HuckingFuge
New Member
I'm going with bro science. most research are so flawed it makes me pissed I wasted my time reading them.
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Insulin Does Not Increase Muscle Protein Synthesis Rate
- Thread starter Michael Scally MD
- Start date
Sure that makes sense, providing you read and understand what you criticize after posing a legitimate argument. But then again reading isn't for everyone Huck
Voltrader
New Member
I don't take insulin nor will I ever take insulin but this thread I have so far thoroughly enjoyed. I am glad it is on my radar.
HuckingFuge
New Member
Sure that makes sense, providing you read and understand what you criticize after posing a legitimate argument. But then again reading isn't for everyone Huck
most all research is a joke when it comes to being healthy. nothing is done right or at high enough doses to get results. I'll be the human guinea pig. maybe some of the over educated idiots should listen to the bro science guys. maybe, just maybe they'll open up their eyes and minds. they might learn something new. medical science is stuck in a rut to just make meds that fuck you up to need other meds to fix what the other med screwed up.
Oh I sense just a little bit of bias there Huck
But let me tell you something the quinea pigs many bros have become would NEVER be approved as a research study and if I prescribed most of these meds as an off label indication, the minute an adverse effect occurred I'd have attorneys and lawsuits coming out my ears.
We have to use the research we have Huck rather than discounting its importance or relevance entirely. I sincerely hope you don't believe the medical advances that have occurred over the past half century were the consequence of patients experimenting with this, that, or theirs.
Bc if you think that's the answer, everyone just do their own thing, traditional medical practice of the early 19th century, medical practice HURT more patients than it helped bc of the very behaviors your embracing.
Last edited:
Voltrader
New Member
I hear what he is saying though. You just don't see research on the things we do. Research is good as it does apply but quite a bit doesn't apply to Supra levels that are typically run while on cycle. So quite of bit of what we learn is from our experiences and discussing these. Don't get me wrong there is a ton of research that does apply and a bunch that doesn't.
Roid Rage
New Member
I learned all my bro science from professional bro scientist Dom Mazzetti. I even graduated from his D.A.R.E (Dianabol, Anavar and Ritalin Everyday) program. That program is only for advanced level broscientists, though.
It would be easier to legitimize your general dissatisfaction with medicine or medical research but how about providing ANY EXAMPLES to support your ALL or NONE / BLACK or WHITE claims of medical malfeasance.
1) Hmm NOTHING IS DONE RIGHT really? I take it that's why people are living longer today or maybe its the supps championed by bro's that's improving our mortality
2) Tell me ONE THING bro science has proven HUCK, ONE?
3) Meds that fuck you up really. Have you ever thought that certain disease have risks associated with therapy? You know that SERM or AI you have used for PCT did it fuck you up more than YOU DID? How about that breast cancer patient is she more fcked up bc her CA is aggressive and whose function mimics that of normal human cells thus making therapy very complicated yet those drugs prolonged her life by 1 year?
How about those antibiotics that make some puke but cured that pneumonia that put many in the grave as little as 50 years ago?
4) Can you provide examples Huck for your critical recitals or do you never want such rants to be credible!
Ok for those bro scientists out there here is one article I located that shows insulin in SUPRAPHYSIOLOGIC doses MAY enhance protein synthesis.
But before some bro from Eroids pounces on this citation as "proof" insulin is another AAS they should first ask several questions, to include at least the following:
This is one article that some may discount as worthless or a review article also being worthless when the fact is they are indeed relevant and are a hell of a lot better than relying on the experience of one individual to determine efficacy.
I mean utilizing the risks or benefits observed by one to guide therapy is what's worthless on a comparative basis
An unfortunate factoid of broism is it enables the believers of bro to discount literature wo any need for discretion.
I've heard the same argument time and time again bc a specific citation sucks IT ALL sucks and the only thing we bros can rely upon is ourselves. What a lame excuse for not exercising the brain along with those biceps.
I mean how shallow do some want to be, pretty damn shallow IMO!
1) Were other know anabolic hormones such as TT and GH controlled for ?
2) How and at what dose was insulin administered and is it reproducible or practical in a real time setting?
3) Was the influence of Amino Acids, as anabolic agents, accounted for ?
4) What methodology was utilized to determine what effect insulin had on PS?
5) What was the duration of therapy and would an attenuated response been anticipated (bc of the development of IR) with longer "therapy"?
I posted this article not to refute Dr Scally's citation but to confirm it, since SP doses of insulin were suggested as potentially anabolic . . . . .. . . . . . . but is it practical?
Oops will download the article when I'm at my computer rather than limited by this iPhone.
But before some bro from Eroids pounces on this citation as "proof" insulin is another AAS they should first ask several questions, to include at least the following:
This is one article that some may discount as worthless or a review article also being worthless when the fact is they are indeed relevant and are a hell of a lot better than relying on the experience of one individual to determine efficacy.
I mean utilizing the risks or benefits observed by one to guide therapy is what's worthless on a comparative basis
An unfortunate factoid of broism is it enables the believers of bro to discount literature wo any need for discretion.
I've heard the same argument time and time again bc a specific citation sucks IT ALL sucks and the only thing we bros can rely upon is ourselves. What a lame excuse for not exercising the brain along with those biceps.
I mean how shallow do some want to be, pretty damn shallow IMO!
1) Were other know anabolic hormones such as TT and GH controlled for ?
2) How and at what dose was insulin administered and is it reproducible or practical in a real time setting?
3) Was the influence of Amino Acids, as anabolic agents, accounted for ?
4) What methodology was utilized to determine what effect insulin had on PS?
5) What was the duration of therapy and would an attenuated response been anticipated (bc of the development of IR) with longer "therapy"?
I posted this article not to refute Dr Scally's citation but to confirm it, since SP doses of insulin were suggested as potentially anabolic . . . . .. . . . . . . but is it practical?
Oops will download the article when I'm at my computer rather than limited by this iPhone.
A-a-Ron
New Member
What I've read from several studies is that there were varied results. The only consistency was when SP doses were used. However, none of the studies included the use of AAS or GH.
I'm not saying this to argue one side or another. However, my personal conclusion is insulin by itself is a risk not worth taking. I doubt there are any studies that are conducted with a large enough sample to draw a conclusion on whether AAS or GH make insulin a gain changer. Although, some of the studies do suggest insulin provides an increase in nutrient rich blood to the muscle. That would not necessarily mean it is an anabolic agent in itself....from the way I interpreted things anyway.
The problem is you cannot study cause and effect from personal experiences. You cannot control variables, study populations, control for placebo, calculate statistical significance, etc from personal experiences bc half the time you're running underdosed or bunk gear, running crap quality SERMs or ancillaries, not doing blood work, etc.
It's pretty easy to criticize science and research from the comfort of one's own home (that was built in large part bc of science), with your central air AC or heat on (which was in enter due to science), typing on the computer (which was developed by scientists), sendin messages over the internet (which was designed by scientists and Al Gore), and talking about steroids which were manufactured through science. This doesn't even touch upon the "meds that fuck you upto need other meds to fix what the other med screwed up" part where you're on steroids (meds) and need to take AI, SERMs, HCG and more (other meds) to fix what the first fucked up. You're going to criticize science and the medical field for the same exact shit you happen to be doing to yourself? That doesn't deseve a rebuttal even.
Voltrader
New Member
You can't read. You feeling a little butt hurt by my statement that SOME research does not apply to us and really has no business being used it is apples to oranges. Yet people love throwing it around. You must be a researcher
. I think I was pretty clear I like both. I can't tell you though how many times research is thrown around that is completely irrelevant though.
You can't read. You feeling a little butt hurt by my statement that SOME research does not apply to us and really has no business being used it is apples to oranges. Yet people love throwing it around. You must be a researcher
Hey V I'm sure DOCD would correct me if I was in error, but in fairness to DOC I know he was not referring to your post but rather the HUCKISM comments which preceded your post.
HuckingFuge
New Member
lol no one took an AI back before your stupid research said Test should be used as a base for cycles. I wasn't just referring to only AAS use. you have the protein research intake that is a total joke. protein being bad for the kidneys. that research was done on rabbits, that is a joke. cholesterol meds are a joke. I can go on and on, but you will keep trying to say how stupid I am, cause I'm not an educated idiot. peer review is a fucking joke.
technology is advancing and medicine is retracting. since we want to compare apples and oranges.
technology is advancing and medicine is retracting. since we want to compare apples and oranges.
You can't read. You feeling a little butt hurt by my statement that SOME research does not apply to us and really has no business being used it is apples to oranges. Yet people love throwing it around. You must be a researcher
I can read very well and my butt happens to feel quite lovely this morning. Maybe you're feeling a bit butt hurt bc I quoted the wrong person? My apologies for that but the point remains.
I'm sure you have plenty of examples to give me of how research is thrown out that is competely irrelevant. There's one problem with that though. That's the problem of the person throwing around the research not the research itself....
And I'm only a researcher in my spare time. It's not my profession
The problem with your Huckisms is they are NOT referenced.
So what you believe increasing protein intake can't alter renal function studies Huck? And you honestly believe that type of data was only performed on Rabbits.
Huck now your making ignorant comments to support your generalized disdain for medicine.
So Huck please define how cholesterol ends "are a JOKE" since they have saved MANY lives for those with familial hypercholesterolemia?
I honestly don't know why I even waste my time rebutting these unsubstantiated comments of yours!
So what you believe increasing protein intake can't alter renal function studies Huck? And you honestly believe that type of data was only performed on Rabbits.
Huck now your making ignorant comments to support your generalized disdain for medicine.
So Huck please define how cholesterol ends "are a JOKE" since they have saved MANY lives for those with familial hypercholesterolemia?
I honestly don't know why I even waste my time rebutting these unsubstantiated comments of yours!
And everybody and there mother used to smoke before the research told us it can cause cancer. Nobody used airbags or seatbelts until the stupid research told them they could help save lives. Nobody was taking an antibiotic when they got infections until that stupid research told us it could kill the bacteria. So what exactly is your point about AI use then vs now? That we know better now? Bc that's clearly evident to most.
The research doesn't say protein is bad for kidneys. The research says those with kidney issues can be better off with a reduced protein intake and then some idiot took that to mean protein is bad for the kidneys. So instead of blaming the messenger who is at fault you discount the message which is your right to do so but had the human race done that enough times throughout history we'd still be living with the Black Death in midevil times, not driving cars to go down the street to the corner store.....
Nowhere am I saying you're stupid. I have not said that once anywhere. What I am saying is you're too biased and myopic to see the difference between research being applied correctly and research being applied incorrectly.
Relying on bro science aka anecdotes aka glorified story time is the joke. In the absence of more compelling and objective evidence it can have a place to be discussed but it proves nothing in the end whether you care to admit that or not.
Voltrader
New Member
Well thanks DOCD its a sensitive subject but I have learned from Broscience most of which was done on myself so Volscience I guess and clinical studies. You know I was giving you a hard time more then anything.I can read very well and my butt happens to feel quite lovely this morning. Maybe you're feeling a bit butt hurt bc I quoted the wrong person? My apologies for that but the point remains.
I'm sure you have plenty of examples to give me of how research is thrown out that is competely irrelevant. There's one problem with that though. That's the problem of the person throwing around the research not the research itself....
And I'm only a researcher in my spare time. It's not my profession
I hope you don't mind but I plan on using Volscience in real life from now on. That ones just too good to pass up hahaha.
HuckingFuge
New Member
cholesterol meds haven't saved any lives. people still die from clogged arteries while taking cholesterol meds, BP meds and what ever else they are prescribed. the medical industry preaches lives are saved and the sheep believe it. they are giving cholesterol meds to people that do not even have high cholesterol. carbs, insulin, and shitty diets are to blame for clogged arteries, not cholesterol.
I would like to read some honest fucking research. I've not done that in a long time, cause everyone has an agenda now days.
stop wasting your time with, cause I don't believe your shit you spout and you don't believe my shit, so we are even.
Similar threads
