Improvement with NO2

Jerrycat: Hyperbole is not the answer to my questions. Please provide your medical insight into your assertions. Common sense leads me to believe the absence of facts is, in fact, factless. I might be inclined to believe your comments on "absurd", "ridiculous" , "empty promises, no results, false hope, and wasted money" if you had some supporting information. I did not state opinions, I asked for you to support the claims you made.

Nitrous oxide is FDA approved as an inhalational anesthetic, to be administered by a licensed health care profesional. I believe that amyl nitrate, abused recreationally and referred to as poppers, is in capsule form but is inhaled after breaking the capsule open. Neither is available to the public (legally). The effects are transient but an overdose can be fatal.

Through time there is always some new drug out there that supposedly helps performance and doesn't cause negative health consequeces. These drugs are stupid to try, and should be avoided at all costs no matter what the marketing adds say, and no matter what other people at the gym say. Know better, be smarter. Swimming is not a sport where one needs to be juiced up. In fact, no sport requires juicing. Just ask Arnold, who had his heart valve replaced due to ill effects of steroids--sure he was big, but also risked his life. Also, I train at a very serious gym where most people (including women) are competitive bodybuilders. These people are nuts--and I don't mean with intensive training. They are nuts with all of the supplements they take (non steroid). They take a minimum of 40 to 48 pills a day--8 with every meal, and there are 5 to 6 meals a day! Every time I turn around someone is cramming pills in their mouth. It is absurd. Also, the average life expectancy of bodybuilders is 56 years old. Severe fluctuation in body weight and body fat causes heart disease...and in fact, many bodybuilders die early due to heart disease. So, don't do what your bodybuilding friends do. Think about it. Is swimming a slightly faster 50 once in a blue moon worth the high risk of heart disease, or other health problems? Get real! Your bodybuilding friends aren't thinking long term. Plus, tomorrow they'll be swearing by some other drug. Jerrycat.

Aquageek, Just like you have a right to your opinion, I have a right to mine. I think stuffing 40-48 supplements a day or more into your body each and every day for years and years is bad. Also, the hyping of supplements is ridiculous--just like the hyping of fad diets and other products. To me, it's all in the same catagory of empty promises, no results, false hope, and wasted money. So, go ahead and eat sawdust, or cow liver, or whatever you want. And, rather than compare cheese puffs to a protein/caffeine shake thing, how about comparing a good whole diet to a protein/caffeine shake thing. Gee, hmmm. I can eat these grilled chicken breasts, or drink this purple thing that has ingredients I can't pronounce. Tough call. It's common sense.

I went looking to see what we're talking about. What they're taking isn't nitrous oxide, and they're not inhaling it. They're actually ingesting arginine alpha-ketoglutarate and arginine-ketoisocaproate in 3000 mg capsules, which are supposed to cause the body to increase its own production of nitric oxide. Note that it's nitrIC oxide (NO), not nitrOUS oxide (NO2), that's being produced in the body. Why the manufacturer called it NO2 is puzzling. I have no idea whether this stuff actually works, or whether you really want it to work if it does. The discussion just seemed to be going off in a weird direction with people inhaling laughing gas before swimming (boy wouldn't THAT be interesting), so I thought I'd bring it back to the actual supplement in question.

In the latest issue of Outside Magazine, there is an article by a middle-aged guy who went on a drug program (Steroids, HGH, EPO, etc) under a doctor's supervision just to see what would happen to his athletic ability (he did cycling, mainly). Bottom line is that it worked quite well. A really interesting article that would have been better if there were better measurements (timed exhaustion, strength gains and the like) and not just anecdotal evidence. I'll pass on the medications, however. -LBJ

The whole supplement issue is very controversial. Just a few comments: The role of the FDA is to protect the public; I don't always agree with their decisions (or the time required to make them). Keep in mind that we live in a litiginous society (and the FDA did not create that problem). Physicians try to practice "evidence-based" medicine, applying the results of large scale clinical trials to the care of their patients. As a result of this, just to give one example, the mortality rates after a heart attack have fallen dramatically over the past two decades. Some therapies may look promising at first but later turn out to be ineffective or even harmful (large doses of magnesium increased mortality when studied in a randomized trial). Just because something is sold over the counter does not guarantee its safety. I've seen patients with significant bleeding problems after surgery due to gingko (this is now well recognized in the medical community).

Originally posted by Matt S Jerry, Aquageek, I think you both have valid points, and what's best for Terry (the original poster with the question, remember him/her?) depends on Terry's objectives. Aquageek, I like your point about all of us learning from people who are willing to try something new, and you are correct when you ask for specific, scientific data on specific substances. Obviously, some substances are less effective or safe than others, and we need to get specific if we want to draw any valid conclusions. Jerry, I appreciate the cautions you sound about messing around with our metabolism. Why are we in this sport? Does recognition as one of the faster swimmers in USMS justify taking a risk, even if it is a small risk? Very valid questions to ask. My view is that it depends on what you want. If you are a professional athlete, or an Olympic hopeful, and a legal supplement (I distinguish these from substances that are not legal for competition, and will get you DQ'ed/suspended if you are found out) will make the difference between "winning" and a six or seven figure income, and unemployment, obviously, there is a strong incentive to use that supplement. On the other hand, if you are in a sport primarily for your own fitness and personal fulfillment, why jack around with "supplements" that have not been tested for safety or effectiveness. I'll not denigrade anyone's desire to make top ten or set USMS records, but how many of us have those objectives at the top of our list, and how many mostly want to have fun while staying in shape, and being as fast as we can be within the limitations the rest of our lives impose on our swimming? I'd venture that most of us are in the later category. Aquageek, you are right; there is precious little data. For me, that is a cautionary flag. The FDA has little authority over the "nutritional supplement" industry, and some of the claims sound a bit ridiculous. The 19th Century snake oil salesmen would smile and nod their heads knowingly at some of the pseudo-scientific nonsense out there. Favorite obscure quotation: "The mystery man came over. And he said, 'I'm outta site.' He said for a nominal service charge, I could reach nirvana tonight. If I was ready, willing and able, To pay him his regular fee, He would drop all the rest of his present affairs, And devote his attention to me.... With the Oil of Aphrodite, And the Dust of the Grand Wazoo. 'And I'll tell you something else, little fella. It'll cure your asthma too!' But I said, 'Look here, brother. Who you jivin' with that cosmic debris?'" Frank Zappa For me, show me it's safe; show me it's effective. Then I'll decide if I feel like it would be cheating, and whether I'd want to use it. Terry, you asked the question. What do you think? How are things working for you? Matt

Originally posted by Leonard Jansen In the latest issue of Outside Magazine, there is an article by a middle-aged guy who went on a drug program (Steroids, HGH, EPO, etc) under a doctor's supervision just to see what would happen to his athletic ability (he did cycling, mainly). Bottom line is that it worked quite well. A really interesting article that would have been better if there were better measurements (timed exhaustion, strength gains and the like) and not just anecdotal evidence. The guy who wrote that was interivewed by Terry Gross on NPR. She asked interesting questions; a few were: when he began to do better, did he feel it was the drug or was it him? How did he feel when he did so well on that long bike ride he had been training for? His response (and I paraphrase) was that a strange thing happened; he got the drugs and himself mixed up and that he had a sense that it was his own ability that made him go faster. On his success for the bike ride, he said he was disappointed in himself. He couldn't tell if it was his ability or the drug. He wanted to believe it was his training and ability, but when it came down to it, he couldn't. It was a fascinating interview. glenda