legal steriods

Change Page: < 12 | Showing page 2 of 2, messages 31 to 39 of 39
Author Message
DiscussBodybuilding.com
Master Lifter
7 Stars

  • Total Posts : 5274
  • Reward points : 10
  • Joined: 6/20/2003
  • Status: online

 
bremac

  • Total Posts : 25
  • Reward points : 10
  • Joined: 4/27/2008
  • Status: offline
Re:legal steriods - Friday, July 10, 2009 9:47 PM ( #31 )
odw777


bremac


You will not be able to buy genuine P orals for the price you are thinking of paying, they are fake.  As a physician I just want to make a couple of points about steroids that someone thinking about them should know.  I am not making these references to condone or object to their use.  I only use the names in necessity.
There are only a small handful of steroids that are indicated for use by human subjects, anything outside this small handful are considered too dangerous in their effect of side effect to be considered pharmaceuticals.  The term "human grade" does not exist and it is proposterous to think that anything that doesn't go through its final quality control checks in North america could be considered a pharma product.
The steroids with North American indications are:
stanazolol (Upjohn) for wasting and anti progesteronic effects.  2mg tabs blister packs only, suspension is a non FDA approved vet medication called winstrol V, winny-V is not stanazolol

oxandrolone for wasting (generics available) 5mg pressed tabs in blisters only

oxymethanolone by Searle, no known approved generics 50mg pressed tabs in blister pack only.  I have heard of an approved 25mg but the 50's are scored so i doubt it.

nandrolone decanoate (discontinued in 2007)  there are no approved forms of nandrolone decanoate, all organon products are either fake or obsolete.  25 and 50mg/ml in 2ml for a max of 100mg per vial is the only once approved form

testosterone base in cream gel or patch to a maximum concentration of 5% in creams and gels and dose of 12.5mg in a patch

testosterone enanthate in 200mgml, in 10ml multiject (delasteryl) and a 4ml ampoule but I can't remember the name.

cypionate is said to be made by sandoz canada and available but there is no indication for prescribing it in Canada, perhaps in the states but cypionate has not been reported as being made under license for a long time, enanthate took over.

I'm sure some of you will want to argue with me because you have 300mgml human grade deca or something but I'm sorry its a futile argument.

if you are considering a drug that is not part of that list in those forms you are buying either an illegal ugl product or something from a foreign country without our guidelines that we considered to dangerous.

many of todays prohormones and prosteroids are attempts at pharma drugs that couldn't get approved due to their dangers.  Now that the old patents are expiring the supps companies scoop them up and register them as new patents as supps, this skirts the drug number/registration since the originals of those have also expired.  Epistane is the classic example, a cytotoxic antineoplastic (chemotherapy) drug that could only get approved for use with patients in China.  It is toxic to fast growing cells due to it effect of binding up dna so it cant separate, the cell can't multiply so it dies.  Who wants to kill fast growing cells when you are building muscle?

Some of the ugl products out there especially in canada are extremely high quality, but, they are NOT approved therefore if you get sick, you have no recourse.  I would say no on cheap thai 50's (no such thing) and the cheap primo.  thai 50's are a product of a british company with the same die for their tab press.

you got a lot of good advice  from this thread so far, these guys know much more about building muscles than the eurorip artists offering to make it easy for you.  besides you are at the wrong place to find a blessing for using steroids.

good luck to you.


You sound exactly like the user on AM forums that was banned. You're the M.D., Ph.D. no?

Please explain to me how methylepitiostanol is a cytoxic agent. The only studies I've seen have been using epitiostanol in breast cancer therapy but strictly as a steroidal anti estrogen, do you have any studies involving methylepitiostanol being used as a antineoplastic agent? I'm sure a lot of people would love to see them. For an antineoplastic agent, it sure seems to have some pronounced anabolic effects. I would really love to get a respone for this because, it's been somethin that's been bugging me since you made that allegation on AM.

Btw there are numerous designer steroids that were produced over the years, just because only a handful is licensed for medical use doesn't meant any other steroidal anabolic is "too dangerous for human use". Nandrolone and testosterone the only anabolic steroids licensed in the UK, but that's just because use of these drugs outside of hrt is so limited there.


Do you even know what an antineoplastic is?  Its exactly what you just said it is used for.  Come on you guys I know its fun to pick on people who have something to say about your chosen products but don't do stuff like that, at least look the word up first.
bremac

  • Total Posts : 25
  • Reward points : 10
  • Joined: 4/27/2008
  • Status: offline
Re:legal steriods - Friday, July 10, 2009 10:00 PM ( #32 )
since I have no credibility because I don't know the trade name of this stuff, you can read this, straight from wikipedia they are probably against epistane too though, I never thought of that.

Health effects/occupational exposure

The adverse health effects associated with antineoplastic agents (cancer chemotherapy drugs, cytotoxic drugs) in cancer patients and some non-cancer patients treated with these drugs are well-documented. The very nature of antineoplastic agents makes them harmful to healthy constantly dividing cells and tissues, as well as the cancerous cells. For cancer patients with a life-threatening disease, there is a great benefit to treatment with these agents. However, for the healthcare workers that are exposed to antineoplastic agents as part of their work practice, precautions should be taken to eliminate or reduce exposure as much as possible.There already is a limitation in cytotoxics dissolution in Australia and the United States to 20 dissolutions per pharmacist/nurse, since pharmacists that prepare these drugs or nurses that may prepare and/or administer them are the two occupational groups with the highest potential exposure to antineoplastic agents. In addition, physicians and operating room personnel may also be exposed through the treatment of patients. Hospital staff, such as shipping and receiving personnel, custodial workers, laundry workers, and waste handlers, all have potential exposure to these drugs during the course of their work. The increased use of antineoplastic agents in veterinary oncology also puts these workers at risk for exposure to these drugs.[3]

so for those of you with life threating illnesses its a great anabolic prosteroid or anti estrogen, for the rest of you take each bottle of epistanohol you've used and subtract 365 days from you life and probably one of two thousand muscle fibres as they are constantly dividing cells.
but what do I know, I'm not a doctor or anything, I just make this **** up cuz i can't afford epristnoal.
If you are going to take drugs to build muscle why would you not just do it and not f around with stuff like this, you would get twenty times the results with methandro for way less money.  Do you think the DEA would let you go just because this isn't scheduled, IT IS SCHEDULED, ever heard of the analog law?  I've been an expert witness for defence trying to prove that the analog law shouldn't hold, noone is listening people.  At any time the dea can change the schedules, they can do it in the car on the way to your house, they can do it on the phone with you sitting there in cuffs while they try and figure out how to not make it a wasted trip.
I saw a guy get off from using real gear by saying he was sorry and pleading no contest, you fight, they fight. He was given four hours time served, was a guilty but he walked out on his own steam, he bummed a smoke off me.
[link=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antineoplastic#cite_note-2][/link]
MVP

  • Total Posts : 2387
  • Reward points : 10
  • Joined: 1/5/2009
  • Location: Virginia
  • Status: offline
Re:legal steriods - Friday, July 10, 2009 11:14 PM ( #33 )
Bremac although I can't contribute to the debate due to lack of knowledge upon the subject, I can say that Wikipedia isn't a significant source of information, just about anyone can put information on there.
ACE-CPT, NASM-CPT, AFPA-Nutrition Consultant 
odw777

  • Total Posts : 917
  • Reward points : 15
  • Joined: 12/14/2005
  • Status: offline
Re:legal steriods - Saturday, July 11, 2009 5:15 AM ( #34 )
bremac


Do you even know what an antineoplastic is?  Its exactly what you just said it is used for.  Come on you guys I know its fun to pick on people who have something to say about your chosen products but don't do stuff like that, at least look the word up first.


I do know it means, I was asking you to provide a study or excerpt where methylepitiostanol is used specifically in treating breast cancer or any medical use for that matter. Which you seem unable to produce, aside from wikipedia excerpts.

In fact I don't see you making the distinction between chemotherapy drugs and hormonal drugs. There was a number of androgens used in breast cancer throughout the years, for example drostanolone (ie. masteron, the parent drug to methyl masteron aka superdrol). Epitiostanol was used as an anti estrogen, but how do we get from that to saying that to saying it has a similar effect as an antimetabolite like methotrexate? So I suppose by this logic aromasin and letrozole also actively destroy dividing cells? Please explain to me the mode of action of methylepitiostanol that seems to allow it to act in all these ways. Also if I remember correctly from my physiology lectures, existing differentiated skeletal muscle cells don't undergo cell division.

Wikipedia is not even close to a reliable source. I'm sure any medical school in the world would stress the fact in their curriculum.

Is it true that you were the same user on the anabolicminds forums that was talking about this same topic? Because you have the same exact writting style. Can I ask why were you banned? I do have an idea but just wanted to see your side, because if I remember right it was supposedly for pming people with links to buy steroids. Something that seems a bit out of character for an md with 3 degrees.




<message edited by odw777 on Saturday, July 11, 2009 5:16 AM>
BJDPhoto

  • Total Posts : 1808
  • Reward points : 10
  • Joined: 10/10/2005
  • Location: Northern VA
  • Status: offline
Re:legal steriods - Saturday, July 11, 2009 7:57 AM ( #35 )
odw777

Is it true that you were the same user on the anabolicminds forums that was talking about this same topic? Because you have the same exact writting style. Can I ask why were you banned? I do have an idea but just wanted to see your side, because if I remember right it was supposedly for pming people with links to buy steroids. Something that seems a bit out of character for an md with 3 degrees.

Seems completely plausible to me.  If I may... How do you know you're in a Toyota dealership?  All the salesmen are bashing Honda.  How do you know you're in a Honda dealership?  All the salesmen are bashing Toyota.  I can smell a salesman a mile away, dude, and this guy reeks.

I had a hair stylist once with exactly the same tone.  She was hell bent on convincing me that my preferred shampoo had the same ingredients as "rug cleaner", as though that was supposed to scare me into buying her $40 boutique brand.

I don't doubt that bremac has some level of experience in hormonal science.  I believe he has precisely enough experience to compile a very polished and rehearsed set of talking points.  Yet, as you pointed out, odw, I have yet to see a single medical juornal or clinical study quoted supporting his claims.  For someone with three degrees and an MD in endocrynology, this strikes me as a glaring lack of due diligence at best, and outright academic incompetence at worst.

bremac

This molecule was dismissed as being too dangerous for human consumption at a dose that would be effective as antitumor in 1974.  It toxic effect carried over into healthy quickly dividing cells rendering them incapable of dna replication.

Perhaps it was.  Is anyone here equating the antitumor dosage to that required to reap the alleged anabolic effects??  Again, this is the kind of spurious comparison that has people questioning your critique of these compounds as "cytotoxic".  At a high enough dose, friggin' WATER is toxic.

Sorry dude, but your credentials don't impress me, and like most of the people I work with every day who mortgaged the first thrid of their job history paying for them, I don't think they grant you the credibility you asume they do.  Forgive me for thinking (like odw777) that anyone willing to put in that much study and jeopardize it all  to shill for illicit steroids on the Internet can't be the brightest bulb on the tree.
Perrynaytor

  • Total Posts : 1297
  • Reward points : 10
  • Joined: 5/19/2007
  • Status: online
Re:legal steriods - Saturday, July 11, 2009 6:30 PM ( #36 )
I can't even comprehend half of Bremac's posts. They are so confusing.

But I do know this, Epistane is one of the best mild orals you can take at an effective dose for strength and some size.
feb 2010
220 12-14%
bp 315
bs 405
dl 515

MVP

  • Total Posts : 2387
  • Reward points : 10
  • Joined: 1/5/2009
  • Location: Virginia
  • Status: offline
Re:legal steriods - Sunday, July 12, 2009 1:00 AM ( #37 )
I agree with Perry regarding Epistane, if I were to ever try anabolics, it'd be Epistane.

As far as the hormonal science, I've found veg has been a highly creditable source, I'd trust his advice.
ACE-CPT, NASM-CPT, AFPA-Nutrition Consultant 
PumaKrieg

  • Total Posts : 901
  • Reward points : 10
  • Joined: 6/10/2007
  • Status: offline
Re:legal steriods - Tuesday, July 14, 2009 8:35 PM ( #38 )
correct me if im wrong but isnt epistane going to be banned soon?
Perrynaytor

  • Total Posts : 1297
  • Reward points : 10
  • Joined: 5/19/2007
  • Status: online
Re:legal steriods - Tuesday, July 14, 2009 9:07 PM ( #39 )
Whenever they figure out that its Epitiostanolol, it will be banned. I can't remember if thats the right steroid it is a clone of, but you catch my drift.

I figured tren would be gone by now. That stuff is as hardcore as superdrol. And it's progestin based. I read that it's almost like friggen birth control.
feb 2010
220 12-14%
bp 315
bs 405
dl 515

Change Page: < 12 | Showing page 2 of 2, messages 31 to 39 of 39

Jump to:

Current active users
There are 0 members and 1 guests.
Icon Legend and Permission
  • New Messages
  • No New Messages
  • Hot Topic w/ New Messages
  • Hot Topic w/o New Messages
  • Locked w/ New Messages
  • Locked w/o New Messages
  • Read Message
  • Post New Thread
  • Reply to message
  • Post New Poll
  • Submit Vote
  • Post reward post
  • Delete my own posts
  • Delete my own threads
  • Rate post

DiscussBodybuilding.com is supported by:
Supplements101.com | NoBullBodybuilding.com | JustAskMarc.com
© 2003-2009 DiscussBodybuilding.com, LLC. All rights reserved.
© 2000-2009 ASPPlayground.NET Forum Version 3.4
DiscussBodybuilding.com