4-andro

[thebigt]

It happens a lot. A guy will come on here and try to "enlighten" all the OGs with their superior knowledge.

I think it was maybe a year and a half ago, that a Dr came on here and was trying to correct every other post/comment. .... You know... 'Cause he's a Dr, and he and his Dr friends can explain to us why so much of what we believe is wrong. ('cause they're Drs).

He's gone now.
He didn't stay long. Not because we ran him off, but because we already knew the truth (from decades of experience, and study).

I guess he finally got tired of being wrong (or not being trusted, simply because he was a Dr).

I'm in NO WAY downplaying medical knowledge. We have some wonderfully knowledgeable and talented guys on here in the medical field (I won't call them out here, because I don't want them to be swamped with questions and tags).

But those guys know how to balance their medical knowledge with their own personal experiences, and with the experiences of other knowledgeable guys on here.

don't forget all the 'google' experts who have come and gone...the list is long.

 

[Renew1]

don't forget all the 'google' experts who have come and gone...the list is long.

It's incredibly long.

We all have access to Google.
Some of us just understand how limited and fallible it really is.

 

[thebigt]

It's incredibly long.

We all have access to Google.
Some of us just understand how limited and fallible it really is.

if it's on he internet it must be true

 

[StarScream66]

you are really good at posting studys…. I ran the original oympus labs 4andro and epiandro while on trt for 2 months...I got blood tested towards the end of cycle and my test was 500 points higher. it nearly got me taken off trt, had to convince doc it was a fluke, when retested a month after cycle my test had returned almost to normal with it being only slightly above base--estrogen remained within range with only a slight increase....look at some of the reviews, my results were pretty much the norm.

Well, you have to remember, 4andro also converts to androstenediol, so it will increase testosterone - no doubt. But the problem is 4DHEA is a pro-prodrug. It has to convert via 2 enzymes into androstenedione and androstenediol. Both of those are competing with that enzyme to make the conversion.

It happens a lot. A guy will come on here and try to "enlighten" all the OGs with their superior knowledge.

I think it was maybe a year and a half ago, that a Dr came on here and was trying to correct every other post/comment. .... You know... 'Cause he's a Dr, and he and his Dr friends can explain to us why so much of what we believe is wrong. ('cause they're Drs).

He's gone now.
He didn't stay long. Not because we ran him off, but because we already knew the truth (from decades of experience, and study).

I guess he finally got tired of being wrong (or not being trusted, simply because he was a Dr).

I'm in NO WAY downplaying medical knowledge. We have some wonderfully knowledgeable and talented guys on here in the medical field (I won't call them out here, because I don't want them to be swamped with questions and tags).

But those guys know how to balance their medical knowledge with their own personal experiences, and with the experiences of other knowledgeable guys on here.

So, you think I'm just a Google expert looking up things and posting them here? I mentioned in another thread that have decades of experience using AAS/PHs/DS. I'm not just pulling things out of my ass or Googling them to make it seem like I'm some kind of medical expert. I'm not, and I corrected myself above and said I was wrong, and after looking at the evidence, I'm willing to admit I'm wrong.

It's obvious you don't like me. I'm not sure why, maybe we got off on the wrong foot or you've seen people like me who claim to have knowledge come here and tell you. But I'm getting these ad hominem attacks, along with burden of proof and tu-quoquetu. The logical fallacies are all over the place.

But the fact of the matter is, you can also claim to be an expert who has years of experience with this, but that doesn't mean you know what's happening in the human body or that the studies I post are invalid. In fact, I'm the only one who is posting any valid scientific evidence to backup my arguments. All I get from you is "Pfft, meaningless. I have years of experience."

Real science > years of anecdotal "experience"

If you want to argue with me, fine, but understand your bias towards me and at least acknowledge you can't find the studies to back up your arguments, you could be wrong on certain things, and you could have been experiencing the placebo effect and your confirmation bias is causing you to ignore evidence when it's right in front of you because it doesn't fit with what you already believe.

So, if you don't like me, fine. I'm here to learn and I'm here to help. I don't know everything, but I do know a lot. I can back up what I say with sources, and if I'm wrong I'm happy to correct myself. I'm not trying to show off or claim I'm some kind of hot sh!t know it all. Just like you, I'm here to try and help people on subjects I know about. Ones I don't know about I don't post in those threads. Others, I do.

-SS

 

[Renew1]

Well, you have to remember, 4andro also converts to androstenediol, so it will increase testosterone - no doubt. But the problem is 4DHEA is a pro-prodrug. It has to convert via 2 enzymes into androstenedione and androstenediol. Both of those are competing with that enzyme to make the conversion.



So, you think I'm just a Google expert looking up things and posting them here? I mentioned in another thread that have decades of experience using AAS/PHs/DS. I'm not just pulling things out of my ass or Googling them to make it seem like I'm some kind of medical expert. I'm not, and I corrected myself above and said I was wrong, and after looking at the evidence, I'm willing to admit I'm wrong.

It's obvious you don't like me. I'm not sure why, maybe we got off on the wrong foot or you've seen people like me who claim to have knowledge come here and tell you. But I'm getting these ad hominem attacks, along with burden of proof and tu-quoquetu. The logical fallacies are all over the place.

But the fact of the matter is, you can also claim to be an expert who has years of experience with this, but that doesn't mean you know what's happening in the human body or that the studies I post are invalid. In fact, I'm the only one who is posting any valid scientific evidence to backup my arguments. All I get from you is "Pfft, meaningless. I have years of experience."

Real science > years of anecdotal "experience"

If you want to argue with me, fine, but understand your bias towards me and at least acknowledge you can't find the studies to back up your arguments, you could be wrong on certain things, and you could have been experiencing the placebo effect and your confirmation bias is causing you to ignore evidence when it's right in front of you because it doesn't fit with what you already believe.

So, if you don't like me, fine. I'm here to learn and I'm here to help. I don't know everything, but I do know a lot. I can back up what I say with sources, and if I'm wrong I'm happy to correct myself. I'm not trying to show off or claim I'm some kind of hot sh!t know it all. Just like you, I'm here to try and help people on subjects I know about. Ones I don't know about I don't post in those threads. Others, I do.

-SS

Nope.
You're wrong man.
I was actually preparing a post praising how much you're willing to dig in and research, when you (once again) posted things that you read as fact, totally dismissing everyone else who has been trying (pretty fruitlessly) to get you back on track.

You aren't as knowledgeable as you believe yourself to be... And that is 100% ok. It's ok to lack knowledge.
But when you present yourself as holding all the facts, just waiting to put them out there on the table, claiming that the rest of us are wrong. .... That's not going to gain you a lot of support here man.

We love truth, and we love people (the real truth protects and helps people). So when guys come in and try to shoot down truth, with their mistaken idea of truth .... That ends up being a difficult road.

 

[Renew1]

.... Notice ... It isn't Renew is against Starscream. It is Starscream claiming most of us to be wrong.

 

[StarScream66]

Nope.
You're wrong man.
I was actually preparing a post praising how much you're willing to dig in and research, when you (once again) posted things that you read as fact, totally dismissing everyone else who has been trying (pretty fruitlessly) to get you back on track.

Well, I appreciate that. Maybe I do get a bit off track in certain threads, but sometimes I just have streams of consciousness that I feel would be interesting or relevant to the particular thread.

You aren't as knowledgeable as you believe yourself to be... And that is 100% ok. It's ok to lack knowledge.
But when you present yourself as holding all the facts, just waiting to put them out there on the table, claiming that the rest of us are wrong. .... That's not going to gain you a lot of support here man.

Here's what I want to emphasize. I'm trying to say you're wrong. If you want to use a product, by all means do so, but all I'm saying is be aware of the potential side effects. What I'm trying to do is create a debate. A civil discussion where we can come together and say "Hey, you know maybe XYZ is wrong. I think ABC". And that's totally fine. I never meant to come across as insulting or like a know it all trying to tell you that your years of experience counts for nothing and the studies I post are written in stone or anything. So, I apologize if I come across like that, but it's not been my intention.

We love truth, and we love people (the real truth protects and helps people). So when guys come in and try to shoot down truth, with their mistaken idea of truth .... That ends up being a difficult road.

Well, I'm here to learn as well as help. I'm doing what I can.

.... Notice ... It isn't Renew is against Starscream. It is Starscream claiming most of us to be wrong.

Again, I don't want to come across that I'm saying you're wrong. I'm trying to encourage you to look at the evidence, look at the studies, look at what countless doctors, scientists and experts in their field have discovered already about these things and know that it's not just bogus nonsense that should be ignored.

 

[Renew1]

Well, I appreciate that. Maybe I do get a bit off track in certain threads, but sometimes I just have streams of consciousness that I feel would be interesting or relevant to the particular thread.



Here's what I want to emphasize. I'm trying to say you're wrong. If you want to use a product, by all means do so, but all I'm saying is be aware of the potential side effects. What I'm trying to do is create a debate. A civil discussion where we can come together and say "Hey, you know maybe XYZ is wrong. I think ABC". And that's totally fine. I never meant to come across as insulting or like a know it all trying to tell you that your years of experience counts for nothing and the studies I post are written in stone or anything. So, I apologize if I come across like that, but it's not been my intention.



Well, I'm here to learn as well as help. I'm doing what I can.



Again, I don't want to come across that I'm saying you're wrong. I'm trying to encourage you to look at the evidence, look at the studies, look at what countless doctors, scientists and experts in their field have discovered already about these things and know that it's not just bogus nonsense that should be ignored.

Seriously .... Those who've seen many of my posts at all know how often I stress that guys need to study. Because some don't.
But I do. And Ripper does. And thebigt does. Pretty much, all of the established guys do. So when you post the studies and papers, etc, it isn't that we're unwilling to look at that stuff. It's that most of the time, we already have. And if we're dismissing it, it is because we know that the information stated there is not entirely accurate. Either because of (many times) personal experience, or other means.

Everybody can be wrong. I certainly am sometimes.
And everybody isn't always the favorite around here. There was a time when (although I was appreciated), I wasn't always the guy people were happy to see show up to a conversation, because sometimes I can push the "harm-reduction" pretty hard.

But thankfully, nobody (for the most part) holds grudges around here. And people who mean well, and aren't 100% inflexible, usually enjoy the atmosphere.

 

[cheftepesh1]

Seriously .... Those who've seen many of my posts at all know how often I stress that guys need to study. Because some don't.
But I do. And Ripper does. And thebigt does. Pretty much, all of the established guys do. So when you post the studies and papers, etc, it isn't that we're unwilling to look at that stuff. It's that most of the time, we already have. And if we're dismissing it, it is because we know that the information stated there is not entirely accurate. Either because of (many times) personal experience, or other means.

Everybody can be wrong. I certainly am sometimes.
And everybody isn't always the favorite around here. There was a time when (although I was appreciated), I wasn't always the guy people were happy to see show up to a conversation, because sometimes I can push the "harm-reduction" pretty hard.

But thankfully, nobody (for the most part) holds grudges around here. And people who mean well, and aren't 100% inflexible, usually enjoy the atmosphere.

Well said

 

[bigdadybry]

The full study is available here:

Androstenedione Does Not Stimulate Muscle Protein Anabolism in Young Healthy Men1

Androstenedione is the immediate precursor of testosterone. Androstenedione intake has been speculated to increase plasma testosterone levels and muscle anaboli

academic.oup.com

I realize I am over two months late to this, but I happen to be searching about diols, read some of these posts, and felt compelled to say something.

It helps to read the protocol of the study being posted which states androstenedione causes muscle loss. From the study itself:
"Subjects were recreationally active, although none was involved in consistent resistance exercise training. None of the subjects was taking any form of medication, creatine, amino acid supplements, or anabolic steroids or was on an excessive protein diet."

If the OP were expecting to increase muscle mass by not consuming excess protein, supplementing with creatine or aminos, and absent of consistent resistance exercise training from his regiment, then yes, over a 5 day period, he too may lose muscle mass.

On the contrary, the linked study does not apply to those who frequent this forum to improve physique or performance nor should it be applicable to anyone looking to use androstenedione in conjunction with resistance training and proper supportive nutrition.

You can find a study that says just about anything you want, but it is in the methods and protocols which determine if it is applicable or not. Given the date of this study (2000), if I was forced to guess the motivation for this study, I would assume it was looking at androstenedione as a treatment for a wasting syndrome (HIV/AIDS, cancer, etc.) where maintaining LBM is paramount, absent of nutrition and exercise. Remember, it was less than a decade earlier when Megace (similar to progesterone) was used in this fashion to halt rapid weight loss. Soon after, they realized weight alone was a horrible marker for success.

 

[thebigt]

I realize I am over two months late to this, but I happen to be searching about diols, read some of these posts, and felt compelled to say something.

It helps to read the protocol of the study being posted which states androstenedione causes muscle loss. From the study itself:
"Subjects were recreationally active, although none was involved in consistent resistance exercise training. None of the subjects was taking any form of medication, creatine, amino acid supplements, or anabolic steroids or was on an excessive protein diet."

If the OP were expecting to increase muscle mass by not consuming excess protein, supplementing with creatine or aminos, and absent of consistent resistance exercise training from his regiment, then yes, over a 5 day period, he too may lose muscle mass.

On the contrary, the linked study does not apply to those who frequent this forum to improve physique or performance nor should it be applicable to anyone looking to use androstenedione in conjunction with resistance training and proper supportive nutrition.

You can find a study that says just about anything you want, but it is in the methods and protocols which determine if it is applicable or not. Given the date of this study (2000), if I was forced to guess the motivation for this study, I would assume it was looking at androstenedione as a treatment for a wasting syndrome (HIV/AIDS, cancer, etc.) where maintaining LBM is paramount, absent of nutrition and exercise. Remember, it was less than a decade earlier when Megace (similar to progesterone) was used in this fashion to halt rapid weight loss. Soon after, they realized weight alone was a horrible marker for success.

what a great post!!!

 

[bigdadybry]

what a great post!!!

Thank you sir!

 

[johnny412]

It says it plain as day.

anybody can write an article and post it online

 

[StarScream66]

anybody can write an article and post it online

Not if it's a peer reviewed medical study that published by a prestigious medical institute into a legitimate medical journal. That's what I'm referring too. Not just some article I read online.

 

[StarScream66]

I realize I am over two months late to this, but I happen to be searching about diols, read some of these posts, and felt compelled to say something.

It helps to read the protocol of the study being posted which states androstenedione causes muscle loss. From the study itself:
"Subjects were recreationally active, although none was involved in consistent resistance exercise training. None of the subjects was taking any form of medication, creatine, amino acid supplements, or anabolic steroids or was on an excessive protein diet."

But, in this study they specifically lost muscle mass while taking 4androsenedione. That shouldn't happen under any circumstances, unless the conversion rate to 4AD is extremely receptor to be converting into estrogen.

 

[bigdadybry]

But, in this study they specifically lost muscle mass while taking 4androsenedione. That shouldn't happen under any circumstances, unless the conversion rate to 4AD is extremely receptor to be converting into estrogen.

I am not looking for an argument, I don't have a dog in the fight. Here's my reply.

Yes, this small sample size did experience muscle loss. Recall that "they" = "recreationally active, although none was involved in consistent resistance exercise training. None of the subjects was taking any form of medication, creatine, amino acid supplements, or anabolic steroids or was on an excessive protein diet."
The study does not extend these findings to include a group that is completely different than the study group. The study was performed using a different subset of humans than what is present in this forum.

Your conclusion regarding "the conversion rate to 4AD is extremely receptor to be converting into estrogen" is not the conclusion of the researchers in the study.