• All new members please introduce your self here and welcome to the board:
    http://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/showthread.php?t=259
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
M4B Store Banner
SPC-210x65
Riptropin Store banner
Generation X Bodybuilding Forum
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Mysupps Store Banner
IP Gear Store Banner
Anabolic Hormones Store Banner
Ganabol Store Banner
Spend $100 and get bonus needles free at sterile syringes
Professional Muscle Store open now
LandmarkChem Email Banner
advertise1
Bruce Labs Store banner
gd
Professional Muscle Store open now
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
granabolic123
Blackroids-animated-optimized-number-1
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
advertise1
apollo
steroidjet
kinglab
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store

Parenabol/EQ and "Gurus"

N.L....M.....

Well-known member
Registered
Newbies
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
824
Your first 13 words show your ignorance and closed mind.

Most of the mice and rats used in medical trials are inbred so they are almost identical genetically helping to make the results of medical trials more uniform. Another reason they're used as models in medical testing is that they have served as the preferred species for animal models due to their anatomical, physiological, and genetic similarity to humans.
Rats are a poor predictor of human reaction. Most things I’ve seen you type show a poor understanding of most things.
I’m not close minded I’m just critical and think and question.
 

ripriot

Verified Customer
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
350

N.L....M.....

Well-known member
Registered
Newbies
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
824
How can you say eq caused your kidney damage if you run it for a few cycles? Your blood work can show all normal and still be actively damaging your kidneys. Hence, why ultrasounds are much better then blood work. Blood work just triggers that more test is needed. If you catch kidney damage soon enough then it is acute, and your body can repair. However, you don’t always have the luxury to catch acute kidney damage because your kidneys can filter much more then what we put them through in a day. Hence, why you can live with one kidney but are born with two. So, this damage is occurring, but your body is maintaining but slowly taking away your renal function. This slow progress of damage is when biological markers become abnormal and kidney damage becomes chronic.

For example, take a person who is suicidal. So, they decide to drink anti-freeze to kill themselves. However, someone finds them passed out in a coma. The hospital saves them by putting them on dialysis. Dialysis cures them to almost complete renal function of 80% (antifreeze is much more toxic then EQ).

If you catch renal failure fast enough you can fix the acute disease. If you don’t catch it then slowly turns into a decreased renal function or worse a terminal disease. Hence, why people’s kidney damage has been smoldering and not found by a single occurrence unless it’s a toxic 1 or toxic 2 or genetics.
Dude. There’s no fuckimg evidence in humans that eq is harmful to healthy individuals.
 

MR. BMJ

Kilo Klub Member / Verified Customer
Kilo Klub Member
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
3,645
First, i want to thank Victor for coming, but I have a few concerns.

Rodent/murine models: I hold these for what they are...research done that determines whether future research needs to continue, or not be done. Nothing more or less. Victor, you can't hold them in such high regard, when extrapolation is poor toward humans in a lot of cases, then downplay members, many who have strong science backgrounds, when they state "Its a Rat Model," "We are not Rats," "I have been using it for years and I am fine." Many of the people you posted on the other thread here, of people you learned from and admire yourself (you listed a group of guys with science backgrounds), will agree with this, and they mentioned what I am stating in terms of rodent/murine models themselves many times over the years. Now i'm not ignoring the fact that research is limited in humans, but you also posted that there at '40 studies' supporting your case, yet claim there are few in humans. You can't extrapolate rodent to human, it's not proof of any kind, though you can use a hypothetical/theoretical approach to them, which is what many users already do, even with bloodwork.

The human study you posted on the prior page, it's not something we haven't discussed here or other forums, but I think it's worth noting that the journal it was printed in also has a low Impact factor of 1.2, which means the studies within it are also usually of low impact a lot of times. I had access to the full paper when it came out from a member at another forum, so i'll see if he still has it. I can't remember all the details, and the abstract does not state much. I appreciate the graph you posted. Furthermore, you downplayed the members above who have stated that they had bloodwork with their Eq use and it wasn't reflective of the study you posted, why? Some of the same bloodwork (BUN, Cr, electrolytes, etc) was also what was used in the study, and what you use as a means of supporting that Eq can be renal-toxic. That said, i'm not discounting there being a possible effect on the kidneys with Eq use.

I want to point out that I think it was brave of you to come here and 'defend' yourself, and you have been respectful in doing so. However, I think you discredit these "bro forums" a little too harshly. Again, the people you mentioned, almost all of them have got their start on these discussion forums at some point in time. Many you mentioned were/are members here, and other forums i've been on, as Mod and Admin, since the 90's. Sure, these forums have douchebags on them, but there is knowledgeable guys who still post on them. Many guys have moved on and have their own social media/blogs/pay sites....but again, most started on these forums whether they want to admit it these days or not.

Also, i'm not 100% positive, but I think you live in a different country? Forgive me if I am wrong. I can't comment as to the legality of use/discussion where you live, but here in the states, it's illegal to use without a physician's prescription. Many guys use alias names to not be so open about their use of these compounds, many who have professional careers, so I think you are being a bit harsh, but I can understand where you are coming from. It's not like LE can't find out who I am with my handle name. I've also had people threaten me that if they obtained my real identity, they'd find a way to ruin my career. There is a reason why many "NEED" to use fake handle names, and I would hope you respect that. I can give my name and info to any noteworthy person here for verification.....DC, MODS, etc. I've met Pesty in real life, and a few others from here. Hell, I met BIGMIKE295 when I looked my absolute worse ever. Some guys choose to use their real names and also post about their use here/other forums/socail media, etc....I can't for the life of me support that. If I had never, or would ever, talk about my own personal use, i'd have no problem with using my real name. Guys like DC have talked about this ad nausea.

I'd just like to also point out that you are pretty adamant about stating you are giving out free info, that is awesome and cool of you, and it's appreciative. That said, many others also do the same, or give free info on this topic. Also, the owner here of proM could also state the same....he has an open forum for awesome discourse, and he could charge if he wanted to, b ut doesn't, nor does he have to ram it into people. Dante posts here, and he doesn't charge, same with many others. I think you should respect that a little with it being a 2-way street.

I just want to end that I hope you continue to drop in, I think you are doing a good thing, and I can't comment negatively on somebody i don't know...nor would I want to do that without any sort of proof. I don't think anybody should hold it against you for trying to make some $$$ with a pay site, and we all appreciate what you offer for free as well.

btw...if anything came off rude or wrong, please forgive me, it's past 7pm and my kiddos are interrupting me nonstop for attention, and I lost track some above, lol.
 

N.L....M.....

Well-known member
Registered
Newbies
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
824
I totally agree.

I'm sorry that study is from 2009. In academics we don't accept anything older than 10 years. Please try again.

P.S. your single study goes against the fundamentals of medical research. Your title even says "often"
Okay cool. So the study he posted from 1970 should be thrown out. Also you’re not an academic. Also rats absolutely are a poor predictor of how something affects humans. I honestly don’t like you and have even made it a point to not respond to anything you type because I think you’re remedial and an asshole. So this will be my last response to you from here on out about anything. If you are an academic well that just goes to show that a certificate isn’t a reflection of intelligence. Thanks and have nice life
Also you really didn’t read it as it’s not so much a study as an explanation
 

ripriot

Verified Customer
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
350
Okay cool. So the study he posted from 1970 should be thrown out. Also you’re not an academic. Also rats absolutely are a poor predictor of how something affects humans. I honestly don’t like you and have even made it a point to not respond to anything you type because I think you’re remedial and an asshole. So this will be my last response to you from here on out about anything. If you are an academic well that just goes to show that a certificate isn’t a reflection of intelligence. Thanks and have nice life
Also you really didn’t read it as it’s not so much a study as an explanation
What was the point of responding at all? I never mentioned the study from 1970.

P.S. "I totally agree" was a typo from a post i was doing before yours
 

VictorBlack

Active member
Registered
Newbies
Joined
Apr 7, 2021
Messages
63
First, i want to thank Victor for coming, but I have a few concerns.

Rodent/murine models: I hold these for what they are...research done that determines whether future research needs to continue, or not be done. Nothing more or less. Victor, you can't hold them in such high regard, when extrapolation is poor toward humans in a lot of cases, then downplay members, many who have strong science backgrounds, when they state "Its a Rat Model," "We are not Rats," "I have been using it for years and I am fine." Many of the people you posted on the other thread here, of people you learned from and admire yourself (you listed a group of guys with science backgrounds), will agree with this, and they mentioned what I am stating in terms of rodent/murine models themselves many times over the years. Now i'm not ignoring the fact that research is limited in humans, but you also posted that there at '40 studies' supporting your case, yet claim there are few in humans. You can't extrapolate rodent to human, it's not proof of any kind, though you can use a hypothetical/theoretical approach to them, which is what many users already do, even with bloodwork.

The human study you posted on the prior page, it's not something we haven't discussed here or other forums, but I think it's worth noting that the journal it was printed in also has a low Impact factor of 1.2, which means the studies within it are also usually of low impact a lot of times. I had access to the full paper when it came out from a member at another forum, so i'll see if he still has it. I can't remember all the details, and the abstract does not state much. I appreciate the graph you posted. Furthermore, you downplayed the members above who have stated that they had bloodwork with their Eq use and it wasn't reflective of the study you posted, why? Some of the same bloodwork (BUN, Cr, electrolytes, etc) was also what was used in the study, and what you use as a means of supporting that Eq can be renal-toxic. That said, i'm not discounting there being a possible effect on the kidneys with Eq use.

I want to point out that I think it was brave of you to come here and 'defend' yourself, and you have been respectful in doing so. However, I think you discredit these "bro forums" a little too harshly. Again, the people you mentioned, almost all of them have got their start on these discussion forums at some point in time. Many you mentioned were/are members here, and other forums i've been on, as Mod and Admin, since the 90's. Sure, these forums have douchebags on them, but there is knowledgeable guys who still post on them. Many guys have moved on and have their own social media/blogs/pay sites....but again, most started on these forums whether they want to admit it these days or not.

Also, i'm not 100% positive, but I think you live in a different country? Forgive me if I am wrong. I can't comment as to the legality of use/discussion where you live, but here in the states, it's illegal to use without a physician's prescription. Many guys use alias names to not be so open about their use of these compounds, many who have professional careers, so I think you are being a bit harsh, but I can understand where you are coming from. It's not like LE can't find out who I am with my handle name. I've also had people threaten me that if they obtained my real identity, they'd find a way to ruin my career. There is a reason why many "NEED" to use fake handle names, and I would hope you respect that. I can give my name and info to any noteworthy person here for verification.....DC, MODS, etc. I've met Pesty in real life, and a few others from here. Hell, I met BIGMIKE295 when I looked my absolute worse ever. Some guys choose to use their real names and also post about their use here/other forums/socail media, etc....I can't for the life of me support that. If I had never, or would ever, talk about my own personal use, i'd have no problem with using my real name. Guys like DC have talked about this ad nausea.

I'd just like to also point out that you are pretty adamant about stating you are giving out free info, that is awesome and cool of you, and it's appreciative. That said, many others also do the same, or give free info on this topic. Also, the owner here of proM could also state the same....he has an open forum for awesome discourse, and he could charge if he wanted to, b ut doesn't, nor does he have to ram it into people. Dante posts here, and he doesn't charge, same with many others. I think you should respect that a little with it being a 2-way street.

I just want to end that I hope you continue to drop in, I think you are doing a good thing, and I can't comment negatively on somebody i don't know...nor would I want to do that without any sort of proof. I don't think anybody should hold it against you for trying to make some $$$ with a pay site, and we all appreciate what you offer for free as well.

btw...if anything came off rude or wrong, please forgive me, it's past 7pm and my kiddos are interrupting me nonstop for attention, and I lost track some above, lol.

I take literally zero offense to any of this

and I totally 100% agree on a purely practical level if there are guys on here that have been saying all this ?

Great 100% great. Nothing I say is " secret" its totally plausible that there are guys that get all, like I do..

Please read this very carefully

My single largest potential " bias" coming in here is this

LATS is the co-founder of this forum right ?

This is what he had to say on my content

I have been in this ” game” for over 30 years.. having written for various bodybuilding magazines and I help run a well known board..

After all this time I can tell you your not going to find this much info anywhere . .

Studies and content are here that are rarely seen anywhere else.

Guys.. I can tell you that it’s silly not to join for that low amount everyone can afford that given the info your given..

I’m going to join tonight. I have put it off long enough

” I thought I knew most everything I could about peds but since being here I’ve implemented numerous things based on our conversations and studies posted that I never would have otherwise.

So I take that to mean

The cofounder of the Forum is saying

" What I am talking on my pages" is NOT "what is being talked about here on his Forum"

If anyone reads that I expect you to understand how that shapes my opinions coming in here

I have preformed opinions about " forums" they are fucking lot of work and headache.. for content providers.. you spend a lot of time " covering ground over and over" and debating the same points over and over for years the same questions, the same pushback .

+

When LATS says this coming in my filters are colored by that

Not someone that is on the forum, the co-founder of the Forum

Hopefully when guys read that they can say ok I understand

I wish all well

If, if there are guys here doing all this ? great

There is no reason for me to double down right ?

easy
 

VictorBlack

Active member
Registered
Newbies
Joined
Apr 7, 2021
Messages
63
One last comment on financial modelling

"free vs paid"

I promise you, I know because I asked

The guys that run this forum make more " money" from ads that they run than I do.. for memberships

I have no problem with that, I maybe one day will move in that direction myself - its a valid business model

But make no mistake this forum is a business model for the owners and why would it not be ?

Here the difference is everyone is contributing content for free and the in return for eyeballs owners of the site get paid

That is not a complaint its just a business model

I have two choices - make content and someone else gets paid

make content and I get paid

I mean if you want honesty .. lets be honest why would I do one over the other ?

I would start on a forum like this to build a profile a following large enough to break out on my own right ?

Makes sense

But guys I already have that..

anything I post here contributes to the owner's revenue

anything I post on my page contributes to mine
 

ripriot

Verified Customer
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
350
I take literally zero offense to any of this

and I totally 100% agree on a purely practical level if there are guys on here that have been saying all this ?

Great 100% great. Nothing I say is " secret" its totally plausible that there are guys that get all, like I do..

Please read this very carefully

My single largest potential " bias" coming in here is this

LATS is the co-founder of this forum right ?

This is what he had to say on my content

I have been in this ” game” for over 30 years.. having written for various bodybuilding magazines and I help run a well known board..

After all this time I can tell you your not going to find this much info anywhere . .

Studies and content are here that are rarely seen anywhere else.

Guys.. I can tell you that it’s silly not to join for that low amount everyone can afford that given the info your given..

I’m going to join tonight. I have put it off long enough

” I thought I knew most everything I could about peds but since being here I’ve implemented numerous things based on our conversations and studies posted that I never would have otherwise.

So I take that to mean

The cofounder of the Forum is saying

" What I am talking on my pages" is NOT "what is being talked about here on his Forum"

If anyone reads that I expect you to understand how that shapes my opinions coming in here

I have preformed opinions about " forums" they are fucking lot of work and headache.. for content providers.. you spend a lot of time " covering ground over and over" and debating the same points over and over for years the same questions, the same pushback .

+

When LATS says this coming in my filters are colored by that

Not someone that is on the forum, the co-founder of the Forum

Hopefully when guys read that they can say ok I understand

I wish all well

If, if there are guys here doing all this ? great

There is no reason for me to double down right ?

easy

Thank god @LATS is around.
 

ripriot

Verified Customer
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
350
First, i want to thank Victor for coming, but I have a few concerns.

Rodent/murine models: I hold these for what they are...research done that determines whether future research needs to continue, or not be done. Nothing more or less. Victor, you can't hold them in such high regard, when extrapolation is poor toward humans in a lot of cases, then downplay members, many who have strong science backgrounds, when they state "Its a Rat Model," "We are not Rats," "I have been using it for years and I am fine." Many of the people you posted on the other thread here, of people you learned from and admire yourself (you listed a group of guys with science backgrounds), will agree with this, and they mentioned what I am stating in terms of rodent/murine models themselves many times over the years. Now i'm not ignoring the fact that research is limited in humans, but you also posted that there at '40 studies' supporting your case, yet claim there are few in humans. You can't extrapolate rodent to human, it's not proof of any kind, though you can use a hypothetical/theoretical approach to them, which is what many users already do, even with bloodwork.

The human study you posted on the prior page, it's not something we haven't discussed here or other forums, but I think it's worth noting that the journal it was printed in also has a low Impact factor of 1.2, which means the studies within it are also usually of low impact a lot of times. I had access to the full paper when it came out from a member at another forum, so i'll see if he still has it. I can't remember all the details, and the abstract does not state much. I appreciate the graph you posted. Furthermore, you downplayed the members above who have stated that they had bloodwork with their Eq use and it wasn't reflective of the study you posted, why? Some of the same bloodwork (BUN, Cr, electrolytes, etc) was also what was used in the study, and what you use as a means of supporting that Eq can be renal-toxic. That said, i'm not discounting there being a possible effect on the kidneys with Eq use.

I want to point out that I think it was brave of you to come here and 'defend' yourself, and you have been respectful in doing so. However, I think you discredit these "bro forums" a little too harshly. Again, the people you mentioned, almost all of them have got their start on these discussion forums at some point in time. Many you mentioned were/are members here, and other forums i've been on, as Mod and Admin, since the 90's. Sure, these forums have douchebags on them, but there is knowledgeable guys who still post on them. Many guys have moved on and have their own social media/blogs/pay sites....but again, most started on these forums whether they want to admit it these days or not.

Also, i'm not 100% positive, but I think you live in a different country? Forgive me if I am wrong. I can't comment as to the legality of use/discussion where you live, but here in the states, it's illegal to use without a physician's prescription. Many guys use alias names to not be so open about their use of these compounds, many who have professional careers, so I think you are being a bit harsh, but I can understand where you are coming from. It's not like LE can't find out who I am with my handle name. I've also had people threaten me that if they obtained my real identity, they'd find a way to ruin my career. There is a reason why many "NEED" to use fake handle names, and I would hope you respect that. I can give my name and info to any noteworthy person here for verification.....DC, MODS, etc. I've met Pesty in real life, and a few others from here. Hell, I met BIGMIKE295 when I looked my absolute worse ever. Some guys choose to use their real names and also post about their use here/other forums/socail media, etc....I can't for the life of me support that. If I had never, or would ever, talk about my own personal use, i'd have no problem with using my real name. Guys like DC have talked about this ad nausea.

I'd just like to also point out that you are pretty adamant about stating you are giving out free info, that is awesome and cool of you, and it's appreciative. That said, many others also do the same, or give free info on this topic. Also, the owner here of proM could also state the same....he has an open forum for awesome discourse, and he could charge if he wanted to, b ut doesn't, nor does he have to ram it into people. Dante posts here, and he doesn't charge, same with many others. I think you should respect that a little with it being a 2-way street.

I just want to end that I hope you continue to drop in, I think you are doing a good thing, and I can't comment negatively on somebody i don't know...nor would I want to do that without any sort of proof. I don't think anybody should hold it against you for trying to make some $$$ with a pay site, and we all appreciate what you offer for free as well.

btw...if anything came off rude or wrong, please forgive me, it's past 7pm and my kiddos are interrupting me nonstop for attention, and I lost track some above, lol.

Maybe you would be enlightened to know that we are actively inserting human genes into rats and raising rat populations with human genes to better understand medicine. That means rats have value in human medicine. Granted there is more research done when research passes scientific studies in rats. To dismiss animal studies passing research "as only more research needs to be done" is ignorant.
 

Stewie

Featured Member / Verified Customer
Featured Member
Kilo Klub Member
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Feb 3, 2011
Messages
5,121
I totally agree.

I'm sorry that study is from 2009. In academics we don't accept anything older than 10 years. Please try again.

P.S. your single study goes against the fundamentals of medical research. Your title even says "often"
Is 2020 a suitable year? I'd suspect you're familiar with p53 functions?


Mice Are Not Humans: The Case of p53

Murine models remain an approximation of the human system, as mice are not only smaller and die at a younger age; they also have an increased metabolic rate and develop a different spectrum of tumors than humans do. Luckily, humans are less susceptible to cancer development than mice.

Murine models are useful representation of both in-vitro and in-vivo, yet as previously aforementioned we don't share the same hematological-immunological responses. This in and of-itself nullifies extrapolation to humans. Even transgenic murine models.
 

ripriot

Verified Customer
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
350
Is 2020 a suitable year? I'd suspect you're familiar with p53 functions?


Mice Are Not Humans: The Case of p53



Murine models are useful representation of both in-vitro and in-vivo, yet as previously aforementioned we don't share the same hematological-immunological responses. This in and of-itself nullifies extrapolation to humans.
When did we start talking about cancer? You and I both know cancer is a different biological function.
 

Stewie

Featured Member / Verified Customer
Featured Member
Kilo Klub Member
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Feb 3, 2011
Messages
5,121
When did we start talking about cancer?
By your premise, murine models are perfect representation of human equivalent outcome, correct?
 

cracker backer

Active member
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Messages
317
It’s funny - I hadn’t ever heard of Victor until this rant thread. Of course as son as I read it I had to go to social media and look and see how bad/crazy he was - typical human curiosity. But after I looked at a bunch of his posts on social media, I thought he was putting forth some well thought out stuff, enough to make me want to pay to see what else on his site.

I think some of the overarching points Victor makes gets lost in the discussion here - that is, if there’s a bunch of studies (even if in only animals) that point to the fact there “might” be an issue with liver/kidneys/etc - then why risk it *IF* there are other similar compounds available that don’t have these issues (which there are). If you are looking to do this as safely as possible, then why not just pick a different compound? Makes sense to me. If you are pursuing competitive bodybuilding at all costs and you want to say that that there’s not enough compelling evidence to dissuade you from you using EQ, then that’s fine - no one is saying you can’t or shouldn’t. But again, that’s not really his target audience - he’s trying to reach people who are looking to try and do all this as healthy as possible.

For me, I think he’s shown there’s enough data to show that EQ “may” have some issues, and it’s not like EQ is the end all, be all, holy grail of muscle building drugs - so why not just pick something else that doesn’t have as much concerning data around it? Personally for me, that make sense.
 

ripriot

Verified Customer
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
350
By your premise, murine models are perfect representation of human equivalent outcome, correct?
No sir. A rat does not mean a cancer conversation. I know your very intelligent. Much respect for you. As I have talked to you previous in other threads. You and I both know that cancer is a very complicated disease that does not have prejudice on race or gender. I have no knowledge in cancer.
 

ripriot

Verified Customer
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
350
By your premise, murine models are perfect representation of human equivalent outcome, correct?
To save time. Please send me over studies you want me to reveiw. I will get back with you asap.
 

ripriot

Verified Customer
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
350
By your premise, murine models are perfect representation of human equivalent outcome, correct?
My premise never used the word "perfect." As restated below. Perfection is elusive.

Most of the mice and rats used in medical trials are inbred so they are almost identical genetically helping to make the results of medical trials more uniform. Another reason they're used as models in medical testing is that they have served as the preferred species for animal models due to their anatomical, physiological, and genetic similarity to humans.
 

VictorBlack

Active member
Registered
Newbies
Joined
Apr 7, 2021
Messages
63
It’s funny - I hadn’t ever heard of Victor until this rant thread. Of course as son as I read it I had to go to social media and look and see how bad/crazy he was - typical human curiosity. But after I looked at a bunch of his posts on social media, I thought he was putting forth some well thought out stuff, enough to make me want to pay to see what else on his site.

I think some of the overarching points Victor makes gets lost in the discussion here - that is, if there’s a bunch of studies (even if in only animals) that point to the fact there “might” be an issue with liver/kidneys/etc - then why risk it *IF* there are other similar compounds available that don’t have these issues (which there are). If you are looking to do this as safely as possible, then why not just pick a different compound? Makes sense to me. If you are pursuing competitive bodybuilding at all costs and you want to say that that there’s not enough compelling evidence to dissuade you from you using EQ, then that’s fine - no one is saying you can’t or shouldn’t. But again, that’s not really his target audience - he’s trying to reach people who are looking to try and do all this as healthy as possible.

For me, I think he’s shown there’s enough data to show that EQ “may” have some issues, and it’s not like EQ is the end all, be all, holy grail of muscle building drugs - so why not just pick something else that doesn’t have as much concerning data around it? Personally for me, that make sense.

again kudos

You understand what I am saying

I am against Men using SARMs - they make no sense but if that was all we had ? Hell I would be all over that shit haha

GH Secretagogues ? why ? if you can access good rHGH at $200 USD for 100 IU ? why

Live in Australia or NZ ? Hell move over let me show you how to use GHRH's I cant afford the GH there, I need to use the poor second cousin

But if you can afford it ? use it

If you can tell me what Boldeneone does that you cant get from other AAS with a plausibly better safety profile ?

By all means then use it

But if you can do " that" with drugs where the " maybe" is not "maybe" then why take on the "maybe" ?

1, I have 40 studies on Boldenone that suggest issues
2, I can't tell you " why" I need to use it

Hard to come up with a reason that I need it..

Guys keep saying we have heard this all before Victor, plenty of guys saying the same as you..

You don't have anything unique to offer

I am listening, I get it..

What I am saying you all understand, you have plenty of guidance here

Great.. there is no point in me pointing out such Captain obvious things like " is there is a maybe" and " we have a valid alternative " without the maybe lets start but removing that

Its not rocket science, that is why i agree why is it not possible guys here are telling you that every Man that has looked the data should be able to come up with that takeaway on their own

and it they are ?

Then great you don't need me to say the same things.
 

ripriot

Verified Customer
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
350
Is 2020 a suitable year? I'd suspect you're familiar with p53 functions?


Mice Are Not Humans: The Case of p53



Murine models are useful representation of both in-vitro and in-vivo, yet as previously aforementioned we don't share the same hematological-immunological responses. This in and of-itself nullifies extrapolation to humans. Even transgenic murine models.
If your trying to prove that rodents are insignificant in medical research then we won't find common ground. I am more then willing to talk to you through here, email, or othermeans. However, if your objective is to prove that rodents have no medical value then I wil not agree with you
 

Staff online

  • pesty4077
    Moderator/ Featured Member / Kilo Klub

Forum statistics

Total page views
509,277,748
Threads
124,948
Messages
2,417,468
Members
155,908
Latest member
Saisaici
Top