Effects of a moderate (500mg/week for 10 weeks) steroid cycle on cardiac dimensions

[CroLifter]

Disclaimer: Number of subjects: 1

Alright everyone, as I said in another thread, I have compiled echocardiogram results from right after the cycle, 4 months after the cycle and few days ago (post pneumonia echo).

What is important are cavity sizes, LVIDD (internal diameter of the left ventricle), LAD (internal diameter of the left atrium), RVIDD (right ventricle internal diameter) and the ejection fraction (shows the percentage of blood your left ventricle is able to squirt on every stroke).

All 3 echocardiograms were performed on the same machine and by the same cardiologist.

Cycle was Test E 500mg per week and I used Mast E at 200mg/week for the last 3.5 weeks.
Here we go:

3 weeks post last injection:
LVIDD 5,75cm
LAD 3,99 cm
RVIDD *no measurement
Aortic root diameter 3,05 cm
Ejection fraction 54%

After this i started "trt", 125mg per week of underdosed/blank test, so this was more like bad natty levels

4 months after the last injection
LVIDD 5,3cm
LAD 3,6 cm
RVIDD 3cm
Aortic root diameter 2,4 cm
Ejection fraction 64%


Now, between this second echo and this last i did 2 days ago, i did 8 weeks of 100mg test per week from september to november and i sporadically used mk677, i would say that i accumulated roughly 2 months on mk677 at 12.5 - 20 mg a day.

3rd echo (most recent one)
LVIDD 5,4 cm
LAD 3,5cm
RVIDD 2,9cm
Aortic root diameter 2,4 cm
Ejection fraction 62%


My conclusion?

-the measurements from my 2nd and 3rd echo which were 9 months apart are nearly identical and I believe it is safe to assume that these are my normal, baseline measurements.

- legit trt doses of up to 100mg per week do not negatively effect either the ejection fraction or cardiac cavity smeasurements

- sporadic increases in igf 1 stemming from use of mk677 (also peptides i believe since the increase in igf from peps isnt much more if any than mk) do not lead to statistically significant cardiac hypertrophy

-A moderate (~500mg per week) 10-12 week steroid cycle leads to significant (10-15%) increase in cardiac cavity sizes and also leads to significant decreases in ejection fraction, which also implies concenctric hypertrophy (thickening of the walls of the heart) it is safe to assume cardiac mass is also significantly increased

- cardiac hypertrophy induced by AAS is reversible in a short time frame, 3-4 months is enough to see positive changes in ejection fraction (which means that heart walls are decreasing in thickness) and normalization of cavity sizes


This is NOT my pledge to refrain from using aas. I simply put out this information for informational and awareness purposes.
I am a libertarian and dont care what anyone else does with their own body as long as it doesnt negatively affect me (e.g. a family member using harsh drugs etc)

If there is anything that I would advise based on this is that time OFF is mandatory not only for the sake of regaining natural T production but also for normalizing other, much more important aspects of your organism.

 

[mrjoda]

I have the same levels after my first cycle as natural a year ago, my cycle 250mg tst e e5d 12w + proviron 50mg, I'm surprised your levels after cycle have improved, that's gratifying

 

[Joshinator]

Disclaimer: Number of subjects: 1

Alright everyone, as I said in another thread, I have compiled echocardiogram results from right after the cycle, 4 months after the cycle and few days ago (post pneumonia echo).

What is important are cavity sizes, LVIDD (internal diameter of the left ventricle), LAD (internal diameter of the left atrium), RVIDD (right ventricle internal diameter) and the ejection fraction (shows the percentage of blood your left ventricle is able to squirt on every stroke).

All 3 echocardiograms were performed on the same machine and by the same cardiologist.

Cycle was Test E 500mg per week and I used Mast E at 200mg/week for the last 3.5 weeks.
Here we go:

3 weeks post last injection:
LVIDD 5,75cm
LAD 3,99 cm
RVIDD *no measurement
Aortic root diameter 3,05 cm
Ejection fraction 54%

After this i started "trt", 125mg per week of underdosed/blank test, so this was more like bad natty levels

4 months after the last injection
LVIDD 5,3cm
LAD 3,6 cm
RVIDD 3cm
Aortic root diameter 2,4 cm
Ejection fraction 64%


Now, between this second echo and this last i did 2 days ago, i did 8 weeks of 100mg test per week from september to november and i sporadically used mk677, i would say that i accumulated roughly 2 months on mk677 at 12.5 - 20 mg a day.

3rd echo (most recent one)
LVIDD 5,4 cm
LAD 3,5cm
RVIDD 2,9cm
Aortic root diameter 2,4 cm
Ejection fraction 62%


My conclusion?

-the measurements from my 2nd and 3rd echo which were 9 months apart are nearly identical and I believe it is safe to assume that these are my normal, baseline measurements.

- legit trt doses of up to 100mg per week do not negatively effect either the ejection fraction or cardiac cavity smeasurements

- sporadic increases in igf 1 stemming from use of mk677 (also peptides i believe since the increase in igf from peps isnt much more if any than mk) do not lead to statistically significant cardiac hypertrophy

-A moderate (~500mg per week) 10-12 week steroid cycle leads to significant (10-15%) increase in cardiac cavity sizes and also leads to significant decreases in ejection fraction, which also implies concenctric hypertrophy (thickening of the walls of the heart) it is safe to assume cardiac mass is also significantly increased

- cardiac hypertrophy induced by AAS is reversible in a short time frame, 3-4 months is enough to see positive changes in ejection fraction (which means that heart walls are decreasing in thickness) and normalization of cavity sizes


This is NOT my pledge to refrain from using aas. I simply put out this information for informational and awareness purposes.
I am a libertarian and dont care what anyone else does with their own body as long as it doesnt negatively affect me (e.g. a family member using harsh drugs etc)

If there is anything that I would advise based on this is that time OFF is mandatory not only for the sake of regaining natural T production but also for normalizing other, much more important aspects of your organism.

Well written and informative! Cool stuff. Id be interested to see if future cycles produce the same effects. Do you think you might run a cycle in the future, and do the same tests?

 

[CroLifter]

Well written and informative! Cool stuff. Id be interested to see if future cycles produce the same effects. Do you think you might run a cycle in the future, and do the same tests?

Well, it depends. I would like to cycle again, but who knows with this covid 19 paradigm shift.

I dont think i will do more post cycle echo's, i didi this because i had other issues that simply coincided with this timeline.


But...if I cycle again, it will be 6-8 weeks, up to 500mg max total per week, and once per year at most. If not once every 2 years.

This cardiac remodelling is much bigger concern for those who blast and cruis, especially if they keep high doses in while cruising because their heart will not return to normal size while they cruise and next time they blast it will grow bigger, so the problems are compounding.

For the average "cycler" who does a cycle here and there, for example before he goes to a beach holiday (for example, people who do 4-6 weeks of oral designers for summer, i know a bunch of those kids), keep the doses reasonable and cycle length under 10 weeks, and doesnt do that couple or more times a year, i dont see this being a big of a problem for that type of person. Not saying sth bad cant happen, just saying that it is unlikely, since AAS induced cardiac hypertrophy and myopathy are reversible (https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2015/203/5/steroid-induced-cardiomyopathy).

This kind of stuff is, imho, more of a concern for people who blast and cruise, people who toy with high trt doses and people who like to add other stuff to trt.

For the average cycler outlined above, i would say that hypogonadism is still the biggest concern.



The reason why I sound like an egghead on this forum all the time is because i had issues which coincided with my cycle so naturally i got scared and researched the matter.

 

[maximillia]

Very solid information. Thanks for this. Do you know anything about the effects SARMS have on the heart?

 

[CroLifter]

Very solid information. Thanks for this. Do you know anything about the effects SARMS have on the heart?

I am not sure. But seeing that they effect lipids and rbc levels Id est peripheral tissues I would assume that they dose dependently affect the heart as well.

 

[jim2509]

I am not sure. But seeing that they effect lipids and rbc levels Id est peripheral tissues I would assume that they dose dependently affect the heart as well.

Might be something or nothing but in early 2019 I ran Ostarine at 20 mg and it literally trashed my Vo2 max. I mean I couldn't get my heart rate over 162-4 without feeling wiped out. I stopped the cycle 4 weeks in and within weeks I was back to pushing it at 176-8. I was 44 at the time.

I wasn't impressed with Ostarine at all.

 

[CroLifter]

Might be something or nothing but in early 2019 I ran Ostarine at 20 mg and it literally trashed my Vo2 max. I mean I couldn't get my heart rate over 162-4 without feeling wiped out. I stopped the cycle 4 weeks in and within weeks I was back to pushing it at 176-8. I was 44 at the time.

I wasn't impressed with Ostarine at all.

I heard this happening with ostarine and also rad 140. We dont know the full extent of action of those drugs just yet.

 

[Nac]

Were these stress echos?

 

[Whisky]

Interesting stuff @CroLifter - thanks for posting.

I had seen before that the cardiovascular changes from aas use are reversed during time off and your results clearly reinforce that.

Id be interested to know whether you did much LISS on cycle? Did you use any heart protective supps?

On a personal note I’ve always made sure that I do 30 mins of LISS at least 5 time’s a week and take things like K2 and red yeast rice on cycle to try and mitigate some of the issues.....

 

[CroLifter]

Interesting stuff @CroLifter - thanks for posting.

I had seen before that the cardiovascular changes from aas use are reversed during time off and your results clearly reinforce that.

Id be interested to know whether you did much LISS on cycle? Did you use any heart protective supps?

On a personal note I’ve always made sure that I do 30 mins of LISS at least 5 time’s a week and take things like K2 and red yeast rice on cycle to try and mitigate some of the issues.....

I did have a light intensity (lots of walking) physical job at the time,

No, these were not stress echocardiograms.

No heart protective supplements except coq10 and avoiding saturated fat (fatty meat, cream, cheese and eggs were out of the question for me as they are also now and will be during any of the potential future cycles), hence my cholesterol (all of 3, total, hdl and ldl) stayed in range even on cycle while i was irrationally abusing aromasin.

I dont think it is possible to prevent cardiac hypertrophy while using aas. Heart is a muscle. I guess it would be only possible if you were in an extreme caloric deficit and in a position where your body is not able to grow any muscle in your body.

I dont believe that aas preferentially grow the heart. I think heart is grown in proportion to the skeletal muscle.




I have to say that increase in cardiac cavity sizes (normal LVIDD =< 5.9cm) after the cycle was still physiologic and in itself was not a reason for panic.

However, a significant decrease in ejection fraction (62-64% -->54%) is very significant, implies severe thickening of the heart wall and imho IS a cause for concern.

The major issue with aas is that they dont just grow the heart thus making it more able to supply bigger muscles with more blood. The issue is that it grows the heart "incorrectly", thickening the heart wall and thereofre decreasing the heart's ability to pump blood.

 

[NoAddedHmones]

Can you show us your workings on how you got an p-value of less than 0.05 on your n=1 experiment?

Thanks

 

[CroLifter]

Can you show us your workings on how you got an p-value of less than 0.05 on your n=1 experiment?

Thanks

I posted the results for everyone here to see. I have drawn some assumptions of my own but everyone here is free to draw their own conclusions.

I do not care what kind of emotions will this provoke in someone.

If you have conducted a similar research showing different/contradicting results, post them here so that we all can see how wrong I was.


PS: I want you all to know that i have no agenda here. I wanted to put out this information out here because it happens that i was in position to gather those measurements and i know that this is often talked about.

Whether the positives outweigh the negatives or vice versa is something ultimately each one of us has to answer for ourself.

 

[Smont]

I'm a little late here but this is something that's going to vary greatly from person. It's great to know how you are responding to these things and how it's effecting your health markers and your heart, but it doesn't necessarily mean that someone else will have the same negative impact, or they could have a much worse result.

 

[Smont]

It's awesome you did this tho, not many ppl do, and heart health is number 1 with this stuff

 

[Smont]

There's a lot of things that can effect heart growth. Being morbidly obese with very little muscle can easily result in heart growth. On the other end, very small thin high endurance athletes also show a lot of heart growth. Overly muscled, heart growth. With or without steroids these play a factor. I'd bet juiced up crossfitters have massive heart growth as well.

You see a lot of big bodybuilders get the same negative health effects of really overweight ppl.

Leads me to believe that basically anything you do that makes your body work harder then normal on a day to day basis is going to enlarge your heart to try to keep up with the demand

 

[thebigt]

were all 3 ECG tests paid for by insurance--i just looked up cost and they can run up to and over $3,000 each including cost of interpretation of tests...just curious if you had insurance cover cost how you were able to justify-do you have pre-existing condition?

 

[Smont]

were all 3 ECG tests paid for by insurance--i just looked up cost and they can run up to and over $3,000 each including cost of interpretation of tests...just curious if you had insurance cover cost how you were able to justify-do you have pre-existing condition?

I had a ekg like 2.5 years ago, it cost about $89.00 and if I had the stress test or or something like that it would have been another $175.00

I know if you have problems from the test then the follow up tests can cost thousands but the basic stuff was fairly cheap

 

[celc5]

Ecg is not the same as EKG. Its costly as BigT suggested.

Smont, he continued training with the improved thickness measures. The variable is decreased dosage. I'd assume he was still working hard.

 

[ELROCK]

Ecg is not the same as EKG. Its costly as BigT suggested.

Smont, he continued training with the improved thickness measures. The variable is decreased dosage. I'd assume he was still working hard.

ECG and EKG are the same test. They are not a costly test. They are very cheap tests actually.

Are you thinking of an ECHO (echocardiogram)?

 

[ELROCK]

were all 3 ECG tests paid for by insurance--i just looked up cost and they can run up to and over $3,000 each including cost of interpretation of tests...just curious if you had insurance cover cost how you were able to justify-do you have pre-existing condition?

The insurance reimbursement for a basic EKG is around $30. Are you sure you are thinking of the right test?

 

[CroLifter]

Echo cost is usd 65 approx here and i paid out of my pocket.

Yes of course I continued training the same. Only variable is no longer on cycle.

 

[thebigt]

The insurance reimbursement for a basic EKG is around $30. Are you sure you are thinking of the right test?

according to what i saw on google the cost of test is pretty cheap it is the reading/interpreting of test that is expensive...hey if i'm wrong i'm wrong i will be the 1st to say that google is not infallible and neither am i.

 

[ELROCK]

according to what i saw on google the cost of test is pretty cheap it is the reading/interpreting of test that is expensive...hey if i'm wrong i'm wrong i will be the 1st to say that google is not infallible and neither am i.

The $30 insurance reimbursement includes the interpretation of the basic ekg.

 

[thebigt]

The $30 insurance reimbursement includes the interpretation of the basic ekg.

ok...your point? i was quoting what the out of pocket expense is...the reason for my doing this is i was curious how he was able to get insurance to pay for so many ekg?

 

[ELROCK]

ok...your point? i was quoting what the out of pocket expense is...the reason for my doing this is i was curious how he was able to get insurance to pay for so many ekg?

Just that an ekg is not an expensive test and does not cost $3,000 like you suggested. That’s all man.

 

[thebigt]

Just that an ekg is not an expensive test and does not cost $3,000 like you suggested. That’s all man.

i'm not a expert and don't claim to be...but i said that the actual test is not expensive-the expense comes from the reading/interpretation from what i saw....see post #23.

 

[celc5]

ECG and EKG are the same test. They are not a costly test. They are very cheap tests actually.

Are you thinking of an ECHO (echocardiogram)?

Yes, you are correct. My mistake on the abbreviation.