Estrogen blocker cycle.....

woah, with all that **** on nolva and you see ppl taking it all the time ! But how can it be a carcinogen and at the same time be used to treat breast cancer ? Whats the idea of using a carcinogen to treat another cancer ? Seems like a loop to me.

So since nolva is out of the question would you suggest Clomid ?
 
migs said:
woah, with all that **** on nolva and you see ppl taking it all the time ! But how can it be a carcinogen and at the same time be used to treat breast cancer ? Whats the idea of using a carcinogen to treat another cancer ? Seems like a loop to me.

So since nolva is out of the question would you suggest Clomid ?
Click to expand...

Cancer of teh liver, bro.
 
Lakevillethor said:
Probably will never use it again.

-AT
Click to expand...

Actually, I use 300 mg of Formadrol (Which has 40 mg diadzin in it which competes for the ER like nolva), and 75 mg 4OH androdione per capsul. Actually that means that I take 225 mg OHdione, and 120 mg diadzin, and then 300 mg of 6-OXO for two weeks. Like I said before, it seems as though I keep gaining even when I go OFF. I know there are a lot of Legalgear haters over here but formadrol really is a stellar product.

-AT
 
wastedwhiteboy2 said:
I'll give this a try. nolva will increase natural test and so will a larger amount of clomid. nolva increases sensitivity while clomid decreases sensitivity. which means you build up a tolerance to clomid and the opposite with nolva. this is not exactly correct but gives you the idea. does this sound close guys?
Click to expand...

Yes, that is a good explaination.
 
Also, re: the cancer risk, you have to realize that you make different decisions when death is imminent. The risk/reward factor for tamox treatment when you have breast cancer is very different from a healthy male subject.

I've personally read all I need to, from studies, to official reports, to recommendations by national health boards, to officially switch up my PCT protocol.
 
Brodus said:
Also, re: the cancer risk, you have to realize that you make different decisions when death is imminent. The risk/reward factor for tamox treatment when you have breast cancer is very different from a healthy male subject.

I've personally read all I need to, from studies, to official reports, to recommendations by national health boards, to officially switch up my PCT protocol.
Click to expand...
What will be your know protocol, Brodus?
 
I feel like I started this whole contraversy when I mentioned nolva's liver toxicity and recommended Clomid, so I'll say it again: medicinal pharmacology is my long time hobby. I've been studying and following these issues for over 15 years. I've seen people really hurt by nolva (women, but still) I also have a gut feeling about this that I can not offer a link too or point to a study about. I trust clomid because it has a 4-Cl. It's an electron withdrawer and the liver toxicity is based on nucleophiles. I'm not saying I'm right and I'm not about to give a chemistry lesson most could care less about anyway, Bobo and Size just for a few offered some good reasons to pick nolva, just saying don't use it casually.

Why is Clomid only used clinically on women trying to get pregnant (at up to 150mg) and yet Nolva is only used in women that have cancer and at much lower doses? Think about it.

BTW, toremifene is 4-chlorinated. Rise up people! Demand that the sponsors carry it as an alternative! A very effective one I might add, again.
 
Lakevillethor said:
I am quite aware of the difference. And I also pointed out the increased estrone level to PA and he said that it was something else registering as estrone in the study. Was he spewing bullshit? Probably. However, I can say that from my own real world results, that 6-OXO works the best for me post cycle --- it seems as though I keep gaining when I use it --- However, I am also very sensitive to orals in general so perhaps this is why. While his study was conducted with normal men, the biochemistry would essentially be the same for raising test levels with men with temporary test shut down. It is known that clomid raises test in normal men as well? Additionally, in your study posted above, you even displayed that clomid did not work in men with hypogonadotropic hypogonadism --- however, it does work with men with temporary shut down. What I am getting at is this: 6-OXO ultimately works on the same mechanism as clomid/nolva to raise test levels. They both shut down estrogen (via different mechanisms but both do it), which leads to a increased testosterone output. Isn't it a stretch to say that 6-OXO doesn't work?

Additionally people that continually post pub med studies to back up everything they say annoys me. As an engineer myself, I also have to take the facts into consideration before making a conclusion about almost everything I do -- this is a given -- and, to some extent, I can appreciate a good pub med study here and there. The difference is though, in my field, things are known --- we don't deal with the human body where new things are being discovered daily. There is so much that is still unknown about all of the things that pertain to bodybuilding and all the pubmed studies don't really mean **** --- maybe 6-OXO is working on a seperate mechinam that isn't even known yet-- maybe it hinders myostatin temporarily, maybe it boosts IGF-1 levels, etc? My point is that there is so much going on that the pubmed studies do not indicate that it is almost better to take real world results than the data supplied in those studies. 20 years from now, many of these folks will look back and laugh at what they thought of as "fact" in this day and age. I know that I am not alone in this thinking too as the doctors at The Mayo Clinic even prescribe my mother (a cancer patient) things that seem to work on people although they have no conclusive data. Just my $.02
Click to expand...



1. No, the "physiology" is not the same when comparing a normal man and hypogonadic. You can even ask Pat on that. They are two completely different things.

2. I posted two studies showing the arguement goes both ways. That was the point.

3. No, 6-oxo doens't work on the same mechanisms. SERMS and AI work very differently. Nolva does not shut down estrogen, in fact it increases estrone levels.

4. Who said 6-oxo doesn't work? Would you pickt the one that is documented by study or one with a study funded by a company that sells it. Pretty simple to me.

5. You don't like people backing up scientific explanations with references? Forget it, no comment. Well if that doens't wokr, how about the boatload of experience I have in using most of these. Would that help?

6. Boosting IGF-1? That is a result of estrogen. Plus the increase would be coutered by IGFBP3 anyway.

7. Nobody said this is fact but its also a fact people take things out of context and blow things way out of proportion. THere is reason I posted both sides of the story.
 
Lakevillethor said:
I am quite aware of the difference. And I also pointed out the increased estrone level to PA and he said that it was something else registering as estrone in the study. Was he spewing bullshit? Probably.
Click to expand...

Nolvadex does the same thing.
 
Brodus said:
Even Australia's conservative National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) warned that no amount of tamoxifen is safe when it comes to carcinogenic effects. </B>
In California there is a law called "Proposition 65" that requires the state to publish and maintain a list of all known carcinogens. In May 1995, the state's Carcinogen Identification Committee voted unanimously to add tamoxifen to its list.</B>

[font=sans-serif, helvetica, Times New Roman, Times]Following suit, in 1996 the World Health Organization formally designated tamoxifen a human carcinogen, grouping it with 70 other chemicals — about one quarter of them pharmaceuticals — that have received this dubious distinction. </B>[/font]

Tamoxifen is toxic to the liver, and there have been reports of acute hepatitis in patients treated with tamoxifen. Liver damage has occurred in every animal given tamoxifen. According to Gary Williams, medical director of the American Heart Foundation, tamoxifen has been shown in animal studies to be a "rip-roaring" liver carcinogen, inducing highly aggressive cancers in about 12 per cent of rats.

Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...

You do understand the Australia also states that 99% of the supplements we use are very dangerous. There is a reason everything is banned over there. Once again, blow out of proportion.

I mean you know that ephedra kills right?
 
Lakevillethor said:
Actually, I use 300 mg of Formadrol (Which has 40 mg diadzin in it which competes for the ER like nolva), and 75 mg 4OH androdione per capsul. Actually that means that I take 225 mg OHdione, and 120 mg diadzin, and then 300 mg of 6-OXO for two weeks. Like I said before, it seems as though I keep gaining even when I go OFF. I know there are a lot of Legalgear haters over here but formadrol really is a stellar product.

-AT
Click to expand...


Of course it is, it has androgenic activity.

And Seth's complaint about the study was the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard in my life. That guys spins more **** than anyone.

I just hope your Leydig cell response is sufficient when you are 35.
 
Lakevillethor said:
Probably will never use it again.

-AT
Click to expand...

Don't use hormones then. You should see the results the claim about using "enahancing agents".

Don't even think about HRT, that kills and causes major liver and heart failure.
 
DR.D said:
I feel like I started this whole contraversy when I mentioned nolva's liver toxicity and recommended Clomid, so I'll say it again: medicinal pharmacology is my long time hobby. I've been studying and following these issues for over 15 years. I've seen people really hurt by nolva (women, but still) I also have a gut feeling about this that I can not offer a link too or point to a study about. I trust clomid because it has a 4-Cl. It's an electron withdrawer and the liver toxicity is based on nucleophiles. I'm not saying I'm right and I'm not about to give a chemistry lesson most could care less about anyway, Bobo and Size just for a few offered some good reasons to pick nolva, just saying don't use it casually.

Why is Clomid only used clinically on women trying to get pregnant (at up to 150mg) and yet Nolva is only used in women that have cancer and at much lower doses? Think about it.

BTW, toremifene is 4-chlorinated. Rise up people! Demand that the sponsors carry it as an alternative! A very effective one I might add, again.
Click to expand...


I wouldn't use any of these casually but the bottom line is if these are used in the proper way, the toxicity is WAY overblown. The reports equal tamoxifen to cigarette smoke.


If you are looking to use these for very long peroids of time then you should get you head checked before your liver.
 
I hear you Bobo, and I agree, I take chances every night that I work in a bar playing music, which is five nights a week inhaling sidestream smoke.

It was not Autralia's reponse that made me change my mind. It was this quote from the director of the American Heart Foundation that made me pause and reconsider:

"Tamoxifen is toxic to the liver, and there have been reports of acute hepatitis in patients treated with tamoxifen. Liver damage has occurred in every animal given tamoxifen."

This is not worth it to me, as I already worry about my liver enough. Just a personal choice.
 
Brodus said:
Three questions:

1. As far as I can tell, the only way to administer HCG is through injection, correct?

2. I don't see how the studies don't help-->whatever the mechanism is, what matters is the increase in Test/LH repsonse post-cycle right? Isn't this data quite clear in the studies?

3. The fact that Nolva is the only one of the antiestrogen to be classified as a carcinogen is bothersome. Based on this board, I've been a Nolva user for the past three cycles, but now I'm having second thoughts. Don't you think exposing yourself to a Class 1 carcinogen is a bad idea, if alternatives exist? LIke 6-OXO?
Click to expand...


1. No, they have done sublingual deliveries.

2. No that isn't the only thing that matters because a true test of recovery is what happens when the drug is discontinued. If you check the FULL text on the Clomid study his levels dropped back to a suppressed state the first time it was discontinued. IOW, the drug caused the increases but when nautre took over, he went right back to being suppressed. It took another 2 months of Clomid use to bring him back so in essence did the drug help or did he recover on his own? SO this is why saying a 3 week study on 6-oxo will be sufficient to reverse a hypogonadic state is ridiculous. Its a classic example of a study being exploited and twisted. Pat hasn't done this, he just saaid it helped raise test in normal men and probably would help PCT but as you can see there are MANY variable that are not being accounted for.

3. .It wans't the only one. THere were a host of others.

"Toremifene has also shown to be genotoxic". SO the one Dr.D was also show to be genetoxic but to a lesser extent.

THe point is, don't uise any of them for long peroids of time. The recommendations of doctors are based on women using these for YEARS on end.
 
Brodus said:
I hear you Bobo, and I agree, I take chances every night that I work in a bar playing music, which is five nights a week inhaling sidestream smoke.

It was not Autralia's reponse that made me change my mind. It was this quote from the director of the American Heart Foundation that made me pause and reconsider:

"Tamoxifen is toxic to the liver, and there have been reports of acute hepatitis in patients treated with tamoxifen. Liver damage has occurred in every animal given tamoxifen."

This is not worth it to me, as I already worry about my liver enough. Just a personal choice.
Click to expand...


If you took those animal doese and equated them to human use, it would be off the charts.

You also have to into account the context in which he is sayin this. They are talking about long term treatment (5-10+ years), not 3 weeks.
 
migs said:
woah, with all that **** on nolva and you see ppl taking it all the time ! But how can it be a carcinogen and at the same time be used to treat breast cancer ? Whats the idea of using a carcinogen to treat another cancer ? Seems like a loop to me.

So since nolva is out of the question would you suggest Clomid ?
Click to expand...

Chemotherapy isn't exactly great for you either.

The point is there there are always risk and the majority of the reports the link cancer is for endometrial cancer. Now unless you had a sex change operation I wouldn't worry too much.

Here is a possible explanation of why Nolvadex is used for cancer.




Cancer Detect Prev 2002;26(5):370-5

A proposed mechanism of tamoxifen in breast cancer prevention.

Yu FL, Bender W.

Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Illinois, College of Medicine at Rockford, 1601 Parkview Avenue, Rockford, IL 61107, USA. [email protected]

Recent clinical trials suggest that tamoxifen (TAM) is a preventive agent for breast cancer, however, the mechanism is unknown. Previously, we found that both 17beta-estradiol (E2) and estrone (E1) could be activated by epoxidation resulting in their ability to bind to DNA, forming DNA adducts both in vitro and in vivo, and to inhibit nuclear DNA-dependent RNA synthesis. Since epoxidation is required for the activation of many well-known chemical carcinogens including benzo(a)pyrene, 7,12-dimethylbenz(a)anthracene, aflatoxins, etc., we proposed that estrogen epoxidation is the underlying mechanism for the initiation of breast cancer (Carcinogenesis 17 (1996) 1957). Here, we report that TAM is able to dramatically inhibit the formation of E2 and E1 epoxides as measured by both the loss of their ability to inhibit nuclear DNA-dependent RNA synthesis and to bind to nuclear DNA. These findings suggest that the breast cancer preventive effect of TAM may be through a competitive epoxidation inhibition mechanism that prevents the formation of E2 and E1 epoxides and consequently, the initiation of breast cancer.

__________________


Evidently estrogens are readily epoxidized in the body. An epoxide is a compound which has an oxygen attached to two seperate carbons, forming a triangular structure. Epoxides are very reactive. (Anyone that has ever used Epoxy knows how vigorous the chemical reaction is as it hardens.) Many carcinogens are epoxides. They bind to cellular DNA and lead to mutant cells that can become cancerous.

Tamoxifen can prevent the epoxidation of estradiol (as well as the epoxidation of other potential carcinogens), and this may be how it prevents cancer.
 
So you think the risk is completely overstated? Or do you think there is any reason to look at other options?
 
Yes I do. I tihnk people should be much more concernced with substances they use before Nolvadex.

There is ALWAYS reason to look for other options but there isn't one for completeing condeming Nolvadex as liver toxic and dangerous. FOr all those that developed problems there are 10x that that have not. And remember those people have been using it for years on end. Its like saying I can get cancer from 3 weeks of smoking. You have to look at things with a realistic perspective.
 
You also have to understand a lot of these studies on animals are meant to find problems so the doses they are given are insane.
 
Yeah, I understand the rationale behind it, and all. Three weeks of smoking won't cause cancer in 99.9% of the population. I'm just saying if there is another option that works well and doesn't cause liver cancer in animals, I'd be willing to try that instead. Although, until I see actual numbers comparing doses w/ bodyweight (mg/kg), length of administration, and onset of malignancy timeline, I reserve judgement. I'm sure it's
 
Ophthalmologically definable scotomata and retinal cell function (electroretinographic) changes have also been reported. A patient treated during clinical studies developed phosphenes and scotomata during prolonged clomiphene citrate tablets USP administration.

Animal Fetotoxicity. Oral administration of clomiphene citrate to pregnant rats during organogenesis at doses of 1 to 2 mg/kg/day resulted in hydramnion and weak, edematous fetuses with wavy ribs and other temporary bone changes. Doses of 8 mg/kg/day or more also caused increased resorptions and dead fetuses, dystocia, and delayed parturition, and 40 mg/kg/day resulted in increased maternal mortality. Single doses of 50 mg/kg caused fetal cataracts, while 200 mg/kg caused cleft palate.

Following injection of clomiphene citrate 2 mg/kg to mice and rats during pregnancy, the offspring exhibited metaplastic changes of the reproduction tract. Newborn mice and rats injected during the first few days of life also developed metaplastic changes in uterine and vaginal mucosa, as well as premature vaginal opening and anovulatory ovaries. These findings are similar to the abnormal reproductive behavior and sterility described with other estrogens and antiestrogens.

In rabbits, some temporary bone alterations were seen in fetuses from dams given oral doses of 20 or 40 mg/kg/day during pregnancy, but not following 8 mg/kg/day. No permanent malformations were observed in those studies. Also, rhesus monkeys given oral doses of 1.5 to 4.5 mg/kg/day for various periods during pregnancy did not have any abnormal offspring.

Carcinogenesis, Mutagenesis, Impairment of Fertility

Long-term toxicity studies in animals have not been performed to evaluate the carcinogenic or mutagenic potential of clomiphene citrate.

Oral administration of CLOMID to male rats at doses of 0.3 or 1 mg/kg/day caused decreased fertility, while higher doses caused temporary infertility. Oral doses of 0.1 mg/kg/day in female rats temporarily interrupted the normal cyclic vaginal smear pattern and prevented conception. Doses of 0.3 mg/kg/day slightly reduced the number of ovulated ova and corpora lutea, while 3 mg/kg/day inhibited ovulation.




You can find things about any drug. IN this case you don't evne know the long term toxic effects because they studies havne't even been carried out as they have with Nolvadex. The point is, when you realistically looks at things, the doses and time frames we are using are fine.
 
Right, we're at about .5mg/kg - 1mg/kg and for only short periods of time. Women might need to exercise more caution, but they wouldn't be needing Nolva for PCT, so that point is moot.

It's like that hulabaloo about Clen and heart damage...they were dosing rats at over 1mg/kg to create this effect...insanity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top