Article source: MESO-Rx

Sustanon 250, whether as the trademarked Schering brand or as another product using the same name, is one of the most popular types of anabolic steroids. Unlike most other steroid injectables, Sustanon comprises a mixture of esters. Specifically, each ampule or mL contains testosterone propionate 30 mg, testosterone phenylpropionate 60 mg, testosterone isocaproate 60 mg, and testosterone decanoate 100 mg. This mixture includes short, medium, and long-acting esters.

For a steroid cycle, there are two advantages to combining multiple esters in the same formulation as Sustanon does.

Using multiple esters allows the fairly high total concentration of 250 mg/mL without requiring a large percentage of solubility enhancers in the vehicle. This is because solubilities of different esters of a steroid are nearly independent of each other. So for example if a vehicle (oil plus solubility enhancers) could dissolve 100 mg/mL of either one steroid ester alone or another alone, it could probably dissolve 200 mg/mL total as a combination of both. The greater total concentration adds convenience for the user.

A second effect of the blending is that extended duration of action can be achieved from including a long-acting ester without having the slow onset of action that such esters have when used alone. From the medical standpoint, it’s desirable that a patient experience benefit shortly after treatment. This is also true for steroid cycles. Because Sustanon contains short-acting esters, it can provide quick effect while also providing a fairly long duration of action.

From the bodybuilding perspective, this is helpful where the bodybuilder does not know how to frontload a steroid. But if he does, frontloading a longer acting single ester will accomplish very nearly the same thing. So, a different testosterone ester product such as testosterone enanthate or testosterone cypionate can very readily be used in an anabolic steroid cycle in place of Sustanon.

The multiple esters in Sustanon result in slightly complex pharmacokinetics or change in drug level with time. With a single ester, after so many hours or so many days blood level falls to one-half of what it had been; then by double that time that falls in half again resulting in one-quarter of the previous level; then by triple that time the level falls to one-eighth of what it had been, etc. This time period is called the half-life.

For Sustanon there is no such fixed time period. I estimate that after the last injection levels drop to one-half by the 4 day point; to one-quarter by the 10 day point; to one-eighth by the 16 day point; and to one-sixteenth by the 23 day point. Or if preferring to work with round numbers in terms of percent, as approximate values levels drop to 40% by day 6; to 30% by day 8; to 20% by day 11; and to 10% by day 18.

How then to use this information in a steroid cycle? While there is no exact black-and-white value, a good figure to work with is that when clomiphene or tamoxifen is correctly used, recovery of LH production may begin when levels from injected androgen have fallen to a level commensurate with ongoing 200 mg/week steroid usage. Stronger recovery can occur as levels fall yet further to about half this or less.

So let’s say Sustanon was used at 500 mg/week. In this case the user would need levels to fall by 40% before recovery might plausibly begin. From the above, this would be at approximately 6 days after the last injection.

If we had another athlete who used the rather high dosage of 2000 mg per week, he would need for levels to drop to 10% of what they had been. This would be at about 18 days past the last injection of the steroid cycle.

So much for the matter of the time required between the last injection and the point where recovery could begin. The remaining question regarding Sustanon’s unusual pharmacokinetics is, How to frontload it?

Ordinarily, determining a frontloading value is simple enough, being calculated from the half-life and the dosing schedule. However, Sustanon does not have any one half-life figure, so there is no mathematically perfect answer. However, we can come more than close enough for practical purposes.
The amount used for frontloading — the first day’s injection amount — should be that which will on average be taken in 5 days, plus the usual dosage. This total value may be rounded for convenience as exactness isn’t required.

So for example if taking 750 mg/week as three injections of 250 mg each, the average daily rate is 107 mg/day (750 mg divided by 7 days.) So the five-day amount works to five times this, or 535 mg. Add what will be the usual injection amount which is 250 mg, we have 785 mg. Because this is an inconvenient amount and absolute precision is not required, I’d round this to 750 mg.

After this, subsequent injections for the steroid cycle are all 250 mg.

This procedure will give proper blood levels much more rapidly than is the case when failing to frontload.

As to dosage, there are many ways to look at it, but a fairly simple and useful one is to categorize Sustanon usage at increments of 250 mg/week.

Usage of 250 mg/week usually amounts to nothing other than high-end testosterone replacement therapy. There is no guarantee that this usage will even cause testosterone levels to exceed the normal range. The dosing is high enough to cause the side effect of suppressed LH production, but in most cases is not high enough for any striking anabolic or fat-loss effects. Depending on individual sensitivity, this amount may be high enough to cause the side effects of gynecomastia if an aromatase inhibitor is not used, or may be enough to cause oily skin or acne. In a few instances, anabolic or fat loss benefits may be impressive, as there are individuals who are high responders. But this isn’t the usual outcome for this dosage level.

500 mg/week. In my opinion, this is a reasonable minimum for an actual steroid cycle. I see little point in suppressing the HPTA but probably failing to get much gains out of it, as is the usual outcome for any dosage much less than this. Again, because testosterone aromatizes to estradiol, an aromatase inhibitor may be required to avoid estrogen-related side effects. No one, I think, will fail to see substantially improved gains at this dosage level compared to natural training, but the rate of improvement may be slow. Eight weeks, however, is sufficient even at this amount for a quite significant improvement, unless of course one has trained for enough time at this usage level to have gotten most of what the individual can obtain from it.

750 mg/week. I would rather see this amount used if choosing to do a cycle. If an aromatase inhibitor is used it is unlikely that increased side effects would be a real reason to prefer 500 mg/weeek over this dosage, and results are very substantially superior.

1000 mg/week. I have no problem with this being the dosage for a first steroid cycle but that is in the context of a serious lifter who understands what he is doing. If the steroid use is in fact cycled — that is to say, there are both on and off periods and the on periods are not overly long, and normalization of function is accomplished in the off periods — this is not an overly aggressive dosage by any means. At this dosage, the superiority over natural training is dramatic.

Lastly, there are of course uses such as 2000 mg/week of Sustanon. I don’t see a reason to go to this until one has achieved such a level of development — relative to the individual — that for example 1000 mg/week has done about all that it can do. In that case, if personal goals call for it, a dose such as this can be completely appropriate.

Regardless of dosing level, frequency of injection should be at least twice per week, and more preferably at least 3x/week.

Further information on testosterone, the active anabolic steroid within Sustanon, can be found here.

Originally published at: How to Use Sustanon 250

No related posts.

Article source: MESO-Rx

Those of you who want to help advance the understanding of testosterone use for different conditions can join research studies that are currently enrolling. I was amazed to see how many studies are out there! However, none are looking at long term management of side effects like polycythemia with therapeutic phlebotomy, testicular atrophy with long term or cycled HCG therapy, HPGA normalization protocols using HCG+Clomid+estrogen blockers, and other important modalities that are being used by many physicians but with little controlled data.

Remember that some studies have placebo arms. Every study requires for you to read and sign a consent form that should clearly describe the risks and implications in joining the study. Make sure that the private investigator or research nurse overseeing the study explains things to you clearly.

Study to Determine the Long-Term Effects of Testosterone Replacement in Men

Unfortunately, there have been no controlled studies on the long-term use of testosterone replacement in men, even though many of us have been using it for over 20 years.

To answer questions about the long-term effect of testosterone replacement therapy in men the National Institute on Aging, part of the National Institutes of Health, announced in November 2009 the start of a large-scale clinical trial to evaluate the effect of testosterone therapy in older men. Led by researchers at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine and conducted at 12 sites across the nation, the testosterone trial involves 800 men aged 65 years and older with low testosterone levels. The testosterone trial includes five separate studies. Men aged 65 years and older with low serum testosterone and at least one hypogonadal condition (anemia, decreased physical function, low vitality, impaired cognition, or  reduced sexual function) are randomly assigned to participate in a treatment group or a control group.

Treatment groups are given a testosterone gel that is applied to the torso, abdomen, or upper arms. Control groups will receive a placebo gel. Serum testosterone will be measured monthly for the first three months and quarterly thereafter for up to one year. Participants will be tested on a wide range of measures to evaluate physical function, vitality, cognition, cardiovascular disease, and sexual function.

Volunteering for a trial can really help advance research. Men interested in finding out more about participating in the study should call one of the following institutions:

• University of California, Los Angeles; 310-222-5297
• University of California, San Diego; 877-219-6610
• Boston University; 617-414-2968
• University of Pittsburgh; 800-872-3653
• Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, N.Y.; 718-405-8271
• Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas; 713-798-8343
• University of Minnesota, Minneapolis; 612-625-4449
• Yale University, New Haven, Conn.; 203-737-5672
• University of Alabama at Birmingham; 205-934-2294
• VA Puget Sound Health Care System and University of Washington
• School of Medicine, Seattle; 206-768-5408
• Northwestern University, Evanston, Ill.; 877-300-3065
• University of Florida, Gainesville; 866-386-7730, 352-273-5919

Testosterone - The King of All Steroids

Other Studies:

This is a list obtained from clinicaltrials.gov in summer of 2011 (visit the respective link to find out more about every study. This is a great way to not only have access to therapy, but also to have great monitoring and to serve for the better of humanity):

Title: Exogenous Testosterone plus Dutasteride for the Treatment of Castrate Metastatic Prostate Cancer
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Prostate Cancer|Castration-resistant, Metastatic Interventions: Other: testosterone (AndroGel®) with the 5α-reductase inhibitor dutasteride
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00853697

Title: Anabolic and Inflammatory Responses to Short-Term Testosterone Administration in Older Men
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Sarcopenia
Interventions: Drug: Testosterone injection|Drug: Testosterone gel
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00957801

Title: Testosterone for Penile Rehab After Radical Prostatectomy
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Low Testosterone Levels|Erectile Dysfunction
Interventions: Drug: Testim® + Viagra®|Drug: Placebo Testim® + Viagra®
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00848497

Title: Use of Nebido® to Assess Tolerability and Treatment Outcomes in Daily Clinical Practice
Recruitment: Recruiting Conditions: Male|Hypogonadism
Interventions: Drug: Testosterone Undecanoate (Nebido, BAY86-5037) URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00410306

Title: Pharmacokinetic and Comparative Bioavailability Study of Testosterone Absorption after Administration of Testosterone Gel 1.62% to the Upper Arms/Shoulders Using an Application Site Rotation or a Combination of Application Sites in Hypogonadal Males
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Hypogonadism
Interventions: Drug: Testosterone Gel 1.62%|Drug: Testosterone Gel 1.62%
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01133548

Title: Effect of Testosterone on Endothelial Function and Microcirculation in Type 2 Diabetic Patients with Hypogonadism
Recruitment: Not yet recruiting
Conditions: Type 2 Diabetes|Hypogonadism
Interventions: Drug: Testosterone
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01084369

Title: An Open-Label Study of Serum Testosterone Levels in Non- dosed Females After Secondary Exposure to Testosterone Gel 1.62% Applied to the Upper Arms and Shoulders and Use of a T-shirt Barrier
Recruitment: Recruiting Conditions: Pharmacokinetics Interventions: Drug: Testosterone Gel 1.62%
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01130298

Title: Testosterone Replacement for Fatigue in Male Hypogonadic Advanced Cancer Patients
Recruitment: Recruiting Conditions: Advanced Cancer
Interventions: Drug: Testosterone|Drug: Placebo
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00965341

Title: Effect of Testosterone in Men with Erectile Dysfunction
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Erectile Dysfunction|Testosterone Deficiency|Diabetes
Interventions: Drug: Sildenafil citrate (open label)|Drug: Testosterone gel 1% (active or placebo)|Drug: Topical testosterone gel 1%
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00512707

Title: Influence of Administration Route of Testosterone on Male Fertility
Recruitment: Not yet recruiting
Conditions: Hypogonadism
Interventions: Drug: MPP10, testosterone|Drug: Testosterone
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00705796

Title: NASOBOL spray in Hypogonadal Men in Comparison to Testosterone Levels in Normal Healthy Male Volunteers Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Hypogonadism
Interventions: Drug: testosterone|Other: No treatment
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00647868

Title: Effect of Testosterone Gel Replacement on Fat Mass in Males with Low Testosterone Levels and Diabetes
Recruitment: Not yet recruiting
Conditions: Hypogonadism|Diabetes
Interventions: Drug: Testosterone gel|Drug: placebo
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00440440

Title: The Testosterone Trial
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Andropause
Interventions: Drug: AndroGel® (testosterone gel)
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00799617

Title: Vaginal Testosterone Cream vs ESTRING for Vaginal Dryness or Decreased Libido in Early Stage Breast Cancer Patients Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Sexual Dysfunction, Physiological
Interventions: Drug: Testosterone Cream|Drug: Estring URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00698035

Title: Effect of Testosterone Therapy in Men with Alzheimer’s Disease and Low Testosterone
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Alzheimer’s Disease|Hypogonadism
Interventions: Drug: AndroGel (Solvay Pharmaceuticals)
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00392912

Title: 5-Alpha Reductase and Anabolic Effects of Testosterone
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Male Hypogonadism|Muscle Atrophy|Prostate
Enlargement|Sarcopenia
Interventions: Drug: Testosterone Enanthate|Behavioral: Collection of 3-day food logs with counseling of subjects|Drug: Finasteride|Behavioral: Collection of 3-day food logs with counseling of subjects|Drug: Testosterone Enanthate|Drug: Finasteride|Behavioral: Collection of 3-day food logs with counseling of subjects
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00475501

Title: Effects of Testosterone Replacement on Pain Sensitivity and Pain Perception
Recruitment: Recruiting
Study Results: No Results Available
Conditions: Pain|Hypogonadism
Interventions: Drug: Androgel (testosterone gel)|Other: Placebo
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00351819

Title: Testosterone Gel Applied to Women with Pituitary Gland Problems
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Panhypopituitarism
Interventions: Drug: Transdermal Testosterone gel
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00144391

Title: Testosterone Therapy in Men With Low Testosterone Levels and Metabolic Syndrome or Early Stages of Type 2 Diabetes
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Metabolic Syndrome
Interventions: Drug: Transdermal testosterone therapy|Drug: Placebo
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00479609

Title: Effect of Testosterone Replacement on Insulin Resistance
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Metabolic Syndrome|Hypogonadism
Interventions: Radiation: Testosterone gel|Drug: Placebo for testosterone gel
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00487734

Title: Effect of Androgel on Type 2 Diabetic Males with Hypogonadism
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Diabetes Mellitus Type 2
Interventions: Drug: Testosterone( AndroGel)
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00350701

Title: TEAM: Testosterone Supplementation and Exercise in Elderly Men
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Healthy
Interventions: Drug: Testosterone Gel|Behavioral: Exercise – Progressive Resistance Training (PRT)|Drug: Placebo Gel URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00112151

Title: Dose Titration Investigation of the Pharmacokinetics of Testosterone Transdermal Systems in Hypogonadal Men Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Hypogonadism
Interventions: Drug: Testerone Transdermal System
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01104246

Title: Testosterone for Peripheral Vascular Disease
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Hypogonadism|Peripheral Vascular Disease|Type 2 Diabetes
Interventions: Drug: Testosterone|Drug: 0.9% saline
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00504712

Title: A Pilot Study of Parenteral Testosterone and Oral Etoposide as Therapy for Men with Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Prostate Cancer
Interventions: Drug: Testosterone|Drug: Etoposide
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01084759

Title: Efficacy and Tolerability of an Intra-Nasal Testosterone Product
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Hypogonadism
Interventions: Drug: Nasobol® (Itra-nasal Testosterone)|Drug: Androderm® (Positive Control)
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00975650

Title: Testosterone Replacement in Men with Diabetes and Obesity
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Hypogonadism
Interventions: Drug: testosterone|Drug: placebo
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01127659

Title: NEBIDO in Symptomatic Late Onset Hypogonadism (SLOH)
Recruitment: Not yet recruiting
Conditions: Hypogonadism
Interventions: Drug: Testosterone Undeconate (Nebido, BAY86-
5037)|Drug: Placebo
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01092858

Title: Baseline Sexual Function, Cognitive Function, Body Composition and Muscle Parameters and Pharmacokinetics of Transdermal Testosterone Gel in Women With Hypopituitarism
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Panhypopituitarism
Interventions: Drug: Transdermal Testosterone Gel
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00144404

Title: Effect of Increasing Testosterone on Insulin Sensitivity in Men with the Metabolic Syndrome
Recruitment: Recruiting Conditions: Metabolic Syndrome
Interventions: Drug: Zoladex|Drug: AndroGel|Drug: Arimidex
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00438321

Title: Testosterone Replacement in Men with Non-Metastatic Castrate Resistant Prostate Cancer
Recruitment: Recruiting Conditions: Prostate Cancer
Interventions: Drug: AndroGel|Drug: placebo
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00515112

Title: The Effect of IM Testosterone Undecanoate on Biochemical and Anthropometric Characteristics of Metabolic Syndrome in Hypogonadal Men
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Metabolic Syndrome|Hypogonadism
Interventions: Drug: Nebido (testosterone undecanoate)|Drug: Placebo
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00696748

Title: The Therapy of Nebido as Mono or in Combination With PDE-5 Inhibitors in Hypogonadal Patients With Erectile Dysfunction
Recruiting Conditions: Hypogonadism|Erectile Dysfunction
Interventions: Drug: Testosterone undecanoate
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00421460

Title: Transdermal Testosterone Gel/Effect on Erection Quality as Measured by DIR Recruitment: Recruiting Conditions: Hypogonadism
Interventions: Drug: AndroGel (Transdermal Testosterone Gel)
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00425568

Title: The Effect of 5-Alpha Reductase on Testosterone in Men
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Sex Disorders
Interventions: Drug: testosterone enanthate|Drug: duastride
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00070733

Title: Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction in Hypogonadal Men with Testosterone Undecanoate
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Erectile Dysfunction|Hypogonadotrophic Males
Interventions: Drug: Testosterone Undecanoate and/or PDE-5
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00555087

Title: Analgesic Efficacy of Testosterone Replacement in Hypogonadal Opioid-Treated Chronic Pain Patients: A Pilot Study.
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Pain|Hypogonadism
Interventions: Drug: Testosterone Gel
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00398034

Title: Anabolic Therapies: New Hope for Treating Secondary Disabilities of SCI
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Hypogonadism|Spinal Cord Injury
Interventions: Drug: Testosterone Replacement Therapy Patch 5mg daily
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00266864

Title: Does Testosterone Improve Function in Hypogonadal Older Men
Recruitment: Recruiting Conditions: Hypogonadism Interventions: Drug: Testosterone
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00304213

Title: The Effect of Testosterone Replacement on Bone Mineral Density in Boys and Men with Anorexia Nervosa
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Bone Metabolism
Interventions: Drug: testosterone cypionate|Other: Bone monitoring
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00853502

Title: Effects of Testosterone in Women with Depression
Recruitment: Recruiting Conditions: Depression Interventions: Drug: Testosterone
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00676676

Title: Reandron in Diabetic Men With Low Testosterone Level
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Type 2 Diabetes|Hypogonadism Interventions: Drug: Reandron 1000|Drug: placebo URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00613782

Title: Outcomes of Mechanically Ventilated Patients With Low Serum Testosterone
Recruitment: Recruiting
Study Results: No Results Available Conditions: Acute Respiratory Failure
Interventions:
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00797433

Title: Testosterone Therapy on Angina Threshold and Atheroma in Patients with Chronic Stable Angina
Recruitment: Recruiting Conditions: Angina Pectoris
Interventions: Drug: Nebido
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00131183

Title: Hormone and Information Processing Study
Recruitment: Recruiting Conditions: Mild Cognitive Impairment|Alzheimer’s Disease
Interventions: Drug: testosterone gel|Drug: placebo gel
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00539305

Title: Efficacy Study for Use of Dutasteride (Avodart) With Testosterone Replacement
Recruitment: Recruiting Conditions: Hypogonadism
Interventions: Drug: dutasteride|Drug: placebo
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00752869

Title: Testosterone Replacement in Middle-Aged Hypogonadal Men With Dysthymia: Parallel Group, Double Blind Randomized Trial
Recruitment: Recruiting Conditions: Dysthymic Disorder
Interventions: Drug: Testoviron
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00260390

Title: Decreased Testosterone Levels in Men Over 65
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Aging|Hypogonadism|Andropause
Interventions: Drug: Anastrozole|Drug: Testosterone Gel|Drug: Placebo tablet|Drug: Placebo gel|Dietary Supplement: Calcium Cardone 500mg with vitamin D 400 IU
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00104572

Title: Testosterone Replacement Therapy in Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease
Recruitment: Recruiting
Study Results: No Results Available
Conditions: Kidney Failure|Kidney Diseases
Interventions: Drug: Testim (1% testosterone gel) URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00645658

Title: The Cardiac Benefit of Testosterone Replacement in Men with Low Testosterone Levels With Coronary Artery Disease After Successful Intervention of the Blockage or Narrowed Heart Artery
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Coronary Artery Disease
Interventions: Drug: AndroGel 5 Grams
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00413244

Title: Dose-Response of Gonadal Steroids and Bone Turnover in Men
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Healthy Volunteers
Interventions: Drug: testosterone|Drug: goserelin acetate|Drug: anastrazole
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00114114

Title: Effect of Androgel on Atherogenesis, Inflammation, Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Adiposity in Type 2 Diabetic Males With Hypogonadotrophic Hypogonadism
Recruitment: Not yet recruiting
Conditions: Type 2 Diabetic Male with Hypogonadotrophic Hypogonadism.
Interventions: Drug: Androgel
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00467987

Title: Hormonal Factors in the Treatment of Anorexia Nervosa
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Anorexia Nervosa|Eating Disorder|Anxiety|Depression
Interventions: Drug: Testosterone|Drug: Placebo
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01121211

Title: Investigator Initiated Study of the Effects of Androgen Therapy on Carbohydrate and Lipid Metabolism In Elderly Men
Recruitment:
Recruiting Conditions: Aging|Obesity|Insulin Resistance|Hypogonadism
Interventions: Drug: Topical testosterone (Androgel) 10 g/day
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00365794

Title: Phase II Randomized Study of Physiologic Testosterone Replacement in Premenopausal, HIV-Positive Women Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: HIV Infections|Cachexia
Interventions: Drug: testosterone
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00004400

Title: Amino Acid Supplement and/or Testosterone in Treating Cachexia in Patients With Advanced or Recurrent Cervical Cancer
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Cachexia|Cervical Cancer
Interventions: Dietary Supplement: leucine-enhanced essential amino acid dietary supplement|Drug: therapeutic testosterone|Other: placebo URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00878995

Title: Deslorelin Combined With Low-Dose Add-Back Estradiol and Testosterone in Preventing Breast Cancer in Premenopausal Women Who Are at High Risk for This Disease
Recruitment:
Recruiting Conditions: brca1 Mutation Carrier|brca2 Mutation Carrier|Breast Cancer
Interventions: Biological: therapeutic estradiol|Drug: deslorelin|Drug: therapeutic testosterone
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00080756

Title: Effect of High Testosterone on Sleep-associated Slowing of Follicular Luteinizing Hormone (LH) Frequency in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Polycystic Ovary Syndrome
Interventions: Drug: Flutamide|Drug: Placebo
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00930228

Title: Metabolic Effects of Androgenicity in Aging Men and Women
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Aging|Insulin Resistance Interventions: Drug: Testosterone|Drug: Estrogen
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00680797

Title: Safety and Efficacy of LibiGel® for the Treatment of Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder in Surgically Menopausal Women
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder
Interventions: Drug: testosterone gel|Drug: placebo gel
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00613002

Title: Sexual Dysfunction and Hypotestosteronemia In Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome And Its Effects With CPAP Therapy
Recruitment: Recruiting
Conditions: Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome (OSAS)|Sleep Apnea|Hypotestosteronemia
Interventions:
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00832065

Title: Surveillance Study of Women Taking Intrinsa®
Recruitment: Recruiting
Study Results: No Results Available
Conditions: Ovariectomy|Hysterectomy|Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder
Interventions:
URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00551785

Originally published at: Testosterone Research Studies

More Steroid Articles from MESO-Rx:

• Testosterone Side Effects: Latest Research
• Growth Hormone vs. Testosterone – A Retrospective Based on the Latest Research
• UFC Dana White Supports Testosterone Replacement Therapy in MMA

Article source: MESO-Rx

British bodybuilders who order anabolic steroids over the internet will be considered criminals beginning today – April 23, 2012 – under a new amendment to the British steroid law. Fortunately, the possession of anabolic steroids for self-administration remains perfectly legal under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (“MDA”). However, the new amendment makes the importation of steroids illegal.

The only exception involves cases of “personal custody”. For example, athletes attending the London Olympics this summer can legally bring steroids and performance-enhancing drugs with them in their luggage. But everyone else living inside the United Kingdom is prohibited from importing them via mail.

The amended steroid law reflects the recommendations made by the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (“ACMD”) last summer. The recommendations reflect a blatant disregard for the health and safety of anabolic steroid users.

The primary beneficiary of the new steroid laws are “underground labs” (UGLs) that illicitly manufacture anabolic steroids within the United Kingdom. In fact, UGLs could not have dreamed of crafting legislation that would have been any more beneficial to them!

The ACMD did a few things that will directly and dramatically increase business for domestic UGLs.

1. They recommended the removal of references to “medicinal products” in the old steroid law. Courts had previously interpreted this to mean that the possession of non-medicinal UGL steroids was illegal. The new law makes UGL steroids unambiguously legal to possess for personal use.
2. By banning the importation of steroids, the new law effectively eliminates ALL competition from internet sources or international sources.
3. The new law essentially directs bodybuilders to obtain their steroids exclusively from domestic sources i.e. underground labs if they wanted to follow the law.

Harm reduction organizations are warning Needle-Syringe Program (NSP) workers to be prepared for an increase in the number of bodybuilders who may suffer adverse consequences from the increased use of UGL steroids.

Nigel Brunsdon, the director of Injecting Advice LTD and a planning committee member at the National Needle Exchange Forum, issued this notice for NSP workers involved in steroid harm reduction:

Part of the conversations with steroid users have always been about their knowledge of the law and the sources of their steroids. Previously these have been two separate topics, but with importation being illegal this now means that for at least the next few months this becomes one discussion.

After that of course we’ll start seeing the fallout from the increased underground production, at a guess this will be a rise in bacterial infections, abscesses and issues relating to variable strengths of products produced.

Last year, MESO-Rx wrote about the ramifications of the ACMD’s steroid-related recommendations:

What impact will this have on steroid use in the United Kingdom?

The production of anabolic steroids by UGLs within the United Kingdom will likely explode accompanied by a concomitant increase in the use of UGL steroids by British bodybuilders. Bodybuilders will switch from pharmaceutical steroids to lower-quality UGL steroids.

Unfortunately, this seems largely at odds with the efforts at “harm reduction” by the government. The quality control standards of UGLs are generally inferior to those of legitimate pharmaceutical products (that have been legally obtainable over the internet prior to the current pending amendments.)

Brunsdon also discussed the effect of the new steroid law with Martin Chandler, the Inter Agency Drug Misuse Database Manager at Liverpool John Moores University, during the Welsh National Drugs Conference last week. Chandler confirmed the negative consequences for steroid harm reduction.

This will cause a rise in home produced products by illicitly sourced raw testosterone powders, so we’ll see a rise in underground products produced in the UK, this is likely to decrease the quality and increase the risk….. and this year in particular there is a crackdown on raw materials as the government have to be seen to be preventing the importation and production of anabolic steroids prior to the Olympics.

The environment for steroid users in the United Kingdom is likely to become increasingly risky as the London Olympics approach. At least Britain has resisted the increasing pressure by the World Anti-Doping Agency to criminalize the personal use of steroids. Nonetheless, the passage of legislation that takes a major step backwards from the goal of steroid harm reduction is reason for significant concern. Bodybuilders looking for steroids in the months ahead should proceed with caution as law enforcement seeks to crackdown (or at least give the appearance of a crackdown) on steroids before the Olympics.

UGL steroids will become increasingly popular in the United Kingdom

Originally published at: UK Bodybuilders Who Import Steroids Considered Criminals Beginning Today

More Steroid Articles from MESO-Rx:

• Oklahoma Targets Competitive Bodybuilders Using Steroids in Grand Jury Investigation
• Bad News for British Bodybuilders – Buying Steroids on the Internet Soon to be Illegal
• Dentist Who Sold Prescriptions for Anabolic Steroids to Bodybuilders

Article source: MESO-Rx

Will Selective Androgen Receptor Modulators Replace Anabolic Steroids?

Oral selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMs) are investigational agents. Studied since 1998, they are still very much in the infancy of their development and marketing. SARMs may be able to provide the benefits of increased muscle mass and bone density, and fat loss that testosterone and other traditional anabolic/androgenic steroids provide but without the unwanted side effects (prostatic enlargement). SARMs are not intended to be a form of testosterone replacement therapy. So, why am I talking about them?

Besides replacement therapy, testosterone and other anabolics can be useful in the treatment of certain aspects of disease. This is a topic close to my heart since this kind of medical use saved my life and that of many others. I spent years researching it to co-write the book “Built to Survive: A Comprehensive Guide to the Medical Use of Anabolic Therapies, Nutrition and Exercise for HIV+ Men and Women” (published in 1999 and then two more editions a few years later and available on amazon.com). Excuse me while I digress from the current topic.

Unintentional weight loss is common in a number of medical conditions (e.g., HIV/AIDS, burns, trauma, cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease). The loss of too much weight, especially muscle mass, increases the risk of complications, including death. Dr. Donald Kotler from New York was able to plot body cell mass data versus mortality from different pathologies and found that once you lose 50% of your normal body cell mass, you die. So, there seems to be a minimum amount of lean tissue that the body needs to stay alive and functioning. Fat mass has not been correlated to increased survival, although losing fat has been proven to improve cardiovascular risks.

Cancer cachexia, or the unintentional loss of muscle mass and body weight, may lead to a loss of protein stores, severe weakness and fatigue, immobility and a loss of independence. It can impair the ability to tolerate and to respond to cancer treatments. An estimated 1.3 million cancer patients in the United States have cancer cachexia. Cancer-induced muscle wasting is thought to be responsible for greater than 20 percent of cancer deaths.

There are no drugs currently approved for the treatment of cancer cachexia. Physicians often prescribe different medications that have the side of effect of increased appetite in an attempt to fight weight loss. Megace, a progesterone-based appetite stimulant, is commonly used to increase weight. Unfortunately most of this weight consists of fat (lean body mass, not fat gain, has been correlated to increased survival.) Megace also increases the chances for blood clots, high blood sugar and bone death.

Anabolics like nandrolone undecanoate and oxandrolone have been prescribed by progressive physicians to treat wasting in patients with non-androgen dependent cancers (colon, throat, lung, stomach, etc.) and HIV associated wasting. Androgens are contraindicated for people with prostate and breast cancer, as they can worsen these types of cancers.

Anabolics are usually prescribed along with testosterone replacement even if the patient starting them for wasting syndrome has normal testosterone levels. Anabolics have the same inhibiting effect as testosterone on the HPGA and they decrease testosterone blood levels if no testosterone is used in combination with them. Many doctors fail to remember this and treat patients who are wasting with anabolics alone, which results in loss of sexual function in patients using them for a few weeks. So, testosterone replacement is essential as an adjunctive therapy when prescribing oxandrolone or nandrolone to patients with HIV, cancer, or other debilitating wasting conditions.

Oxandrolone (brand name: Oxandrin), an oral anabolic agent, is FDA approved as “adjunctive therapy to promote weight gain after weight loss following extensive surgery, chronic infections, or severe trauma, and in some patients who without definite pathophysiologic reasons fail to gain or to maintain normal weight, to offset the protein catabolism associated with prolonged administration of corticosteroids, and for the relief of bone pain frequently accompanying osteoporosis.” (From the products package insert).

Adjunctive means it is an additive or supportive therapy but it does not treat the underlying condition directly. In some patients and depending on the dose and duration, oxandrolone can increase liver enzymes and/or decrease high density cholesterol (HDL), the good cholesterol. Both side effects reverse when the drug is stopped. The usual dose for men is 20 mg/ day (it can be used in women with wasting at 5-10 mg/day). As previously mentioned, testosterone is needed with it since it reduces testosterone and potentially sexual function after a few weeks in some patients. It is expensive at $1200 per month for 20 mg/day but insurance companies pay for it with some restrictions.

Nandrolone decanoate (brand name: Deca Durabolin), an injectable anabolic steroid, is the most studied anabolic agent for wasting syndrome. It requires a weekly injection of 200-400 mg plus testosterone replacement (100-200 mg testosterone cypionate a week or 5-10 grams of testosterone gel per day).

Nandrolone is legally prescribed in an off-label manner to treat wasting syndrome since it is indicated for the management of the anemia of renal insufficiency and has been shown to increase hemoglobin and red cell mass. No liver toxicity has been reported in the many studies, but decreases in HDL and other side effects typical of testosterone have been observed in those using higher doses. Nandrolone is no longer available in regular pharmacies but it is available cheaply in compounding pharmacies by prescription (there is a list in the Appendix section). The average cost for 200 mg/week is $40 per month and it may produce the same effects on lean body mass than oxandrolone at 20 mg/day. Both nandrolone and oxandrolone can have the same side effects of testosterone (polycythemia and gynecomastia).

The only drug that is actually approved in the United States for HIV wasting syndrome that does not require an off label prescription is Serostim (human growth hormone made by Serono), although doctors prescribe oxandrolone and nandrolone a lot more due to cost and lower side effects. Depending on the dose used, Serostim can cost $3000 to $6000 per month. This product can cause joint aches, water retention, and irreversible diabetes. More details on treatment of wasting syndrome can be found in the previously mentioned book “Built to Survive” which I co- authored with Michael Mooney (the book is available on Amazon.com in a print or electronic version and has been translated into Spanish).

Low doses of growth hormone (growth hormone replacement therapy) are commonly prescribed in antiaging and men’s clinics. It is a controversial topic that is beyond of the scope of this book. A lot of details are provided in ‘Built to Survive.”

So back to the SARMs:

SARMs are aimed to have the same benefits as anabolics but without the side effects.

Ostarine is an oral agent that has demonstrated the ability to increase lean body mass and improve muscle strength and performance in postmenopausal women, elderly men, and men and women with cancer cachexia. Ostarine is made by the company GTx’s and has been studied in seven Phase I, Phase II, and Phase IIb clinical trials in 582 subjects.

It had no serious adverse events reported, although I have yet to see the data. Ostarine also exhibited no apparent change in measurements of serum prostatic specific antigen (PSA), sebum production (which causes acne), or decreases in blood levels of LH (which hints that it may not affect the HPGA at the doses tested). I have not seen LDL or HDL and hematocrit or hemoglobin data on this product to assess its effect on lipids and red blood cells, respectively. I am also curious about its effect on liver enzymes.

SARMs have anecdotally not helped increase sexual function, so they probably will not replace testosterone for treatment of hypogonadism. They also decrease the body’s production of testosterone, just like anabolic steroids do. So, testosterone replacement will most probably be still required with their use for illness or aging associated loss of lean body mass. We await more data on these interesting compounds as they may have the same clinical benefits as anabolic steroids without the stigma and possibly without their side effects.

For more information read: Testosterone: A Man’s Guide

Selective Androgen Receptor Modulators (SARMs)

Originally published at: Selective Androgen Receptor Modulators for HIV Wasting and Cancer Cachexia

More Steroid Articles from MESO-Rx:

• Androgen Receptor Regulation
• Androgen Action and the Androgen Receptor
• Prostate Cancer and Steroids: Let the Pendulum Swing

Article source: MESO-Rx

The battle between Lance Armstrong and the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) is shaping up to be much more than a doping case. USADA has formally accused Armstrong of using a variety of performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) during his accomplished career as a professional cyclist. And USADA rarely loses a case when it decides pursue an athlete. So, how can Lance Armstrong win?

What is the Meaning of Lance Armstrong’s #Unconstitutional Tweets?

Armstrong’s legal team at Patton Boggs may soon file a lawsuit claiming that USADA has violated fundamental civil rights guaranteed to their client under the United States Bill of Rights including the first, fifth and fourteenth amendments. USADA has openly deprived a group of individuals known as “professional athletes” of these rights that have been guaranteed to every other American.

Of course, USADA, as an independent and non-governmental agency, is under no legal requirement to provide athletes with such constitutional protections even as it uses taxpayer funds to pursue athletes. USADA could make the “we’re-not-a-state-actor” argument and legally deprive athletes of such constitutional rights.

In order to succeed, Armstrong will need a federal judge to legally classify USADA as a “state actor”.

What is a “State Actor”?

A “state actor” is an entity that essentially acts as an extension of the federal government. Any private citizen or private organization that acts on behalf of or conspires with the government is subject to federal regulation under the Bill of Rights. This prevents state actors from violating the certain constitutional freedoms guaranteed to its members.

This will not be the first time USADA has been accused of being a state actor. The issue was introduced directly and indirectly during several cases involving BALCO defendants. USADA largely defended itself against previous accusations. But Lance Armstrong’s case may present different challenges for USADA.

Arguments That USADA is a State Actor

Funded by Government

The fact that USADA receives the majority of its funding from the federal government is not, in and of itself, proof that it is a state actor. However, since they have consistently received over two-thirds of their funding from federal grants distributed by the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), it is clear that USADA is strategic in the government’s “war on drugs”. According to disclosures made in IRS Form 1090, USADA received $9.6 million, $9.8 million and $10 million in taxpayer funds in 2008, 2009 and 2010, respectively.

Symbiotic Relationship Between USADA and Federal Government

USADA has actively fostered a symbiotic relationship with federal law enforcement agencies in their fight against doping. USADA has worked side-by-side with law enforcement from the early days of Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative (BALCO) steroid investigation in 2003.  Larry Bowers, the Chief Science Officer for USADA, was present, along with Jeff Novitzky and other federal agents, at the raid BALCO’s offices in Burlingame (California) according to BALCO founder Victor Conte.

USADA CEO Travis Tygart has participated with Novitzky in witness interviews according to Armstrong’s lawyers. The Associated Press reported that Tygart accompanied FDA Criminal Division investigator Novitzky and Assistant United States attorney Doug Miller to France in November 2010 as part of Los Angeles U.S. Attorney Andre Birotte Jr.’s federal criminal investigation of Armstrong.

USADA Piggybacked on Federal Investigation of Lance Armstrong

U.S. Attorney Birotte ultimately announced the termination of the criminal investigation into Armstrong. Immediately after the announcement, Tygart made it clear that the investigation of Armstrong was far from over and that USADA would use its available resources to pursue Armstrong on its own.

USADA reportedly requested access to the extensive evidence gathering and grand jury testimony obtained by Birotte’s office. However, USADA and the federal government have refused to discuss the extent of their information-sharing regarding the Lance Armstrong investigation. USADA will likely assert that its case against Armstrong is based solely on evidence independently obtained by the agency.

Armstrong’s attorneys feel otherwise. In attorney Robert Luskin’s letter to USADA, he accused USADA of acquiring evidence in violation of grand jury secrecy laws. Novitzky was suspected of the leak.

WADA Encourages Close Cooperation with Federal Agencies

The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) has actively encouraged its National Doping Organizations to exploit and gain access to intelligence collected by law enforcement agencies. WADA has published guidelines that provide “practical, sensible suggestions on how to go about working together with law enforcement, customs, immigration and other officials in order to properly and appropriately share information.”

USADA’s close working relationships with federal government agents, as part of WADA’s overarching strategy, makes USADA more vulnerable to being labeled as a state actor.

United States Has Ratified UNESCO International Convention against Doping in Sport

Michael Straubel, the director of the Sports Law Clinic at Valparaiso University and only attorney to successfully defeat USADA, told the New York Times that the United States’ ratification of the UNESCO Internatinal Convention Against Doping in Sport may further support the likelihood that USADA will be recognized as a state actor.

“You could make a strong case for it, simply because of the government funding USADA has received and an international treaty against doping the U.S. has signed,” said Straubel. “If they piggybacked on the federal investigation and obtained some of that evidence, it could make for an even stronger case.”

Former U.S. President George W. Bush made the ratification of the Convention official in 2008 after approval by the Senate. Anti-doping officials applauded the treaty as “apply(ing) the force of international law to anti-doping” opening the door to further cooperation between USADA and the federal government.

Conclusion

The real significance of the Armstrong vs. USADA case has little to do with the question of whether or not Lance Armstrong used erythropoietin (EPO), testosterone, human growth hormone (hGH) or any other performance-enhancing drug (PED). If Armstrong wins and the courts recognize USADA as a state actor, USADA will be forced to change.

It would represent a watershed moment for the rights of professional athletes. Athletes would no longer have their procedural due process rights routinely trampled by USADA. As a state actor, such actions would be considered “#unconstitutional”.

Athletes accused of doing violations will be afforded, without delay, full access to evidence against them.

The standard of proof could be raised from “comfortable satisfaction” or “clear and concise” to something comparable to that in civil cases if not criminal cases.

It will also raise questions about the non-profit status of USADA as well as the role of government involvement in anti-doping.

The goal of anti-doping doesn’t always justify the means by which its objectives are achieved. The rights of athletes are important too.

Lance Armstrong vs United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA). Photo credit: Millard Baker

Originally published at: How Lance Armstrong Can Win Against the United States Anti-Doping Agency

More Steroid Articles from MESO-Rx:

• Lance Armstrong vs. Anti-Doping Movement: Who Is Really Defrauding the Government?
• Lawsuit Accuses United States Anti-Doping Association of Cheating
• Russian Anti-Doping Agency Turns to USADA

Article source: MESO-Rx

For a print paperback or Kindle copy : http://www.amazon.com/Built-Survive-Comprehensive-Therapies-Nutrition/dp/0983773998/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1345271729&sr=8-2&keywords=nelson+vergel

Originally published at: Free Bodybuilding Book: Built to Survive

More Steroid Articles from MESO-Rx:

• Bodybuilding Cosmetic Surgeon Bruce Nadler Dead in Murder-Suicide
• Pharmaceutical Companies Sponsoring Pro Bodybuilding Contests?
• Man Goes to Prison for Advertising Anabolic Steroids in Bodybuilding Magazines

Article source: MESO-Rx

Q: What is the “Designer Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2012″?

A: It’s a Senate Bill (SB 3431) introduced by Senators Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and referred to the Judiciary Committee. If passed by Congress, it will amend the Controlled Substances Act to more aggressively regulate steroidal substances being sold as dietary supplement ingredients. The clear intent is to remove remaining “prohormone” products from the market and prevent new ones from being introduced. The bill would take such past or present supplement products as ATD, 6-oxo, 6-bromo, Furazadrol, Halodrol, Havoc, and Tren and legally classify them as anabolic steroids and Controlled Substances. Here’s what Sen. Whitehouse said in introducing the bill on July 25^th, 2012:

I am pleased to join Senator Hatch in introducing the bipartisan Designer Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2012. This measure will help keep American children and families safe from dangerous designer drugs that masquerade as healthy dietary supplements. This legislation is based on Senator Specter’s work in the previous Congress, and I thank him for his leadership on this issue.

Doctors and scientists have long recognized the health hazards of non-medical use of anabolic steroids. For that reason, Congress has previously acted to ensure that these drugs are listed as controlled substances. Nonetheless, according to investigative reporting and Congressional testimony, a loophole in current law allows for designer anabolic steroids to easily be found on the Internet, in gyms, and even in retail stores.

Designer steroids are produced by reverse engineering existing illegal steroids and then slightly modifying the chemical composition, so that the resulting product is not on the Drug Enforcement Administration’s, DEA, list of controlled substances. When taken by consumers, designer steroids can cause serious medical consequences, including liver injury and increased risk of heart attack and stroke. They may also lead to psychological effects such as aggression, hostility, and addiction.

These designer products can be even more dangerous than traditional steroids because they are often untested, produced from overseas raw materials, and manufactured without quality controls. As one witness testified at a Crime Subcommittee hearing in the last Congress, ‘all it takes to cash in on the storefront steroid craze is a credit card to import raw products from China or India where most of the raw ingredients come from, the ability to pour powders into a bottle or pill and a printer to create shiny, glossy labels.’

The unscrupulous actors responsible for manufacturing and selling these products often market them with misleading and inaccurate labels. That can cause consumers who are looking for a healthy supplement–not just elite athletes, but also high school students, law enforcement personnel, and mainstream Americans–to be deceived into taking these dangerous products.

Loopholes in existing law allow these dangerous designer steroids to evade regulation. Under current law, in order to classify new substances as steroids, the DEA must complete a burdensome and time-consuming series of chemical and pharmacological testing. As a DEA official testified before Congress: ‘in the time that it takes DEA to administratively schedule an anabolic steroid used in a dietary supplement product, several new products can enter the market to take the place of those products.

The Designer Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2012 would quickly protect consumers from these dangerous products. First, it would immediately place 27 known designer anabolic steroids on the list of controlled substances. Second, it would grant the DEA authority to temporarily schedule new designer steroids on the controlled substances list, so that if bad actors develop new variations, these products can be removed from the market. Third, it would create new penalties for importing, manufacturing, or distributing anabolic steroid’s [sic] under false labels.

Senator Hatch and I have worked closely with a range of consumer and industry organizations to ensure that this legislation would not interfere with consumers’ access to legitimate dietary supplements. I am pleased that the measure has been endorsed by the United States Anti-Doping Agency, the Alliance for Natural Health, the Council for Responsible Nutrition, the American Herbal Products Association, the Natural Products Association, the Consumer Health Products Association, and the United Natural Products Alliance.

I thank these organizations for their support, and look forward to working with them, with Senator Hatch, and with colleagues from both sides of the aisle to enact this common sense measure into law.

Q: Is the bill specific in naming the substances to be added to the list of anabolic steroids?

A: The “Discussion Draft” of the bill that I reviewed would specifically add 27 chemical compounds to the list of substances defined as anabolic steroids in Title 21 of the U.S. Code [21 USC 802(41)]. The bill presents the chemical nomenclature for these substances. Some of the chemical names listed, according to steroidal supplement guru Patrick Arnold, contain errors or refer to compounds that may actually not exist. But any minor mistakes aside, it seems that the drafters of the bill extensively canvassed the supplement market and perhaps even the Internet message boards in an effort to identify and specifically name as many compounds as possible. This isn’t the first time that Congress has expanded the list of anabolic steroids. The original list, compiled in 1990, was amended in 2004 to include androstenedione and a variety of other steroidal products. The DEA later issued a Final Rule (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2009-12-04/pdf/E9-28572.pdf), effective January 2010, classifying three more compounds as anabolic steroids (boldione, desoxymethyltestosterone, and 19-nor-4,9(10)-androstadienedione, along with their salts, esters and ethers). Then the DEA last year published a notice of proposed rulemaking to add yet two more steroidal compounds, prostanozol and methasterone (marketed as Superdrol), along with their salts, esters and ethers, to the list. The Final Rule on these two was issued on July 30^th, 2012 (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-07-30/pdf/2012-18495.pdf), effective August 29^th, 2012. This new bill just follows up by adding a whole bunch more (although now a moot point, it includes the recently scheduled prostanozol and Superdrol) … and by design, misses very few.

Q: What about steroidal substances that are not on the list?

A: The bill changes the way unlisted steroidal compounds are dealt with. It says that “a drug or hormonal substance (other than estrogens, progestins, corticosteroids, and dehydroepiandrosterone) that is not listed … and is derived from, or has a chemical structure substantially similar to, 1 or more [listed] anabolic steroids [is considered an anabolic steroid] if … [it] has been created or manufactured with the intent of [promoting muscle growth or having pharmacological effects like testosterone or] has been, or is intended to be, marketed or otherwise promoted [to suggest it will promote muscle growth or have pharmacological effects like testosterone]. Notice that there’s no proof requirement that the substance actually promote muscle growth or act like testosterone pharmacologically – only that it’s created, manufactured, marketed or promoted with the intent of doing so. So, for supplement industry purposes, a company that markets any product that is derived from or has substantial chemical similarity to a listed anabolic steroid and is also created or marketed to build muscle or have a pharmacological effect like testosterone is marketing an anabolic steroid. An interesting question arises in the following theoretical scenario: Company A markets an ingredient derived from a listed anabolic steroid for health and wellness purposes, and the ingredient has neither anabolic nor androgenic effects. Company B markets the same ingredient but makes the claim, falsely, that the ingredient builds muscle. If Company B is prosecuted and convicted for marketing the ingredient as an anabolic steroid, where does this leave Company A? While it would seem reasonable that the ingredient is an anabolic steroid only with respect to Company B, the issue is not addressed in the language of the bill.

Q: Are there any exemptions provided in the bill?

A: Yes. Unlisted steroidal compounds that are herbs or botanicals are exempted. So are concentrates, metabolites, and extracts of an herb or botanical, or a constituent isolated directly from an herb or botanical. This provision was drafted as an acknowledgement to the current position of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) articulated with respect to New Dietary Ingredients (NDI’s): that a compound is a “constituent” of a botanical only if it is isolated directly from it, and not if it is instead synthetically created in a lab. The bill further connects the Controlled Substances Act with the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (“DSHEA,” a part of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) by requiring that any exempted substance must be a “dietary ingredient” under DSHEA. And the bill puts the burden of DSHEA compliance on the marketer, by providing that anyone “claiming the benefit of an exemption [has] the burden of going forward with the evidence.” In other words, somebody arrested for selling an anabolic steroid whose defense is that it is an exempted constituent would have the burden of showing evidence of DSHEA compliance.

Q: Does the bill make it easier to add new unlisted substances to the list?

A: It does, by amending a different section of Title 21 [21 USC 811] to provide a fast-track for scheduling. The Attorney General may issue a temporary order, to take effect 30 days after publication, adding a substance to the list if it meets certain criteria. The temporary order “is not subject to judicial review” and a permanent order could be simultaneously sought. But the bill also provides that an unlisted steroidal substance can be considered an anabolic steroid if it’s determined to meet the criteria of an anabolic steroid “in any criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding arising under this Act.” So, while the Attorney General has the power to declare substances to be anabolic steroids through the rulemaking process, unlisted substances can nevertheless be considered to be anabolic steroids without prior rulemaking notice if it’s proven in a court of law, such as during a criminal prosecution of a supplement company or its principals. But the bill also makes it easier for the Attorney General to add new compounds because it changes the criteria and tosses out the rigorous scientific inquiry currently required.

Q: How would the criteria for administrative action change under the proposed new law?

A: Under current requirements, the DEA has to extensively examine peer-reviewed published literature and sometimes even undertake its own pharmacological assay studies to determine if a compound has androgenic and anabolic activity similar to testosterone. This can be a huge, lengthy, complicated endeavor, and the DEA has been far from wild about it. For example, back in September 2009, Joseph Rannazzisi, Deputy Assistant Administrator at DEA’s Office of Diversion Control, testified before the Crime Subcommittee at the hearing (“Body Building Products and Hidden Steroids: Enforcement Barriers”) referenced this month by Sen. Whitehouse in introducing the bill. Mr. Rannazzisi expressed the hurdles imposed by the current law, citing as an example the difficult process of scheduling boldione, desoxymethyltestosterone, and 19-nor-4,9(10)-androstadienedione which was, at that time, in its final stages. He also testified that a review of three (3) additional compounds – methyldrostanolone (methasterone), prostanozol, and adrenosterone (misspelled adrenostreone in his written statement) – had begun. But although three compounds were reviewed, only two were scheduled. Neither the notice of proposed rulemaking in November 2011 nor the Final Rule issued in July 2012 referenced adrenosterone, a compound sold under the name “11-oxo.” Were there problems proving some aspect of the requirements? We don’t know, and the implications from this are open to debate (note also that the substance is also not listed among the specific compounds in the new bill). In any event, under the new definition of an anabolic steroid, the process for scheduling is much easier. If the compound is derived from, or has a chemical structure substantially similar to a listed anabolic steroids, and it’s not an estrogen, progestin, corticosteroid or DHEA, then it’s considered an anabolic steroid merely if it’s been created or manufactured with the intent of being anabolic or androgenic or if it’s marketed or promoted to suggest that it’s anabolic or androgenic. The new definition offers an enormous reduction in the DEA’s burden to schedule a new steroid.

Q: Weren’t many of these supplement products already illegal under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act?

A: Yes. Many of these substances were synthetically created compounds and did not meet the criteria to be sold as dietary supplements under DSHEA. Since they were not DSHEA compliant, they were unapproved and mislabeled “drugs” and the FDA had the authority to investigate and bring charges for federal prosecution. Until recently, however, many in the supplement industry didn’t understand the criminal penalties for non-DSHEA compliance, or didn’t take the threat seriously. But that has changed since a number of sports nutrition companies were prosecuted for selling prohormone products in the wake of the execution of a search warrant on a distributor’s Boise, Idaho facility back in 2009. Some of the same substances now being added to the list of anabolic steroids under the Controlled Substances Act were already declared illegal drugs under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&CA) … and the companies selling them were prosecuted federally and convicted. The new bill, however, gives the DEA – often viewed as more aggressive at enforcement than the FDA – the authority to take action. Also, by classifying these substances under the Controlled Substances Act, the new bill escalates the severity of potential punishments.

Q: What does the bill say about sentences for steroid crimes?

A: The bill directs the United States Sentencing Commission to “review and amend the Federal sentencing guidelines.” The last time Congress directed this, the Commission brought the hammer down and greatly escalated the punishments for steroid trafficking crimes by re-calculating the way steroids were quantified. As of 2006, injectable and oral steroids became quantified for punishment in a 1:1 ratio to other Schedule III drugs, resulting in a twenty-fold measurement increase for injectable steroid units and a whopping fifty-fold increase for oral steroid units.  One “unit” of an oral steroid became one pill, tablet or capsule rather than fifty; one unit of a liquid steroid was reduced to .5ml rather than 10ml, and steroids in other forms (“e.g., patch, topical cream, aerosol”) were to be reasonably estimated based on a consideration of 25mg as one unit. We don’t know exactly what the Commission will do if this new bill passes, but the bill specifically directs that for steroid products where dosage cannot be readily ascertained, such as powders or topical creams, that “the sentence shall be determined based on the entire weight of the mixture or substance.” So, a person trafficking a kilogram of pure testosterone powder would be at the same federal sentencing level as the person who was selling a product that contained a small or even trace amount of testosterone.

Q: What does the bill say about the way products are labeled?

A: The bill introduces a whole new theory by which to prosecute these cases by making it a crime to import, export, manufacture, distribute, dispense, sell, offer to sell, or possess with intent to manufacture or sell any anabolic steroid, or any product containing an anabolic steroid, unless it bears a label clearly identifying the anabolic steroid by accepted (IUPAC) nomenclature. This provision would apply to manufacturers who use deceptive or “creative” ingredient labeling to conceal that the product is an anabolic steroid. It would also apply to distributors and retailers who know, intend, or have reasonable cause to believe that the product contains an anabolic steroid. Criminal penalties can be up to 10 years imprisonment and massive fines (up to $2.5 million on corporations). Civil penalties can be up to $500,000 per product violation for importers, exporters, manufacturers and distributors. Even retailers can be hit with a $25,000 penalty per product violation (and each package size, form, or differently labeled item is a separate product).

Q: What impact would this bill have on consumers?

A: The bill would have a huge impact on consumers. While marketing prohormones that are currently illegal under DSHEA and the FD&CA subject the marketers to criminal sanctions, consumers don’t face charges. Simple possession itself is not illegal. All that changes when a compound becomes classified as a controlled substance. By reclassifying these compounds into controlled substances, this bill criminalizes the consumers as well as the marketers (the DEA’s Final Rule on prostanozol and Superdrol, once effective, will do this on those two compounds). Being in simple possession of a compound that is a controlled substance is a federal crime – a federal misdemeanor that carries with it up to a year of incarceration. But it likely won’t stop there. If the bill passes, it’s quite probable that individual states will view what Congress did as an important step in protecting the public, especially children, and will seek to amend their own laws to be consistent with the new federal law. In some states, though, simple possession of an anabolic steroid is a felony, not a misdemeanor, and in those states the simple possession of any of these compounds would be a felony. If states follow suit, a person caught during a car stop with a single capsule of 6-bromo, for example, would be charged with either a misdemeanor or a felony (depending on his or her state’s law). An old bottle of Superdrol sitting in a gym bag would be like illegally having a bottle of Vicodin.

Q: Do you think this bill will achieve the intended purposes of Congress?

A: Unlike the poorly conceived and drafted 2004 amendment to the Anabolic Steroid Control Act, this bill shows an investment of considerable effort and thought. It’s clear that the intent behind it is to eradicate steroidal ingredients from the retail supplement market. This bill has the potential to accomplish that. It even requires the Administrator of the DEA to keep Congress in the loop by reporting to them every 2 years on what new steroids have been scheduled. Of course, the bigger picture is unclear. Will consumer demand for steroidal substances that may build muscle disappear? Or will the reclassification of these items and their removal from the dietary supplement market lead to the creation of a black market for them … or to an increased demand for the traditional pharmaceutical anabolic steroids already on the black market? The realities of demand and supply and our experience with alcohol Prohibition would suggest that legislative efforts like this one don’t entirely eliminate problems but instead may push them underground. Time will tell.

Q: What do you predict for this bill?

A: Senator Hatch is viewed as a stalwart advocate for dietary supplements. So, when he sponsors legislation to restrict the industry, many in Congress will see it as something that sorely needs to be done. The bill has received the overwhelming support of the large industry trade groups and there is no organized opposition. Unless there’s some unexpected curveball tossed out, or Earth is hit by an asteroid, there’s a high likelihood the bill will pass. For future updates and analysis, visit www.supplementcounsel.com and www.steroidlaw.com or follow me on Twitter (@RickCollinsEsq) and at Facebook.com/RickCollinsOnline.

About Rick Collins

Rick Collins, JD, CSCS [www.rickcollins.com] is the lawyer that members of the bodybuilding community and nutritional supplement industry turn to when they need legal help or representation. He and his firm represent dietary supplement companies nationwide, and he has personally defended steroid criminal charges from coast to coast. He can be reached at 516-294-0300.

[© Rick Collins, 2012. All rights reserved. For informational purposes only, not to be construed as legal or medical advice.]

Originally published at: The New Designer Steroid Bill and YOU: Questions and Answers with Rick Collins

More Steroid Articles from MESO-Rx:

• Rick Collins’ Testimony to the United States Sentencing Commission
• Rick Collins Warning to Supplement Companies Selling Illegal Steroidal Products
• Rick Collins Interview – Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Not Getting Busted But Didn’t Know Where to Look

Article source: MESO-Rx

Prosecutors don't have time to research steroids, they just cut and paste from Wikipedia.

Federal prosecutors apparently don’t require the use of scholarly or authoritative sources when discussing the side effects of anabolic steroids. They are perfectly satisfied with citing Wikipedia as proof that steroids are evil. Why take the issue of steroid side effects seriously when cutting and pasting from Wikipedia is so much easier?

What is wrong with using Wikipedia to help justify sending a steroid user to prison? For one thing, the open-source Wikipedia is vulnerable to manipulation by contributors motivated by ideology or bias.

“As an open source that is not subjected to traditional forms of peer review, Wikipedia must be considered only as reliable as the credibility of the footnotes it uses,” according to Maurice Hall, the associate professor of communication and culture at Villanova University. “But I also tell students that the information can be skewed in directions of ideology or other forms of bias, and so that is why it cannot be taken as a final authority.”

A good example of how the government used Wikipedia to help send a steroid user to prison can be seen in the case of the United States of America vs John Isaac Hudelson (Case number 4:12-cr-00064-CVE).

Stephen Greubel, the public defender representing Hudelson, filed a motion to get a reduced sentence for his client. Hudelson was facing 47 to 54 months in prison on two steroid-related charges. Greubel didn’t feel his client deserved to spend over four years in prison for manufacturing steroids for use by himself and his bodybuilding friends.

Greubel argued that anabolic steroids were qualitatively different than other drugs listed on the Controlled Substances list. Steroids were not addictive. And steroids were not used to create an instantaneous, mind-altering effect. Instead, steroids were used as part of a long-term goal-directed behavior aimed at increasing muscle mass and reducing bodyfat.

“[T]he Court should further consider that inclusion of steroids in Schedule III was a contested issue. Steroids do not share the addictive qualities associated with other Schedule III substances – substances such as amphetamine, methamphetamine, codeine, opium, and morphine,” wrote Greubel. “Steroids also are dissimilar to such street or recreational drugs in that they are not taken for an immediate, mind-altering effect, but rather in measured amounts over a substantial period of time so as to gradually increase muscle size and definition…”

The government responded, in part, by demonizing muscle. Whereas steroids may not be addictive, muscularity and the desire for muscle may be addictive. Apparently, that is just as bad as drug addiction.

The government also rejected the argument that steroids are qualitatively different from other Schedule III substances. Danny Williams, the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Oklahoma, suggested that steroids are just as dangerous. He “borrowed” heavily from the Wikipedia definition of ‘anabolic steroids’ to support the assertion.

“Steroids may not be addictive, but the result of their use very well may be. Additionally, steroids can have long-term, if not permanent, effects on a user’s physical health. According to wikipedia.com, some of these effects are harmful changes in cholesterol levels, high blood pressure, liver damage (mainly with oral steroids), dangerous changes in the structure of the left ventricle of the heart (such as enlargement and thickening of the left ventricle, which impairs its contraction and relaxation, and can lead to hypertension, cardiac arrhythmias, congestive heart failure, heart attacks, and sudden cardiac death), testicular atrophy, roid rage, damaged immune system, aggression and violence, mania. How these possible side effects are not as harmful as addiction to other Schedule III controlled substances simply makes no sense.”

What makes no sense is how the government can dismiss a very reasonable argument regarding anabolic steroid side effects with a quick cut-and-paste job from Wikipedia when a man’s liberty hangs in the balance.

The italicized portions of the following excerpts from the Wikipedia entry on “anabolic steroid” appear in the United States Attorney’s court documents:

These effects include harmful changes in cholesterol levels (increased low-density lipoprotein and decreased high-density lipoprotein), acne, high blood pressure, liver damage (mainly with oral steroids), dangerous changes in the structure of the left ventricle of the heart…

Other side-effects can include alterations in the structure of the heart, such as enlargement and thickening of the left ventricle, which impairs its contraction and relaxation. Possible effects of these alterations in the heart are hypertension, cardiac arrhythmias, congestive heart failure, heart attacks, and sudden cardiac death…

A 2005 review in CNS Drugs determined that “significant psychiatric symptoms including aggression and violence, mania…

For the record, United States District Judge Claire Eagan did grant Hudelson a downward departure in sentencing. Hudelson was sentenced to 37 months in prison instead of 46-57 months.

Anabolic steroids definition in Wikipedia

Sources:

United States of America vs. John Isaac Hudelson. Defendant’s Motion for Variance or Nonguideline Sentence. (19 September 2012). 4:12-cr-00064-CVE

United States of America vs. John Isaac Hudelson. Government’s Response in Opposition to Defendant’s Motion for Variance or Nonguideline Sentence. (27 September 2012). 4:12-cr-00064-CVE

Anabolic steroid. (n.d.) In Wikipedia. Retrieved October 4, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabolic_steroids

Burnsed, B. (June 20, 2011). Wikipedia Gradually Accepted in College Classrooms. Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2011/06/20/wikipedia-gradually-accepted-in-college-classrooms

Originally published at: Federal Prosecutors Use Wikipedia as Source for Steroid Information

More Steroid Articles from MESO-Rx:

• Steroid Source for Elite Track Athletes Working with Federal Investigators
• Attorney Philip Sweitzer Responds to Steroid Legalization Strategy
• Original British Dragon Founder Dies After Being Released from Federal Prison

Article source: MESO-Rx

Micro-dosing testosterone and EPO avoids detection by drug testers

The Secret Race, the new book about doping in cycling by Tyler Hamilton and Daniel Coyle, has been lauded as proof positive that Lance Armstrong doped. Most of the  reviewers appear to be anti-doping crusaders who are obsessed with their pursuit of Armstrong as a doper. As a result, they overlook the real significance of Hamilton and Coyle’s book.

The Secret Race: Inside the Hidden World of the Tour de France: Doping, Cover-ups, and Winning at All Costs is a virtual how-to guide on using anabolic steroids and erythropoietin (EPO) in cycling while evading drug testers. It exposes the ineffectiveness of drug testing in the sport.

Hamilton dismisses the characterization of athletes and drug testers as being involved in an “arms race”. WADA never really had a chance of winning according to Hamilton. It was merely a “big game of hide-and-seek played in a forest that has lots of good places to hide, and lots of rules that favor the hiders.”

A key weakness in the WADA code involves the seven hour window every day during which athletes are assured they will not be tested for steroids, EPO or any other prohibited performance-enhancing drug (PED).

WADA requires that athletes make themselves available for testing between the hours of 6am and 11pm every day of the year.

This leaves a nighttime window for athletes to misbehave. Spain, the most popular destination for cyclists to train during the off-season, has even criminalized drug testing during this period due to privacy concerns.

WADA and Spain assume that any use of PEDs during this window will still remain detectable the following morning.

Cyclists know that this is not the case.

Hamilton explains how athletes have exploited this weakness in his book.

How to Use EPO in Cycling Without Getting Caught?

Evading detection in the urinary EPO test is relatively easy. It requires a procedure known as microdosing. Rather than inject EPO subcutaneously every 3-4 days, athletes inject smaller amounts of EPO intravenously every night.

“Instead of injecting 2,000 units of Edgar [EPO] every third or fourth night, we injected 400 or 500 units every night. Glowtime minimized; problem solved. We called it microdosing.”

How to Use Anabolic Steroids in Cycling Without Getting Caught?

If microdosing worked for EPO, why not use it for anabolic steroids too?

“Around 2001 we got away from the red eggs [Andriol gelcaps containing orally-active testosterone undecanoate] and started using testosterone patches, which were more convenient. They were like big Band-Aids with a clear gel in the center; you could leave one on for a couple of hours, get a boost of testosterone, and by morning be clean as a newborn baby.”

Hamilton provides a few more interesting tips on how to thwart WADA drug testers in the book. He doesn’t go really explain how to circumvent the the “biological passport” system other than to suggest cyclists are using smaller blood bags during transfusion. I guess this can be called a sort of “micro-infusion”.

But cyclists know that the biological passport has not eliminated doping. Doping simply requires a little more effort. The goal is to maintain a physiological range of reticulocytes between 0.5% and 1.5%. Blood doping can be masked by micro-dosing with EPO after blood infusions to keep the reticulocyte percentage in range.

Keep the above in mind when you hear people celebrate the so-called new generation of clean riders. Just like the introduction of EPO didn’t mark the beginning of doping in cycling, neither does the introduction of the biological passport mark the end of EPO. Doping was rampant before EPO (with amphetamines and steroids). The nature of doping just changed with EPO. Similarly, doping has simply been transformed as a result of new testing.

Doping is a fact of life in cycling. People should stop pretending it isn’t.

What do you tell the kids that want to become professional cyclists? How about the truth. There is no Santa Claus. There is no Easter Bunny. And there is no such thing as Clean Sport at the elite level.

The Secret Race is Tyler Hamilton’s guide to using anabolic steroids and EPO in cycling

Originally published at: Tyler Hamilton’s Guide to Using Anabolic Steroids and EPO in Cycling

More Steroid Articles from MESO-Rx:

• Floyd Landis: Easy to Take Anabolics in Cycling Without Getting Caught
• Blood Booster EPO Only the Tip of the Iceberg in Cycling
• Professional Cycling is Synonymous with Doping

Article source: MESO-Rx

Arnold's Disappointing Steroid Comments in His Autobiography "Total Recall"

Arnold Schwarzenegger has released a new autobiography this month entitled “Total Recall: My Unbelievably True Life Story.” Most people want to know the gossipy details about Arnold’s extramarital affairs. But most bodybuilders want to know if Arnold reveals any new details about his history of anabolic steroid use during his time as a competitive bodybuilder.

Bodybuilders seeking steroid information from the book will be highly disappointed. Schwarzenegger only spends a couple of pages in his 656-page book discussing the performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs). No discussion of specific steroid dosages. No discussion of specific steroids e.g. Dianabol, Primobolan, Deca Durabolin, etc. And unfortunately, Arnold’s commentary and the evolution of his perspective on steroids is likely to disappoint many.

To Arnold’s credit, he never felt compelled to apologize for his steroid use. He recognized that steroid use was pervasive in bodybuilding. Steroids were essential to success in the sport of competitive bodybuilding. Steroids were required. Arnold accepted this fact without complaint. He just did it.

“All I needed to know was that the top international champions were taking steroids, something I confirmed by asking the guys in London. I would not go into a competition with a disadvantage. “Leave no stone unturned” was my rule. And while there wasn’t any evidence of danger— research into steroids’ side effects was only getting under way— even if there had been, I’m not sure I would have cared. Downhill ski champions and Formula One race drivers know they can get killed, but they compete anyway. Because if you don’t get killed, you win. Besides, I was twenty years old, and I thought I would never die.”

But then Schwarzenegger attempts to minimize the significance of his use of steroids. He distinguishes his steroid use during the 1970s and 1980s from that of subsequent generations of bodybuilders.

When Arnold used steroids, he could legally obtain them for bodybuilding purposes with a prescription from a doctor.

When Arnold used steroids, he only used them for six to eight weeks as part of a pre-contest steroid cycle leading up to the competition.

When Arnold used steroids, he only used relatively small dosages of the drugs compared to later bodybuilders.

When Arnold used steroids, the side effects of steroids were allegedly unknown.

When Arnold used steroids, they only made a trivial difference in one’s physique. The difference was comparable to having a suntan!

“I learned to use the drugs in the final six or eight weeks leading up to a major competition,” wrote Schwarzenegger. “They could help you win, but the advantage they gave was about the same as having a good suntan.”

When Arnold used steroids, they weren’t a problem in the sport of bodybuilding.

Steroids only became a problem after Arnold retired from bodybuilding. That is why Schwarzenegger has been working hard with the International Federation of Bodybuilders (IFBB) to eliminate steroids from the sport.

“Later on, after I retired from bodybuilding, drug use became a major problem in the sport. Guys were taking doses of steroids twenty times the amount of anything we took, and when human growth hormone came on the scene, things really got out of hand. There were instances where bodybuilders died. I’ve worked hard since then with the International Federation of Bodybuilding and other organizations to get drugs banned from the sport.”

Schwarzenegger didn’t discuss the progress he’s made towards this goal.

Arnold Schwarzenegger’s discussion of steroids in Total Recall is disappointing.

Originally published at: Arnold Schwarzenegger: Steroids Give Same Advantage as a Suntan in Bodybuilding

More Steroid Articles from MESO-Rx:

• Producer of Arnold Classic Bodybuilding Contest Warns Competitors About Steroids
• Arnold Schwarzenegger and Steroid Use in 2008
• Arnold Schwarzenegger in “Bigger Stronger Faster”

Article source: MESO-Rx

I am glad to announce my latest video in which I explain in simple terms what needs to be done to optimize benefits and minimize side effects of testosterone in “Practical Tips for Testosterone Replacement Therapy (TRT).

Originally published at: Nelson Vergel on Testosterone Replacement Therapy [VIDEO]

More Steroid Articles from MESO-Rx:

• Interview with Nelson Vergel about “Testosterone: A Man’s Guide”
• Finasteride and Testosterone Replacement Therapy
• How to Find a Good Physician for Testosterone Replacement Therapy

Article source: MESO-Rx

William Llewellyn, the author of the best-selling ANABOLICS books, provides a brief history of the sale, distribution and use of anabolic steroids in sport during a presentation entitled “”Anabolic Steroids: An Evolving Black Market.” The lecture was filmed during the National Drug Conference held in Cardiff, Wales on April 19, 2012.

Originally published at: William Llewellyn Discusses Evolving Black Market for Anabolic Steroids [VIDEO]

More Steroid Articles from MESO-Rx:

• Nelson Vergel on Testosterone Replacement Therapy [VIDEO]
• Black Market Androgens: The Legal Risks
• Anabolic Steroids Cause Irrational Exuberance in the Stock Market

Article source: MESO-Rx

The Lance Armstrong doping scandal has created an unprecedented degree of hysteria over the use of anabolic steroids, erythropoietin (EPO) and other performance-enhancing drug (PEDs) in the sport of professional cycling. The anti-doping movement often pretends to be about something more than enforcing an arbitrarily and capriciously defined morality. Lip service is given to the protection of the health of athletes by anti-doping rules. But in reality, these rules exist primarily to demonize users of steroids and PEDs as “sinners” who deserve to be punished.

Pro cyclist David Millar, the “reformed” former doper who is currently a leading anti-doping crusader in cycling, proudly and sanctimoniously defended the puritanical nature of the anti-doping movement in an interview with Donald McRae of the Guardian. Millar made the comments in response to statements by two former Tour de France winners who chose to defend Armstrong.

“I’ve thought a lot about them because I know [Alberto] Contador and [Miguel] Indurain. I was so disappointed when I read those comments. But I live in Spain and have lots of Spanish friends. Our Anglo-Saxon mentality is puritanical – ‘Punish ‘em forever, they did wrong.’ But the Spanish say: ‘He’s a father of five, he works for charity, he rides a bike … let’s move on.’ It was incredibly inappropriate what they said and, believe me, they went ‘Oh shit!’ when it broke. But they had no idea that what they said was wrong because their mentality is so different.” (Emphasis added by author.)

There are likely cultural differences in the perception of doping. Perhaps steroids and PEDs are not stigmatized to the same degree in Spain. Perhaps doping does not have the same moral significance in Spain. But Millar’s arrogant defense of the superiority of the “Anglo-Saxon [puritanical] mentality” certainly can’t be the best approach to doping in sports.

David Millar, Photo credit: Petitbrun / Flickr

Source:

McRae, D. (November 5, 2012). David Millar: Cycling needs to face its dark period to climb out of abyss. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/nov/05/david-millar-cycling

Originally published at: David Millar, Pharmacological Puritanism and the Anti-Doping Movement

More Steroid Articles from MESO-Rx:

• Lance Armstrong vs. Anti-Doping Movement: Who Is Really Defrauding the Government?
• Blame Spain for Doping in the Tour de France
• Spain National Steroid Laws Based on Olympic Doping Rules

Article source: MESO-Rx

Question: Bodybuilders talk about taking too high a dosage of anabolic steroids and how there comes a point at which the androgen receptors become ‘overloaded’. For example, if one were to take five different steroid compounds all at high dosages, how much can your body actually use? I understand that everyone would be somewhat different but there must be a point of diminishing returns?

Bill Roberts’ answer: For any drug, the approach to virtually 100% binding is a gradual one as dose increases. No hard line can be drawn where some exact value represents maximal effect.

It might be hoped that an answer could be provided from pharmacological theory but due to poor data, that isn’t the case.

For most drugs there would be dose/response studies that would answer the question. This isn’t the case for testosterone or any anabolic steroid, however, so far as I know.

The closest work seems to be that of Forbes. From his data, it appeared to me that a testosterone ester dosage of approximately 4 grams per week is where I would interpret the effect as being virtually 100%.

But really Forbes’ data was not enough to be conclusive.

From the practical bodybuilding standpoint, my conclusion is that if testosterone alone is used, then from the standpoint of, for example, many NPC bodybuilding competitors, 2 grams/week represents very-near-maximal effect. I’d readily grant it as reasonable that doubling the dose might well eke out a little more effect that is important at a yet-higher level of competition.

Some who have better drug sensitivity may have near-maximal effect on substantially lower doses than this.

Oh, as an addition: the fact that 2 grams/week might be called “very near maximal” effect — with it being arbitrary as to exactly what is considered to be very near — does not mean that for example half that dose gives only half that effect.

Quite the contrary. For someone who is presently quite some ways from the level of development at which he’d achieve homeostasis at 1 gram/week and his training and nutrition protocol, 1 gram/week would give very nearly equal rate of gains.

And so far as what level of development is possible at one dosage vs the other, it is also not the case that the 2 grams/week level would provide twice the improvement over natural vs the 1 gram/week level. The difference might be only a few pounds of muscle mass.

For most, 1 gram/week of total steroid use is a quite solid, yet reasonable dose.

Ask Bill Roberts about anabolic steroids

Originally published at: What is Highest Steroid Dosage the Body Can Actually Use?

More Steroid Articles from MESO-Rx:

• How to Use Primobolan Depot
• How to Use Masteron
• Why Do You Discourage the Use of Deca Durabolin?

Article source: MESO-Rx

Are you now or have you ever used anabolic steroids? Erythropoietin? Human growth hormone? Insulin-like growth factor-1?

The United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) wants to know. USADA’s investigation of Lance Armstrong was just the beginning. Now, the anti-doping organization wants to initiate a full-scale witch-hunt in the entire sport of cycling and look under each and every rock for suspected dopers. Steroid McCarthyism is alive and well.

What is the best way to promote a witch-hunt? Why not create an official-sounding commission to compel athletes in cycling to confess their doping “sins”? Why not go as far as comparing the abolition of doping in cycling to the abolition of apartheid in South Africa?

The analogy will inevitably lead to comparisons between cycling’s steroid-using athletes and apartheid’s perpetrators of violence and gross human rights violations. Does USADA think it help will demonize performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) and those that use them? That is exactly what USADA wants to do.

USADA has advocated the creation of a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” that would be openly based on the commission of the same name established in post-apartheid South Africa. USADA wants to offer “amnesty” to cyclists who confess, repent and ask forgiveness for their doping sins. But in order to be granted full amnesty, former steroid users must be willing to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth by “snitching” on friends, teammates, team doctors, team directors and anyone else who was rumored to be involved in doping.

Jonathan Vaughters, a reformed former doper who was once a teammate of Armstrong but is now an outspoken anti-doping crusader, explained how a Truth and Reconciliation Commission would work. The Commission would probe each cyclist individually and would fully investigate “rumors” in the sport:

“[The Truth and Reconciliation Commission would] look for specific rumors or issues or whatever else that seems unaddressed and then try to address them,” Vaughters said. “You know: `What happened there? What happened here? We’ve heard this rumor of X, Y or Z. Is it true? Is it not true?’ The point of it is that you’re trying to figure out what went wrong, how did people avoid testing positive, how did they circumvent anti-doping measures, and so how can that be prevented in the future.”

Travis Tygart, the CEO of USADA, told  John Leicester of the Associated Press that USADA knows about many other “dopers” in cycling but has purposely withheld their names. USADA has demanded that the international governing body for the sport of cycling - the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) – establish a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. If Tygart doesn’t get his way, USADA threatened to release names of “several dozen” previously unidentified cyclists who doped.

Tygart said that during the probe of Armstrong and doping on his teams, USADA uncovered information on “several dozen” other people, some of them still in cycling and so far unidentified. “That’s just what we found, there are far more there,” he said.

If there’s no truth commission, USADA would turn over that information to other anti-doping agencies and the World Anti-Doping Agency.

“It’s really important people are revealed,” he said. “If you got away with it in the past and think you can get away with it today, what’s going to change?”

“There’s really no choice.”

USADA’s investigation into Lance Armstrong and the USPS pro cycling team has greatly embarrassed the UCI and the sport of cycling. Additional revelations of doping by individuals, who are still involved in the sport in some capacity, would further damage cycling.

USADA is determined to perpetuate the PED witch-hunt in cycling. The ends justify the means even if it requires some form of blackmail to accomplish its goal.

United States Anti-Doping Agency and Steroid McCarthyism

Source:

Leicaster, J. (October 24, 2012). Column: What of cycling’s other secrets? Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20121024/cyc-john-leicester-241012/

Originally published at: USADA Promotes Steroid McCarthyism with Truth and Reconciliation Commission

More Steroid Articles from MESO-Rx:

• Russian Anti-Doping Agency Turns to USADA
• USADA Travis Tygart Urges State Attorneys General to Sue Supplement Companies
• USADA Longitudinal Testing Program – Project Believe

Article source: MESO-Rx

Are FedEx and UPS breaking the law when they (unknowingly) transport illegal anabolic steroids on behalf of their customers? If a domestic steroid source uses FedEx, has FedEx “aided and abetted” the distribution of steroids? How about when steroids are shipped by compounding pharmacies and/or TRT clinics that may be operating illegally? Or when illegal synthetic steroids are sold as dietary supplements by online supplement shops? If the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has its way, the answer may be ‘yes.’

The DEA is clearly upping the ante in its war on drugs by attempting to hold private courier companies responsible for monitoring the contents of packages that they deliver. The government’s investigation into FedEx and the United Parcel Service (UPS) has been going on for at least four years.

The investigation is part of a crackdown on illegal drug sales from online pharmacies. While the focus appears to be on prescription painkiller drugs like Oxycontin, it could be a precedent-setting case applied to a broader range of prescription drugs, such as anabolic steroids and performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs), and even illegal dietary supplements, such as synthetic steroids and clones of synthetic steroids.

FedEx and UPS were subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury in Northern District of California investigating the “transportation of packages on behalf of online pharmacies that may have operated illegally” in 2007 and 2008.

Patrick Fitzgerald, the vice president for corporate communications for FedEx, has characterized the investigation as “absurd and deeply disturbing.” The company does not feel it should be held responsible for knowing the contents of the packages they deliver. FedEx is a transportation company and not a law enforcement agency according to Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald made the case for the company to the Wall Street Journal:

FedEx’s Mr. Fitzgerald said the shipments in question involved legal drugs with a valid prescription from online pharmacies licensed by the DEA. He said the shipper had no way of knowing whether deliveries of those medications were illegal. “We are a transportation company,” said Mr. Fitzgerald. “We are not law enforcement, we are not doctors and we are not pharmacists.”

He said the DEA could easily stop such deliveries by sharing a list of suspect pharmacies. He said DEA had repeatedly refused FedEx’s request for the list.

FedEx turned over internal emails that suggest that some employees may have noticed unusual jumps in shipments from certain online pharmacies. The DEA alleges the emails suggest that FedEx knew some businesses might be shipping illegally, said Mr. Fitzgerald. But he said it isn’t unusual for an employee to notice spikes in business with a customer, and observing such a change doesn’t indicate knowledge of illicit activity, he said.

The Department of Justice has informed FedEx of its intent to file criminal charges against the company. FedEx has maintained its innocence and plans to vigorously defend itself against the charges.

UPS, on the other hand, has fully cooperated with the DEA investigation, explored the possibility of accommodating the government’s demands and considered paying a fine to settle the case according to their most recent 10-Q quarterly report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

In May and December 2007 and August 2008 we received and responded to grand jury subpoenas from the DOJ in the Northern District of California in connection with an investigation by the Drug Enforcement Administration. We also have responded to informal requests for information in connection with this investigation, which relates to transportation of packages on behalf of on-line pharmacies that may have operated illegally. We have been cooperating with this investigation and are exploring the possibility of resolving this matter, which could include our undertaking further enhancements to our compliance program and/or a payment. Such a payment may exceed the amounts previously accrued with respect to this matter, but we do not expect that the amount of such additional loss would have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

The United States Attorney’s Office in Northern California is handling both cases according to the Wall Street Journal.

We applaud FedEx for taking a stand against the disturbing new direction taken by the government in its ‘War on Drugs’.

FedEx and anabolic steroid shipments

Originally published at: Could Government Hold FedEx & UPS Accountable for Steroid Shipments?

More Steroid Articles from MESO-Rx:

• Fugitive Steroid Doctor Unapologetically Condemns Steroid Witch-Hunt by Government
• DecaVol Steroid Scandal at Government Nuclear Weapons Facility
• Steroids in the NFL Next Target for Government Witch-Hunt

Article source: MESO-Rx

Question: I am 18-years old. Can I safely do a cycle of anabolic steroids? Now I know most of you will say ‘you’re too young’ and ‘you should wait until you are over 21.’ I’ve read it all before but at the end of the day it’s my own personal choice. Many top pros started steroids in their teens and have had great success so why can’t I have great success if I start now? Please do not flame me. I am just trying to learn and have not and may not do steroids.

Bill Roberts’ Answer: It is entirely possible for someone who is 18-years old to use anabolic steroids in an intelligent and disciplined manner that I have no reason to think is going to — if done correctly — have any really substantial if any adverse effect. It is well within the realm of reasonable personal risk taking, just as my personal take.

But here are just a few reasons why they probably shouldn’t use steroids:

1) Steroids Won’t Make You a Professional Athlete: For all the young men and their families thinking they have what it takes to be NFL players, MLB players, NBA players, etc, for every one who is actually right, there are at least 1000 who are wrong, and the great majority of them are WAY wrong.

Still, if there’s a real point to the person because they want to be THEIR best, then the fact that the goal was unrealistic doesn’t mean that the pursuit of pushing oneself to one’s best was worthless. But don’t expect steroids to make you a pro.

2) General Lack of Steroid Knowledge: Most commonly the first steroid cycles done by teenagers (or for that matter, those in their twenties) are very badly planned in the first place.

3) Lacking of Training Foundation Leads to Reliance on Steroids: Where someone, of any calendar age, hasn’t built the training base where they KNOW how to train and get good long term results without steroids, then all too frequently the result of early (relative to “training age”) steroid use is that the user becomes dependent on steroids and either winds up on them constantly, or alternates between using steroids and training seriously with not using steroids and having a defeatist attitude during these periods and not only not accomplishing anything, but backsliding seriously.

In contrast when someone has the experience where they really know how to train — not just beginner gains, but really knowing how to train — without steroids, then they handle their off periods just fine and neither find a need for constant use nor suffer severe backslides when not using.

There are some instances where an 18 year old, out of having started training early and being very dedicated and working at learning and having the natural smarts for it, does know how to train naturally for long term results and does have the dedication and mindset to do it and will have no problem cycling off. There are also certainly cases where 30 year olds are NOT in that position.

For more information on whether or not you should use steroids, read Rick Collins’ advice to teenagers.

Anabolic Steroids and Teenagers

Originally published at: Can An Eighteen-Year Old Safely Use Anabolic Steroids?

More Steroid Articles from MESO-Rx:

• What Do We Tell Teenagers About Anabolic Steroids?
• DNP Instead of Anabolic Steroids
• Mitchell Report on Anabolic Steroids in Baseball

Article source: MESO-Rx

The Legendary Coach for Ben Johnson Remained Unrepentant Even at the End

The late Charlie Francis was considered by many to be one of the greatest sprint coaches in the history of athletics. But most have chosen to label him simply as the “disgraced” ex-coach of Ben Johnson. Anti-doping crusaders remember Francis for his refusal to apologize for his role in the Ben Johnson steroid scandal. Yet, few people have been more honest about the state of doping in sports than Francis.

Canadian Ben Johnson tested positive for stanozolol (Winstrol) after winning the 100-meter finals at the 1988 Summer Olympics in Seoul. The Canadian government investigated the steroid scandal in what became known as the “Dubin Inquiry”. Francis was one of the primary targets of the investigation.

After being subpoenaed to testify, Francis admitted introducing and providing steroids to Johnson and other elite Canadian athletes. Francis told the commission that steroids were a requirement for athletes who participated at the elite level.

“[Ben Johnson] could decide either he wanted to participate at the highest levels in sport or not. If he wanted to compete, it’s pretty clear that steroids are worth approximately a meter at the highest levels of sport,” Francis testified. “And he could decide to set up his starting blocks at the same line as all the other competitors in the international competition or set them a meter behind them all. And obviously that would be an unacceptable situation for a top-level athlete.”

Athletics Canada, the sport governing body for track and field in Canada, gave Francis a lifetime ban as a consequence of his admission. At the same time, the Dubin Report outlined a set of criteria that, if met, could lead to the possibility of future reinstatement.

However, Francis had no desire for contrition, remorse or the promotion of drug-free sport.

Francis chose honesty instead. He maintained that, even in the post-Ben Johnson period, steroid use was pervasive and required to compete at the elite level.

“The only way to go back into [track] is to sort of act like, ‘Oh, I was wrong. Drugs aren’t necessary. Gee kids,’” Francis told CBC Radio’s The Inside Track during a 1990 interview. “And adopt the party line and go through some miraculous Saul-like conversion and come back out and toe the party line, and I’m not prepared to do that.”

Francis alluded to the Biblical story of Saul of Tarsus. Saul zealously opposed Christianity and led a crusade to eliminate all Christians after the resurrection of Jesus. After being “blinded by the light” and hearing the voice of Jesus, Saul underwent an instant 180-degree conversion and became one of history’s most influential Christian missionaries. Saul changed his name to Paul the Apostle and went on to write a significant portion of the New Testament.

In 2000, Francis became a member of “Project World Record.” The project was organized by BALCO’s Victor Conte to propel sprinter Tim Montgomery towards the title of the “world’s fastest man.” The project succeeded when Montgomery set the 100-meter world record of 9.78 in September 2002.

Francis had good reason to maintain his position that steroids were a prerequisite for success in elite track and field. Montgomery’s world record was reportedly achieved with the help of the once-undetectable designer steroid known as tetrahydrogestrinone (THG).

The BALCO scandal exposed the widespread use of steroids and PEDs throughout a variety of sports. The 2002 United States government investigation into BALCO made it clear that steroids were still everywhere.

The omertà (code of silence) was broken for the first time with the Ben Johnson scandal. The omertà was broken once again with the BALCO scandal. Each time the anti-doping crusaders promised “clean sport” would come as a result.

Francis knew better. Francis knew the truth about steroids in sports. He never believed in the fairy-tale of “clean sport”. He never wavered in the face of considerable pressure. And he was right.

The miraculous “Saul-like conversion” never happened. Francis did not disingenuously become an anti-doping crusader like so many other athletes have done after getting caught using steroids.

Francis died on May 12, 2010 after a five-year battle with cancer. He remained unrepentant at his death.

It is unfortunate that Francis is not still alive to see the omertà broken yet again during the Lance Armstrong scandal. And to laugh at the proclamations of “clean sport” in its aftermath.

“Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.”

Ben Johnson and Charlie Francis

Source:

CBC. (May 12, 2010). Former sprint coach Francis dies of cancer. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/sports/amateur/story/2010/05/12/sp-francis-death.html

Originally published at: Charlie Francis Was Honest About Steroids in Sports and Refused to Join Anti-Doping Crusade

More Steroid Articles from MESO-Rx:

• History of Anabolic Steroids in Sports Courtesy of Sports Illustrated
• “Stupidity and Mistakes of the Anti-Doping Crusade”
• New Book on History of Anabolic Steroids and Doping in Sports

Article source: MESO-Rx

The recent fungal meningitis outbreak has been linked to contaminated methylprednisolone acetate (MPA) injections produced by the New England Compounding Center (NECC). The contaminated corticosteroid injections have resulted in 590 cases and 37 deaths. It has been a tragedy for the families involved. For anti-steroid crusaders, it has simply provided another tool to unfairly demonize anabolic steroids.

Various news media and anti-steroid organizations have erroneously included the risk of fungal meningitis as a possible side effect of anabolic steroids.

The Bay County Sheriff’s Office (BCSO) is the most recent agency to add to the unwarranted hysteria among users of black market anabolic steroids. BCSO recently shut down an underground lab (UGL) that manufactured anabolic steroids under the label “Spartan Laboratories.”

BCSO Captain Faith Bell cited the NECC case as the reason BCSO investigators were concerned about fungal contamination according to WMBB-TV in Panama City, Florida.

“Potential to spread the fungus and bacteria was our main concern,” said Bell. “In this case, that people would be injecting this stuff and within a short window of time be dead.”

Whether out of willful ignorance or careless fact-checking, the irresponsible statements by the BCSO has contributed to the societal hysteria regarding anabolic steroids.

The truth is that there is essentially zero risk of non-medical anabolic steroid users contracting fungal meningitis.

MPA is a synthetic corticosteroid and NOT an anabolic steroid.

MPA are introduced directly into the central nervous system (CNS) via epidural injections.

Anabolic steroids are introduced into the muscular system via intramuscular injections.

The risk of fungal meningitis is rare.

The current outbreak was solely the result of a contaminated MPA solution being injected into the central nervous system.

Individuals injecting anabolic steroids intramuscularly are not at risk of being dead “within a short window of time” from fungal meningitis.

It is still important to note that there are significant risks associated with the potentially-contaminated injections of UGL anabolic steroids of unknown quality.

But fungal meningitis is not one of them.

The media has utterly failed to make any corrections or clarifications with regard to this matter. Please spread the word.

Spartan Labs was an UGL that illegally manufactured anabolic steroids

Spartan Labs – anabolic steroid underground laboratory

Originally published at: Do Anabolic Steroids Cause Fungal Meningitis?

Article source: MESO-Rx

Question: Do anabolic steroids cause kidney damage? A few years ago, the New York Times had a story suggesting that steroids could have been responsible for focal segmental glomerulosclerosis in a few IFBB pro bodybuilders. Bodybuilder Flex Wheeler had a kidney transplant. Bodybuilder Luke Wood died of complications from a kidney transplant. What role, if any, did steroids play?

Bill Roberts’ answer: More than one factor is involved, but for reasons having — in my opinion — to do with the muscle-hating psychology of many individuals, these findings may be considered by them to be a useful weapon against anabolic steroids.

It is actually a reasonable argument that supraphysiological androgen levels may aggravate glomerulosclerosis where it is already developing, or perhaps be “the last straw” if other factors contribute. Or perhaps even with some forms of use being sufficient as a sole factor. There is considerable evidence that testosterone, even at physiological levels, can be an aggravating factor.

However, whether this is due to anything but hypertension, I don’t know.

Certainly hypertension is strongly linked to this disease state, and is prevalent among those with high BMI, whether from extreme muscle mass or from obesity. Androgens also can raise blood pressure, but of course the individual can monitor this and so by no means is this an inevitable side effect.

I have never had anyone I consulted with on steroid use — which is certainly more than a thousand individuals — come back and report to me that they suffered kidney problems from following my advice, whether at the time or years later. It certainly is not an inevitable outcome when reasonable care is taken.

As an example reference on the link between hypertension and glomerulosclerosis, which could well be the best explanation for the reported result or a possibly-necessary factor (first part of the abstract only):

Med Clin North Am. 2009 May;93(3):733-51.
Obesity and hypertension: mechanisms, cardio-renal consequences, and therapeutic approaches.
Reisin E, Jack AV.

The increasing prevalence of obesity in the industrialized world is causing an alarming epidemic. Almost 70% of American adults are overweight or obese. The link between increasing body weight and hypertension is well established. Obesity hypertension through metabolic, endocrinic, and systemic hemodynamic alteration causes structural vascular and cardiac adaptations that trigger concentric, eccentric left ventricular hypertrophy and electrophysiological changes, which may increase the risk for congestive heart failure and sudden cardiac death as a result of arrhythmias. The increased renal blood flow in conjunction with a decreased renal vascular resistance causes renal hyperperfusion and hyperfiltration. Such changes lead to glomerulomegaly, focal segmental glomerulosclerosis, tubulointerstitial inflammation, and fibrosis that characterize the renal damage in obese hypertensive subjects.

Were steroids responsible for Luke Wood’s kidney problems?

Originally published at: Do Anabolic Steroids Cause Kidney Damage?