Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums

Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Tom on October 22, 2006, 05:02:35 PM

Title: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: Tom on October 22, 2006, 05:02:35 PM
okaybesides jay's increasing chin/jawline, ronnie's about to give birth stomach, why haven't either one and other top pros, i.e. schlierkamp ever gotten any of the other signs of massive juice/drug use? i'm talking about the acne on the face and shoulders and back, hair loss, etcetera. i won't even go into shrinkage?! laugh.

is it because these guys are not how should i say predispose to acne, hair loss, etc. in the first place no matter if they did or didn't juice? or do they take stuff to combat the first onset of these side affects?

thanks in advance for the replies!
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: NarcissisticDeity on October 22, 2006, 05:05:30 PM
Yates once said you don't know the side effect of the drugs until you do them , its all has to due with genetics , just like some people can smoke for years and years and never develop cancer and some do without ever smoking , the irony is you don't know until it may be to late .
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: JasonH on October 23, 2006, 05:24:50 AM
Some guys get side effects - some don't. It's as simple as that. Gunter probably does get side effects - it's just that they aren't noticeable on the outside.

But inside, his organs are cooking. Trust me.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: BroadStreetBruiser on October 23, 2006, 05:31:55 AM
Some guys get side effects - some don't. It's as simple as that. Gunter probably does get side effects - it's just that they aren't noticeable on the outside.

But inside, his organs are cooking. Trust me.

What should we trust you about? Your remark has no more truth to it then me saying you smuggle gerbils up your ass.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: rccs on October 23, 2006, 06:05:05 AM
The use of GH has less, noticeables, side effects than heavy test use! Despite that, they use all kind of protectors for the liver, prostate etc. But it also depends on everyone's genetics! I see old bbers still around and some of them pretty buffed! No one knows for sure the dosages and what effects these guys are experiencing!
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: JasonH on October 23, 2006, 06:34:30 AM
His insides are shot to pieces - all those years of heavy gear use will take it's toll.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: Jerryme7 on October 23, 2006, 06:46:15 AM
If you notice pictures of Ronnie prior to ever winning the Olympia..he never had gyno.

But when he started winning and getting bigger in size he started developing gyno. Ive noticed his gynecomastia has gotten bigger !
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: sgt. d on October 23, 2006, 06:47:44 AM
His insides are shot to pieces - all those years of heavy gear use will take it's toll.

proof?
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: body88 on October 23, 2006, 06:50:53 AM
proof?

Proof? You do not think all those years of  heavy drug use will effect these guys at all? They will be lucky to live to 65.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: sgt. d on October 23, 2006, 06:54:26 AM
Proof? You do not think all those years of  heavy drug use will effect these guys at all? They will be lucky to live to 65.

What about the millions of people who use gear that lived past 65? You must be natural
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: ricosauve on October 23, 2006, 06:57:51 AM
His insides are shot to pieces - all those years of heavy gear use will take it's toll.
Were is your scientific evidence to back this up?  why are you so sure about this? what are you credentials? why should we trust you on this?
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: ricosauve on October 23, 2006, 07:00:01 AM
Proof? You do not think all those years of  heavy drug use will effect these guys at all? They will be lucky to live to 65.
nope give me proof and examples of real people!! may be one case study?? you are summing here  ???
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: body88 on October 23, 2006, 07:06:13 AM
.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: Farcry on October 23, 2006, 07:10:54 AM
diuretics
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: Jerryme7 on October 23, 2006, 07:11:21 AM
You guys remember that David Palumbo (i believe it was him) was attributing GH gut as a "natural" occurence saying that the reason for GH gut isnt because of GH but because the amount of food people eat...

Then he said it was the overdevelopement of the abs that since  the muscle didnt have anywhere to go but outwards....
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: Jerryme7 on October 23, 2006, 07:14:16 AM
Andreas and Benazazi died of duiretics....

Prince, Flex, and Long....I dont believe it was because of gear use.....
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: electricvomit on October 23, 2006, 07:25:28 AM
Proof? You do not think all those years of  heavy drug use will effect these guys at all? They will be lucky to live to 65.

Meh, it's all relative. Personally, I think that genetics aside (let's face it, it's the most important factor) the most important factor regarding lifespan and heavy steroid use is how you treat your body after the fact. After such a potentially life-altering habit, one needs to immediately seek medical screening to address any potential health problems. Just look at quitting smoking, there are measurable health benefits basically immediately after you put out your last smoke.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: the shadow on October 23, 2006, 07:29:59 AM
.
these guys are legends of bodybuilding.there are no pros like these in present day bodybuilding..RIP ANDREAS AND MOMO
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: brianX on October 23, 2006, 07:33:49 AM
Maybe they use extremely low dosages?
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: body88 on October 23, 2006, 07:34:56 AM
Andreas and Benazazi died of duiretics....

Prince, Flex, and Long....I dont believe it was because of gear use.....


Momo and Andreas died from diuretics. That was compounded by the massive amounts of drugs they took. Fex wheeler and Don longs kidney problems where accelerated by all the drugs. Newman's cancer was sped up by all the GH. The human body is not madeto have 100 times its natural test count running through it (or whatever the number is). Abusing steriods/gh is no different than abusing any other drug.

Ps, duiretics are covered in the word "drugs". When you say all the drugs BB take they are included.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: Playboy on October 23, 2006, 07:36:13 AM
Yates once said you don't know the side effect of the drugs until you do them , its all has to due with genetics , just like some people can smoke for years and years and never develop cancer and some do without ever smoking , the irony is you don't know until it may be to late .
Exactly. Plus they could also be taking tons more then the others.

PB
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: jaejonna on October 23, 2006, 07:37:08 AM
Momo had a wide waist...
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: Jerryme7 on October 23, 2006, 07:37:40 AM
Body88...you need to argue with John Romano...he said in a televised interview that no one died of steriods

Like he said...if anyone has died because of steriods...where are the bodies?
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: body88 on October 23, 2006, 07:38:26 AM
Exactly. Plus they could also be taking tons more then the others.

PB


That is true. But if you take the number of people who smoke. Then the number who get cancer over those who smoke for years with zero health problems you see the obvious medical danger of smoking. With all the drugs guys are taking today we shall see in 20 years how they make out :-[
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: body88 on October 23, 2006, 07:40:10 AM
Body88...you need to argue with John Romano...he said in a televised interview that no one died of steriods

Like he said...if anyone has died because of steriods...where are the bodies?


I am not arguing with anyone. I would agree steriods in light doses are not going to kill you. But alot of these guys take enough to supply a small town.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: tomr1976 on October 23, 2006, 08:14:23 AM
used condoms with AIDS infected semen inside the dome
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: Necrosis on October 23, 2006, 08:46:31 AM
smuggle gerbils up your ass ahahhahahahahahah
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: WiseGuy on October 23, 2006, 08:47:05 AM
Were is your scientific evidence to back this up?  why are you so sure about this? what are you credentials? why should we trust you on this?


translation: rico knows he juices and is worried HIS insides are melting.......


hahahaha
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: JasonH on October 23, 2006, 08:51:03 AM

I am not arguing with anyone. I would agree steriods in light doses are not going to kill you. But alot of these guys take enough to supply a small town.

Agreed. You don't need "scientific proof".

I take gear myself and I'm pretty certain it's fcuked me up - especially with mental problems such as depression and paranoia for which I now take anti-depressants for. And I've hardly taken anything - I've never used GH or diuretics so god know's what would happen to me if I overdosed on stuff like that.

I still use gear now despite those problems but I fear for these pro bodybuilders who are probably taking ten times the amount that I've taken - I pity these idiots who argue that it doesn't cause them problems just because you don't see external problems such as acne or baldness.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: UpTheDosage on October 23, 2006, 09:41:19 AM
.

2 dead and 2 with kidney problems out of how many bodybuilders in history?

I think I'll take my chances.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: pumpster on October 23, 2006, 09:44:02 AM
Quote
Agreed. You don't need "scientific proof".

I take gear myself and I'm pretty certain it's fcuked me up - especially with mental problems such as depression and paranoia for which I now take anti-depressants for.
Sometime still taking like this has no idea yet whether there's any lasting long-term problems. Also, some are taking a lot more than others.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: body88 on October 23, 2006, 02:05:06 PM
2 dead and 2 with kidney problems out of how many bodybuilders in history?

I think I'll take my chances.

Yes, those are the only ones ::) What do you think I am going to research for 3 days? Take your chances lol. No one is stopping you. When you are 40 years old with no hair, the test levels of a 13 year old girl and kidneys on the way to failure early make sure to post some pictures of how good you looked!!!!! If you take the levels of sauce that some pro BB's take you have alot more problems than health issues.

The funny part is I know a ton of guys who juice. They will never quit either. It only gets worse the older you get. It becomes harder and harder to look good. Along with all the health issues it can cause. It is devastating mentally. You will never be as big as when you are on a cycle. Never train as intense, never make those big gains and never be as ripped and dense as when you are all sauced up. You my friend will never be able to train naturally again.

I doubt a mild cycle done responsibly would affect a person. But how many people stick to that? It is always more. Then you start hitting cycles more often. I know how it works. My training partner juices. Alot of the athletes I played sports with did at some point.  Steriods in big doses are pointless for recreational uses. I would rather worka littler harder and take much longer, but have my health in the end.   I have no problems with those who juice. They look damn good!
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: Jr. Yates on October 23, 2006, 02:11:47 PM
Yes, those are the only ones ::) What do you think I am going to research for 3 days? Take your chances lol. No one is stopping you. When you are 40 years old with no hair, the test levels of a 13 year old girl and kidneys on the way to failure early make sure to post some pictures of how good you looked!!!!! If you take the levels of sauce that some pro BB's take you have alot more problems than health issues.

The funny part is I know a ton of guys who juice. They will never quit either. It only gets worse the older you get. It becomes harder and harder to look good. Along with all the health issues it can cause. It is devastating mentally. You will never be as big as when you are on a cycle. Never train as intense, never make those big gains and never be as ripped and dense as when you are all sauced up. You my friend will never be able to train naturally again.

I doubt a mild cycle done responsibly would affect a person. But how many people stick to that? It is always more. Then you start hitting cycles more often. I know how it works. My training partner juices. Alot of the athletes I played sports with did at some point.  Steriods are pointless for recreational uses :o
I agree. Lots deny it but thats the truth.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: body88 on October 23, 2006, 02:13:50 PM
I agree. Lots deny it but thats the truth.

I have no problem with guys who juice. None at all. That is their choice. Most guys who know a thing or two admit it is not the best thing for them. The guys who claim there is no effect at all are the ones I wrote that to.

I also do not think a mild cycle would harm a person. but how many people stick with mild cycles? Very few unfortunatly.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: Jr. Yates on October 23, 2006, 02:18:07 PM
I have no problem with guys who juice. None at all. That is their choice. Most guys who know a thing or two admit it is not the best thing for them. The guys who claim there is no effect at all are the ones I wrote that to.

I also do not think a mild cycle would harm a person. but how many people stick with mild cycles? Very few unfortunatly.
yup, lots just skip the mild ones and go straight into hard stuff. I know of one guy that trained for 2 months then started, HGH, Insulin, the whole shabang! he spent over 10 grand on stuff.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: dorkeroo on October 23, 2006, 02:19:30 PM
I am completing a Master's of Science in Biology (mostly molecular biology), have two undergraduate degrees (one in chemistry and one in biomedical biology), have taught human anatomy and physiology at a university level and am beginning medical school next year.

I am not an authority on this subject, however, I am willing to bet I know enough to make the educated statement that too much of any "drug" is often toxic in one form or another. To assume any of these guys is healthy is like burying your head in the sand and pretending a problem doesn't exist. I agree that the diuretics have been the cause of many a competitor's problems, however, to assume that habitual, exogenous steroid use (at their level especially) is safe just because you don't see any effects is really not a good idea.

Before many of the obvious physiological problems make themselves visible to the naked eye, many diseases progress throughout the body and only in later stages does it become obvious that there is a problem. In other cases however, it can be the opposite.

Therefore, to defend the abuse of steroids that is being seen in this sport and demanding "proof" is like winning an argument by taking your toys inside. There will NOT be any published studies regarding this because the studies would be illegal and expensive. There is probably data out there, but we will never see it.

Anyways, just my two cents, however, I would tend to side with those that are coming to the conclusion that just because these men look healthy on the outside, they are likely not 100% inside. However, I do hope I am incorrect as it would be great if they were all completely healthy.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: body88 on October 23, 2006, 02:23:23 PM
yup, lots just skip the mild ones and go straight into hard stuff. I know of one guy that trained for 2 months then started, HGH, Insulin, the whole shabang! he spent over 10 grand on stuff.

I was a gm in 2 nightclubs for a few years. When I was in college most stuck with test. Before I left the big thing in the club scene with all the club rats was GH. These guys do not think about the awful sides this shit presents. Lol idiots. They are going to have fun with the bone growth later on :o
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: legbreaker on October 23, 2006, 02:23:42 PM
Believe me there are plenty of side effects.  If anyone does enough GH to create acromegaly changes in the mandable and hands their heart is also effected. Way before the skull of acromegaly patients goes haywire, the heart is enlarging abnormally and way beyond control.  This causes rythm disturbances, aside from the structural changes that will literally make the patient feel as if they are sufficating.  Nothing you can do to stop this, no medication and short of removal or radiation to the Pituatary.  Gh abuse, (because that is what it is) also causes irreversable damage to the kidneys.  The hair loss and acne is a genetic thing....if your are predispossed it will accelarate or exacerbate the problem.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: Jr. Yates on October 23, 2006, 02:26:49 PM
I was a gm in 2 nightclubs for a few years. When I was in college most stuck with test. Before I left the big thing in the club scene with all the club rats was GH. These guys do not think about the awful sides this shit presents. Lol idiots. They are going to have fun with the bone growth later on :o
ha! no doubt! no one has patience anymore....I get guys come into my gym and tell me their life story and then ask me all sorts of questions and they all say this "I wish there was a pill i could take that just took 75lbs off me" one of them, later the same day I saw them on a picnic bench drinking from a 2L coke bottle and eating mcdonalds.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: body88 on October 23, 2006, 02:28:46 PM
Typical!
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: Jr. Yates on October 23, 2006, 02:45:05 PM
Typical!
yup its sad. Everyone wants the fast way out, take an advil if you got a headache, take dbol if you can only bench 225 for 4 reps. and the lazy fat people just won't get on a treadmill and help themselves.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: rccs on October 24, 2006, 03:05:35 AM
I am completing a Master's of Science in Biology (mostly molecular biology), have two undergraduate degrees (one in chemistry and one in biomedical biology), have taught human anatomy and physiology at a university level and am beginning medical school next year.

I am not an authority on this subject, however, I am willing to bet I know enough to make the educated statement that too much of any "drug" is often toxic in one form or another. To assume any of these guys is healthy is like burying your head in the sand and pretending a problem doesn't exist. I agree that the diuretics have been the cause of many a competitor's problems, however, to assume that habitual, exogenous steroid use (at their level especially) is safe just because you don't see any effects is really not a good idea.

Before many of the obvious physiological problems make themselves visible to the naked eye, many diseases progress throughout the body and only in later stages does it become obvious that there is a problem. In other cases however, it can be the opposite.

Therefore, to defend the abuse of steroids that is being seen in this sport and demanding "proof" is like winning an argument by taking your toys inside. There will NOT be any published studies regarding this because the studies would be illegal and expensive. There is probably data out there, but we will never see it.

Anyways, just my two cents, however, I would tend to side with those that are coming to the conclusion that just because these men look healthy on the outside, they are likely not 100% inside. However, I do hope I am incorrect as it would be great if they were all completely healthy.
Well, in this sport everything is done to enhance muscle development. Even if you are a "natural" bber or PLitfer you tend to use supplements, probably, I repeat, probably, they will provoque some damage to your system as well. You have to eat large amounts of protein and fats, dextrose etc, to maintain nitric balance in your blood, as you know, too much protein can also affect your liver and your kidneys! Heavy training, throughout the years damage your tendons and some of your bones... You see, this isn't actually a matter of good or bad conduct, it is a matter of choice, whether you do it or not! That is why this is not a sport for the average Joe!
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: Van_Bilderass on October 24, 2006, 04:05:21 AM
Gh abuse, (because that is what it is) also causes irreversable damage to the kidneys.  
Really? Through what mechanism? And what do you consider abuse dosages of GH? HIV+ patients get up to 18iu daily and I can't recall kidney damage being mentioned in the literature I've read.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: GoneAway on October 24, 2006, 04:10:17 AM
Jr. Yates, I don't mean to be rude, but you use, and you're here calling these other users idiots? Makes no sense.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: phreak on October 24, 2006, 04:49:32 AM
There will NOT be any published studies regarding this because the studies would be illegal and expensive. There is probably data out there, but we will never see it.

You can research it if it is self administered, which is almost always done way above recommended dosage.


-------
Since the abuse of androgenic-anabolic steroids (AAS) has been associated with the occurrence of serious cardiovascular disease in young athletes, we performed two studies to investigate the effects of short-term AAS administration on heart structure and function in experienced male strength athletes, with special reference to dose and duration of drug abuse. In Study 1 the effects of AAS were assessed in 17 experienced male strength athletes (age 31 +/- 7 y) who self-administered AAS for 8 or 12 - 16 weeks and in 15 non-using strength athletes (age 33 +/- 5 y) in a non-blinded design. In Study 2 the effects of administration of nandrolone decanoate (200 mg/wk i. m.) for eight weeks were investigated in 16 bodybuilders in a randomised double blind, placebo controlled design. In all subjects M-mode and two-dimensional Doppler-echocardiography were performed at baseline and after 8 weeks AAS administration. In the athletes of Study 1 who used AAS for 12 - 16 weeks a third echocardiogram was also made at the end of the AAS administration period. Echocardiographic examinations included the determination of the aortic diameter (AD), left atrium diameter (LA), left ventricular end diastolic diameter (LVEDD), interventricular septum thickness (IVS), posterior wall end diastolic wall thickness (PWEDWT), left ventricular mass (LVM), left ventricular mass index (LVMI), ejection fraction (EF) and right ventricular diameter (RVD). For assessment of the diastolic function measurements of E and A peak velocities and calculation of E/A ratio were used. In addition, acceleration and deceleration times of the E-top (ATM and DT, respectively) were determined. For evaluation of factors associated with stroke volume the aorta peak flow (AV) and left ventricular ejection times (LVET) were determined. In Study 1 eight weeks AAS self-administration did not result in changes of blood pressure or cardiac size and function. Additionally, duration of AAS self-administration did not have any impact on these parameters. Study 2 revealed that eight weeks administration of nandrolone decanoate did not induce significant alterations in blood pressure and heart morphology and function. Short-term administration of AAS for periods up to 16 weeks did not lead to detectable echocardiographic alterations of heart morphology and systolic and diastolic function in experienced strength athletes. The administration regimen used nor the length of AAS abuse did influence the results. Moreover, it is concluded that echocardiographic evaluation may provide incomplete assessment of the actual cardiac condition in AAS users since it is not sensitive enough to detect alterations at the cellular level. Nevertheless, from the present study no conclusions can be drawn of the cardiotoxic effects of long term AAS abuse.

PMID: 12868045
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: legbreaker on October 24, 2006, 10:12:55 AM
Really? Through what mechanism? And what do you consider abuse dosages of GH? HIV+ patients get up to 18iu daily and I can't recall kidney damage being mentioned in the literature I've read.


Van, The information is out there.  In reference to Aids and research the guy to look at is Dr. Coltler at St. Lukes hospital in NY.  He is the person initiating all the use and research of gh with aids patients.  Do you know that the 18 iu is no longer a daily dose?  It is 9 or 6 iu because of the side effects.  The damage to the kindneys is very well known in the legit medical field.  Inappropriate treatment with GH (abuse, I believe to be over 4 iu day, ESPECIALLY if long term) leads to severe long-term toxicity, particularly in the kidneys, with development of glomerulosclerosis (tissue scarring), kidney insufficiency.  This is one of the perfect examples of how something that is basically necessarry and beneficial can be dangerous in abuse.  The positive effects gh has on things like stroke volume, ejection fraction in the heart at a normal 25 year old IGF level becomes negative and life threatening at abusive levels.  Same with the positive effects of the collagen and elastin protiens in the skin...with abuse the skin becomes course, oily and thick.  Gh, I believe, is responsible for a lot of the kidney damage in bodybuilders today.  An old friend of mine had his very promising bb carreer cut short because of kidney damage.  Guys, DO NOT believe that the 18 iu is a NORMAL dose....IT IS NOT and no longer is even considered such among the aids population.  Over 4 iu a day long term your risking your cardiovascular and kidney health.  3 iu you can do forever and have positive effects.  Bodybuilders believe that if 18 iu is used in medicine than double that is safe....

When your brow at your eye brow becomes thickened, your mandible grows so that it appears that you have an underbite, your nose thickens, your cartilage at the throat grows so it looks like you have a double chin EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE RIPPED and your hands thicken...guess what your heart is FUCKED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  If a person chose to use gh and stuck to 3 iu a day they would be fine and have positive effects.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: Jr. Yates on October 24, 2006, 10:36:48 AM
Jr. Yates, I don't mean to be rude, but you use, and you're here calling these other users idiots? Makes no sense.
I am not calling users idiots and I am not a user "yet", I start in December.  I am calling the ones that go to it after 2 months of training idiots. The ones that have no patience. The ones that have never seen a natural gain in their life. There is a BIG difference. I respect all "users" that have learned how to train and eat properly and have pushed their genitic potential to at least somewhat of a distance. No where did I day "anyone who uses gear is an idiot" because i would never say that.
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: rccs on October 25, 2006, 03:57:07 AM
You can research it if it is self administered, which is almost always done way above recommended dosage.


-------
Since the abuse of androgenic-anabolic steroids (AAS) has been associated with the occurrence of serious cardiovascular disease in young athletes, we performed two studies to investigate the effects of short-term AAS administration on heart structure and function in experienced male strength athletes, with special reference to dose and duration of drug abuse. In Study 1 the effects of AAS were assessed in 17 experienced male strength athletes (age 31 +/- 7 y) who self-administered AAS for 8 or 12 - 16 weeks and in 15 non-using strength athletes (age 33 +/- 5 y) in a non-blinded design. In Study 2 the effects of administration of nandrolone decanoate (200 mg/wk i. m.) for eight weeks were investigated in 16 bodybuilders in a randomised double blind, placebo controlled design. In all subjects M-mode and two-dimensional Doppler-echocardiography were performed at baseline and after 8 weeks AAS administration. In the athletes of Study 1 who used AAS for 12 - 16 weeks a third echocardiogram was also made at the end of the AAS administration period. Echocardiographic examinations included the determination of the aortic diameter (AD), left atrium diameter (LA), left ventricular end diastolic diameter (LVEDD), interventricular septum thickness (IVS), posterior wall end diastolic wall thickness (PWEDWT), left ventricular mass (LVM), left ventricular mass index (LVMI), ejection fraction (EF) and right ventricular diameter (RVD). For assessment of the diastolic function measurements of E and A peak velocities and calculation of E/A ratio were used. In addition, acceleration and deceleration times of the E-top (ATM and DT, respectively) were determined. For evaluation of factors associated with stroke volume the aorta peak flow (AV) and left ventricular ejection times (LVET) were determined. In Study 1 eight weeks AAS self-administration did not result in changes of blood pressure or cardiac size and function. Additionally, duration of AAS self-administration did not have any impact on these parameters. Study 2 revealed that eight weeks administration of nandrolone decanoate did not induce significant alterations in blood pressure and heart morphology and function. Short-term administration of AAS for periods up to 16 weeks did not lead to detectable echocardiographic alterations of heart morphology and systolic and diastolic function in experienced strength athletes. The administration regimen used nor the length of AAS abuse did influence the results. Moreover, it is concluded that echocardiographic evaluation may provide incomplete assessment of the actual cardiac condition in AAS users since it is not sensitive enough to detect alterations at the cellular level. Nevertheless, from the present study no conclusions can be drawn of the cardiotoxic effects of long term AAS abuse.

PMID: 12868045
And did you reach any conclusion about liver toxicity, having as reference those dosages?
Title: Re: why don't cutler,coleman, schlierkamp,etc. had obvious other side effects?
Post by: phreak on October 25, 2006, 04:52:28 AM
And did you reach any conclusion about liver toxicity, having as reference those dosages?
No, because I didn't look for that. Liver toxicity is a moot point for the most part: there is no point in using orals for 99.9% of steroid users.