RE: 1-Ad, 1-Test...
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Logged in as: Guest
|
Login  | |
|
RE: 1-Ad, 1-Test... - 1/28/2004 8:49:26 PM
|
|
|
VaNDammE
Posts: 6
Joined: 1/27/2004
Status: offline
|
hey i appreciate everyone putting in their 2 cents. i'm just really confused with pro hormones and pro steroids. i do have availability to steroids, and was considering a dbol and test cycle. however ph's are said to have less sides, and i don't really want to inject. i've been lifting for 5 years, and i need a plateau breaker. my cousin says he used a product by twinlab that had androstene in it, and trust me he went from 150lbs to 190lbs in 6months roughly. my opinion is that he used steroids, but he claims he didn't(he looks awesome). i just hear alot of bullshit about how prohormones are useless, then some say they are f!@#ing awesome. everyone has good results with gear, but dammit it's illegal because some dumbasses have to overdose the **** and die. all i know i'm ready to advance.
_____________________________
remember the 3D's of bodybuilding....desire,determination,and dedication. they are the best to supplements to build muscle.
(in reply to VaNDammE)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1-Ad, 1-Test... - 1/28/2004 11:03:33 PM
|
|
|
Marc David
Posts: 9189
Joined: 4/6/2003
From: Bay Area -CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
everyone has good results with gear, but dammit it's illegal because some dumbasses have to overdose the **** and die. all i know i'm ready to advance.
Not entirely true.
Increasing your test naturally, or steroids or pro-hormones has associated side effects.
Using pro-hormones which is legal (for now) isn't as effective as steroids. But it's effective for what it is. Legal. It has risks. It is not risk free.
Using steroids is not only illegal (doesn't matter if you agree.. you can still get a lame fine and jail time for possession if you piss off a neighbor, or boss, or ex-girlfriend or cop). And it has the same risks maybe more as there's really no conversion (as I understand it).
Neither are risk free.
Pro-hormones aren't useless. But they require education and learning and research beyond using protein. This thread is by far a good reason for you, as the consumer to PM people, to post more, to ask for links and to research.
Taking steroids (not condoning that as it's illegal) or pro-hormones is something you need to research and carefully weight the side effects.
If you think that there are none if used properly.. that is untrue. There's always something in increasing testosterone 1000%. Prostate cancer loves that. Be aware of the risks.
If you do it.. pro-hormones or whatever, at least do yourself the favor of continuing the education and don't be the guy who only gives a crap out 24" guns and dies from a heart attack or kidney failure at 32. That .. is a dumbass.
quote:
all i know i'm ready to advance.
Which is fine. Just be educated and continue that learning process on your own. Forum or not. Read, use Google, ask Twin Peak for links, ask for links here, do your research before you do anything.
This isn't a scare tactic. Continue to ask questions and you'll find an acceptable path for yourself. And do it with some knowledge and you'll be ahead of most.
_____________________________
(in reply to VaNDammE)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1-Ad, 1-Test... - 1/29/2004 10:19:08 AM
|
|
|
Powerhaus
Posts: 1474
Joined: 12/17/2003
From: Oakland, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
If there's a DR right there.. that's all the proof a squirrel like you needs.
Many MDs have gone over to the DARK SIDE...do not be fooled!
Pro-hormones and pro-steroids are the same thing. "Pro" means they (hopefully) turn into a "hormone" in the body, and since the hormone they are all supposed to become is some form of tetosterone, that's a pro-steroid.
I don't know how many kids I've talked to about steroids who seem to think that injected steroids are worse than oral ones. Yes, people are scared of needles, but the injected ones are actually almost always less toxic than the oral ones. This is another concern I have about pro-hormones, they're taken orally and have to be processed by the liver, so I'd assume there's some toxicity there.
Since steroids are actual DRUGS, they have been approved by the FDA as safe and effective for their intended use. Of course, I am sure the companies that make steroid drugs are producing and selling MANY TIMES the amount of drugs that would be required if they were only being used for their on-label use. For example, Winstrol is given to treat swelling of the heart. I'm guessing most of the Winstrol out there isn't going for that though.
Supplements are mostly unregulated, so it's buyer beware. If you try them and they work for you, that's great, but the reason that there's so much difference of opinion on whether or not they work is because it's all based on personal experience, and personal experience varies WIDELY.
(in reply to Marc David)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1-Ad, 1-Test... - 1/29/2004 10:24:35 AM
|
|
|
Marc David
Posts: 9189
Joined: 4/6/2003
From: Bay Area -CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
Supplements are mostly unregulated, so it's buyer beware.
It wasn't always that way. It is has been since 1994.
quote:
What is FDA's role in regulating dietary supplements versus the manufacturer's responsibility for marketing them?
In October 1994, the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) was signed into law by President Clinton. Before this time, dietary supplements were subject to the same regulatory requirements as were other foods. This new law, which amended the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, created a new regulatory framework for the safety and labeling of dietary supplements.
Under DSHEA, a firm is responsible for determining that the dietary supplements it manufactures or distributes are safe and that any representations or claims made about them are substantiated by adequate evidence to show that they are not false or misleading. This means that dietary supplements do not need approval from FDA before they are marketed. Except in the case of a new dietary ingredient, where pre-market review for safety data and other information is required by law, a firm does not have to provide FDA with the evidence it relies on to substantiate safety or effectiveness before or after it markets its products.
Also, manufacturers do not need to register themselves nor their dietary supplement products with FDA before producing or selling them. Currently, there are no FDA regulations that are specific to dietary supplements that establish a minimum standard of practice for manufacturing dietary supplements. However, FDA intends to issue regulations on good manufacturing practices that will focus on practices that ensure the identity, purity, quality, strength and composition of dietary supplements. At present, the manufacturer is responsible for establishing its own manufacturing practice guidelines to ensure that the dietary supplements it produces are safe and contain the ingredients listed on the label.
_____________________________
(in reply to Powerhaus)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1-Ad, 1-Test... - 1/29/2004 10:29:17 AM
|
|
|
Powerhaus
Posts: 1474
Joined: 12/17/2003
From: Oakland, CA
Status: offline
|
Yeah, did you see any pro hormones before 1994?
(in reply to Marc David)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1-Ad, 1-Test... - 1/29/2004 10:43:19 AM
|
|
|
Powerhaus
Posts: 1474
Joined: 12/17/2003
From: Oakland, CA
Status: offline
|
Well, my brother was in high school football in the 1980's. There may have not been an Internet, but there sure were a lot of high school football coaches looking for an edge. He was taking protein powder, which back then was nasty and clumpy and stuff (I think it was basically powdered cottage cheese), and some megadoses of vitamins.
I will have to do some poking around, but I don't recall seeing even DHEA before 1994.
(in reply to Marc David)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
 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 |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Printable Version
