Are Anabolic Steroids and Human Growth Hormone as bad as "they" say?

  • InsatiableBlo...

    Posts: 442

    Jan 27, 2009 1:43 AM GMT
    I recently saw the documentary "Bigger, Stronger, Faster" and I got the notion that steroids were'nt as bad as what teachers and people have told me my whole life.. So back to the original question: Are Anabolic Steroids and Human Growth Hormone as bad as "they" say?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 27, 2009 2:19 AM GMT
    Go watch "Reefer Madness" and draw some parallels between it and real life.

    If you're looking to get beefier just eat more; it's cheaper than juice and obviously more legal.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 27, 2009 2:22 AM GMT
    Golly. Every government propaganda campaign isn't true (SIC)?

    I sure haven't heard about folks dragging the producers of Bigger, Stronger, Faster into court for telling fibs.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 27, 2009 2:33 AM GMT
    Go to Google Scholar and search for anabolic steroids or pick any steroid you can think of. You'll get tons of fact-based articles for which you can read the abstracts (nice short summaries) and then make a decision yourself.

    Personally, as a medical student, I would say they're not good for you - unless you have some endocrine disorder the hormonal levels in your body are where they are for a reason. Ingesting steroids will mess with things that you don't want to alter and though it may not be noticeable, you are doing harm to yourself. I could go into more detail but I'll let the scholarly literature speak for itself.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 27, 2009 2:39 AM GMT
    Be certain to research anti-aging. One reason the endocrinologists have recommended that AAS not be controlled. No single medical organization has EVER recommended that AAS be treated as controlled substances. In fact, quite the contrary. Despite that, they were.

    There are a wide range positive health affects from AAS. That's why they remain the treatment of choice for chronic disease, especially the sickest of the sick (cancer and HIV).

    Disease prevention, rather than disease treatment, should be the order of the day.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 27, 2009 2:48 AM GMT
    'Nitro' from the '90s 'American Gladiators' has a new book out on the subject;

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,475904,00.html
  • dionysus

    Posts: 420

    Jan 27, 2009 2:56 AM GMT
    its really simple. you inject roids, you increase your testosterone levels. your body reacts by upping all your other hormones. now. keep in mind your body had those levels set at a specific time in your life for specific reasons. so its like going 5 mph faster on the freeway, everyone around you speeds up.

    now, when you go "off-cycle" your other levels are still WAY up there cuz you're body is regulating those. and it just assumed it was making those levels of testosterone. back to the freeway assumption, you got to your exit, all the other cars keep going. so now you've jacked up everything else BUT your testosterone, so now you gotta wait for everything to slow down (a much longer time frame than when you were adding the roids to your system) and thats when the problems start. not to mention you are decreasing your body's "timeline" so to speak, so things start breaking down faster cuz they were going 5 mph over the speed limit.

    sorry if that was all over the place. it's easier in person. i swear it.

    point is this: you're a freaking idiot to take steroids. you take them cuz you want a fast solution to what you consider a "problem" simple as this. work for what you want. stop giving into the standard stereotype of having what you need right in front of you. work. for. what. you. want.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 27, 2009 2:57 AM GMT
    NakedDevil said'Nitro' from the '90s 'American Gladiators' has a new book out on the subject;

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,475904,00.html

    What an idiot. Everything he talks about could have been prevented with an estrogen block.

    For someone making money, he was a complete MORON. I can't believe that he was surrounded by money and surely someone with some smarts and he didn't talk to anyone in the know. We watched the news story. The man is truly a moron.

    A classic example of how stupid folks make money. ROFL.

    Had he even gone to a simpleton doctor, the first order would have been an anti-e. DOH!

    Of course, you can look at any competitive bodybuilding group and know it's just not a uniform thing. Most folks are much smarter.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 27, 2009 3:03 AM GMT
    With all respect, Chucky, I think that part of the reason they don't mind giving terminally/chronically ill patients steroids, in spite of the adverse effects is because if they don't administer them the outcome will be far worse. I mean how bad can increased cholesterol, elevated blood pressure or a weakened liver be when you're facing death from cancer?

    I don't really think there is much preventative benefit to most steroids - they're generally palliative. Granted they can be used to stimulate bone marrow growth but most of the time, as in AIDS patients, they're just trying to slow down the wasting away. Even other steroidal drugs such as hydrocortisone usually alleviate symptoms, not the cause. For example, steroids used to treat allergies (like nasal sprays) don't stop you from having the allergic response, they merely dull the response. Taking a steroid-based cough medicine? It just reduces the inflammation and post-nasal drip, it doesn't make the cold go away. Putting cortisone on a burn? It just numbs the wound, it doesn't expedite healing.

    So, I don't know if you can really say that there are tremendous preventative health benefits from taking steroids...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 27, 2009 3:11 AM GMT
    "Cycling" is another moronic idea. Bouncing your system around is never good. You don't have to be a genius to understand that.

    That's why a good doctor will put someone on, and leave them on to get all the benefits without bouncing someone around.

    Caspervann needs to study his endocrinology, though, a bit, as he's kind of mis-informing you. Everything returns to normal in about 3 weeks (almost every effect from AAS / HRT is transitory), for testosterone, and for stuff like T3, even if you're on for 40 years, it returns to normal in about 3 DAYS. Capservann needs to study the various endo circuits to understand that what he is saying is mostly wrong.

    I'm not going to drag out a debate, but, study after study.

    I will say that, like my friend Bob Klapp, in the video from HBO Real Sports #99 above, I've been the benefactor of HRT for years. I have a number of friends that are in the same spot, some who don't even workout. I enjoy a cholesterol of 130, a bp of 135/82, and, when I'm training, I can hold my heart rate at 160 for 20 minutes (way over for a guy of 4icon_cool.gif. As with HIV patients, I've not only been allowed to continue a quality of life disease free, but have enjoy the good moods, the ability to continue to be an athlete in middle age, and I've kept my bones strong, improved my cognitive ability, and prevented diseases of aging. In my book, that's real good science, and beat the middle-aged blues, and list of medications.

    UNT (University of North Texas) did a study in 1999 comparing pro and competitive bodybuilders morbidity against others. What they found was that the bodybuilders not only lived a higher quality of life, but, ALSO LIVED LONGER, and with fewer diseases.

    I've talked with numerous geriatric and internal medicine doctors who know this truth as well.

    I'd encourage the poster to research anti-aging, internal medicine, AIDS / HIV treatment. It's no coincidence that the sickest of the sick are given these life-changing natural hormones.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 27, 2009 3:14 AM GMT
    skifan08 has cortico-steriods (which are catabolic) confused with AAS (anabolic and androgenic) and, to be frank, is completely and totally clueless. One is bad (catabolic / inflammation reducing / disease masking ) and one is good (anabolic / muscle preserving / healing promoting / androgenic / masculinizing). He fails to make any distinction between the two and CLEARLY is not well informed. He is a classic example of urban myth and misinformation.

    The positive affects of AAS far outweigh the negative effects in nearly every case. That's why HRT is so very popular.

    I'm afraid skinfan08 is very confused.
  • dionysus

    Posts: 420

    Jan 27, 2009 3:15 AM GMT
    3 weeks as opposed to 10 seconds to inject the needle, like i said, based on reference, its a longer period of time.

    please. tell me what study my college did, cuz im pretty sure any information found in 1999 in relation to steroids is completely different than any study from 2008 and seeing as i just got my bachelor's of science from University of North Texas and it was pretty well preached that steroids are REAL bad. icon_smile.gif
  • dionysus

    Posts: 420

    Jan 27, 2009 3:17 AM GMT
    chuckystud said"Cycling" is another moronic idea. Bouncing your system around is never good. You don't have to be a genius to understand that.

    That's why a good doctor will put someone on, and leave them on to get all the benefits without bouncing someone around.

    Caspervann needs to study his endocrinology, though, a bit, as he's kind of mis-informing you. Everything returns to normal in about 3 weeks (almost every effect from AAS / HRT is transitory), for testosterone, and for stuff like T3, even if you're on for 40 years, it returns to normal in about 3 DAYS. Capservann needs to study the various endo circuits to understand that what he is saying is mostly wrong.

    I'm not going to drag out a debate, but, study after study.

    I will say that, like my friend Bob Klapp, in the video from HBO Real Sports #99 above, I've been the benefactor of HRT for years. I have a number of friends that are in the same spot, some who don't even workout. I enjoy a cholesterol of 130, a bp of 135/82, and, when I'm training, I can hold my heart rate at 160 for 20 minutes (way over for a guy of 4icon_cool.gif. As with HIV patients, I've not only been allowed to continue a quality of life disease free, but have enjoy the good moods, the ability to continue to be an athlete in middle age, and I've kept my bones strong, improved my cognitive ability, and prevented diseases of aging. In my book, that's real good science, and beat the middle-aged blues, and list of medications.

    UNT (University of North Texas) did a study in 1999 comparing pro and competitive bodybuilders morbidity against others. What they found was that the bodybuilders not only lived a higher quality of life, but, ALSO LIVED LONGER, and with fewer diseases.

    I've talked with numerous geriatric and internal medicine doctors who know this truth as well.

    I'd encourage the poster to research anti-aging, internal medicine, AIDS / HIV treatment. It's no coincidence that the sickest of the sick are given these life-changing natural hormones.



    you also have to take into account that when steroids are injected, there not dosing properly which is the main reason for the all the issues. doctors giving you a perscription is completely different. i agree with testosterone injections at a certain age, its a good idea. however, the 19 year olds jamming 5 CC of whatever is out there now, um deca?, are not helping their level of morbidity.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 27, 2009 3:18 AM GMT
    I have no problems with people taking anabolic steroids. As long as they know the risks and don't whine about it later on down the road when/if their hair falls out or lose a kidney.

    I'd have to agree with Chucky here. There are dumb steroid users and smart ones. The smart ones do the research beforehand. And they know when to stop. The dumb ones blindly inject themselves with whatever they can get at the Mexican pharmacy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 27, 2009 3:18 AM GMT
    Here you go:

    The Positive Effects of Testosterone on the Heart
    The Positive Effects of Testosterone on the Heart
    by Doug Kalman MS, RD

    I assume you were unable to find it yourself.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 27, 2009 3:19 AM GMT
    xrichx, GAO (General Accounting Office) did a study of the AAS user. It seems, they are healthier, make more money, live longer, and are of higher IQ than the lay public. It's all well documented in their report to Congress.

    They say it's a problem to try to sell intelligent folks a lie, basically. Go figure.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 27, 2009 3:22 AM GMT
    To reiterate, watch "Reefer Madness" and draw parallels between pot and steroids.
  • dionysus

    Posts: 420

    Jan 27, 2009 3:23 AM GMT
    just one point. you speak of research showing how steroids might be beneficial, im pretty sure thats your stand-point. how about a much more recent research article published in sweden (ill be honest, the kines boys at UNT can't screw a light bulb in so i dunno how "good" our 1999 article might be, and this one is from 2006)

    Observations by health-care professionals suggest that the use of anabolic androgenic steroids (AAS) may be associated with lethal complications, but this has not yet been confirmed by controlled epidemiological studies. Here, we investigated the diagnoses (in the Swedish patient care records) and mortality rate among patients who tested positively for the presence of AAS (n=24icon_cool.gif in connection with receiving medical care. Patients who had tested negatively (n=1215) were used for comparison.

    The proportions of patients who had received institutionalized care for substance abuse, psychiatric disorder or central thoracic pain were significantly higher in the AAS-positive subjects (RR=2.2, 95% CI=1.2–4.2; RR=2.1, 95% CI=1.4–3.2 and RR=3.5, 95% CI=1.1–10.9, respectively). Furthermore, unspecified convulsions were highly over-represented in the AAS-positive group (RR=53.9, 95% CI=7.0–415.7) and one of these patients died during a seizure. The standardized mortality ratios (SMR) in the AAS-positive patients and -negative patients were 20.43 (95% CI=10.56–35.70) and 6.02 (95% CI=3.77–9.12), respectively. The relatively higher SMR in the AAS-positive patients was observed irrespective of what type clinic had referred the patients for AAS testing.

    In conclusion, use of AAS appears to be an indicator of increased risk for premature death in several categories of patients. However, the nature of the association between AAS and premature death remains unclear and additional research on this question is urgently required.


    although its not entirely conclusive, as shown in the final paragraph, there needs to be more research, but the mortality ratios are almost 3 times greater in the AAR positive group. there might be some questioning to the size of the two samples, since there was a large difference as well, but the ratios are defined as a reference within the sample. my point is this: steroids are bad. and i stick with that. i use the generalized terminology to emphasize my points, because you do ramp up your natural hormone production and although i never did take an endocrinology class, i think my BS in biology was able to provide a fairly intermediate level of knowledge since we dont specifically go into cholesterol dervice hormonal release. not to mention the fact, we're still completely stupid on our ideas, with only theories that sometimes get disproved the very next day. so im more than willing to research and discuss, but im going to stick to my grounds and say doing steroids is completely stupid.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 27, 2009 3:25 AM GMT
    I have to go workout, honest......but, let's get real honest.

    100 million folks are obese in the U.S. 8 million of those fatties will die needlessly, from obesity, each year.

    AAS is rated near dead last in mortality.

    You are more likely to die from an airplane crash than AAS.

    You are vastly more likely to die from obesity than AAS.

    You are vastly more likely to die from second hand smoke than AAS.

    There has NEVER, in 40 years of study by the Army, been a single case of AAS induced mortality. None, zero, notta'. Not a single death has been ruled related to AAS...ever.

    Now...at some point, common sense has to prevail. I've been around it for 33 years, and my juice head friends aren't dropping dead. In fact, most are the pictures of health.
  • dionysus

    Posts: 420

    Jan 27, 2009 3:31 AM GMT
    it was stated that idiots grab a needle. im all for researching it properly, but the same people who research it, are the people who are NOT obese, because they're the intelligent people of america. the few. the proud. the smart. (i think its kinda of funny that the marines kinda grabbed that as well, lame) but what you're saying is similar to

    great white shark attacks are the least likely cause of death. therefore. go jump into the ocean waters when you see one.

    the reason car accidents are so high: so many people drive.

    not the entire core of the world uses steroids. thats why its a low number. there's too many negatives associated with it. and the UNT research is never cited in that guys page which, from what ive read so far, is testosterone replacement, not steroid injection. two. completely. different. items.

  • dionysus

    Posts: 420

    Jan 27, 2009 3:33 AM GMT
    chuckystud saidI have to go workout, honest......but, let's get real honest.

    100 million folks are obese in the U.S. 8 million of those fatties will die needlessly, from obesity, each year.

    AAS is rated near dead last in mortality.

    You are more likely to die from an airplane crash than AAS.

    You are vastly more likely to die from obesity than AAS.

    You are vastly more likely to die from second hand smoke than AAS.

    There has NEVER, in 40 years of study by the Army, been a single case of AAS induced mortality. None, zero, notta'. Not a single death has been ruled related to AAS...ever.

    Now...at some point, common sense has to prevail. I've been around it for 33 years, and my juice head friends aren't dropping dead. In fact, most are the pictures of health.


    Furthermore, unspecified convulsions were highly over-represented in the AAS-positive group (RR=53.9, 95% CI=7.0–415.7) and one of these patients died during a seizure.

    *patient died during seizure*
    its easy to determine that AAS isn't bad for you when AAS is FUNDING THE STUDY.

    hey check it, high fructose corn syrup is good for you. you know who said that? the manufacturers of high fructose corn syrup.

    my english teacher taught me one thing that has ONLY held true: follow the money.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 27, 2009 3:45 AM GMT
    I'm thinking that in just a few years, perhaps 10...you'll be a bit more insightful. Youthful arrogance can be a wonderful thing.

    I've spent hours talking with doctors, users, and reading, as well as have my own observations of 33 years in the weight room(scientific and otherwise).

    I suspect that as you mature your views will moderate. That's often the case.

    It's hard for truth to come out, and for studies to be made, when stuff is forced into The Underground.

    As you grow older, I suspect you'll realize how little you truly know.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 27, 2009 3:48 AM GMT
    Okay, I think it's useless commenting any further on the topic since people will continue to believe what they want, however, I will say that I knew I was bringing up two separate classes of steroids in my post, that is the reason they were mentioned in separate paragraphs and denoted as "other". I didn't feel the necessity to go into extreme detail in a post on a sports forum. Perhaps in the future I should start writing dissertations on here.

    The reason I brought corticosteroids up is because of the parallels that can be drawn between their general modes of action in reference to treating medical conditions. One class may build tissue and the other may lead to its breakdown, but the important thing is that neither is actually doing anything to treat the illness. Promoting tissue growth via an androgenic steroid may make a cancer or AIDS patient stronger, but it doesn't make the disease go away. In the same vein treating a cough with a corticosteroid may make the cough go away but it won't make the illness causing the cough any better. This is something that is characteristic of pretty much all medically administered steroids.

    Chucky failed to answer the points that have been brought up by the "anti-steroid" posters regarding the ill-effects of anabolic/androgenic steroids, but he pounces on other details without looking at the bigger picture of what they are trying to say. I personally find this quite irritating and insulting.

    Also, Chucky, before demeaning people (which is really rather unnecessary - you could just as easily prove your points with a sound argument as with inflammatory language) and reading only what you want in their posts I think you should open up the dictionary and find out the difference between the usages/meanings of effect and affect. The two aren't even homophones so you have no excuse for interchanging them.

    (Oh, and thanks caspervann for putting forth some sound advice.)
  • MikemikeMike

    Posts: 6932

    Jan 27, 2009 3:59 AM GMT
    Ski it didn't take you too long to realize when you read BS or not-well done! He usually doesn't answer questions and usually his comments turn into useless stuff about himself and how increasing testosterone in all men is beneficial. HAHAHAHA!!!! icon_lol.gif Welcome to the WWC The wild world of chucky. Oh and bride of chucky to follow...
  • dionysus

    Posts: 420

    Jan 27, 2009 4:00 AM GMT
    chuckystud saidI'm thinking that in just a few years, perhaps 10...you'll be a bit more insightful. Youthful arrogance can be a wonderful thing.

    I've spent hours talking with doctors, users, and reading, as well as have my own observations of 33 years in the weight room(scientific and otherwise).

    I suspect that as you mature your views will moderate. That's often the case.

    It's hard for truth to come out, and for studies to be made, when stuff is forced into The Underground.

    As you grow older, I suspect you'll realize how little you truly know.


    i understand i have the young thing going for me, which sucks cuz you think i dont actually know what im talking about. but i have the degree, i would love to see what your's is in. sweet, talk to your doctors, thats awesome. but ill tell you right now, med school does not revolve around bodybuilders. ive read your posts, i know you're smart, and i can agree with you on some points. but im glad to see you're willing to attack me instead of attacking the points ive presented. its nice to see you find it effective to attack the debater rather than the actual debate. everything you've sited, has been testosterone REPLACEMENT, that whole thing with cardiac increase. REPLACEMENT 200 mg, dude, thats MINISCULE, compared to the GRAMS that people will inject. 200 mg is the dosage of a pill. now. a CC, as commonly used by people who inject themselves, usually runs on the 250 mg/mL (where mL = 1cc) therefore, the average teen who will probably inject 5 CCs is injecting about 1,250mg of AAS into his system. right, the average 40 year old man to replenish his testosterone level needs 200 mg, less than 1/5 the amount the teen just injected, who still has normal T levels.

    so. do me a favor. attack my logic. not me. the evidence you're pointing out is circumstantial at best and not applicable to the original question.