Anchillaries/Carcinogenicity/Oestrogens REVISED!

[GrymReefer]

Estrogens/Anabolics/Ancillaries/Carcinogenicity/HPTA Revised!

Still In Progress. Posting section at a time to avoid the incident that occurred on the previous attempt when I had some interaction with HTML and WAPKA or something along those lines. Also taking my time to make sure everything actually makes sense. If you see something illogical point it out besides the title. I know there is typo in the title and I tried fixing it, but its still at its previous name. I will eventually properly source everything with correct citations and a proper bibliography.


Estrogens/Anabolics/Ancillaries/Carcinogenicity/HPTA!........and anything else that magically became a related topic halfway through writing.
by: The GrymiestReefer

(fix interchanging usage of estrogen/oestrogen to not confuse)


-food for thought

The HPTA!

in revision





Aromatase Inhibitors, Estradiol and Carcinogenicity!

Source 1 First topic source is provided by The Department of Health and Human Services. This is an official document in reference to The National Toxicology Program.
Source 2 NIOSH list of hazardous drug substances
Source 3 "Aromatase inhibitor-associated bone and musculoskeletal effects: new evidence defining etiology and strategies for management" study

Now I have read a few times in various places within the internet that an AI (Aromatase Inhibitor) isn't always necessary on cycle. This is usually led with the claim that as long as one does not recognize physical estrogenic side effects then the individual's e2 (estradiol) is in check. I'm only referring to E2 because majority of us actively posting are males. Just to clarify E1 is estrone. E3 is estriol. These two are significantly less potent than E2 and thus are generally negligible for this specific post. That is why males get a HPLC-MS test called Sensitive Estradiol Assay. Females posses those estrogenic compounds in larger volumes.

Enough with the confusion....

The reason I believe in why you should use an AI on cycle at all times is to mitigate the influx of the aromatase enzyme's activity. To me, it doesn't make sense to leave the enzyme uninhibited. Estrogenic side effects can be internal and external so playing the guessing game without proper blood work is futile. Especially those who aren't necessarily sensitive to the common physical side effects. Just because you don't have excessive water retention, early precursors associated with gynecomastia development, erectile dysfunction or insomnia to name a few does not mean that you don't have abnormally high estrogen concentration in your blood.
Now, I am not saying that you should completely remove estrogen from the equation, either. Within normal ranges it brings along potential benefits especially if managed properly on cycle. Abnormally low estrogen levels contribute to fatigue, diminished skin appearance, feeling like straight shit and the funny thing is it also affects your sex drive. Regardless of high or low estrogen becomes your friend down their isn't going to perform like you want it to. Even if you try to beat that thing like it owes you money it won't respond.

Another good example of why you should control your estrogen is that it is a known carcinogen. Refer to this little excerpt from the first source:

“The National Toxicology Program previously evaluated some specific steroidal estrogens, including conjugated estrogens (listed in the Fourth Annual Report on Carcinogens
in 1985 as known to be human carcinogens)and a number of individual nonconjugated steroidal estrogens, including estradiol-17β, estrone, ethinylestradiol, and mestranol (which also were listed in the
Fourth Annual Report on Carcinogens in 1985 as reasonably anticipated to be human carcinogens). In identifying steroidal estrogens as carcinogenic to humans..”

Now if you could control the impact of something that possesses a carcinogenic nature and quite a profound one ( Group 1 IARC carcinogens) would you? Why let something pose a risk over and over when you can take the time to get appropriate blood work and suffer through one instance of figuring out how much in reference to AI dosaging you need to supplement your individualistic needs. It is possible to properly control estrogen on cycle, keep it within an appropriate level that mimics natural serum concentrate and have a negligible impact on your overall net increase in LBM from your cycle.
If for some reason you also think that AIs are hazardous substances then you are correct. But, in reference to estradiol it isn't a fair comparison. They both have vastly different toxicity mechanics, but the bright side is that anastrozole for example is not considered carcinogenic in nature. It even shows less of a negative impact than tamoxifen in reference to source 3.


SERMs, PCT, Toxicity and Gynecomastia!

Source 1 "Hormonal effects of an antiestrogen, tamoxifen, in normal and oligospermic men." study


in revision

 

[NeighborMike]

Stuff like this is why I stick to basic AAS use...
I never believed there was a reason to use various things unless a problem arose..ive never once used PCT and always seemed to recover fine..never had problems with gyno either

I think adding all type of extra stuff comes alone around like those who suggest people take massive dosses of gear

 

[Yeetbeat]

^^^ which echoes GF's stance - minimise polypharmacy everywhere possible. The less compounds you're sticking in your body, the better. At the very least it'll save possible confusion!

Keeping a keen eye on this thread. OP has already given me some interesting insight and proc'd some thinking cheers Grym!

 

[GrymReefer]

^^^ which echoes GF's stance - minimise polypharmacy everywhere possible. The less compounds you're sticking in your body, the better. At the very least it'll save possible confusion!

Keeping a keen eye on this thread. OP has already given me some interesting insight and proc'd some thinking cheers Grym!

Stuff like this is why I stick to basic AAS use...
I never believed there was a reason to use various things unless a problem arose..ive never once used PCT and always seemed to recover fine..never had problems with gyno either

I think adding all type of extra stuff comes alone around like those who suggest people take massive dosses of gear

I know at all costs you should reduce polypharmacy, but my best cycle (albeit I've only done 4 total) was when I finally dialed in on controlling estrogen properly, utilizing HCG to minimize testicular atrophy, and having a successful PCT to help restart the natural feedback associated with my HPTA. (finally understanding performance nutrition was 60% of it) I'm all about harm reduction and I truly believe that coming off of exogenous administration without proper PCT or at least a tapered dose minimizes your total net gain of LBM and has lasting effects on the HPTA.

Agreeing with what you said Mike, using all these various compounds can also have lasting effects on the body if each individual compound isn't understood appropriately and utilized effectively.

I'm waiting for GF to come melt my face some more and this time around I'm trying to make sure if I am saying something I have multiple sources to back it up and sources that could possibly contradict it. Trying to get every possible angle.

I just want to create a PCT discussion that gets pretty in depth. Hopefully it ends up just becoming a resource of various studies, ideologies surrounding personal protocols and approaches, pros and cons and some harm reduction theories. AAS usage in reference to fitness is pretty much undocumented due to laws so it is pretty hard to dictate a one shoe fits all approach.

 

[GrymReefer]

I know this thread does seem to facilitate the notion of polypharmacy, but that is not my goal to try to promote that. I'm trying to showcase all the variables that I feel are ignored, but are definitely substantial factors that if properly understood could help an individual lessen the harm he may bring upon himself. This may even be eye opening for those that believe steroids are the simple solution to muscular development and it will alleviate poor diet, genetics or motivation. It definitely isn't an easy way out and the sheer complexity when trying to perfect a cycle protocol can be frustrating.

You have to think if you meticulously monitored and attempted to control every possible variable that you can tangibly interact with and maintained the optimum levels for key markers associated with maximal muscle development, would your gains be substantially larger than before? I say yes and no. Controlling the variables on cycle would create the perfect storm for hypertrophy/hyperplasia and executing an effective PCT to bring the body back into its desired equilibrium would mitigate the possible loss of LBM. It could even help alleviate symptoms that an individual may be highly prone to. Is this going to cause that 8 week cycle to produce 25 lbs vs 15 lbs? Highly doubt it. Is the proper maintenance and understanding going to allow someone to keep 15 lbs prior to PCT vs. his 8 lbs he experienced before? Possibly.

Now I know this writing definitely won't apply to the cruisers/blasters here, but maybe if they wanted to come off and return to natural physiological levels then this could possibly give a little insight.