument on any given topic.

    Well thats news to me, but certainly its better than Testosterone magazine. Like I said before, if the studies are worthless, feel free to rip them apart and refute them with studies (not from Pubmed) that say otherwise, until then, I will continue to hold Pubmed right up there at the top with the golden standards of research.

  2. Banned
    John Benz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    520
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    17
    Lv. Percent
    99.21%

    Originally posted by Biggin
    ... why then is there even a Pubmed link down there? let's all use the test rag
    Pubmed is a good source of information; a tool. They list it all, good and bad; but they can't make the right selections for you. You have to use common sense and wade through the crap, and find the good published articles. Leave those unpublished, uncited ones on the scrap heap.
  3. YellowJacket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    0
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    37
    Lv. Percent
    95.44%
    Achievements Activity Pro

    Originally posted by John Benz

    Pubmed is a good source of information; a tool. They list it all, good and bad; but they can't make the right selections for you. You have to use common sense and wade through the crap, and find the good published articles. Leave those unpublished, uncited ones on the scrap heap.
    This has nothin to do with the glutamine articles/studies right?

    So if they're uncited, that makes them null correct? even if it confirms common knowledge? Even if its done by more then legit universities and institutions? Even if you can read and comprehend the method, materials, results and conclsion and it all matches?

    Riiiiight.
    •   
       

  4. Banned
    John Benz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    520
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    17
    Lv. Percent
    99.21%

    Originally posted by YellowJacket
    Well thats news to me, but certainly its better than Testosterone magazine. Like I said before, if the studies are worthless, feel free to rip them apart and refute them with studies (not from Pubmed) that say otherwise, until then, I will continue to hold Pubmed right up there at the top with the golden standards of research.
    If they are not worthless, cite them and where they were published, please. If not one major journal felt they were golden, neither do I.
  5. Senior Member
    windwords7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    2,297
    Rep Power
    1558
    Level
    35
    Lv. Percent
    32.82%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    I know that this is going to be an excellent debate on the merits of a stated case, right fellas? LOL! Pretty please!
  6. Banned
    John Benz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    520
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    17
    Lv. Percent
    99.21%

    Originally posted by YellowJacket


    This has nothin to do with the glutamine articles/studies right?

    So if they're uncited, that makes them null correct? even if it confirms common knowledge? Even if its done by more then legit universities and institutions? Even if you can read and comprehend the method, materials, results and conclsion and it all matches?

    Riiiiight.
    If they were professionally done and deemed worthy, they would have been printed in a major journal. Every Harvard grad who does one of these studies, does it with the highest aspirations of getting his/her work published. Journals will turn you down if your work is not noteworthy. And if is not, why would I heed advice from someone turned down for publication.

    Read my lips, Pubmed is a directory for every scrap of information. They DO NOT evaluate or determine if it is correct or not! Good stuff in there sure; but a lot of junk as well. Anything uncited and unpublished must be taken with a grain of salt.
  7. YellowJacket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    0
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    37
    Lv. Percent
    95.44%
    Achievements Activity Pro

    Originally posted by John Benz

    If they were professionally done and deemed worthy, they would have been printed in a major journal. Every Harvard grad who does one of these studies, does it with the highest aspirations of getting his/her work published. Journals will turn you down if your work is not noteworthy. And if is not, why would I heed advice from someone turned down for publication.
    Now you're going off in the wild blue. Whats the criteria for getting your studies published? Insufficient data I would assume is one ite on the list of musts, but if you re-read this articles, each are fully detailed. Who knows, no one even knows if they appear in journals or not, for all we know, they could be. Back to my main point, if you feel they're crap and unworthy, feel free to pick them apart, no one thus far has taken up that offer, only giving opinions that it's PROBABLY unworthy, sorry, I just dont see it.

    Read my lips, Pubmed is a directory for every scrap of information. They DO NOT evaluate or determine if it is correct or not! Good stuff in there sure; but a lot of junk as well. Anything uncited and unpublished must be taken with a grain of salt.
    Really cant read your lips as this is the internet, but on a serious note, I dont think its a fair assumption to say because it doesnt include a citation of journal publication that its total trash, and if your only basis for saying its total trash is the lack of journal cited and not content, well then this argument is over because that holds no merit.
  8. Senior Member
    windwords7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    2,297
    Rep Power
    1558
    Level
    35
    Lv. Percent
    32.82%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    I think balance in your approach to pubmed is the key. You cant assume that just becuase its on pubmed that its gospel and equally you cant assume that its not. That's where multiple studies become the key, seeing the study demonstrated more than once, in different circumstances, with the same or similar results.
  9. YellowJacket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    0
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    37
    Lv. Percent
    95.44%
    Achievements Activity Pro

    Originally posted by windwords7
    I think balance in your approach to pubmed is the key. You cant assume that just becuase its on pubmed that its gospel and equally you cant assume that its not. That's where multiple studies become the key, seeing the study demonstrated more than once, in different circumstances, with the same or similar results.

    Oh, stellar point. Thats why I always request multiple studies. You can find 1 study on the effects of dietary **** on muscle growth, but can you find 2? Doubtful. Good point Jake.
  10. Banned
    John Benz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    520
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    17
    Lv. Percent
    99.21%

    Originally posted by YellowJacket
    ....Back to my main point, if you feel they're crap and unworthy, feel free to pick them apart, no one thus far has taken up that offer, only giving opinions that it's PROBABLY unworthy, sorry, I just dont see it.
    I won't pick apart uncited articles, as without citation and publication, it's just someone's opinion, not a reference source. The authors of these uncited and unpublished works have no credibility, even less than the writers of a bodybuilding mag. At least those writers know their subject, and are not delving into whether gluatamine can cure feline aids through intravenous administration or grow new skin on a deformed dog. Sheeeeze, do you even read what you post, or just spit out words to see where they splatter? Please do not keep quoting and posting uncited work. This argument is over. Sorry you can't find any journal publications to back up your articles.
  11. YellowJacket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    0
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    37
    Lv. Percent
    95.44%
    Achievements Activity Pro

    Originally posted by John Benz

    I won't pick apart uncited articles, as without citation and publication, it's just someone's opinion, not a reference source. The authors of these uncited and unpublished works have no credibility, even less than the writers of a bodybuilding mag. At least those writers know their subject, and are not delving into whether gluatamine can cure feline aids through intravenous administration or grow new skin on a deformed dog. Sheeeeze, do you even read what you post, or just spit out words to see where they splatter? Please do not keep quoting and posting uncited work. This argument is over. Sorry you can't find any journal publications to back up your articles.
    This is opinion? LMAO! A double blind study, in lab report format is someone's opinion? Oh god, I have honestly heard it all. No credibility? Wtf? This is great. But a glutamine article in Testosterone Magazine does? Hahahaha. Good ****.... well like I said, if you can not refute them because you can not find the proper material, then leave well enough alone.
  12. Banned
    John Benz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    520
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    17
    Lv. Percent
    99.21%

    Originally posted by windwords7
    That's where multiple studies become the key, seeing the study demonstrated more than once, in different circumstances, with the same or similar results.
    These can be used for personal reference, but if unpublished cannot be used as definitive evidence, as 3 unpublished studies are simply 3 opinions that agree on a point. To be published, you must meet a set of criteria and rigid parameters. many of these glutamine studies done on lab rats etc, don't even mention number of rats, aids patients, etc; how long they were studied, or how rigid were the controls.

    Without knowledge of these variables, these studies are invaid and worthless as definative references.
  13. YellowJacket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    0
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    37
    Lv. Percent
    95.44%
    Achievements Activity Pro

    Well I got bored, so I took it upon myself to research if these articles really were journal publications, and uh oh.....

    The first one is from the American Academy of Neurology.
    http://www.neurology.org/cgi/content/abstract/60/1/132

    The same authors can be seen cited in the NEJM & JAMA.


    The second is also published, by a lesser known, but known publishing group:

    http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v2.../0802061a.html

    Not too worried about this one, this was the most obvious of the studies.


    The third one can be found here in full text:

    http://ntp-server.niehs.nih.gov/htdo...ealkaloids.pdf

    Appears on hundreds of university online libraries and published by the same organization as above, not to mention government approved.

    The 4th can be found in full text here:

    http://www.senate.gov/~gov_affairs/073102heymsfield.pdf

    (Note the website), its also published in by the same group as above
    and also published by Annals of Internal Medicine and can be found here: http://jama.ama-assn.org/issues/v289.../jrv20107.html Published by JAMA.


    And the final article can be found here in full text:

    http://www.med.uni-magdeburg.de/~csc...999_20_805.pdf

    And also posted in the American Journal of Physiology.


    **So there you have it, all credibility is confirmed. Damn, that was some work.


    Last edited by YellowJacket; 03-16-2003 at 02:42 AM.
  14. Banned
    John Benz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    520
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    17
    Lv. Percent
    99.21%

    Originally posted by YellowJacket


    This is opinion? LMAO! A double blind study, in lab report format is someone's opinion? Oh god, I have honestly heard it all. No credibility? Wtf? This is great. But a glutamine article in Testosterone Magazine does? Hahahaha. Good ****.... well like I said, if you can not refute them because you can not find the proper material, then leave well enough alone.
    Take your own advice. Testosterone magazine articles showing Dr Eric Serrano's personal results are far more valid than your half-baked double-blind lab aids study with no citation. What are the credentials of your testers? How were the controls set up? And where are the double blind studies on healthy weight-lifting human patients to refute the well renouned work of Eric Serrano? Too much for you? Come back when you understand, and when you figure out how to cite some real published studies for me refute. I won't refute an invalid double blind on lab rats or aids patients. Nothing to do with Bodybuilders and their added need for glutamine.
  15. Senior Member
    windwords7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    2,297
    Rep Power
    1558
    Level
    35
    Lv. Percent
    32.82%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    I do tire of reading about animals when it may or may not have anything to do with how it effects humans. We talked many a moon ago on BB.com about setting up a study center just to test stuff on humans, specifically bodybuilders for just that reason.
  16. New Member
    p_zub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    26
    Rep Power
    159
    Level
    4
    Lv. Percent
    77.21%

    Hey Hal. These studies do exist. I researched medline for 4 days going though hundreds of abstracts. All it takes is time but I guess you want things spoon-fed to you.

    As far as the prestige of certain journals...because they are peer-reviewed, they like it when you tell them what they want to hear...much like a university science course. Consider the JAMA. The american medical association probably has very strong ties to the pharmaceutical industry...hence the word "medicine". Do you think they want to hear that a $30 bottle of ECA is more effective than their 100-something dollar drug and is still safe? I think people want to believe that MDs are always concerned about the well being of their patients, but ever wonder why doctors prescribe anti-biotics for a flu or cold? This over-prescription is why bacteria are becoming resistant to our medicines.

    The other journals probably aren't as prestigous as the JAMA or New Eng J Med, but a properly done study should be regarded just as much ..especially when the trial is replicated with similar results. Unitl double-blind placebo-controlled studies conclude that ephedrine causes unwanted side effects, I wouldn't trash the current research just because the MDs of this world dont want their profession associated with it.
  17. Banned
    John Benz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    520
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    17
    Lv. Percent
    99.21%

    Thumbs up


    Originally posted by YellowJacket
    Well I got bored, so I took it upon myself to research if these articles really were journal publications, and uh oh.....
    Good job. See, you can find them if you look. These have much more relevance. Now I'm off to bed.
  18. Senior Member
    windwords7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    2,297
    Rep Power
    1558
    Level
    35
    Lv. Percent
    32.82%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Listen, I take my own results over studies when it's all said and done. If I know it works for me, I don't care what anyone else says. Even if that ends up meaning that it's all placebo effect, I really don't care. What I care about are results. How I get those results arent the primary issue to me. THAT I get the results is. Some good points pzub. Benz you have some good points and as always, so does YJ.
  19. Senior Member
    windwords7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    2,297
    Rep Power
    1558
    Level
    35
    Lv. Percent
    32.82%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    There, YJ has provided the references. Now we can all play nice!
  20. New Member
    p_zub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    26
    Rep Power
    159
    Level
    4
    Lv. Percent
    77.21%

    I totally agree ww7. I think that people underestimate the placebo effect. Think about it this way, if you buy a supplement to increase strength. Even if there's no "scientific evidence" for it, if you take it and you increase your strength more than you normally would have, is it really a **** supplement and a waste of money? For some people, its their psychological side that prevents from achieving any serious gains, so I say if the supplement did what you wanted it to do and you didn't mind paying for it, then all the power to you. What if someone created a treatment for cancer that was highly effective...do you think the patient would care if it was a placebo-effect, if it god rid of the cancer?
  21. Senior Member
    windwords7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    2,297
    Rep Power
    1558
    Level
    35
    Lv. Percent
    32.82%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Exactly Pzub, in the end its that it works for you!
  22. New Member
    p_zub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    26
    Rep Power
    159
    Level
    4
    Lv. Percent
    77.21%

    why can't modern medicine and holistic medicine just get along like they do in Germany and most of europe? probably because it doesn't cost much to rip a plant out of the ground....
  23. YellowJacket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    0
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    37
    Lv. Percent
    95.44%
    Achievements Activity Pro

    Ok, Not agreeing or disagreeing here but heres my only problem with that....

    Ok, Im a creatine non responder. So I buy some anyway, I gain 10lbs on my bench in 3 weeks, pretty good. All placebo right? Ok, heres where Science comes in. To each his own, somethings work for different people, creatine doesnt work for me, nor does glutamine. But some people swear by it. Science and studies are the golden standard. They set the mark for the general population, not just in bodybuilding. They provide physiological reasons as to WHY what works and what doesnt. People want to debate me in various things related to supplementation effectiveness, I provide countless studies, and I get in return "well it works for me". Well great, but things work differently for different people, I think we can all agree with that. So a study, backed with science provides information on how different supplements effect different people. Like the above studies.

    Science saves money. Surei t works for you, great, but you can make a generalization and say it will work for everyone? No, not if you have any intelligence or common sense.
  24. Senior Member
    Biggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    1,285
    Rep Power
    789
    Level
    30
    Lv. Percent
    50.13%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    nice one P Zub
  25. Senior Member
    windwords7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    2,297
    Rep Power
    1558
    Level
    35
    Lv. Percent
    32.82%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    I agree there too. I am huge believer in blending Eastern and Western Medicines.
  26. YellowJacket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    0
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    37
    Lv. Percent
    95.44%
    Achievements Activity Pro

    Originally posted by windwords7
    I agree there too. I am huge believer in blending Eastern and Western Medicines.

    I prefer Mexican and Portugal 'medicines'
  27. New Member
    p_zub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    26
    Rep Power
    159
    Level
    4
    Lv. Percent
    77.21%

    Originally posted by YellowJacket



    I prefer Mexican and Portugal 'medicines'
    Yeah...who would have thought that mexican "medicine" can used to treat every known ailment bodybuilders tend to get...
  28. New Member
    Hal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Age
    44
    Posts
    81
    Rep Power
    184
    Level
    10
    Lv. Percent
    13.83%

    YJ, thanks for getting the citations up. All I really meant is that if one is going to go through the work of searching pubmed and posting the articles (I do appreciate you giving the full abstract as well as author and contact information) then the citation is perhaps the most important single line. Pubmed will pull up alot of crap that never gets published in a real journal.
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 01-22-2004, 08:53 PM
  2. In defense of soy
    By ex_banana-eater in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 11-17-2003, 04:36 AM
  3. Whos in charge of banners?
    By db682 in forum General Chat
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 11-13-2003, 02:10 PM
  4. In need of clomid!
    By ttboyy2k in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 08-04-2003, 01:58 PM
  5. Bulk quantity of Ephedrine
    By NPursuit in forum Supplements
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 05-08-2003, 08:36 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Log in
Log in