[quote]therajraj wrote:
I’m just now looking into going the assisted route (undecided just reading).
For those who’ve been lifting for at least 5 years, why did you choose to stay natural or start juicing?
[/quote]
What I have to offer is from personal experience so take it for what it’s worth. After age 44, my “T” had fallen to around 210. I showed most of the Low T signs so my Doc started me on TRT. I have only one real cycle under my belt and will be starting a second.
With 30+ years of lifting I can say I hit my natural peak at about 35 so I will never have to answer the question, “How far could I have gone without AAS?” Not many guys can truthfully answer that so if you are going to wonder and it is important to you, stay off. Also if you want to compete in a natural competition, have any current health issues, can not pay for it, less than 5 years of training, want to bench 300 lbs in the 198 weight class diet is not on, what to impress anyone other than yourself; stay off.
My reason for doing a cycle was simple; AAS was available but a small factor. I made the jump after many years of toiling away with the same weights and seeing zero growth. The law of diminishing returns will catch up with everyone. I could have just gone quietly into the night and respected myself for my natural achievements but that is not my personality. I was not looking to be a monster but rather to just maintain some size.
In closing I think for me it is simple; regardless of age, I want to look and feel good. My boys play ball and when I go to a game and see most of those dumpy dads that are 10 years younger, it makes me shake my head.
[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
Some have proposed that the use of PEDs for Physique/Strength enhancement is simply an extension of natural efforts. Nothing could be further from the truth; it is an entirely seperate path. I take no issue with the choices others make; but let’s be clear about what that choice means. [/quote]
What is your reasoning behind labeling it an entire separate path?
[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
Some have proposed that the use of PEDs for Physique/Strength enhancement is simply an extension of natural efforts. Nothing could be further from the truth; it is an entirely seperate path. I take no issue with the choices others make; but let’s be clear about what that choice means. [/quote]
What is your reasoning behind labeling it an entire separate path?
I am not being a dick. I am genuinely curious.[/quote]
There are obvious reasons why Bodybuilding/Powerlifting offer open and tested divisions. The physique development and totals are substantially different between the two catagories. The window of opportunity and and margin for error are much greater in the enhanced lifter. It is much like the raw vs gear debate among powerlifters; yes both are powerlifting, but there is little else that is comparable between the two. I’m not discounting the efforts of aided lifters, but the distinction is important.
[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
Some have proposed that the use of PEDs for Physique/Strength enhancement is simply an extension of natural efforts. Nothing could be further from the truth; it is an entirely seperate path. I take no issue with the choices others make; but let’s be clear about what that choice means. [/quote]
What is your reasoning behind labeling it an entire separate path?
I am not being a dick. I am genuinely curious.[/quote]
There are obvious reasons why Bodybuilding/Powerlifting offer open and tested divisions. The physique development and totals are substantially different between the two catagories. The window of opportunity and and margin for error are much greater in the enhanced lifter. It is much like the raw vs gear debate among powerlifters; yes both are powerlifting, but there is little else that is comparable between the two. I’m not discounting the efforts of aided lifters, but the distinction is important. [/quote]
Do you still feel this way with respect to those of us who have no interest in competing?
[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
Some have proposed that the use of PEDs for Physique/Strength enhancement is simply an extension of natural efforts. Nothing could be further from the truth; it is an entirely seperate path. I take no issue with the choices others make; but let’s be clear about what that choice means. [/quote]
What is your reasoning behind labeling it an entire separate path?
I am not being a dick. I am genuinely curious.[/quote]
There are obvious reasons why Bodybuilding/Powerlifting offer open and tested divisions. The physique development and totals are substantially different between the two catagories. The window of opportunity and and margin for error are much greater in the enhanced lifter. It is much like the raw vs gear debate among powerlifters; yes both are powerlifting, but there is little else that is comparable between the two. I’m not discounting the efforts of aided lifters, but the distinction is important. [/quote]
Do you still feel this way with respect to those of us who have no interest in competing?
[/quote]
Like I mentioned; I’m not discounting the efforts of the aided lifter. Providing the lifter/athlete does not masquerade as a natural; I support them; however the distiction remains.
I’m not going to pretend to be an expert on steroids, although bae a good working knowledge being a medical scientist (and no a medical student), and from wht various athletes I know have seen. I only have a brief experience about 10+ years ago using them.
Anyway: I have no ethical or moral objections whatsoever. I actually think professional sports could do with a “World Pro-Droping Association” to enhance athletic ability and monitor safety, as well as end pointless prosecutions in countries like the USA for AAS possession and use. Here in the UK steroids are not actually illegal, but selling them or buying mail order (since 2012) is, although you cab carry them through customs. I actually believe allowing drugs, with limits on usage will ensure a fair playing field, and end some of the economic discrimination faced.
Anyway, enough of the soap box. The reason I never used them intentionally was simple: I didn’t want to risk a competition ban. And since I stopped weightlifting seriously, I don’t really have any need for them. If I was still weightlifing, a bit younger and the BWLA or IWF ended testing though, I would be at my doctor within five minutes for an oxandrin prescription.
Really the choice is down to the individual. Do you really want what steroids can offer? Can you afford it? Do you know how to use them properly? Are you thinking or competing, or having kids soon? The answers are as different as the people making the decision. Whatever you do decide though, make sure you do your homework first.
[quote]joeloly wrote:
I’m not going to pretend to be an expert on steroids, although bae a good working knowledge being a medical scientist (and no a medical student), and from wht various athletes I know have seen. I only have a brief experience about 10+ years ago using them.
Anyway: I have no ethical or moral objections whatsoever. I actually think professional sports could do with a “World Pro-Droping Association” to enhance athletic ability and monitor safety, as well as end pointless prosecutions in countries like the USA for AAS possession and use. Here in the UK steroids are not actually illegal, but selling them or buying mail order (since 2012) is, although you cab carry them through customs. I actually believe allowing drugs, with limits on usage will ensure a fair playing field, and end some of the economic discrimination faced.
Anyway, enough of the soap box. The reason I never used them intentionally was simple: I didn’t want to risk a competition ban. And since I stopped weightlifting seriously, I don’t really have any need for them. If I was still weightlifing, a bit younger and the BWLA or IWF ended testing though, I would be at my doctor within five minutes for an oxandrin prescription.
Really the choice is down to the individual. Do you really want what steroids can offer? Can you afford it? Do you know how to use them properly? Are you thinking or competing, or having kids soon? The answers are as different as the people making the decision. Whatever you do decide though, make sure you do your homework first.[/quote]
Fun little study that is a bit related to the possible side effects of roids and more directly to deaths and lifestyle of roid users. You can find the pdf.
Sudden or Unnatural Deaths Involving Anabolic-androgenic Steroids.
Darke S1, Torok M, Duflou J.
Anabolic-androgenic steroids (AASs) are frequently misused. To determine causes of death, characteristics, toxicology, and pathology of AAS positive cases, all cases (n = 24) presenting to the New South Wales Department of Forensic Medicine (1995-2012) were retrieved. All were male, and the mean age was 31.7 years. Deaths were mainly due to accidental drug toxicity (62.5%), then suicide (16.7%) and homicide (12.5%). Abnormal testosterone/epitestosterone ratios were reported in 62.5%, followed by metabolites of nandrolone (58.3%), stanozolol (33.3%), and methandienone (20.8%).
In 23 of 24 cases, substances other than steroids were detected, most commonly psychostimulants (66.7%). In nearly half, testicular atrophy was noted, as was testicular fibrosis and arrested spermatogenesis. Left ventricular hypertrophy was noted in 30.4%, and moderate to severe narrowing of the coronary arteries in 26.1%. To summarize, the typical case was a male polydrug user aged in their thirties, with death due to drug toxicity. Extensive cardiovascular disease was particularly notable.
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
Fun little study that is a bit related to the possible side effects of roids and more directly to deaths and lifestyle of roid users. You can find the pdf.
Sudden or Unnatural Deaths Involving Anabolic-androgenic Steroids.
Darke S1, Torok M, Duflou J.
Anabolic-androgenic steroids (AASs) are frequently misused. To determine causes of death, characteristics, toxicology, and pathology of AAS positive cases, all cases (n = 24) presenting to the New South Wales Department of Forensic Medicine (1995-2012) were retrieved. All were male, and the mean age was 31.7 years. Deaths were mainly due to accidental drug toxicity (62.5%), then suicide (16.7%) and homicide (12.5%). Abnormal testosterone/epitestosterone ratios were reported in 62.5%, followed by metabolites of nandrolone (58.3%), stanozolol (33.3%), and methandienone (20.8%).
In 23 of 24 cases, substances other than steroids were detected, most commonly psychostimulants (66.7%). In nearly half, testicular atrophy was noted, as was testicular fibrosis and arrested spermatogenesis. Left ventricular hypertrophy was noted in 30.4%, and moderate to severe narrowing of the coronary arteries in 26.1%. To summarize, the typical case was a male polydrug user aged in their thirties, with death due to drug toxicity. Extensive cardiovascular disease was particularly notable.[/quote]
I will read this when I have time, as drug toxicity of AAS is something I’ve never encountered before. Although, depending on the sample group, LVH is something you’d expect in people doing serious strength training (non-pathological), especially with large muscular mass. But gicen they are polydrug users, it does.'t really isolate AAS use as a valid variable.
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
Fun little study that is a bit related to the possible side effects of roids and more directly to deaths and lifestyle of roid users. You can find the pdf.
Sudden or Unnatural Deaths Involving Anabolic-androgenic Steroids.
Darke S1, Torok M, Duflou J.
Anabolic-androgenic steroids (AASs) are frequently misused. To determine causes of death, characteristics, toxicology, and pathology of AAS positive cases, all cases (n = 24) presenting to the New South Wales Department of Forensic Medicine (1995-2012) were retrieved. All were male, and the mean age was 31.7 years. Deaths were mainly due to accidental drug toxicity (62.5%), then suicide (16.7%) and homicide (12.5%). Abnormal testosterone/epitestosterone ratios were reported in 62.5%, followed by metabolites of nandrolone (58.3%), stanozolol (33.3%), and methandienone (20.8%).
In 23 of 24 cases, substances other than steroids were detected, most commonly psychostimulants (66.7%). In nearly half, testicular atrophy was noted, as was testicular fibrosis and arrested spermatogenesis. Left ventricular hypertrophy was noted in 30.4%, and moderate to severe narrowing of the coronary arteries in 26.1%. To summarize, the typical case was a male polydrug user aged in their thirties, with death due to drug toxicity. Extensive cardiovascular disease was particularly notable.[/quote]
so basically no conclusions can be drawn from that besides orals potentially being dangerous, which has been known for decades.
[quote]Paul33 wrote:
so basically no conclusions can be drawn from that besides orals potentially being dangerous, which has been known for decades.
[/quote]
Wrong. Several interesting conclusions could be drawn, but I can’t be arsed to force-feed them to you if can’t figure them out by yourself.
In 23 of 24 cases, substances other than steroids were detected, most commonly psychostimulants (66.7%).[/quote]
That is pretty noteworthy, and in line with my own observations. I wouldn’t say that all people who use steroids also use other drugs, but I’ve never met one IRL that didn’t.
In 23 of 24 cases, substances other than steroids were detected, most commonly psychostimulants (66.7%).[/quote]
That is pretty noteworthy, and in line with my own observations. I wouldn’t say that all people who use steroids also use other drugs, but I’ve never met one IRL that didn’t.
[/quote]
I don’t and never have, but most of the guys who I know that compete do.
In 23 of 24 cases, substances other than steroids were detected, most commonly psychostimulants (66.7%).[/quote]
That is pretty noteworthy, and in line with my own observations. I wouldn’t say that all people who use steroids also use other drugs, but I’ve never met one IRL that didn’t.
[/quote]
For many, that could be a mindset that they are predisposed to (either of a rebellious nature). And for others it could be that the same kind of people they’re getting their AAS from are selling the other stuff. And you know, if it’s there…
In 23 of 24 cases, substances other than steroids were detected, most commonly psychostimulants (66.7%).[/quote]
That is pretty noteworthy, and in line with my own observations. I wouldn’t say that all people who use steroids also use other drugs, but I’ve never met one IRL that didn’t.
[/quote]
I don’t and never have, but most of the guys who I know that compete do.[/quote]
In 23 of 24 cases, substances other than steroids were detected, most commonly psychostimulants (66.7%).[/quote]
That is pretty noteworthy, and in line with my own observations. I wouldn’t say that all people who use steroids also use other drugs, but I’ve never met one IRL that didn’t.
[/quote]
For many, that could be a mindset that they are predisposed to (either of a rebellious nature). And for others it could be that the same kind of people they’re getting their AAS from are selling the other stuff. And you know, if it’s there…[/quote]
Yeah. The guys I know/knew were at the far end of a risk taking spectrum and didn’t have any qualms with virtually anything. All the same path though- using what ever, throw juice into the mix, then joint pain → painkillers, stamp bags, prison, and death.
Disclaimer: I know that these guys aren’t typical examples of AAS users, but are typical of the types that end up on a slab like the guys in the study above.
In 23 of 24 cases, substances other than steroids were detected, most commonly psychostimulants (66.7%).[/quote]
That is pretty noteworthy, and in line with my own observations. I wouldn’t say that all people who use steroids also use other drugs, but I’ve never met one IRL that didn’t.
[/quote]
I don’t and never have, but most of the guys who I know that compete do.[/quote]
Which are most prevalent?
[/quote]
For the guys who are recreational users that are also well educated and have been around awhile, I would say very few use any other recreational drugs.
For the ones who are actively competing and pushing themselves to the limit, I would say it is quite high.