Front Loading 800-1000mgs of DNP?? WTF

[dragonfire101]

Also, just so you're aware, there are no pesticides currently registered with the EPA that contain DNP.

2,4-Dinitrophenol was registered for use as a pesticide, however as of December 31, 1991, it is no longer registered for pesticidal use in California (DPR, 1996).

Isn’t the reason because they found it unsafe to be used as one because it was water soluble, toxic, and not easily biodegradable. ?

 

[mace123]

WTF do you know about me? WTF do you know about what is right or wrong for me?

Am i 20lbs lighter....yes
did i kick an addiction...yes
will your girlfriend smile at me in the grocery store...yes

Dr.S isnt an expert on DNP and he proved that himself.

What do I know about you??? Well... your an ignorant loud mouth that thinks he is tough by running lip on his computer. You dont have enough self control to do cardio, watch your diet and not drink a case a day. You think 2 wrongs make a right. And you dont know when to STFU. Shall I continue?

Guys been dropping like flies. If you pay attention guys that are WAY too young are leaving this world and you fucks wanna act like every man woman and child should be on DNP, talking about how it will make you live longer. Come the fuck on. Go ahead and read these studies they ALL say a SMALL amount can possibly be beneficial in certain ways such as caloric restriction and what not. For the most part they dont mention what a small dose is just that its small. I would imagine the doses that are common for major weightloss that people HAVE DIED from arent what they are calling a "small" dose. And just because it can benefit certain parts of your body with a "small" dose does not mean that A) that small of a dose is going to do anything for you weightloss wise B) there arent possible side effects that could be easily avoided by not eating junk food or drinking a case a day and running a little bit C) the ways DNP MAY benefit your body are not only available through DNP use, you want caloric restriction then restrict your freaking caloric intake. Like alot of other guys have been saying if you wanna take it then please go right ahead BUT dont go acting like its the virgin mary in a capsul, enstead show both points of view and point out the dangers of ANYTHING you EVER recommend and when people are telling you from first hand experiance it can fuck you up or better yet from second hand experiance it can KILL you take a step back, press pause on your bill nye the science guy video and listen....

 

[Dr.S]

Your argument is vacuous. You are begging the question, i.e. assuming to be true what you need to demonstrate to be true. What is in dispute is whether DNP is toxic at any dose. You are asserting -- only asserting without a scintilla of evidence -- that DNP use is unconditionally and without qualification a bad idea. You have yet to demonstrate this point, which is central to your position.

Yes people have died using DNP and many more have died from prescription drugs with a narrow therapeutic index. Perhaps the acetaminophen anaology wasn't appropriate and a better anaology could have been made using a drug with a therapeutic index similar to that of DNP. Nevertheless your position regarding DNP can only be characterised as a prejudice based entirely on emotion and justified merely with reference to your putative authority as a medical doctor. Do you have a similarly rancourous attitude towards all drugs with a TI < 50?

Also, you aren't actually offering a medical/scientific opinion you are doing nothing more than expressing your personal subjective preferences, dressing them up in drag and pushing them on to stage to fool the drunken audience. How you value fat loss has no significance to anyone else. Nor does your personal tolerance for risk have any significance to anyone other than your financial advisor and stock broker. What on earth could possibly privilege you to dictate someone's preference hierarchy?

Fat loss may have a significance to 2BIGSTILL which none of us can appreciate and his tolerance for risk may be much higher than yours. This can't be disputed because it is neither right nor wrong -- it just is. It is akin to someone's flavour preferences. You can't convince someone that vanilla is a better flavour than chocolate through argument and evidencce and you can't call on a "flavour expert" to make the final pronouncement on which flavour is better. You have to accept a person's subjective preferences and phenomenology as brute facts.

I've received PM's from a couple members about this thread as well---telling me it's not worth it to argue with you and your buddies. As Armageddon and Mace alluded to, we're hoping to dissaude folks from using DNP.

Primate, thank you for the wonderful studies; and for breaking out the Thesaurus so as to dazzle us with your prodigious knowledge---it makes things so much more entertaining.

We could go back and forth posting studies, but why bother when the answer is so simple? Look at the huge statin drug scam perpetrated by Big Pharma--they constructed the "research" to produce certain data. You can look at all the studies you want, but DNP is an industrial chemical used to make dyes, wood preservatives, explosives, and insect control substances. Again, we are talking about FAT BURNING--that's it. Looking back to the late 1990's I can recall aprx. 10 DNP deaths posting on the various bb'ing boards. I know, I know---one can OD on tylenol, ephedrine, etc.

I agree that the risk/reward is specific to and will be assessed by the individual---right now some guy is telling himself it's fine to use 5 grams test/week, 300mg Anadrol/day, along with clen/ephedrine/diuretics. He thinks the benefit outweighs the risk; later in life theres a good chance he'll change his mind

There are many safe/effective ways to burn fat, then there is DNP. Let's make it really simple-- If you jumped from a 5 story building, you "might" not kill yourself; but wouldn't it be easier to simply use the stairs?

 

[gelatine]

Dr. S, is there some reason that you believe the mass of studies done on DNP are falsified? Or is it that you believe it is inevitable some people who don't know the meaning of restraint will get on DNP and keep pushing the dosage limits until they die, and that you have some moral imperative to prevent these deaths?

From the data available, the overwhelming majority (99%+) of people could take DNP practically indefinitely at 50-100mg a day with literally no negative side effects.

 

[Conciliator]

How any of you think you are smarter than a Doctor, who has a backround in it, is beyond me.

Who is a doctor who has a background in DNP? I can't image that "Dr. S" is in light of his torpid reasoning and false assertions. Reminds me of how neither "Dr. P" nor "Dr. Pangloss" are doctors. I think when people put Dr. in their username, it's usually because they like to play doctor.

Con, I believe you are very knowledgeable and know what you are talking about, however there are young kids on this forum that read your posts. To make it sound like the reward benefit is worth the risks, invites tradegy.

I'm not telling anyone how to weigh the risks against the rewards. What I want is an honest discussion about the risks. My problem is when people like Dr. S ignorantly misrepresent the risks. That's just pathetic. As iprimate said, you can't beg the question. You can't start out with the assumption that DNP is outrageously dangerous and conclude that, therefore, it's "obvious" it causes "long term damage" to the "brain, heart, lungs," and whatever other organ you can think of. That's not evidence based. That's silly conjecture. You can't assume extreme danger and then criticize someone presenting the facts as being irresponsible by making it sound too safe. The evidence and research ARE what demonstrate the danger. If the evidence makes DNP sound safer than you feel it is, perhaps your subjective feelings need to be modified and brought in line with the objective facts.

Curious, why did you get banned from BB,com? Didn't they like your philosophy?

I explained it here http://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/showthread.php?p=592411#post592411

 

[Conciliator]

Anyways here is a study that supports the GI irritation problem idea.[/I]

Note that this was looking at colon cells, so it's most relevant to the end of the GI tract. It doesn't really help us explain nausea early discomfort.

The full text explains that DNP was not toxic to the cells at any dose tested, but that it markedly decreased their viability. When you consider that this was in vitro and that DNP increases the demand for energy substrate, that's understandable. In some of the in vivo studies showing that chronic DNP administration increases lifespan, they also note that when food is withheld, viability decreases. Basically, when you require more energy substrate because of the accelerated metabolism, you'll starve faster, which is pretty common sense.

I've taken this paper as evidence for the potential of harm to the GI tract. That's one of the reasons I recommend people split up their doses throughout the day. Besides keeping serum levels more stable and peak levels lower, it would limit GI exposure at any given time.

 

[Conciliator]

2Isn’t the reason because they found it unsafe to be used as one because it was water soluble, toxic, and not easily biodegradable. ?

DNP is a serious environmental contaminant. One of the major reasons is because it's extremely toxic to aquatic organisms.

 

[Conciliator]

I've received PM's from a couple members about this thread as well---telling me it's not worth it to argue with you and your buddies.

Oh, some bros told you it's not worth it... that's a good excuse for failing to provide a shred of evidence to support your BS claims, lol.

We could go back and forth posting studies, but why bother when the answer is so simple?

No, we couldn't go back and forth posting studies, because you HAVE NO EVIDENCE for long term damage to the "brain, heart, and lungs." That is for damn certain. In contrast, I've posted research showing that DNP confers both neuroprotection and cardioprotection. Your statement here is tantamount to saying "anyone can post a study." No, anyone can't, yourself included. How can you take pride in moving the discussion away from the research?

Look at the huge statin drug scam perpetrated by Big Pharma--they constructed the "research" to produce certain data.

This statement is tantamount to the bro-argument that "all research is biased," so lets just not look at research at all. Of course, you have no reason why any of the research on DNP is biased or unreliable. It has nothing to do with pharmaceutical companies. Again, I find your excuses to discount the research and move away from it to be deplorable. You're right on track as iprime and I outlined here. I guess when you know that there's no evidence to support you, there's not really any other option you have.

You can look at all the studies you want, but DNP is an industrial chemical used to make dyes, wood preservatives, explosives, and insect control substances. Again, we are talking about FAT BURNING--that's it.

We've talked about this over and over and over. The fact that a chemical is versatile and that humans have appropriated it for numerous other uses has ZERO bearing on its properties as a drug. Yes, we are talking about FAT BURNING, so why on earth are you talking about irrelevant things like the chemical's combustibility or color?

There are many safe/effective ways to burn fat, then there is DNP. Let's make it really simple-- If you jumped from a 5 story building, you "might" not kill yourself; but wouldn't it be easier to simply use the stairs?

So is this the punchline? After sloughing off all the research, you offer us a compelling analogy: taking DNP is like "jumping from a 5 story building" where you "might" not die, lol. Let's try to fit the analogy to the facts... if 500,000 people jumped off this hypothetical building, less than 10 would die from the building being too high. And the overwhelming majority wouldn't even be injured. So it must not be anywhere near 5 stories. Oh, and like Armageddon, you forgot to mention any benefit. It's a pathetic analogy and this post was a pathetic attempt to squirm away from the research.

 

[Armageddon]

DNP is a serious environmental contaminant. One of the major reasons is because it's extremely toxic to aquatic organisms.

No since you have science behind you, answer this. How much of the body is water? Isn't it around 60%, damn that makes us close enough to be aquatic in my eyes. But I give it a moment before you give me a study......

 

[Armageddon]

So is this the punchline? After sloughing off all the research, you offer us a compelling analogy: taking DNP is like "jumping from a 5 story building" where you "might" not die, lol. Let's try to fit the analogy to the facts... if 500,000 people jumped off this hypothetical building, less than 10 would die from the building being too high. And the overwhelming majority wouldn't even be injured. So it must not be anywhere near 5 stories. Oh, and like Armageddon, you forgot to mention any benefit. It's a pathetic analogy and this post was a pathetic attempt to squirm away from the research.

So 10 people is an acceptable amount to die?

 

[Conciliator]

No since you have science behind you, answer this. How much of the body is water? Isn't it around 60%, damn that makes us close enough to be aquatic in my eyes. But I give it a moment before you give me a study......

I hope you're not actually serious... No, we are not aquatic organisms because we have water in our bodies. Unbelievable.

So 10 people is an acceptable amount to die?

Absolute numbers don't mean much. We're talking about incidence rates. Whether that risk is worth it or not depends on the individual. Plenty of people risk death to drive cars, skydive, run marathons, get implants, run oral steroids, drink alcohol, eat peanuts, and take Tylenol.

 

[wishmg42]

we might have gotten a little off topic...

I have front loaded and with those numbers and it does require more experience to handle and offers no practical advantages. This substance is more an art than many others generally because you have to understand the limits of your temperature, your environment's temperature, your sugar levels, how to retain lean mass, sodium intake, mineral intake, and not to go touching women, etc...

Because of that you need several cycles stepping doses before you understand and are sensitive to everything... publishing that sort of advice just encourages non-adepts to try it, possibly hurt themselves, instead of concentrating on the basics and setting yourself up to really use the tool correctly.

BTW, my number one concern about frontloading is not toxicity but rather overheating or hyperglyceia and getting a stroke, especially if you are using in combination with other tools.

 

[Armageddon]

I hope you're not actually serious... No, we are not aquatic organisms because we have water in our bodies. Unbelievable.
QUOTE]

no i don't believe us to be aquatic but its close enough not to be right

 

[gelatine]

no i don't believe us to be aquatic but its close enough not to be right

I hate when I get shit in my gills.

 

[gelatine]

I like to frontload, it's pretty easy and effective. 1000mg frontloading for a day isn't out of the question, either, but you do need to space the dosing out as far as it can stretch (200mg every 4 hours or so).

Armageddon, it's hilarious that you think we would have a reaction to DNP taken orally in the same fashion as marine life would surrounded by contaminated water.

That said, there's actually an interesting evolutionary theory regarding human past. Some anthropologists would term humans an "aquatic ape", in that not only do we have minimal hair to reduce drag, downward facing nostrils to prevent water getting in the lungs (unique among primates), and an astounding ability to hold our breath when trained, but we also have an innate ability to swim. Newborns are born with the instinctual ability to swim underwater, naturally holding their breath and keeping their eyes open and aware.

 

[Armageddon]

Armageddon, it's hilarious that you think we would have a reaction to DNP taken orally in the same fashion as marine life would surrounded by contaminated water.

I said it because its as silly as the reasons given for taking it in my opinion, but that's just what I think of it.

 

[gelatine]

Please excuse this "science", I went a little overboard, but perhaps you'll find the numbers interesting.

Out of every 500,000 people doing their cardio by going out and jogging, how many die?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6978411

"...or approximately one death per 396,000 man-hours of jogging."

So, if we generalize this data, and assume a lowball 600 calories burned per hour while jogging, we can estimate that jogging causes 4.2 x 10^-9 deaths per calorie burned.

Now, going off of the quoted 3 deaths per 500,000 DNP users over approximately a year's span, 2000 base calories burned per day per person, and a mere 20% increase in calories burned by taking dinitrophenol, we have 1.4 x 10^-11 deaths per calorie burned.

We can then reasonably hypothesize the following:
Per calorie burned, DNP is approximately 400 times safer than jogging at low doses.

Based on these data, if a million joggers jogging one hour a week switched to low dose DNP, not only would 125 lives be saved, but an additional 115,000,000,000 calories would be burned for a total additional fat loss of 33,000,000 pounds.

 

[iprimate]

I've received PM's from a couple members about this thread as well---telling me it's not worth it to argue with you and your buddies. As Armageddon and Mace alluded to, we're hoping to dissaude folks from using DNP.

You are yet to actually advance a non-question begging argument and you are yet to to refute any of the substantive evidence and arguments advanced by Conciliator. Let's be clear here about what you are doing: you are emoting and conjecturing and trying to pass it off as weighty medical opinion.

Primate, thank you for the wonderful studies; and for breaking out the Thesaurus so as to dazzle us with your prodigious knowledge---it makes things so much more entertaining.

I don't use a thesaurus -- I don't need one. Are you one of the "Doctors" that doesn't know about referred pain and that can't distinguish identify GIRD or am I confusing you with another make-believe doctor?

We could go back and forth posting studies, but why bother when the answer is so simple?

I don't think you can post even one study in support of your wild conjecture.

Look at the huge statin drug scam perpetrated by Big Pharma--they constructed the "research" to produce certain data.

So now you are resorting to populist conspiracy theory? DNP isn't patented and I doubt it was when the original studies (that Conciliator references) were performed. I think your recourse to conspiracy theory is as stillborn as your question begging argument.

You can look at all the studies you want, but DNP is an industrial chemical used to make dyes, wood preservatives, explosives, and insect control substances.

This is an asinine argument and if you are really a doctor I really pity your patients. Titanium is used as a pigment and in nautical engineering and its also used as a material in reconstructive cranio-facial surgery. Cocaine is used as a party drug and it is also used as a vasocontrictor before performing surgery on the nose, mouth or throat. Gold is used to make jewellery and it is also injected intramuscularly to treat rheumatoid arthritis (ref. Myocrisin). Maggots are normally laid by flies on rotting carcasses and they are also used in Maggot Debridement Therapy to clean non-healing wounds. What about antineoplastic drugs? Most of those are "poisons" also and it is their toxicity that makes them useful in chemotherapy.

Again, we are talking about FAT BURNING--that's it. Looking back to the late 1990's I can recall aprx. 10 DNP deaths posting on the various bb'ing boards. I know, I know---one can OD on tylenol, ephedrine, etc.

You can apply the phrase "that's it" to anything that is relatively unimportant to you. What is it that privileges you to determine what people should and shouldn't deem important to them?

More than ten people died from accidental suffoctation in relation to autoerotic asphyxiation in the decade 1990-99. The Universe is good at generating fools. What of it?

I agree that the risk/reward is specific to and will be assessed by the individual---right now some guy is telling himself it's fine to use 5 grams test/week, 300mg Anadrol/day, along with clen/ephedrine/diuretics. He thinks the benefit outweighs the risk; later in life theres a good chance he'll change his mind

It depends on whether he is fully informed about the potential dangers of his current behaviour. Also, there is also a "good chance" that if he didn't pursue his bodybuilding goals with that zeal he will regret it when he is an old man and will be haunted with "what if". You are generalising (and so am I to prove a point). A person's behaviour need to be placed into his/her broader worldview and life goals -- they can't be isolated and analysed in a vacuum.

There are many safe/effective ways to burn fat, then there is DNP.

No, you are yet to demonstrate that a measured and modest program of DNP use (as advised by Conciliator) is harmful. Don't assume to be true what you need to prove.

Let's make it really simple-- If you jumped from a 5 story building, you "might" not kill yourself; but wouldn't it be easier to simply use the stairs?

I don't think that is a fair analogy.

 

[gyno]

that is THE best post EVER!!!

Please excuse this "science", I went a little overboard, but perhaps you'll find the numbers interesting.

Out of every 500,000 people doing their cardio by going out and jogging, how many die?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6978411

"...or approximately one death per 396,000 man-hours of jogging."

So, if we generalize this data, and assume a lowball 600 calories burned per hour while jogging, we can estimate that jogging causes 4.2 x 10^-9 deaths per calorie burned.

Now, going off of the quoted 3 deaths per 500,000 DNP users over approximately a year's span, 2000 base calories burned per day per person, and a mere 20% increase in calories burned by taking dinitrophenol, we have 1.4 x 10^-11 deaths per calorie burned.

We can then reasonably hypothesize the following:
Per calorie burned, DNP is approximately 400 times safer than jogging at low doses.

Based on these data, if a million joggers jogging one hour a week switched to low dose DNP, not only would 125 lives be saved, but an additional 115,000,000,000 calories would be burned for a total additional fat loss of 33,000,000 pounds.

 

[dragonfire101]

Please excuse this "science", I went a little overboard, but perhaps you'll find the numbers interesting.

Out of every 500,000 people doing their cardio by going out and jogging, how many die?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6978411

"...or approximately one death per 396,000 man-hours of jogging."

So, if we generalize this data, and assume a lowball 600 calories burned per hour while jogging, we can estimate that jogging causes 4.2 x 10^-9 deaths per calorie burned.

Now, going off of the quoted 3 deaths per 500,000 DNP users over approximately a year's span, 2000 base calories burned per day per person, and a mere 20% increase in calories burned by taking dinitrophenol, we have 1.4 x 10^-11 deaths per calorie burned.

We can then reasonably hypothesize the following:
Per calorie burned, DNP is approximately 400 times safer than jogging at low doses.

Based on these data, if a million joggers jogging one hour a week switched to low dose DNP, not only would 125 lives be saved, but an additional 115,000,000,000 calories would be burned for a total additional fat loss of 33,000,000 pounds.

What if some of the joggers where doing both, jogging and taking dnp . How do we factor them in...