• 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
ddd
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
Medtech Store Banner
Bruce Labs Store banner
qtropin
Professional Muscle Store open now
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
ESPECIL-2
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
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
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store

Testosterone as anti aging drug no more?

SecondAct

Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
275
Good link. Weird study, but it still leaves a lot of room for interpretation for the 35-70 healthy demographic. Truthfully, I think they could have asked anyone here if giving test to already unhealthy 74 year olds with pre-existing cardiac problems was a good idea and got a 100% resounding hell no for an answer.
 

PaulKersey

New member
Registered
Joined
May 30, 2010
Messages
169
Yeah, the fact that the 74 year olds and up were basically in horrible shape to begin with sends up the red flags and flares. I have to wonder if "they" will use this as some type of excuse to KO testosterone therapy etc. At the very end the author notes this doesn't rule out the use of testosterone for other groups. Then why the big deal? Ergo-log has some great info but it also jumps the gun too much, on a lot of occasions using National Enquirer type headlines and leadoffs to grab one's attention.
 

greg.80

New member
Registered
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
54
The study is kinda weird. Why on earth having trials on old man in bad condition. They had to perform chest presses , leg presses, and stair-climbing ...wtf!!!?? No wonder one person died
 

treny

New member
Registered
Joined
Apr 2, 2003
Messages
57
a good read. I bet they all felt better.
 

mojo jojo

New member
Registered
Joined
Apr 16, 2007
Messages
521
Good link. Weird study, but it still leaves a lot of room for interpretation for the 35-70 healthy demographic. Truthfully, I think they could have asked anyone here if giving test to already unhealthy 74 year olds with pre-existing cardiac problems was a good idea and got a 100% resounding hell no for an answer.
Anti-aging means to slow down the aging process. A 74 year old in poor health would need reverse-aging.
 

warrenpeace

New member
Registered
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
647
Taking 100mg a day? 700mg a week? Seems a tad excessive when billed as an anti-aging treatment rather than a muscle building one.
 

strongrhino

Banned
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
1,390
I would like a link to the actual study. Not the authors interpritation. Seems a bit weird to say the least. 700mg a week? a bit excessive to start.
 
Last edited:

cjjrwe

New member
Registered
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
270
This study was foolish at the least, and really rather reckless given the physical condition of the test subjects. At that age, and in that condition, you have already done permanent damage, almost always irreversable, and with the stress and high dose of testosterone I am suprised they didn't kill more people.

Also, anytime you see words like "The days of testosterone as an anti-aging drug are over" tied to a study, rather than a non-biased "Testosterone on very elderly, in terrible shape, at a high dose produces serious side effects" you know the persons/entities responsible for the article are indeed biased. There are far too many studies that show benefit, of course there are always risks, all medications have risks associated with them. One day it may indeed be possible to create a drug that affects all persons the exact same, but that day is not here, and given genetic and biological differences from person to person it is nearly impossible to do so.
 

Crom

Well-known member
Registered
Joined
Mar 20, 2006
Messages
1,299
It's not 100mg a day guys, it's 100mg gel a day! With an absorption rate of around 10% 100mg gel would give them 10 mg test every day.

I agree with everyone here, they can not say that the days of testosterone as a anti aging drug is over based on a completely amateur study like this. How the test subjects were chosen I don't know but it nearly makes me think they chose these subjects becasue they wanted the study to fail...!?
 

slacker86

New member
Newbies
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
35
It's not 100mg a day guys, it's 100mg gel a day! With an absorption rate of around 10% 100mg gel would give them 10 mg test every day.

I agree with everyone here, they can not say that the days of testosterone as a anti aging drug is over based on a completely amateur study like this. How the test subjects were chosen I don't know but it nearly makes me think they chose these subjects becasue they wanted the study to fail...!?

Depending on who funded the study they may have wanted it to fail.
 

Crom

Well-known member
Registered
Joined
Mar 20, 2006
Messages
1,299
Depending on who funded the study they may have wanted it to fail.

The American government, the National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health to be more precise, wanted to know whether you can maintain elderly men’s condition by giving them testosterone, and therefore it financed the Testosterone in Older Men with Mobility Limitations trial.
With the ongoing witch hunt on AAS and the group of questionable test subjects in this study one can wonder what they wanted to find in this study.....
 

phatrr

New member
Registered
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
504
It's not 100mg a day guys, it's 100mg gel a day! With an absorption rate of around 10% 100mg gel would give them 10 mg test every day.

I agree with everyone here, they can not say that the days of testosterone as a anti aging drug is over based on a completely amateur study like this. How the test subjects were chosen I don't know but it nearly makes me think they chose these subjects becasue they wanted the study to fail...!?
REally? Here's the relevant text from the linked article:

The men rubbed 10 g of the gel onto their bodies every day. This amount contains 100 mg testosterone. If necessary, the researchers lowered or raised the dose.
Am I misreading that badly?

And what criteria were used to RAISE that dose?
 
Last edited:

Researchstop

New member
Registered
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
194
I agree with what's been posted.
This study shows nothing about using T for anti-aging. Giving testosterone to 65+ yr old men with limited mobility proves nothing about T being used for anti-aging. In addition I would point out that their problems with CAD had probably already begun, years before this study, and they didn't give these men an Aromatase Inhibitor. So their heath deterioration would be expected given the increase in estrogen.
 

VTliftVT

Banned
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
1,603
REally? Here's the relevant text from the linked article:



Am I misreading that badly?

And what criteria were used to RAISE that dose?
You're reading it correctly but you aren't taking into consideration the absoprtion rate. 100mg of test gel will not be absorbed through the skin at a rate of 100%. As Crom stated, the percentage is much lower thus only approximately 10grams of test will be utilized in the body.
 

mojo jojo

New member
Registered
Joined
Apr 16, 2007
Messages
521
The person who wrote the article is not a person who did the actual study. The writer is seriously biased and is making a lot of assertions from a single study.

Here is an example of a quote taken from the study itself:

"The men in the trial were in bad condition. Many had high blood pressure, diabetes or a cardiovascular problem. Their average age was 74. The researchers conclude that older men in this kind of condition should not use testosterone, but do not exclude its use for other groups. "Caution is warranted in extrapolating these findings to other populations, particularly young men who have hypogonadism without cardiovascular disease or limitations in mobility", they write."

And then here is the author's assertion based on the above quote:

"The makers of this study are not your average scientists. They are the experts. If these people say that older men should not be using testosterone, then there’s only conclusion to be drawn: testosterone is not an anti-aging drug. "

If there was really only one conclusion to be drawn then why didn't the scientists who did the study state that in the study? Of course it is not because you cannot draw that conclusion from this study at all. Sadly the author even goes against a direct quotes s/he took from the study eg "The researchers conclude that older men in this kind of condition should not use testosterone, but do not exclude its use for other groups" and "Caution is warranted in extrapolating these findings to other populations".

The author is biased and is looking to prove his or her own beliefs. This study did show one thing and that is Men around the age of 74 and in bad medical condition should not use testosterone. Any conclusion other then that is pure speculation.
 

Emery

New member
Kilo Klub Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2009
Messages
1,335
Not only were they on hefty dosages but they were being subjected to exercise as well? What about diet alterations? There are many variables here that I don't understand.

Why start at such a high dose? Why start with such unhealthy individuals?

You just can't trust pharma companies. They have agendas that are associated with money. Not health promotion, money promotion.

HRT is good business for Pharma companies though. Potentially could keep men on for life. That's a lot of return business!!
 

sirpumpsalot

New member
Newbies
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
13
Dumb Study

:naughty: Who in their right friggin mind would suggest that a 70yr old, or a 20yr old, that has never had exsperience with AAS, start doseing or even pyramid that high....... it's the stupidest thing Ive heard in a long time. I am 49 and been treating the AAS with respect for about 2yrs now, and still dont dose that high. Damnit man!!! Right now if I were to hit 600mg TC my head would pulse with every beat of my heart at night when I layed down to sleep. :banghead:
 
Last edited:

triathloncoach

Featured Member / Kilo Klub / Board Supporter
Featured Member
Board Supporter
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
4,425
Not complete bunk

Although I certainly do not agree with anything about the study design, it was PUBLISHED in the New England Journal of Medicine. (If I read that correctly).

The New England Journal of Medicine is 100% inarguably the MOST prestigious medical journal. Maybe they were very optimistic about the benefits of Testosterone. Maybe they chose "Train Wreck" old and sick patients hoping for a miraculous improvement.

They did provide fair balance by saying that HRT may still be beneficial to a healthier population.

The authors must be extrememly smart, well respected researchers to be published in the NEJM. Maybe they were simply "swinging for the fence". And missed.
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Total page views
502,878,504
Threads
123,554
Messages
2,356,845
Members
155,166
Latest member
Liang
Top