Think DNP Can Be Used Safely? Think Again

CensoredBoardsSuck

Master
10+ Year Member
It's the time of year when bodybuilders start looking for ways to shed body fat and the interest for many invariably turns to DNP. There are articles on the internet that suggest DNP can be used safely if you're smart about it. Nothing could be further from the truth. DNP is a poison that has lead to cataracts, renal failure and deaths due to hyperthermia. It has an extremely narrow therapeutic index, i.e. the dose of DNP required to induce weight loss is very close to its lethal dose. In addition, its effects are unpredictable. A dose that was well tolerated in a previous cycle might not be tolerated on the next. As the use of DNP continues to gain in popularity, the death rate will continue to climb. There is no safe dose of DNP.

The first two studies below note the dosage of DNP in which deaths have occurred. These dosages are the same dosages currently being advertised as safe and the ones most often used by bodybuilders.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, deaths have occurred in people who ingested 3--46 mg of dinitrophenols per kg of body weight per day (3-46 mg/kg/day) for short periods or 1--4 mg/kg/day for long periods.

Reports of DNP poisoning related to weight loss appear to be becoming more common. McFee et al. (13) reported the death of a 22-year-old male 16 h after his last DNP dose, estimated at 600 mg/day over four days for weight loss.



Journal of Analytical Toxicology, Vol. 30, April 2006

Case Report
Two Deaths Attributed to the Use of 2,4-Dinitrophenol
Estuardo J. Miranda 1, lain M. Mclntyre 2, Dawn R. Parker 2, Ray D. Gary 2, and Barry K. Logan TM


We report the cases of two individuals, one in Tacoma, WA, and
the second in San Diego, CA, whose deaths were attributed to
ingestion of 2,4-dinitrophenol (2,4-DNP). 2,4-DNP has historically
been used as a herbicide and fungicide. By uncoupling
mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation, the drug causes a
marked increase in fat metabolism that has led to its use to aid
weight loss. Both cases reported here involved its use for this
purpose. Features common to both cases included markedly
elevated body temperature, rapid pulse and respiration, yellow
coloring of the viscera at autopsy, history of use of weight loss or
body building supplements, and presence of a yellow powder at
the decedent's residence. Because of its acidic nature, the drug is
not detected in the basic drug fraction of most analytical protocols,
but it is recovered in the acid/neutral fraction of biological extracts
and can be measured by high-performance liquid chromatography
or gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. The concentration
of 2,4-DNP in the admission blood samples of the two deaths
reported here were 36.1 and 28 rag/L, respectively. Death in both
cases was attributed to 2,4-DNP toxicity. Review of information
available on the internet suggests that, although banned,
2,4-DNP is still illicitly promoted for weight loss.
Introduction


[In the paper below, McFee et al. reported the death of a 22-year-old male 16 h after his last DNP dose, estimated at 600 mg/day over four days.]

Vet Hum Toxicol. 2004 Oct;46(5):251-4.
Dying to be thin: a dinitrophenol related fatality.
McFee RB1, Caraccio TR, McGuigan MA, Reynolds SA, Bellanger P.

Abstract
2, 4-dinitrophenol (DNP) was originally used as an explosive and later introduced in the 1930's to stimulate metabolism and promote weight loss. It's also a component of pesticides still available globally. Concerns about hyperpyrexia lead to DNP being banned as a dietary aid in 1938. A 22-y-old male presented to the Emergency Department (ED) with a change in mental status 16 h after his last dose of DNP. On admission he was diaphoretic and febrile with an oral temperature of 102 F, but lucid and cooperative. He became agitated and delirious. Intravenous midazolam was initiated with mechanical cooling. Pancuronium was administered later and the patient was intubated. Over the next hour the patient became bradycardic, then asystolic, and despite resuscitative efforts, died. Advertisements claim DNP safe at the dose our patient ingested. It is widely available and with the potential to cause severe toxicity is an understudied public health concern.



Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 48 (2007) 115–1
Dinitrophenol and obesity: An early twentieth-century regulatory dilemma
Eric Colman

Abstract

In the early 1930s, the industrial chemical dinitrophenol found widespread favor as a weight-loss drug, due principally to the work of Maurice Tainter, a clinical pharmacologist from Stanford University. Unfortunately the compound’s therapeutic index was razor thin and it was not until thousands of people suffered irreversible harm that mainstream physicians realized that dinitrophenol’s risks outweighed its benefits and abandoned its use. Yet, it took passage of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act in 1938 before federal regulators had the ability to stop patent medicine men from selling dinitrophenol to Americans lured by the promise of a drug that would safely melt one’s fat away.


Cyril MacBryde, a physiologist from Washington University School of Medicine, reported ‘‘alarming functional changes’’ indicative of liver, heart, and muscle toxicity in his obese patients treated with small doses of dinitrophenol (MacBryde and Taussig, 1935).

But some physicians continued to believe that the drug was a reasonable therapeutic option for obese patients recalcitrant to dietary intervention when used in the properdose and under the care of a knowledgeable physician. Even this position, however, became untenable when young women taking therapeutic doses of dinitrophenol under the supervision of physicians started going blind (Horner et al., 1935). If the estimate of one San Francisco ophthalmologist is accurate, during a two and a half year span, as many as 2500 Americans may have lost their sight due to what became known as ‘‘dinitrophenol cataracts’’ (Horner, 1936).



Australas J Dermatol. 2014 Nov 4. doi: 10.1111/ajd.12237. [Epub ahead of print]
Cutaneous drug toxicity from 2,4-dinitrophenol (DNP): Case report and histological description.
Le P1, Wood B, Kumarasinghe SP.

Abstract
The use of 2,4-dinitrophenol (DNP) has regained popularity as a weight loss aid in the last two decades due to increased marketing to bodybuilders and the increasing availability of this banned substance via the Internet. 2,4-DNP is a drug of narrow therapeutic index and toxicity results in hyperthermia, diaphoresis, tachycardia, tachypnoea and possible cardiac arrest and death. Skin toxicity from 2,4-DNP has not been reported since the 1930s. We report a case of a 21-year-old bodybuilding enthusiast who presented with a toxic exanthem after taking 2,4-DNP, and describe the first skin biopsy findings in a case of 2,4-DNP toxicity.
 
I've noticed from previous arguments I've had on other boards that this trait is very common among people who know that they are losing the debate.
The minute they realise that someone is debating pretty well against them, they resort to misquoting, misinterpretation, etc in the hope that viewers are too stupid to look back and follow the thread accurately.

Its weirdly satisfying to know someone is having to resort to such measures :)

Just get prepared for the name calling, misquoting, and deflection that will surely follow
 
The forward slash is not used in formal English. Now that that's out of the way, we'll look at your inappropriate use of the forward slash.

The forward slash is sometimes used informally as a substitute for the word "or," and you say that's how you were using it.

Your statement is below. You were comparing DNP to thyroid hormone, with "other obesity drugs" thrown in as an afterthought.


"Here is another interesting paper that compared DNP to thyroid medication and other obesity drugs with the conclusion that dnp was the safer/more effective option"

If the forward slash was used to make a comparison as you claim, your statement actually reads "...the conclusion that dnp was the safer [OR] more effective option."

The statement "the conclusion that dnp was the safer or more effective option" doesn't make sense as the reader is left wondering whether DNP is safer than thyroid hormone, or whether DNP more effective than thyroid hormone.

But your intent wasn't to use a grammatically ambiguous statement in order to give the reader a choice. Your intent was to mislead the reader into believing that the study's author said DNP was both safer AND more effective than thyroid hormone.

Now that we've established that you don't know how to properly use punctuation to articulate your points, we're still left with the fact that you have not provided evidence that supports your assertion that DNP is safer than thyroid hormone OR ANY OTHER anti-obesity drug.

CBS



^^^^ perfect example, we have now resorted to a DNP discussion morphing into an English lesson.

image.jpg
 
Kind of like you with the glucose thing, right? All you posted was bro lore. LMFAO

Still waiting for you to back up your bullshit, DeeDee.

Once again, different expectations for favored members vs unfavored members. When will the hypocrisy stop CBS? We're not getting any younger. Plus there were several studies posted in that thread but how nice of you to conveniently forget that FACT.
 
You conveniently forgot to include the part I highlighted in bold - making it sound like I was suggesting antioxidants make DNP use safe.
AT NO POINT DID I MAKE ANY SUCH SUGGESTION
.

Your statement:

"The cataracts side effect occurred almost EXCLUSIVELY in females and the incidence rate was reported to be 0.1%.
This can easily be countered by having a healthy antioxidant status and/or supplementing with basic vitamins - something not many had access to/were aware of in the 1930s."


Saying "this can easily be countered by having a healthy antioxidant status - something not many had access to/were aware of in the 1930s " sure sounds like you were saying antioxidants can make DNP safe to me.

Is this a common thing on meso - the inability of members to read posts properly?

On the ones that aren't written clearly.
 
But your intent wasn't to use a grammatically ambiguous statement in order to give the reader a choice. Your intent was to mislead the reader into believing that the study's author said DNP was both safer AND more effective than thyroid hormone.
CBS

That was never my intention - if I wanted to say "safer AND more effective" then that's exactly what I would of said, but I didn't.
Your interpretation, as it was from the beginning, is once again wrong.

As for evidence, between me & doc there is a tonne of it in this thread that any interested reader is more than welcomed to read through.

Just get prepared for the name calling, misquoting, and deflection that will surely follow

LOL well timed doc.

My participation is over in this thread anyway.
I mistook this forum as a place for intelligent discussion based on evidence, but instead its just a nerd version of broscience :)

What is the nerd version of broscience?
Bros use their own personal experiences to give advice while ignoring everything else.
Nerds use science that justifies their own preconceived opinions while ignoring everything else.
 
Your statement:

"The cataracts side effect occurred almost EXCLUSIVELY in females and the incidence rate was reported to be 0.1%.
This can easily be countered by having a healthy antioxidant status and/or supplementing with basic vitamins - something not many had access to/were aware of in the 1930s."


Saying "this can easily be countered by having a healthy antioxidant status - something not many had access to/were aware of in the 1930s " sure sounds like you were saying antioxidants can make DNP safe to me.



On the ones that aren't written clearly.

Your reading comprehension must be pretty piss poor in that case. Hell, even lowly Abdul can clearly see he's talking about the cataracts side effects and anti-oxidants NOT safe in general. I'm pretty sure a middle schooler could have realized the difference
 
Your reading comprehension must be pretty piss poor in that case. Hell, even lowly Abdul can clearly see he's talking about the cataracts side effects and anti-oxidants NOT safe in general. I'm pretty sure a middle schooler could have realized the difference

So was I, dipshit. That's why I left the cataract quote in.
 
So was I, dipshit. That's why I left the cataract quote in.

So how does that equate to all of a sudden DNP being safe Merlin? I mean he still finished that same exact post with this:

"I'm not saying that DNP isn't dangerous per se, just that its dangers are blown way out of proportion - statistics don't lie.

I hope the red makes it less easy for you to miss it....again
 
So how does that equate to all of a sudden DNP being safe Merlin? I mean he still finished that same exact post with this:

"I'm not saying that DNP isn't dangerous per se, just that its dangers are blown way out of proportion - statistics don't lie.

I hope the red makes it less easy for you to miss it....again

Oh DeeDee, you try so hard but always come up short. Always a bridesmaid, never a bride.

Better get used to it. It ain't gonna get any better from here. LMFAO
 
You ever have the clap, Sworder? I have not, but I still know it hurts when you pee. You, apparently, aren't capable of knowing that without first acquiring the clap.

Of all the stupid comments I've seen on Meso, you just made the top five. Bravo!
No, I haven't had the clap luckily.
What education and personal experience and you bringing to this discussion?
I agree that DNP is dangerous, I also believe Accutane and Finasteride are extremely dangerous. HOWEVER, if you have a brain and learn about the mechanism of action you can, quoting you "minimize risk" which is what being properly educated will do. Reading an article and seeing only the bad is being close-minded. Not agreeing to DNP being safe, am just saying IF you educate yourself; you can minimize the risk.

But you know, these scare tactic posts can be made against AAS too. Then what separates a scared idiot and a smart user is education. Let's not be sheeple and listen to what is being told to us. What separates a reader/user(I know you don't like the forward slash I am from Sweden so FU; ) is their education.

EDUCATE AND LEARN. REDUCE RISK BY BEING A FOUNTAIN OF KNOWLEDGE.

Also worth noting again, YOU HAVE NEVER USED DNP.
 
But you know, these scare tactic posts can be made against AAS too. Then what separates a scared idiot and a smart user is education. What education and personal experience and you bringing to this discussion?

I brought science. You brought nothing.

I agree that DNP is dangerous, I also believe Accutane are extremely dangerous finasteride.

What you believe is irrelevant. Therapeutic doses of Finasteride and Accutane are neither lethal nor dangerous. Therapeutic doses of DNP are certainly dangerous and have been lethal. Your point is absurd.

HOWEVER, if you have a brain and learn about the mechanism of action you can, quoting you "minimize risk" which is what being properly educated will do.

How can you minimize the risks? The doses used for weight loss have proven lethal, how can you minimize that?

Reading an article and seeing only the bad is being close-minded.

The articles I posted presented the FACTS. The facts aren't biased towards good or bad, they are the facts!

Not agreeing to DNP being safe, am just saying IF you educate yourself; you can minimize the risk.

And I'm saying you're full of shit.

Let's not be sheeple and listen to what is being told to us.

Let's leave the bro lore out of an evidence based discussion and read the science.

I can start posting articles on how bad AAS too but what separates a reader/user(I know you don't like the forward slash I am from Sweden so FU; ) is their education.

Let's see your evidence. To compare AAS with DNP is ridiculous.

EDUCATE AND LEARN. REDUCE RISK BY BEING A FOUNTAIN OF KNOWLEDGE.

Take your own advice. It's clear that you have not read and learned. You are a fountain of bro lore. Nothing more.

Also worth noting again, YOU HAVE NEVER USED DNP.

Also worth noting again, YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT. You've brought nothing to this discussion but unsupported nonsense.
 
Last edited:
The whole thing is ridiculous I think, if you really wanna get lean fast do a PSMF... don't risk your fucking life. Dieting and EC alone have helped me lose some off my waist. Too much for me
 
No, I haven't had the clap luckily.
What education and personal experience and you bringing to this discussion?
I agree that DNP is dangerous, I also believe Accutane and Finasteride are extremely dangerous. HOWEVER, if you have a brain and learn about the mechanism of action you can, quoting you "minimize risk" which is what being properly educated will do. Reading an article and seeing only the bad is being close-minded. Not agreeing to DNP being safe, am just saying IF you educate yourself; you can minimize the risk.

But you know, these scare tactic posts can be made against AAS too. Then what separates a scared idiot and a smart user is education. Let's not be sheeple and listen to what is being told to us. What separates a reader/user(I know you don't like the forward slash I am from Sweden so FU; ) is their education.

EDUCATE AND LEARN. REDUCE RISK BY BEING A FOUNTAIN OF KNOWLEDGE.

Also worth noting again, YOU HAVE NEVER USED DNP.

I hope you have patience Sworder bc there will be a lot of this. CBS believes an example or two of people dying while taking normal doses is a huge deal but neglects that there are 62, I beleive, published deaths from DNP toxicity from the 1930s till 2011, many of which were chronic occupational exposure deaths. All he has shown is how one can cherry pick data to support their PRE-CONCEIVED biases and notions.
 
Edit* don't forget the 2001 study at the top. Is that too from the 1930s? Or has the research changed since then? Apparently they found similar results as they did back then...

I see reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, either. I'm beginning to wonder if you have any strong suits.

"In contrast to the use of thyroid extract (also in common use at the time to treat obesity), DNP did not promote urinary nitrogen excretion, so the assumption was made that weight loss could be attributed to a specific loss of fat (47)."
Look up the definition of past tense, then read your cite again. Notice the phrasing the author uses: "at the time" and "did not promote" and the real clue, "so the assumption was made." Those are all statements pertaining to the past. IOW, your 2001 study is relaying what was written in the 1930s. It says nothing about new research on DNP. Oops! Owned again, DeeDee. LMFAO

CBS
Expert (please obsess)
 
I see reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, either. I'm beginning to wonder if you have any strong suits.

"In contrast to the use of thyroid extract (also in common use at the time to treat obesity), DNP did not promote urinary nitrogen excretion, so the assumption was made that weight loss could be attributed to a specific loss of fat (47)."
Look up the definition of past tense, then read your cite again. Notice the phrasing the author uses: "at the time" and "did not promote" and the real clue, "so the assumption was made." Those are all statements pertaining to the past. IOW, your 2001 study is relaying what was written in the 1930s. It says nothing about new research on DNP. Oops! Owned again, DeeDee. LMFAO

CBS
Expert (please obsess)

It's past tense correct. How you managed to use your clairvoyance and KNOW it's referencing the 1930s specifically is BEYOND us mere mortals CBS. Nice try, keep proving your idiocy as it makes my job THAT MUCH easier :)
 
Just get prepared for the name calling, misquoting, and deflection that will surely follow

All to easy. In chronological order:

Lotta things you miss CBS, I wonder what else?

you're as full of shit

you're just another BROSCIENCE peddler

Jim is pretty good at seeing what he WANTS to see and not what's actually there.

Be careful with this wily character indeed

You're retarded Jim.

You and your walmart-bought medical license...
 
All to easy. In chronological order:

Says Mr. My hands are clean hahahahaha

Where does it say dnp is safer than thyroid hormone? That's a ridiculous statement!

Do you have any thoughts of your own to contribute or should we just expect your usual bullshit? (rhetorical)

Of all the stupid comments I've seen on Meso, you just made the top five. Bravo!

Still waiting for you to back up your bullshit, DeeDee.
,

So was I, dipshit. That's why I left the cataract quote in.
 
Back
Top