AAS: Convey the difference between the act of harm reduction vs thinking recreational use is safe (free of adverse events).
there are NO safe methods for recreational AAS use (which is Abuse in medical terms). The standard of care from any reputable medical provider (which is made by evidence-based consensus statements) confirms this.
Many times, we (myself included) like to think we can construct a safe way to recreationally use (abuse) AAS. Let’s be clear. That thinking is flawed. It’s wishful thinking.
The newbies and other AAS-naive individuals need to understand that AAS abuse (recreational use) come with very high risk of adverse events at the doses required to elicit cosmetic and performance enhancement. The impact of those events can vary based on genetics, time used, and AUC. Hence, this usage is not safe. I agree it should be up to the individual to determine if the risk is worth it (“safe” vs safe, see below).
Although the current phrasing for the Pharma description provides an adequate yet medically flawed message, the right thing to do (and factually accurate thing to do) is to inform and warm potential AAS abusers (recreational AAS users) that this practice is not safe. This message could be shared in an effective way with either method I shared above.
See discussion of terms “safe” vs safe below.
WALL OF TEXT
Thanks for your response. Rather than typing a long-winded wall of text, this reference lays out the terms quite well for those that may be interested:
See this chapter:
Thanks for bringing this up. No, really there aren’t safe methods for recreational AAS use. That was my whole purpose of starting this thread. See below.
Discussion of safe vs "safe"
Excerpt from chapter linked above:
In the case of the recreational user (my observation is this is vast majority of Pharma forum posters), they are not treating a medical problem. They are either using AAS for cosmetic or performance purposes (sometimes both). Once they do their research they may decide the efficacy / effectiveness of AAS outweigh the adverse effects (safety) associated with them. Hence in this recreational form of the term, they may deem the risk is acceptable and that AAS in their particular case is “safe” and there is a benefit. But of course there is no benefit in the clinical and medically proper use of the term.
My understanding what that the T Replacement forum is for discussing TRT. Of course, it’s also used to discuss the so-called TOT option as well.
But just so we don’t confuse the reader, there are other clinical anabolic therapies that are legally prescribed and used for legitimate medical purposes (e.g., oxandrolone, stanozolol, nandrolone, etc.). Not very often, but still used for other medical purposes besides GAINZ. But again, there aren’t may folks coming onto the Pharma forum looking to make sure their physician’s prescription for 0.5 mg/day of stanozolol to treat HA is safe or “safe”.
In contrast, there are AA clinics (so called Anti-Aging or more accurately Accelerated-Aging I call them) that will provide a legal prescription for AAS for cosmetic/ PED purposes. Is this use beneficial or safe in medical terms? Absolutely not.
Some time back I created another thread and you stated this which I think is a great summary:
Thanks again for providing this forum for us and my comments are meant in a constructive manner.