Can you quote it over here?
I'm lazy.
the doc said:looks like carcinogen in a bottle to me.
seriously, delivering an epoxide to the nucleus of a cell = mutagen!
i know the folklore about steroids and cancer but if there was ever one that would live up to it - it would be this! I am not denying that it may work in the short term, but what about the long term?? Much, much to risky imo
the doc has 10k posts and is a super moderator on that site.
Invalid Link RemovedAn epoxide is a cyclic ether with only three ring atoms. This ring approximately is an equilateral triangle, i.e. its bond angles are about 60°, which makes it highly strained. The strained ring makes epoxides more reactive than other ethers, especially towards nucleophiles. Simple epoxides are named from the parent compound ethylene oxide or oxirane, such as in chloromethyloxirane. As a functional group epoxides obtain the epoxy prefix such as in the compound 1,2-epoxycycloheptane which can also be called cycloheptene epoxide.
A lot of us stay confusedIt's like global warming to a point. You can seem to find an argument for whatever stance you take on it. One side imho, has more for it than the other but it's still there. I'll echo what YR said though. Seems Epi/Havoc et al has seen more crap come out of nowhere.
... Simply, if you are prone to a type of cancer, and may develop it over the course of, say, the next 30 years of your life, it is plausible that administration AAS may accelerate the rate of development. (i.e. you may express symptoms sooner than you may have without AAS).
Dr_C
Speaking of which, I think the inverse argument could be made as well. It stands to reason that administration of a specific compound today may delay or eliminate the latency for some otherwise inevitable pre-disposed condition too. Smokers are less likely to manifest Alzheimer's, for example, and show a later onset by ~6yrs over the general pop. (though they are more likely to die of lung cancer) so couldn't proactive, strategic steroid use today yield predicable benefits tomorrow, just as blind use of them may yield problem later? Blanket statement like "mutation" are a weak justification and only serve as fear propaganda. I agree with you about the last few decades of conventional studies.
So many variables and not enough money invested in studying them.