Steroids

Did anyone see the ESPN show this weekend (or Maybe CNN). It talked about steroids. The last doctor said that there are no real studies that indicate steroid use do any of the harmful things everyone thinks they do. He had many good points. It was really interesting.

Originally posted by FindingMyInnerFish When I've had plantar fascitis (a running injury), I could not take NSAIDs b/c I'm allergic to them, so I have occasionally had to take cortisone by injection or by mouth. During one year, I had three shots, and later that year developed a monster case of the flu, one that lasted about a month and spawned sinus infections that lingered all during the winter. Since then, I've been very leery about taking cortisone in any form. There might have been no connection, but that was a case of the flu I never want to repeat. So I've been looking at alternative forms of inflammation control--have had success w/ glucosamine/chondroitin/MSM and massage. I think my allergy to NSAIDs (once I got past the idea that the only other alternative was cortisone) was a blessing in disguise, b/c I have found ways to deal w/ inflammation w/out dangerous side effects. First you aren't allergic to NSAIDs, you had an allergic-like reaction. Second cortisone & other sterioids that are given for plantar fascitis are nothing like anabolic steroids. They only reason both are called steroids is becasue they are both secreted by glands. Third, if you had an anaphlaxoid reaction to NSAIDs, you will possibly become or are now having a negative reaction to the MSN in the over the counter prep you are taking. Have you discussed this with a doctor? MSN is a sulfur htat many peole are either allergic to or become allergic tothrough continued use. It is like Bactrum and other sulfur-based antibiotics. while the two aren't related chemically, many people who react to aspirin and NSAIDs develop sulfur allergies. I don't know why.

The last doctor said that there are no real studies that indicate steroid use do any of the harmful things everyone thinks they do. He had many good points. I am not a Dr.! Having said that, I have a decent amount of common sense and common sense (from my perspective) dictates that as many people who died way short of the norm coupled with the proven problems that occurred from the East German steroid programs (birth defects and poor health), coupled with Lyle Alzato's death at such a young age, I'd say the Doctor who mouthed off saying, "no real studies indicate steroid use do any harmful things," is a flaming MORON! Where do they get MORON'S like this? But, then again, I guess it is not harmful for a woman to grunt when she speaks, have male type genitals, excess body hair, liver dysfunction, and foreheads that protrude like Frankenstien, gosh, that is not harmful....Yea, right!

Originally posted by craiglll@yahoo.com First you aren't allergic to NSAIDs, you had an allergic-like reaction. Second cortisone & other sterioids that are given for plantar fascitis are nothing like anabolic steroids. They only reason both are called steroids is becasue they are both secreted by glands. Third, if you had an anaphlaxoid reaction to NSAIDs, you will possibly become or are now having a negative reaction to the MSN in the over the counter prep you are taking. Have you discussed this with a doctor? MSN is a sulfur htat many peole are either allergic to or become allergic tothrough continued use. It is like Bactrum and other sulfur-based antibiotics. while the two aren't related chemically, many people who react to aspirin and NSAIDs develop sulfur allergies. I don't know why. Well, right, tho. I did note that there was a distinction btw steroids for medical use vs. for performance enhancement. I wouldn't touch anabolic steroids--I run/swim for enjoyment as well as competition, and taking a drug to perform better causes more problems than it solves, and takes away the joy of seeing what one's own body can do--as well as the humility of knowing one's limits. As for response to NSAIDs, you may have a point. Just that after a long time of use w/out problems, on a couple of different occasions within days of each other, I developed hives and my face swelled up (one use), and I began wheezing for close to a half hour (another use). Decided that the handwriting was on the wall at that point. After I stopped taking them, some rashes that I assumed were from a detergent I was using disappeared and never came back. But I don't seem to get that response to the MSM that I'm taking now. So maybe I was reacting to something else that by coincidence I stopped taking/using at the same time as I stopped the NSAIDs. I should add here that swimming seems to be the best means of preventing running injuries I've found so far! I can run more easily with quicker recoveries than I ever did b/4 I added the swimming workouts to my routines! Two great sports! No anabolic steroids for me, thanks! Swimming is a great performance enhancer just by itself :)

Originally posted by FindingMyInnerFish As for response to NSAIDs, you may have a point. Just that after a long time of use w/out problems, on a couple of different occasions within days of each other, I developed hives and my face swelled up (one use), and I began wheezing for close to a half hour (another use). Decided that the handwriting was on the wall at that point. After I stopped taking them, some rashes that I assumed were from a detergent I was using disappeared and never came back. But I don't seem to get that response to the MSM that I'm taking now. So maybe I was reacting to something else that by coincidence I stopped taking/using at the same time as I stopped the NSAIDs. there is a medical distinction between anaphalatoid and anaphalaxys. From NSAIDs you get the first. It isn't really an allergic reaction. There is no protein involved. It is just as dangerous though. Do you ever have problems when you eat things like prepared BBQ suace, some powdered lemonades, and htings that are man-made and yellow?

I do not think htat anabolic steroids should be used. However, even inthe above sited article, there is no real scientific evidence that the negative outcomes given as side effects from steroid use are truly the result of the use of the steroid. We now know that the East German women were given steroids. We nnow know that most of these women have had terrible medical problems. the data collected about the adminstration of steroids to these women, though is just now being analyzed. We do not know that the incidental comments made about different people have any relationship to their exposure to steroids. But by saying this, I do not want anyone to believe that I think people shoudl take steroids. I am aware of one study currently being done with HIV people who have not had major health problems being given very small doses of anabolic steroids. the results will be very interesting. Also, supposedly, there was currently a study published about guinea pigs being given steroids. almost all of the pigs died from brain tunors. I wonder if maybe steroids are so dangerous that a true study would be very unethical?

Perhaps you should try a literature search at pubmed.org. Here's one recent article from the National Cancer Institute: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/.../query.fcgi

The magnitude of the risk cannot be determined from currently available data, because the number of patients receiving androgens is unknown. The above sentence is the conclusion of the article. In the abstract it sites six patients. It doesn't say how many were even looked at during the study. From the abstract, the conclusion seems very risky to me. for all we know there could have been thousands of people. Do you know from what study this abstract was taken?

Originally posted by craiglll@yahoo.com The magnitude of the risk cannot be determined from currently available data, because the number of patients receiving androgens is unknown. The above sentence is the conclusion of the article. In the abstract it sites six patients. It doesn't say how many were even looked at during the study. From the abstract, the conclusion seems very risky to me. for all we know there could have been thousands of people. Do you know from what study this abstract was taken? I don't think you read this very carefully. The abstract is from an article published in the American Journal of Hematology in Nov. 2004. It is a review article, not a trial or study. The authors reviewed the medical literature for all case of hepatic tumors reported with androgen use. They identified 133 patients (6 of whom received the drugs by injection) but correctly state that the magnitude of the risk is unknown since we don't know the denominator (the total number of patients administered anabolic steroids). Keep in mind that these are just the cases that are actually reported in the literature. There is no obligation to report cases. You can click on related articles to view 100 other references. You can also request the full text of the article. I don't disagree with the authors' conclusion that "all patients on anabolic androgenic steroids are at risk of liver tumors." The italics are mine. And I don't think you will see a study of these drugs in healthy volunteers.

I looked at about 20 case abstracts last night that I got by googling steroid and medical studies. I got well over 1000 studies but randomly looked at only 20. All 20 that I looked at well animal studies. Most of the studies used rats or mice, one study used guinea pigs. Almost all concluded that not only did they not find substantial nevgative health effects from steroid use, but also, there seemed to be no long term physical abiblities gained from the steroid use. One study found more negative effects from mice eating fatty diets than from taking steroids. One case did have more than 1% have bad effects from the steroids. In this study the mice were given very small doses. I thought that was very interesting because one study suggested that small doses would have very positive benefits.