How can you tell the difference between bitch tits (gynecomastia) and plain flabb? I’m curious 'cause you see all these guys who have never used roids but damn, they look like they could breast feed. How can you tell on yourself (by feel? Thanks.
Also, links to any sites concerning this would be appreciated.
Wait, I found some past threads dealing with this. Feel free to add more if you want.
[quote]Nu-Naiy wrote:
How can you tell the difference between bitch tits (gynecomastia) and plain flabb? I’m curious 'cause you see all these guys who have never used roids but damn, they look like they could breast feed. How can you tell on yourself (by feel? Thanks.
Also, links to any sites concerning this would be appreciated.[/quote]
It is estimated that nearly 60% of the men in this country have some form of gynecomastia. Steroids are not needed to have gyno. There are different types of gyno and while some can be related to obesity, much of it is also related to the hormonal changes that occur during puberty.
I wrote this on another forum so I am just copying and pasting it here. I am not sure if the pictures will show up or if the mods will allow the pic links:
Because I am tired of people blaming any and every bodybuilder with a muscular chest for having it, and because I know that there are guys out there with this problem who won?t ever admit it, this is the GYNECOMASTIA thread. It is called ?Gyno? for short.
In short, gyno is the development of fatty tissue around the nipple area in young men. Often, this is caused during puberty due to the increased release of testosterone and the resultant aromatization of testosterone to estrogen. Somewhere in the ball park of 60% of all males in this country have some form of it which makes it extremely common. That means most of the guys you have ever known have had some form of it. Considering it would take a relatively low body percentage for it to be noticeable in mild cases, many people will never even know they have it.
These are some pics of natural adolescent gyno in cases that are little more mild to extreme:
Gyno is also caused by steroid use. This is easy to understand considering that testosterone can often be converted to estrogen. This is also why certain drugs are used by many bodybuilders to block this conversion to estrogen to keep this from happening. Most of the drugs used are very effective at keeping this from occurring. These are a few pics of a bodybuilder with this problem:
These are pics of the same bodybuilder after surgery to remove it.
This does NOT mean that every bodybuilder with this problem has used steroids. Since most men get this problem anyway, chances are, many bodybuilders will already be predisposed to this problem. Hopefully this will help end the insults to bodybuilders or even regular guys every time this issue pops up.
Did you happen to see that show on MTV last night about the guy that wanted to look like Arnold, so he was going to have his “gyno” removed? It was going to cost $6500 to have the tissue removed from his chest, and it looked like he needed about two weeks of low-carb dieting to get rid of it. The next scene shows him eating a sandwich and fries at T.G.I. Fridays and talking to his girlfriend about whether he should do it. He kept saying how much of a difference he saw after he had it done, but it was hardly noticeable I thought. That’s an awful lot of money to remove maybe five pounds of tissue.
[quote]johnnychimpo wrote:
Did you happen to see that show on MTV last night about the guy that wanted to look like Arnold, so he was going to have his “gyno” removed? It was going to cost $6500 to have the tissue removed from his chest, and it looked like he needed about two weeks of low-carb dieting to get rid of it. The next scene shows him eating a sandwich and fries at T.G.I. Fridays and talking to his girlfriend about whether he should do it. He kept saying how much of a difference he saw after he had it done, but it was hardly noticeable I thought. That’s an awful lot of money to remove maybe five pounds of tissue. [/quote]
While dieting may reduce the apperance of “bitch tits” it can’t fully get rid of it. Like you mentioned they removed tissue not just your normal body fat but actual breast tissue. I would say the guy on the show was a good candidate for the breast reduction… obviously had abnormal breast tissue but if I was him I would of dieted down first to see if I could live with what remained before forking over all that money.
On another not when I was in my early teens I had sore nips and mild lactation… scary shit
Just to add, it is believed that many of the processed materials we use in everyday life (like plastic containers) actually contribute to the rising occurance of gyno.
dammnit! just looking at those pictures…I might have gyno (bitch-titties)! Ah we’ll see lol
Professor X,
Thanks a lot, the pic were worth a million. A lot better than the previous posts that I’d found.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Just to add, it is believed that many of the processed materials we use in everyday life (like plastic containers) actually contribute to the rising occurance of gyno.[/quote]
Huh. What is it about processed materials that is believed to contribute to gyno? Some kind of exogenous estrogen?
[quote]Kuz wrote:
Huh. What is it about processed materials that is believed to contribute to gyno? Some kind of exogenous estrogen?[/quote]
Bisphenol A, a component of plastics, has been shown to increase the release of prolactin levels, acting like a weak estrogen in rats. I am not aware of studies proving the same occurs in humans but there is much speculation.
[quote]Endocrine researchers at the University of Cincinnati Medical School and Indiana University School of Medicine discovered that bisphenol A can bind to the estrogen receptor in the pituitary and stimulate the release of prolactin in laboratory rats. The pituitary, located at the base of the brain, is the master endocrine gland which controls many important functions such as growth, metabolism and reproduction. In humans, prolactin is normally involved in the production of milk in nursing mothers. When prolactin is produced in excess amounts, however, it can cause infertility in women and impotence in men.
Like naturally occurring estrogen, bisphenol A increased the release of the hormone prolactin from pituitary cell cultures. Under these conditions, bisphenol A was found to be much weaker than estrogen, and approximately 1,000-5,000 more was needed to produce the same effect as estrogen. When given to live rats, however, approximately 100 times more of the component of plastic was needed to raise the blood levels of prolactin.
“Our objective was to examine the effects of bisphenol A on the reproductive system and explore its mechanism of action,” said Nira Ben-Jonathan, PhD, who led the investigative team. “We suspect that in the living animal, bisphenol A may be metabolized in such a manner as to increase its potency.” She added, “Because the workings of the endocrine system are very complex, and still not fully understood, it is critical that additional research continues in this area.”
“These are intriguing results, but we cannot jump to conclusions,” said Society President P. Michael Conn, PhD. “While these results are significant in a laboratory setting, until further work is done, it is premature to draw any conclusion about potential effects of bisphenol A on humans.”
“The study does illustrate, however, the importance of endocrine research,” said Dr. Conn. “It is critical that potential effects of so-called ?endocrine disruptors? be studied by endocrinologists, the experts in the human endocrine system.”
An editorial accompanying the study, also published in the May issue of Endocrinology, calls for a reasoned discussion of the study.
“The public health question raised by all of these studies is: are the amounts of ingested bisphenol A from all sources substantial enough to cause significant estrogenic effects in the population? It is difficult to answer this question because there are no data available yet on the estrogenic potency of bisphenol A via the oral route,” writes the editorial author, David Feldman, MD, of Stanford University.
[/quote]
I will see if I can find more info but this was posted back in '97 in a newspaper article.
Some other web sites you may find interesting:
http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/199909/estrogen.asp
Thanks, Prof. That is some interesting food for thought for sure. It also seems to bring into focus something I remember TC writing about in terms of using M because of all the environmental estrogens we are constantly exposed to (but I was never 100% clear as to where they could come from). Looks like cruciferous veggies are the way to go.
Kuz
I have a slight case of gyno that originally occurred during puberty. It’s less noticeable the leaner I am, but it has always bothered me. I plan to have it surgically removed sometime in the future.
Now that I’ve put on nearly 20lbs since last summer, it is much more noticeable and bothersome to me. So, I’m trying to get a bit leaner in order to reduce the amount of fatty tissue in my nipples. At the same time, I don’t want to lose too much weight and negate the positive gains I’ve made.
Luckily, I’m not near as bad as the photos that Professor X posted, but I could see some resemblance.
I’ve also always had a slight amount of gyno . My situation sounds very similar to Nate Dogg’s. I’ve gotten down to about 8% body fat at one point and it was improved, but still noticable (at least to me). I sometimes wonder how noticeable it is to others, but I always feel uncomfortable taking off my shirt in the summer.
I’ve read before that gyno can only be completely removed via surgery. But reducing body fat definitely seems to help.
Has anyone noticed a reduction with added lean mass? I would think that as one’s chest, shoulders, and back grow any excess breast tissue would stretch to fill the area and thereby reduce the noticeablity. Any thoughts?
[quote]jerryiii wrote:
I’ve also always had a slight amount of gyno . My situation sounds very similar to Nate Dogg’s. I’ve gotten down to about 8% body fat at one point and it was improved, but still noticable (at least to me). I sometimes wonder how noticeable it is to others, but I always feel uncomfortable taking off my shirt in the summer.[/quote]
Same here. If I’m lean (like I was in summer of 2003 - about 6-7% - “Updated Renegade Nate Dogg” post in the Physique forum), I can barely see or tell. But whenever I’m in the 14-16% range, I can always see and tell. However, most people haven’t noticed it or said anything. I think it’s the fact that I do workout and have a fairly muscular chest, that it looks normal to most. But I can always tell, and I hate taking my shirt off when I feel like I have floppy titties on display!
[quote]jerryiii wrote:
Has anyone noticed a reduction with added lean mass? I would think that as one’s chest, shoulders, and back grow any excess breast tissue would stretch to fill the area and thereby reduce the noticeablity. Any thoughts?[/quote]
Absolutely - pec mass helps tremendously, especially when wearing clothes. The mass of the pec above and around the gyno pushes out to round out the chest - it does tend to stretch out the area. Before I grew out my chest, my adolescent-gyno was very obvious even at 10% BF. Now, even at 15%, it’s much improved, but still slightly noticable. However, now it’s more of a long fold of skin, rather than pointy - thank God! I think most of mine is “sag” from my FFB days… same with the lower abs and back… I just love that sag baby! I would probably lose 15 pounds if I had all my excess skin removed.
Another idea to toss out is that I think being dark skinned and/or tanned can help to some extent. Darker skin helps to change the contrast of the shaddows of the chest (or any body part). I’ve noticed that if I have direct light shining head-on, my chest looks normal. But, bright over-head lighting is the worst as far as shaddows go.
TopSirloin
Further to prof x’s comments, it has also been queeried that synthetic estrogen like compounds in under arm anti perspirants have led to increases in breast cancer in women.
Could this also be an issue for us men.
Bring on the roll on.
Hey Professor X would you also say that there is a direct correlation between Gyno and Nipple/Aerola size. I have noticed that every case of gyno whether mild or severe it seems that the person with Gyno has larger Aerolas and Nipples, something more similar to that of a female’s nipple and aerola size.
I have never seen a picture of a guy with gyno who had small (more of as masculine trait) aerolas and nipples.
[quote]EmperialChina wrote:
Hey Professor X would you also say that there is a direct correlation between Gyno and Nipple/Aerola size. I have noticed that every case of gyno whether mild or severe it seems that the person with Gyno has larger Aerolas and Nipples, something more similar to that of a female’s nipple and aerola size.
I have never seen a picture of a guy with gyno who had small (more of as masculine trait) aerolas and nipples.[/quote]
The gland is right beneath the nipples. That means that the reason they are larger is because of moderate to severe gyno. It isn’t because larger nipples is some different unrelated physical trait (even though nipple or aereola size alone is completely genetic). Also, the bodybuilder’s picture I posted the link to did not have nipples that large which means no blanket statements can be made at all. There are varying degrees of how it manifests. Some, like the bodybuilder’s pic I posted, is so small that it would only be noticeable if near contest condition or very lean. Since most people will NEVER diet down that low, many will never notice they even have any variation of it.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I have never seen a picture of a guy with gyno who had small (more of as masculine trait) aerolas and nipples.
The gland is right beneath the nipples. That means that the reason they are larger is because of moderate to severe gyno. It isn’t because larger nipples is some different unrelated physical trait (even though nipple or aereola size alone is completely genetic). Also, the bodybuilder’s picture I posted the link to did not have nipples that large which means no blanket statements can be made at all. There are varying degrees of how it manifests. Some, like the bodybuilder’s pic I posted, is so small that it would only be noticeable if near contest condition or very lean. Since most people will NEVER diet down that low, many will never notice they even have any variation of it.
[/quote]
Excellent that make sense, you’re thinking logic was quite a few steps ahead of mine, I now see the wide flaw in my previous “theory”, though it could possibly apply if a person has say “severe” gyno due to possibly stretching of the skin as you said.
Updating my earlier post: Just like how the Ponds Institute helps “diminish fine lines and wrinkles”, fake-baking helps diminish the apperance of gyno (or “sag” as I prefer). It also helps that I have lost about 7% in BF over the last 4 months. None the less, the shaddows are nicer to me because of the darker skin. Dominican Republic - here I come!!
TS
“FFB turned semi-pretty-boy!”