Medical dosage of anadrol

Maybe it all gets excreted somehow before even making it to the liver in medical patients.

we KNOW guys get fucked up liver values in their blood work on “reasonable” doses in 50-100mg range

Must be some fundamental difference somewhere
 
Maybe it all gets excreted somehow before even making it to the liver in medical patients.
Probably not

Torn down muscle in the blood stream shows as liver enzymes, the test doesn't know the difference, guys who train have a lot more of that than the patients in the studies probably do.
 
Ok so in the past I’ve argued that we are way too weird about anadrol in particular. Moreso Reddit but just as a generality. They talk like 25mg anadrol for 4wks will give instant liver failure, when medical literature cites that one can generally take doses far higher and longer than that used by our community with negligible side effects.

The other half of looking at medicinal uses is that this is a game of risk:reward. An AIDS patient (as a random, but common example) will have a different risk:reward profile than a healthy bodybuilder. If they don’t receive this (or whatever) medicine they may die, thus it’s favorable for them to take the medicine even if it damages systems of their body. With us though we aren’t risking death or organ failure if we don’t use anabolics, so 0mg is the optimal dosage and the further above that the worse you’re hurting your body.
I think that’s a really good point. There is something of a countervailing consideration, however, which is that there are compounds that can get you to the same place with a lower risk if you’re willing to be more patient.

As I type that, though, there is a strong argument to limit the duration of cycles even if it means a higher (though shorter) risk exposure. Ideally, someone on a cycle is insanely dialed in on food, training, blood work, and sleep, with everything organized to make the most of the risk they’re taking. For someone with a family and a career, that amount of time and attention may not be possible for sixteen weeks. In that case, these relatively more toxic, but quickly effective, compounds (anadrol, tren) may be the safer way to arrive at a desired endpoint.

Who the fuck knows, really… it takes all kinds.
 
I’ve only tried 25mg and 50mg for a few weeks each at the different doses and always noticed incredible fullness and strength gains. I can’t imagine running 2-500mg
 
i was also taking test and deca. just felt like i couldnt eat and weak felt like shit, went away as soon as i stopped taking anadrol. took milk thistle nac and tudca too.
Man idk how it never slows my eating like other people, my liver must be a beast, I'm on 100mg pharma drol and 20mg 3rd world pharma sdrol right now and I wish my appetite wasn't so insane, I'm averaging almost exactly 5kcalories a day over the last 3.5 weeks at 217lbs, it's supposed to be 4500 but I fucked up twice and had an 8kcalorie day, plus going slightly over a lot of days. I eat pretty damn clean except for the fuckup moments and my Mrs. Buttersworth syrup in my preworkoutnmeal. High fructose corn syrup is bomb af, I tried some Log cabin syrup with no high fructose corn syrup amd it sucks ass. How well were you hydrating?
 
So I’m considering running the higher end of my recommended medical dosage for my weight, I’ve never gone over 250MG anadrol a day but with the higher end of medical dosage being 5MG/KG of bodyweight a day I think I’m going to throw 650MG Anadrol a day to start my next cycle, anyway my question being, I always liked my orals pre workout but will 650MG be too much all in one go ? Should I split the dosage up ?

Cheers for the advice in advance

“Oxandrin is available in 2.5 and 10 mg tablets. The daily adult dosage of Oxandrin is 2.5 mg to 20 mg given in 2 to 4 divided doses.”
 
You’re confusing oxandrolone and oxymethelone. Oxandrin in anavar
My mistake. I searched for Oxymetholone and Google decided I meant otherwise. I should have checked my results.

I find it very hard to believe that oxymetholone is dosed that high medically, which is why I googled it in the first place. But apparently it is!
 
The 5 mg/kg dosage is not intended for bodybuilding men, it's for anemic girls. 5 mg * 105 kg is qualitatively different from 5 mg * 30 kg (150 mg/d as an upper limit).
 
150 mg/d as an upper limit
This is what I was wondering. With pharmaceuticals, there is always an upper limit - do not exceed this dosage - regardless of what the therapeutic indication in amount/kg?

At any rate, as long as i can remember, bodybuilders always thought that even the upper limit of 150mg/d was crazy and dangerous.

Something else worth noting is that there is big difference in safety profile of a cycle of 150mg/d of Anadrol vs. 150mg/d Anadrol + AAS #2 + AAS #3 stacks that are more typical of bodybuilding use.
 
This is what I was wondering. With pharmaceuticals, there is always an upper limit - do not exceed this dosage - regardless of what the therapeutic indication in amount/kg?
Dosage is a bit of a malleable, contextual concept. While dosage relative to body mass is useful, it is unidimensional and can suffer from misapplication at its extremes (e.g., anemic female children vs. poly-AAS using superheavyweight male IFBB pros). Here are my notes on oxymetholone dosage, from various sources:

Data from [15]:
- n=31 Experimental chronically underweight patients (21 >= +3 lb b.w.; avg. b.w. +8.1 lb & +4.1 lb in first week; 7.5 mg [2.5 thrice daily])
- n=1 for N, P, Ca balance: 2130 kcal, 12.7 g N, 1.6 g Ca, 1.7 g P intake

| Dose | Days | N excretion (g/day) | P " | Ca " |
|-------------|------|---------------------|-----|------|
| Control | 6 | 10.6 | .76 | .56 |
| 10 mg daily | 9 | 6.6 | .62 | .28 |
| Control | 6 | 11.2 | .89 | .69 |
| 20 mg | 10 | 8.9 | .90 | .79 |
| Control | 6 | 10.1 | .80 | .78 |
| 30 mg | 7 | 8.9 | .83 | .80 |


100 mg v. 150 mg HIV eugonadal men and women; 50 mg 2x daily likely MED
The results of the double-blinded RCT on 100 mg daily Adrol vs. 150 mg daily showed that that 27% (n=8) of the 100 mg group vs. 35% (n=11) of the 150 mg group saw ALT, AST, or GGT elevated by >5-fold (in HIV wasting patients). This is classified as grade 3/4 liver toxicity. By week 16, the dose-dependency of the liver toxicity was evident, with only 8% of patients at 50 mg daily experiencing grade 3/4 liver toxicity. All liver toxicity was reversible after cessation of use [86].

[220] Review of Oxymetholone (Effective Dose, PK, etc.)
Effective Dose
...The recommended daily dose of oxymetholone is 1 to 5 mg/kg body weight per day in children & adults with anemias caused by deficient red cell production. The usual effective dose is 1 to 2 mg/kg per day...individualized...3 to 6 months.

[87] 100 mg > 50 mg daily
Indeed, with 50 and 100 mg/day of oxymetholone, total LBM increased by 3.3 ± 1.2 and 4.2 ± 2.4 kg, respectively. These effects are of a magnitude similar to that achieved with 125 and 300 mg of testosterone enanthate (2.9 ± 0.8 and 5.5 ± 0.7 kg, respectively)
The 100 mg group gained 0.9 kg more than the 50 mg group

Duchaine:
50 mg tabs (Syntex #2902)... most powerful oral steroid commercially available... Exceptional at building up RBC levels, its approved use is for combating anemia. It is a borderline androgen, 5α-reducible and estrogenic, and is the second most liver toxic oral steroid. Average oral dosages for men at 25 to 150 mgs(+) per day...men become more sensitive to its side effects a they age. Very few women use (masculinizing)... users comment that although they are very strong while on it, they usually feel sick at the same time.

From Dose-Response for LBM increase:
* oxymetholone (Anadrol) maximally stimulates N retention at 30 mg daily [263]. Note that N retention is similarly a unidimensional concept that fails to encompass all AAS mechanisms of muscle anabolism & anticatabolism especially coupled with high protein diets & progressive resistance training.
At any rate, as long as i can remember, bodybuilders always thought that even the upper limit of 150mg/d was crazy and dangerous.

Something else worth noting is that there is big difference in safety profile of a cycle of 150mg/d of Anadrol vs. 150mg/d Anadrol + AAS #2 + AAS #3 stacks that are more typical of bodybuilding use.
Exactly right. Now, on a certain BB forum that promotes very high dosing, there is a popular thread making the case for 500 mg/d oxymetholone because there is an instance of superheavyweight, international strongman competitor that is reputed to have reported using this dose in a private communication to a particular, high dose advocating influencer there.

Obviously, this, even if true, is not a good reason for such dosing for the average person, it is a case for individualization. We are talking 160 kg strength athletes that compete at the highest level of sport with decadeslong patterns of increasing AAS use.
 
Man idk how it never slows my eating like other people, my liver must be a beast, I'm on 100mg pharma drol and 20mg 3rd world pharma sdrol right now and I wish my appetite wasn't so insane, I'm averaging almost exactly 5kcalories a day over the last 3.5 weeks at 217lbs, it's supposed to be 4500 but I fucked up twice and had an 8kcalorie day, plus going slightly over a lot of days. I eat pretty damn clean except for the fuckup moments and my Mrs. Buttersworth syrup in my preworkoutnmeal. High fructose corn syrup is bomb af, I tried some Log cabin syrup with no high fructose corn syrup amd it sucks ass. How well were you hydrating?
guess hydrate well enough, no other orals did this, i love mixing dbol and winstrol that comes with other issues but nothing serious, winstrol can make you feel very angry suicidal. i did 50mg of dbol for last few days without winstrol but it was making my stomach feel weird, like id feel very full then 30mins later id be starving. everything went back to normal a day or 2 after stopping orals.
 
This is what I was wondering. With pharmaceuticals, there is always an upper limit - do not exceed this dosage - regardless of what the therapeutic indication in amount/kg?
There are two or three closely related ideas when it comes to upper limits for drugs, the maximum safe dose (MAXSD) and the maximum recommended therapeutic dose (MRTD). There another, which is the maximum effective dose (MAXED). They're defined slightly differently but, for everyday medical decisions, they're largely viewed as the same thing.

MAXED and MRTD are the most closely related. Max effective identifies where there is a plateau in efficacy beyond which more doesn't do anything. Max recc. identifies plateaus, similar to max effective, but will pull back the dose further based on when the side effect profile exceeds the benefit.

You can see the first bit of wiggle room already... if a medication treats two different conditions, and one is way more serious than the other, the max recc of the same drug is going to be different. A drug that targets WASF3 for cancer is reasonable to take at doses that cause really profound side effects because the alternative is death. If the same drug is used to treat chronic fatigue, you may end up making yourself worse off if you take an oncological dose.

Max safe (in some formulations) looks at ONLY the side effect profile, forgetting the plateau analysis -- how much can a body handle without severe toxicity. This is a useful number to have floating around -- maybe you have a really oddball patient with a super rare mu-opioid receptor mutation and you ONLY have opioids for a surgery. Will a typically supertherapeutic dose induce liver damage, for instance. Or if a drug is discovered to treat a secondary condition, questions of effective and therapeutic dosages may vary based on the new mechanism of action. On the other hand, if a drug partitions right into

And of course, there's the statistical reality... these are all averages, and individual physiology varies. Most of us carry more muscle and less fat than an average dude. Depending on how a drug is partitioned among tissues, that may make a huge difference, so even a mass per bodyweight range is just an estimate.

The problem with these numbers of AAS is that they're derived from the incredibly narrow use cases that some of the drugs are approved for. Some researchers work on approximating these figures from illicit use, but the error bars are much larger... trusting someone to record their own data and assuming the drug they're taking is what they think it is. But for most of the compounds we're interested in, we're so dissimilar to the patient population both in health status and body composition that it's all very grain-of-salt stuff. You have to look at which tissues are the first to experience deleterious effect and then make a rough guess if body differences will substantially inform the number.

It's, frustratingly, another area where bro science and other people's misfortunes are still our best guides.
 
im running like 550 mg of total test/primo. when i pop anavar it feels like I'm on 2 grams of gear. the workout is ungodly, the pumps are nasty, and im only talking about 25mg anavar

havent had the need to venture past test/primo/sometimes anavar.

i couldnt imagine trying 100mg anadrol LMAO but then again im a baby faced newbie
 
OP are you running the drol yet? Step your game up and drop that mouthful of pills already.

You're gonna be so fucking sick within a week you won't continue, just the water retention in your gut alone might break you off. You better have a Proton pump inhibitor on hand or else you're gonna be barfing stomach acid all the time, just 50 to 100mg turns my stomach into a volcano
 
There are two or three closely related ideas when it comes to upper limits for drugs, the maximum safe dose (MAXSD) and the maximum recommended therapeutic dose (MRTD). There another, which is the maximum effective dose (MAXED). They're defined slightly differently but, for everyday medical decisions, they're largely viewed as the same thing.

MAXED and MRTD are the most closely related. Max effective identifies where there is a plateau in efficacy beyond which more doesn't do anything. Max recc. identifies plateaus, similar to max effective, but will pull back the dose further based on when the side effect profile exceeds the benefit.

You can see the first bit of wiggle room already... if a medication treats two different conditions, and one is way more serious than the other, the max recc of the same drug is going to be different. A drug that targets WASF3 for cancer is reasonable to take at doses that cause really profound side effects because the alternative is death. If the same drug is used to treat chronic fatigue, you may end up making yourself worse off if you take an oncological dose.

Max safe (in some formulations) looks at ONLY the side effect profile, forgetting the plateau analysis -- how much can a body handle without severe toxicity. This is a useful number to have floating around -- maybe you have a really oddball patient with a super rare mu-opioid receptor mutation and you ONLY have opioids for a surgery. Will a typically supertherapeutic dose induce liver damage, for instance. Or if a drug is discovered to treat a secondary condition, questions of effective and therapeutic dosages may vary based on the new mechanism of action. On the other hand, if a drug partitions right into

And of course, there's the statistical reality... these are all averages, and individual physiology varies. Most of us carry more muscle and less fat than an average dude. Depending on how a drug is partitioned among tissues, that may make a huge difference, so even a mass per bodyweight range is just an estimate.

The problem with these numbers of AAS is that they're derived from the incredibly narrow use cases that some of the drugs are approved for. Some researchers work on approximating these figures from illicit use, but the error bars are much larger... trusting someone to record their own data and assuming the drug they're taking is what they think it is. But for most of the compounds we're interested in, we're so dissimilar to the patient population both in health status and body composition that it's all very grain-of-salt stuff. You have to look at which tissues are the first to experience deleterious effect and then make a rough guess if body differences will substantially inform the number.

It's, frustratingly, another area where bro science and other people's misfortunes are still our best guides.
I just learned a few things. Thank you.
 
Top