Guest viewing is limited

Why do so many roid boys do natural shows?

bill86 said:
i just feel like anything thats going to boost your test or gh PAST natural limits is unnatural... test may be natural, but its unnatural to have levels at like 1500, you know?

i guess im cynical because where im from i see guys that are SO small who have taken ph's/aas and im in such disbelief that when i see someone of a decent size im like 'oh, theyre DEFINITELY on it'..... that and so many local bb'ers have told me they arent on anything (especially when i was in my teens, i guess trying to be a good influence haha), then i find out theyre on all kinds of ****.

but the REAL question is.... no offense to any amateur bb'er, you all look 10x better than me, but whether on it or not, amateur bb'ers just look SO small on stage after seeing pros... so WHAT exactly do these pro's put in their bodies to look THAT absurd? lol... i know genetics plays a part, but come on... i was talking to my friend the other day, these guys we see at the gym that are ENORMOUS look soooo small in their bb pics compared to the pros (i know you cant compare this to a pro, but when youre like 5'10 240-250 lean as hell, you look HUUUUUGEE in real life, but then smaller in pics)
Click to expand...

The difference between the pros who do steroids and amatuers who do steroids is two things:

1) is the strictness and dedication to the diet and training
2) is the long term use of steroids (10+ years). U dont look like that overnight, or even overyear. It takes YEARS on AAS to get this way.

Personally, I have the first difference down but not the second which explains my overall mass which is 150-160lbs. However I AM coasting at 7-8% BF which is plenty good to be on a solid start. In 5 years, unless something catastrophic occurs or my life circumstances drastically change, I'll be about 190lbs and 5-6% BF. Simply put, it takes years to produce those kinds of results.
 
the 240 i spoke of was someone around my height, about 6'2.... nowhere near 'bodybuilding' physique, but could have cut about 15 lbs and been there.
 
TheProfessor said:
I agree, like I said, I'm not arguing. It's just more of a semantic issue for me. There are bodbuilders/athletes that are tested for banned substances that some third party organization has deemed banned and bodybuilders/athletes NOT tested for banned substances that a third party organization has deemed banned.. Not natural and unnatural.

If you discover and use a substance that is not on the banned compound list then you fall within the rules of the 'natural' organization. If they end up banning it after then it's an ex post facto situation anyway.


This is why I feel untested organizations actually have a MORE level playing field. You aren't at any disadvantage.
If anyone does particularly well in a tested organization everyone is just leery of them 'cheating' anyway. It gets really old.
Click to expand...


At the end of the day organizations ban whatever seems to work effectively and consistently across the board when it comes to hormones and even other supplements. And, it seems, that whatever works also seems to carry a number of side effects - some of which can be serious and harmful or even fatal if taken beyond measure. This is also why I think the FDA jumped on board in 1990 and ban steroid use period.

All of this solidifies my points in previous posts (not related to this thread) about how steroid side-effects go hand-in-hand with side-effects. Not to change the subject or anything. I'm just correlated the fact that the banned-list, the FDA, and the bb'ing users all go after the same hormones and supplements and all stem from the same reason. For instance,

Organizations ban substances - because they work effectively
FDA bans substances - because those things that work typically have side-effects associated with them that are deemed unsafe
BB'ing users use substances - again, because they work effectively

Now the first and last ones I completely agree with but the FDA I DO NOT because those feds are a bunch of hypocrits. They ban steroids and everything else that works well for BB'ers yet the gov pockets billions in taxes for selling those cancer sticks to the public, which IMO are FAR more unsafe than a hormone could ever amount to.
 
Don't forget (and don't let me get started on) the 'side effects' of booze. Let alone 'cancer sticks'.

Alcohol has done and will do more damage than anything, ever.

This thread has been put to rest.
 
i despise the argument 'if alcohol is legal, then ____ should be too'

sure, steroids CAN be used safely, but so can alcohol. further, we all know the negative effects alcohol can have... hell, we all take a class in high school that TEACHES us all the bad things it can lead to, but in most peoples mind, any 'supplement' they can buy at the store HAS to be safe, right? there are people ive heard of around here who have ended up COMPLETELY f ucked up from buying those damn stacks from complete nutrition (with what, like 4 methylated compounds in the stack?)

just because SOME people know how to use something doesnt mean MOST know how to, especially teenagers that they push this **** on. the point is, if ph's/aas were legal, they would cause far more harm than good because while ive never seen a study on it, i would bet my last dollar that MOST people who take ph's literally have no idea what theyre doing and use them irresponsibly either a) too young, b) without the proper support, c) without proper pct, d) without knowledge of side effects (drinking on cycle, etc) or all of the above, all because they SIMPLY DONT KNOW or nowadays because the pro-steroid guys push this absurd agenda that its all a conspiracy and steroids arent actually bad for you.

if i hear one more person quote that ****ing movie with 'well, more people end up in the hospital because of vitamins than steroids' im gonna punch them in the face..... and im not anti-steroids, id do them myself if i could, but im not going to sit here and say theyre safe when ive seen people i know personally suffer terrible effects because they bought something legal at complete nutrition (or wherever)
 
bill86 said:
i despise the argument 'if alcohol is legal, then ____ should be too'

sure, steroids CAN be used safely, but so can alcohol. further, we all know the negative effects alcohol can have... hell, we all take a class in high school that TEACHES us all the bad things it can lead to, but in most peoples mind, any 'supplement' they can buy at the store HAS to be safe, right? there are people ive heard of around here who have ended up COMPLETELY f ucked up from buying those damn stacks from complete nutrition (with what, like 4 methylated compounds in the stack?)

just because SOME people know how to use something doesnt mean MOST know how to, especially teenagers that they push this **** on. the point is, if ph's/aas were legal, they would cause far more harm than good because while ive never seen a study on it, i would bet my last dollar that MOST people who take ph's literally have no idea what theyre doing and use them irresponsibly either a) too young, b) without the proper support, c) without proper pct, d) without knowledge of side effects (drinking on cycle, etc) or all of the above, all because they SIMPLY DONT KNOW or nowadays because the pro-steroid guys push this absurd agenda that its all a conspiracy and steroids arent actually bad for you.

if i hear one more person quote that ****ing movie with 'well, more people end up in the hospital because of vitamins than steroids' im gonna punch them in the face..... and im not anti-steroids, id do them myself if i could, but im not going to sit here and say theyre safe when ive seen people i know personally suffer terrible effects because they bought something legal at complete nutrition (or wherever)
Click to expand...

I agree with you on the frustration issue. However I believe when you replace your first statement with cigarettes, which can never be used safely...then I think that person has a valid argument. And it pisses me off too when supplement stores sell hormonal products to kids in high school and don't give a ****. I'm not disagreeing with you but why the hell are cigarettes legal? Based on your argument if we are taught in school about steroids they should be legal? Well I was in high school what 4 years ago....we were taught the dangers of steroids in my health class...
 
bill86 said:
i despise the argument 'if alcohol is legal, then ____ should be too'

sure, steroids CAN be used safely, but so can alcohol. further, we all know the negative effects alcohol can have... hell, we all take a class in high school that TEACHES us all the bad things it can lead to, but in most peoples mind, any 'supplement' they can buy at the store HAS to be safe, right? there are people ive heard of around here who have ended up COMPLETELY f ucked up from buying those damn stacks from complete nutrition (with what, like 4 methylated compounds in the stack?)

just because SOME people know how to use something doesnt mean MOST know how to, especially teenagers that they push this **** on. the point is, if ph's/aas were legal, they would cause far more harm than good because while ive never seen a study on it, i would bet my last dollar that MOST people who take ph's literally have no idea what theyre doing and use them irresponsibly either a) too young, b) without the proper support, c) without proper pct, d) without knowledge of side effects (drinking on cycle, etc) or all of the above, all because they SIMPLY DONT KNOW or nowadays because the pro-steroid guys push this absurd agenda that its all a conspiracy and steroids arent actually bad for you.

if i hear one more person quote that ****ing movie with 'well, more people end up in the hospital because of vitamins than steroids' im gonna punch them in the face..... and im not anti-steroids, id do them myself if i could, but im not going to sit here and say theyre safe when ive seen people i know personally suffer terrible effects because they bought something legal at complete nutrition (or wherever)
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing with you and what you listed was not my argument. I did not say that these things should be legalized because alcohol is. Nor am I saying that androgen supplementation is healthy. I just have a personal issues with alcohol and feel like it's the most awful drug there is. That is all. I was not taking a legal or political stance on the issue just a personal one. It was more of an aside, as my post suggested.

As far as cigarettes are concerned, I only give them respect because the United States would not be around if we didn't have tobacco. I do think it's gross and unhealthy, but it made the US what it was early on in the game.
 
yeah, the argument about cigarettes is true, theres no 'safe' way to smoke or use tobacco. but i guess its just one of those things (not saying its right or wrong, just saying) like you mentioned where it generates so much money, making it illegal would be kind of impractical for our economy.

bigdavid - yeah, they touched on them in my class, but im just saying that in general people dont know too much about them, especially with regard to actual use. everyone knows, in general, how to safely drink, but VERY FEW know how to safely use something like prohormones. i guess its a double edge sword, in some ways i think society demonizes steroids and makes blanket statements about their side effects, however, ive personally seen a lot of people suffer some nasty sides from ph's they bought and thought were safe because they were 'legal' (it seems like a lot of people think youre only on 'steroids' if youre using injectables, which they see as too hardcore and dangerous, while something oral and legal is a 'safe' alternative to them)
 
Adding to the natural debate. I think when you sign up for a natural show, you know that theres an expectation to fit into societies idea of a natural bodybuilder.

IMO, a natural body builder should be someone who takes supplements to get healthy and fill in nutritional deficits, and the occasional herbal fat burner/preworkout. Things like creatine and protein both fall into the nutritional deficit filler category. Creatine/stimulants set the bar for how good something can work, with the exception of EFA's, carbs, and qualitie muti's and protein. Other than vitamin D, most popular BB hormones just work too good. Things like PEZ products fall into a weird category. No one really has an Erase dificiency, but at the same time, I would never ask someone on Erase or Shift to go compete with the roid guys, because you have to work really hard to notice anything on those products. Your average guy who goes to the gym for a few months here and a few months there probably would say the products didnt work, except for the libido effect from Erase.

Test, GH and Insulin work way too good though. We all remember when we hit puberty and are muscle just naturaly got a little more plump. Takeing a high dose of test is just way more powerful than anything someone copeting in a natural show should be doing.
 
@ bill
do you have any links to show PH are toxic?
I dont do them, but i KNOW they are toxic- I'm not retarted. But i wanted a link of actual info to send to a friend of mine, who thinks they're OK just b/c they are legal.
 
Nah dude its real. Im serious. I dont take PH. My buddy does. Hes just plain old stupid, and doesnt know they're bad for you. I just was wondering if you knew any SPECIFIC links, that I could send to him.
 
not off the top of my head, but im sure you could find some if you google.... i prefer peoples blood work reports mid-cycle though, and you can find a lot of those around here if you dig deep enough.
 
What does toxic mean?

If you are talking about hepatoxicity, I'd rather do controlled cycles of a PH for 6-8 weeks at a time than take tylenol every day for aches and pains...
 
Dude. I NEVER suggested taking tylenol or asprin ever day. And youre stupid if you compare the dmg from that to the dmg caused by PH. Asprin doesnt suppress your bodys normal fxn of creating tst
 
And if you have a headache or aches and pains every day you need to go to the damn chiropractor. nobody should feel like that. you're not 80 yrs old.
 
and why would that be?

tylenol poses no threat to a healthy individual, taking a normal dosage, who isnt drinking because their body is able to detoxify the metabolite which actually causes the liver problems in tylenol. its not actually the acetaminophen thats toxic, its the metabolite produced in the liver, which is detoxified in most circumstances.
 
aceroni said:
Dude. I NEVER suggested taking tylenol or asprin ever day. And youre stupid if you compare the dmg from that to the dmg caused by PH. Asprin doesnt suppress your bodys normal fxn of creating tst
Click to expand...

Why are you being so volatile? Where is the need to call me stupid? I was asking what you meant by toxic? And you still didn't answer.

Tylenol is not aspirin. I never said aspirin anywhere.
 
bill86 said:
and why would that be?

tylenol poses no threat to a healthy individual, taking a normal dosage, who isnt drinking because their body is able to detoxify the metabolite which actually causes the liver problems in tylenol. its not actually the acetaminophen thats toxic, its the metabolite produced in the liver, which is detoxified in most circumstances.
Click to expand...

I understand the pharmacology of tylenol, trust me. It was more in the context of long term habitual usage.
 
well then, yeah, but thats kind of comparing apples to oranges if you're not going to compare them on the same basis.
 
I was just asking what this guy meant by toxic. He never defined it. I don't consider down regulation of testosterone production a toxic effect. It's a negative feedback loop, it has nothing to do with a chemical being a poison.

And just for 'bar trivia' tylenol causes more liver failure related deaths than all other drugs combined.
 
TheProfessor said:
I was just asking what this guy meant by toxic. He never defined it. I don't consider down regulation of testosterone production a toxic effect. It's a negative feedback loop, it has nothing to do with a chemical being a poison.

And just for 'bar trivia' tylenol causes more liver failure related deaths than all other drugs combined.
Click to expand...

That is flawed logic. Giving an example of a drug that is more liver toxic long term does not change the fact that oral methylated prohormones are liver toxic or justify its use. It is not like someone has the choice to either run a PH cycle or go on tylenol for the rest of their life. And the tylenol usage is for quality of life improvements, not for performance enhancement benefits.
 
I don't understand all the hate.

The reason for drug usage is not relevant. Nor am I justifying the use. I feel like people are putting words in my mouth?

The whole statement was said in jest because he never defined his term 'toxic' or 'bad for you' and therefore it was tough to respond to his post.

I consider performance enhancement a quality of life improvement :-p
 
I am not hating on you just seemed like you were justifying PH usage based on another drug being toxic...I hate logic like that pet peeve of mine lol.
 
I'm not justifying anything :).

I was literally just trying to understand what he was saying so I can be productive in the thread.

But, on a personal note, I'd rather use my glutathione for other biochemistry than to eat up ****ty OTC drug metabolites. That's a waste of good glutathione!
 
agreed.

I suppose I should have abandoned my legitimate urge to help when 'retarded' was spelled 'retarted' while simultaneously being called stupid by the same person.

Abandoning....... now.
 
@ the proffessor. "
I apologize brother I misread everything. By toxic I just meant the LIVER damage.
I mean cmon, we all know that oral PH's are actually worse than injectibles because you are making the liver work really hard to break down that pill...
Idk the exact science behind it, idk much about them, but I do know that above statement. (I dont take either PH or real steroids, i'm a natty bb)
But I do know alot of people that have been bodybuilding for quite some time and have taken real injectibles and all have told me that the orals are much worse for you!
 
im not sure i understand what youre trying to say then. i never said anything about down regulation of test, i was speaking specifically on liver toxicity and/or its other negative effects like on cholesterol levels.

again, throwing out a fact like that about tylenol is taking everything out of context. tylenol causes so many problems because so many people use (or, misuse) it. if the exact same person in the exact same health were to take the dosage of tylenol thats recommended for aches and pains everyday for 6 weeks, i can guarantee that their liver values would not be as out of whack as taking the dosage of a methylated prohormone for 6 weeks without support supps thats recommended to make gains... but i guess what youre saying is that taking copious amounts of tylenol for long periods of time would be worse than taking a methylated prohormone for a short period of time while taking the right support supplements, to which i may not disagree with you, but again, its kind of a weak comparison.

i guess my stance is in agreement with bigdavid... it seems like youre trying to justify ph's being 'safe' or whatever by mentioning other substances that can also have adverse side effects.

my whole point in this was that for the betterment of the general (uninformed) populations health, prohormones are better off banned. simply because most people dont know how to use them properly (sure, we do, but the fact that were subscribers to anabolicminds says something about our interests as compared to an average kid/guy wanting to get big so he walks into a complete nutrition or wherever and says 'give me something that will make me big'). im not anti-ph's/aas in the idea of using them, just the legality of them.

the thing is, they require much more knowledge about how to use them properly than most any other legally available substance with toxic side effects.
 
TheProfessor said:
I don't understand all the hate.

The reason for drug usage is not relevant. Nor am I justifying the use. I feel like people are putting words in my mouth?

The whole statement was said in jest because he never defined his term 'toxic' or 'bad for you' and therefore it was tough to respond to his post.
I consider performance enhancement a quality of life improvement :-p
Click to expand...

Hey bud, I feel ya lol. Even better, I have bloods to prove it haha! I just recently posted my bloodwork after a cycle of Test Prop, Superdrol, Trenazone and H-Drol. I bridged the SD into the Trenazone then stacked the Tren with a low dose H-Drol. Bloods came back fine with my ALT's and AST's slightly out of the ref range, which doesn't mean doodoo. I even made sure a nurse practitioner agree with me.

Anyways, I took 250mg UDCA from weeks 4-6 and everything turned out fine. Granted, 1) I didn't drink while on cycle, 2) I had a relatively clean diet, 3) I didn't overdose my PH's, and 4) well, my liver is just kingpin lol. I never worked him hard so it's not like my liver was weezing over the SD.

The first set of bloods are the ones you want to look at which you'll see a little black pop-up box next to the results. Those bloods were taken 2 DAYS after I stopped the Trenazone and H-Drol. Here is the link: Invalid Link Removed, the liver values can be found in between the "Albumin, serum" and the "ALT" values...

I'm tired of naysayers talking about steroid use and being uber harmful to our bodies. Honestly, the panzy Olympic Organiztion demonized it early on NOT beacuse they deemed them harmful BUT because they WORKED and created unfair competition. Granted, they could've left it alone for a few more years and then everyone would have been on them and no one would have been crying about being a loser. Regardless, it's a bunch of crap hearing people talk about the unknown/known dangers of steroid use. In fact, steroids are being implemented into the medical industry more and more, especially for women these days. There are very strict, well known protocol's for taking each and every type of steroid under the sun these days and yet some people think that it's stil super uber dangerous and harmful to the liver. HOGWASH. Take care of your body, monitor it, make adjustments, get huge, be stronger, be leaner, stop crying.
 
bill86 said:
im not sure i understand what youre trying to say then. i never said anything about down regulation of test, i was speaking specifically on liver toxicity and/or its other negative effects like on cholesterol levels.

again, throwing out a fact like that about tylenol is taking everything out of context. tylenol causes so many problems because so many people use (or, misuse) it. if the exact same person in the exact same health were to take the dosage of tylenol thats recommended for aches and pains everyday for 6 weeks, i can guarantee that their liver values would not be as out of whack as taking the dosage of a methylated prohormone for 6 weeks without support supps thats recommended to make gains... but i guess what youre saying is that taking copious amounts of tylenol for long periods of time would be worse than taking a methylated prohormone for a short period of time while taking the right support supplements, to which i may not disagree with you, but again, its kind of a weak comparison.

Well, didn't u just answer yourself with that statement? Jeeze, this isn't an argument about whether or not you can pop 50mg of SD/day for 6 weeks and still be healthy..no, it's about whether or not PH's can be just as safe as other aggressive medications not related to performance enhancement. My bloods prove that with supporting supplements (UDCA), you can manage just fine on some methylated compounds without worry. And heck, I didn't even take milk thistle..imagine if I did.
Click to expand...
 
a) no... actually... my argument was not whether they can be as safe, its whether the general population is educated enough to use them safely, thus, whether or not they should be legal

b) saying that ONE person (you) had bloods come back fine is PROOF that people in general can manage fine without worry on ph's is idiotic.
 
Ok. Aceroni was cool and left a message on my profile so I'll add my official two cents since he clarified the toxicity thing.

Bill86: Methylated steroids are not toxic, it is the metabolite of the methylated steroid that is toxic :).

Aceroni: The steroid is glucuronidated and it's that glucose 'analogue' that is toxic and causes build up of bile in the liver. eventually causing jaundice etc etc etc

Since steroids interact with the nucleus in the cell, it is likely that this glucuronidated steroid is transported to the nucleus in the liver cell and represses the gene that regulates bile blow.

The same effects occurr with estrogens as well. They both function in the nucleus and if they are both glucuronidated they are likely to cause the same issues.

Steroid D-Ring Glucuronides: Characterization of a New Class of Cholestatic Agents
1983, Vol. 14, No. 5 , Pages 1005-1019

The pragmatic issue of the liver damage is discussed in this paper, which is almost 30 years old...
In this case, the actual mechanism of bile build up in the liver is not relevant,
it happens regardless.

I'm not sure that mechanistic information would be terribly useful in this thread anyhow. no need to do anymore digging than I have to.
 
bill86 said:
a) no... actually... my argument was not whether they can be as safe, its whether the general population is educated enough to use them safely, thus, whether or not they should be legal

b) saying that ONE person (you) had bloods come back fine is PROOF that people in general can manage fine without worry on ph's is idiotic.
Click to expand...

Thanks, so now I'm an idiot. And all because I'm in the top 1% that used real scientific evidence to come to a conclusion rather than bro science and how I "feel" during and after my cycle. Ok.

I just thought you guys would welcome some real scientific support for a more accurate conclusion about methylated PH's. Apparently I was wrong. I'll let you guys hash this one out w/o me.

Good luck.
 
@fueled passion. I never said steroids were terrible for ya bro. I said oral prohormones are horrible for ya...
Anyone I've ever talked to at the gym, whos clearly been lifting most of their lives, all say that if you are opting to do one or the other, take injectibles because they are much less harmful for you.

But again I dont do either, and im not saying to do either...
 
aceroni said:
@fueled passion. I never said steroids were terrible for ya bro. I said oral prohormones are horrible for ya...
Anyone I've ever talked to at the gym, whos clearly been lifting most of their lives, all say that if you are opting to do one or the other, take injectibles because they are much less harmful for you.

But again I dont do either, and im not saying to do either...
Click to expand...

I respect that statement and I believe you are right. I believe oral steroids/pro-hormones are far more consequential than oil and water based injections.

It's even more pathetic to see that, between the two different routes one can take with steroid use, the one that is legal is by far and large the most harmful which I believe supports my claims about steroids not being banned because of harmfulness. It, like most things in government regulation, was deemed illegal due to social influences and demonization of the substances themselves. The fact is steroids got off to a bad start with terrible media and it will take pages upon pages of scientific evidence saying otherwise to undo the negative perception that it currently has.

I meant no disrespect to others, BTW. I have a strong opinion about most things in life which tends to create heated tension. I apologize but despite my stubborn opinion, I never ever have an angry or hurtful heart about the conversation. I would forfeit the debate long before I damage a relationship with another person...even if I hardly know them.
 
professor: touche on that comment, lol

passion: i never meant YOURE an idiot, i dont even know you, just that i feel that train of thought is... that is the exact equivalent of me giving you all 'real scientific support and proof' of the conclusion that if living an otherwise healthy lifestyle, you can smoke cigarettes your entire life without getting lung cancer just because my grandmother did so and lived to be 85 without getting lung cancer.


but i agree, my whole argument is ONLY on the legality of steroids (i feel they should be illegal because of peoples lack of knowledge and lack of companies desire to properly inform customers on how to use them and their side effects), or more specifically prohormones, which are, in my opinion, more harmful to you than injectibles.

when we hear of doctors prescribing steroids to patients for various reasons (such as wasting due to AIDS, etc), i'm assuming theyre test-based injectibles as opposed to oral, methylated prohormones (although i could be wrong).

however, lets also remember that just because a doctor prescribes you something doesnt make its 'safe'. hell, i see multiple commercials everyday advertising class action lawsuits against companies who's prescription meds have caused life threatening side effects, not to mention all the meds that have eventually gotten pulled due to their sides. (but also... not saying steroids/ph's are JUST AS DANGEROUS OR MORE than any of these medications, lets remember that said medications arent legal without a doctor's prescription)
 
although, let me concede to the idea that there are many things that arent illegal because they arent regulated by the fda, and may pose serious threats; specifically, herbs. while kava kava isnt illegal, it has been associated with serious cases of liver toxicity (i think it was due to pieces of the stem being mixed into the formula, not quite sure though), but its not regulated by the fda.

im guilty of this too... but we should also point out that just because something is 'natural' doesnt mean its safer than something 'unnatural'. again, in this situation, i feel like i must go back to the point that many people are unaware of the dangers of 'natural' remedies, and thus think its ok to take as much as they want because 'something natural cant possibly hurt me'
 
Right, people in this generation depend on the FDA to tell them what is safe and not safe, rather than doing their own homework, talking to experienced users, and understanding at least basic science and biology behind it all before making a decision. Furthermore, if the FDA has kept quiet about any particular substance, people assume its ok and safe. AM members know better because we tend to educate ourselves on such matters.

This is another great reason why 1) government regulation has caused less individual initiative and 2) we let the government decide what is safe and unsafe by them deciding what is legal and not legal. Nevermind that often times the government makes such decisions not based on the general populations well-being. They base it on money, often times. Research what the senator of Oregon did to allow such crap to get put on the market via "supplementation"..
 
cant argue with the idea that money fuels the government, which a lot of times leads to certain people (or, in this case, supplements/supplement companies) getting more leeway.

on the flipside, there are always those isntances of politicians wanting to get elected by 'looking out for their constituants well being' so they start crusades against all supplements, or just any performance enhancing supplement (anabolics, or otherwise) in general.... not sure if these rumors ive been hearing about bills to ban most athletic supplements are true or not, but it makes me wonder

kind of reminds me when they banned caffeinated alcoholic drinks around here... the leaders had EVERYONE in a frenzy thinking people were going to die because they were consuming alcohol with caffeine. the only 'science' they provided is that caffeine may make you feel less drunk, so youll drink more, causing you to get alcohol poisoning. but the on-going rumor was that it can cause heart attacks mixing 'uppers and downers like that' which i thought was absurd..... theyll pull those energy-alcohol drinks, but are bars banned from mixing vodka and redbull? jagerbombs? hell... jack and cokes? no, of course not... but people wanted to get elected and/or make their constituents think they cared so much about us, that they just had to make these drinks illegal for our well-being (i, personally didnt drink them, i thought they were disgusting, but it was just an observation of mine, just to clarify any 'bias' i may have in this).
 
bill86 said:
im not sure i understand what youre trying to say then. i never said anything about down regulation of test, i was speaking specifically on liver toxicity and/or its other negative effects like on cholesterol levels.

again, throwing out a fact like that about tylenol is taking everything out of context. tylenol causes so many problems because so many people use (or, misuse) it. if the exact same person in the exact same health were to take the dosage of tylenol thats recommended for aches and pains everyday for 6 weeks, i can guarantee that their liver values would not be as out of whack as taking the dosage of a methylated prohormone for 6 weeks without support supps thats recommended to make gains... but i guess what youre saying is that taking copious amounts of tylenol for long periods of time would be worse than taking a methylated prohormone for a short period of time while taking the right support supplements, to which i may not disagree with you, but again, its kind of a weak comparison.

i guess my stance is in agreement with bigdavid... it seems like youre trying to justify ph's being 'safe' or whatever by mentioning other substances that can also have adverse side effects.

my whole point in this was that for the betterment of the general (uninformed) populations health, prohormones are better off banned. simply because most people dont know how to use them properly (sure, we do, but the fact that were subscribers to anabolicminds says something about our interests as compared to an average kid/guy wanting to get big so he walks into a complete nutrition or wherever and says 'give me something that will make me big'). im not anti-ph's/aas in the idea of using them, just the legality of them.

the thing is, they require much more knowledge about how to use them properly than most any other legally available substance with toxic side effects.
Click to expand...
I agree with you.I have not also understood what they thinking?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top