Metformin does not damage the pancreas, it protects it. There is a movement in bodybuilding where coaches advice starting metformin the very first day someone starts their first AAS cycle. The idea is that the Metformin would reduce insulin resistance thst accompanies high calorie diets as well as improve partitioning of nutrients from fat to muscle. Metformin is a big thing in life extention circles where it's thought that it probably increases lifespan, lowers biological age (though it's hard to measure).
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02638-w
Insulin does not damage the pancreas, it protects it, like Metformin. Metformin is usually the first intervention against prediabetes or type 2 diabetes. But scientists have been asking whether it would be better to introduce insulin from the beginning since it takes control of blood glucose faster and has other protective mechanisms through its antioxidant and antiinflammatory properties.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3757533/
The same coaches and gurus who recommend Metformin from the start recommend low dose long acting insulin from the start as well. BOTH drugs at the same time, not to increase anabolism per se but due to their hypothetical health protective effects. Say 10iu Lantus insulin in the morning and 500mg Metformin at night. The idea is basically that a high calorie diet put stress on the pancreas over time, especially if insulin resistance develops (exacerbated by AAS and especially GH). In advanced insulin resistance islet cell burnout occurs which means the pancreas starts giving up. Exogenous insulin and Metformin would alleviate this.
That's why I said low dose insulin during your cycle was no problem, not dangerous. Just a little extra boost at basically "no cost." I know you viewed it as just another stressor on your body but instead of a seeing insulin as a stressor it can be seen as an anti-stressor. There's good science supporting all this. The research says early intervention with insulin can make newly diagnosed diabetics fare better in the long that those on oral hypoglycemics but you know it is, to draw good conclusions requires tons of short and long term trials with a large amount of study subjects. They talk about something like "metabolic memory" wherein if you don't let things get bad before interventions your body wants to stay at a healthy state. But we know it often takes a long time for diabetics to get diagnosed and then they have had unhealthy and damaging blood glucose levels for maybe years. Then they start the Metformin or whatever and fuck around for a long time, perhaps skipping doses because they "feel fine" and so on.
Really, 10% bodyfat without any drugs would, on paper, be easy to do. That is if you can tolerate not eating much and can tolerate some hunger pangs. But that's no small thing. I know myself am "addicted" to good tasting food and can't find the motivation to eat perfectly for long periods of time. I think hitting 10% can be done healthily too, all dpends on you manage a restricted diet. But here's where drugs come in. Ephedrine would lower appetite, would boost drive, motivation and mood due to it's central effects. Clen is much more potent as a thermogenic i.e. increasing metabolic rate. How safe are they? It's impossible to say exactly. It's also impossible to say which is more dangerous, bulking on AAS or dieting on Ephedrine and Clen. Instinctively I would say the bulking is way more potentially dangerous. All we know by way of studies is one year studies and they say the EC coctail is "safe" for that time frame. Researchers might even argue that in the long term they might increase lifespan - if they make you lose weight. But then there are the potential effects on the heart. You can look at the studies
Great post, Van. Like another classic Getbigger said, you are a board treasure.
It always intrigues me how much things I assume are unhealthy, are actually not just not unhealthy, but potentially even healthy.
I was taken aback when I learned that opiates are not toxic to our organs - it's overdoses that are the major issue with opiates, in addition to the financial cost of those addicted. Otherwise, some people are on them for decades. My mom is friends with a woman who is almost 70, and she's been on 80mg of Oxycontin daily for 23 years now, lol. She also weighs 260-lb.
Sometimes I wish I wasn't such a hypochondriac, because I really prefer how I look on gear.
But I also prefer having hair...I also don't get some massive perma-bulking juicers I see who have backs covered in acne.
I thought it strange that Nasser did so much to have a big and aesthetic physique [for a mass monster], yet was bald, and had glasses. Like, how not get a hair transplant and LASIX?
I want to be in perfect health, and I want or maintain perfect teeth, a great head of hair, and perfectly blemish-free skin.
I want to have a look that looks like I am very into working out - like it's a big part of my life, and that I'm consistent with it. I achieve this look much more easily on gear, and I wish I had the minerals to run more, but again - the hypochondria.
I don't want to end up with a disease in 10 years, and face death knowing that I may have cut 30 years off my life because of life choices I made.
Mike Matarazzo had just such an existential crisis, and it wasn't easy for him to cope with at all. The years 2007 to 2014 were very hard for him, and he personally asked Peter McGough to never contact him again under any circumstances. The memories of his bodybuilding history were too much for him to bear.
I'd like to run more gear. I greatly prefer the look. But I also hate taking risks.
I've been a huge hermit since 2018, because I fear meeting another woman who will financially exploit me. And Lord help me, if I EVER have to work again because some woman burns up my savings - I'd have a full mental collapse.
So I literally stopped taking ANY risks in that time. I have a good thing going on, to live off what I earned in my twenties and thirties...and I just don't want to take risks.
That applies to everything, basically.
It is my fear, Van, that I don't look back regretting what I did, but what I didn't do. That being said - I'm not wrong to think gear may be bad for my overall systemic wellness, and specifically my heart.
I'm just trying to figure out a way to get risks as close to zero as possible. I chiefly adhere to abstinence, as I have yet to figure out what that way is.
