Great articles and discussion on terminology ("anabolic steroids" don't really exist)

[tareload]

What is TRT and What is NOT TRT

Naturally occurring, I’ll agree with you. We wouldn’t say a natural person is using AAS. As soon as it’s modified it’s an AAS. Esterified versions are not plain testosterone, they’ve been modified. They are things like Test E or Test C for example.

forums.t-nation.com

What is TRT and What is NOT TRT

Anyway, Im gonna go inject 1g of NONE AAS (testosterone) into my ass. Tomorrow Ima be back to check out readalots 500000 wikipedia links he will be diggin up all night to keep his status as forum nerd nr1 who knows everything and is always correct (even when he is not). Dont forget to put down...

forums.t-nation.com

What is TRT and What is NOT TRT

@Carma doesnt like @readalot @hankthetank89 doesnt like @readalot @Carma and @readalot having a physique show down. That’s about it! Ps. I like you @readalot. Only love brother. Can’t make everybody happy. I also like @hankthetank89 point of view from a heavy user perspective. I think we...

forums.t-nation.com

No such thing as anabolic steroids or AAS. Technically correct term is "androgens".

Simply outstanding summary:

Commentary: Androgens and “Anabolic Steroids”: The One-Headed Janus

Steroid nomenclature has the difficult task of bridging the gap between the approved but arcane systematic nomenclature (1) and the generic names needed to

academic.oup.com

In the intervening three decades, there have been major advances in understanding androgen action. As exerted by testosterone, the major natural androgen, its distinctive features, including dual prereceptor steroidogenic activation (5α reduction, aromatization), a singular AR, and postreceptor coregulator modulation. AR differs from estrogen and progestin receptors, which each exhibit two receptor isoforms with usually opposing physiological effects (13, 14), a duality that facilitates exploitation of tissue differences in net estrogen or progestin action. Tissue-specific differences have been developed in nonsteroidal synthetic estrogens as specific estrogen receptor modulators, mixed estrogen agonists/antagonists (15) with fortuitous and advantageous differences in estrogen target tissues (14). Despite remaining uncertainty over the responsible mechanisms, this serendipitous discovery stimulated interest in analogous synthetic steroid analogs for other nuclear receptor classes, including androgens (selective AR modulators). Mineralocorticoid and glucocorticoid receptors represent a unique pairing with prereceptor steroid metabolism as a gate-keeper determining net tissue effects of analogs (16). Although development of the first nonsteroidal androgens (17, 18) as candidate selective AR modulators (19) raises hope of resurrecting this defunct term (20), prereceptor activation mechanisms cannot apply to nonsteroidal androgens, and the singular AR lacks a dual drive mechanism of the other paired sex steroid receptors. Consequently, it is not surprising that available knowledge (21) provides only slender hope that this failed, and probably false, dichotomy will now succeed through a renewed search guided by the same in vivo bioassay.

However, this failed search left a residue, the now meaningless term anabolic steroid, which perpetuates a distinction without a difference. Now surviving long after its scientific eclipse, devoid of meaning, it serves principally as a journalistic device for demonization outside science, adding to public misunderstanding about “steroids,” which confuses anabolic steroids and glucocorticoids and mystifies discussion within science. Dispensing with the confused term anabolic steroid, whether used in isolation or joined to the word “androgen” in the oxymoron anabolic-androgenic steroid, is overdue. Although in poetry anything mellifluous goes, accurate terminology matters in scientific communication. Although it may be argued that anabolic-androgenic steroid conveys two apparently different endpoints of androgen action, applying Occam's razor, we never refer to “luteal-gestational progestins” or “mammary-uterine estrogens.” A little thought experiment highlights the issue. Imagine that some scientists come to believe that a unicorn exists and they habitually write about an animal species called the “horse-unicorn” as the generic name for a species, including both unicorns and horses. There would be no real alternative to rejecting such inaccurate terminology and ignoring claims that a unicorn will soon be found until one is.

Only if the scientists set this example can the vanguard of knowledgeable scientific journalists gradually educate public thinking. This misnomer distorts logical thinking and, whether by application of Occam's razor or scientific commonsense, should have been quietly but firmly exiled long ago. In the happy but unlikely event that a nonsteroidal androgen ever proves to have the desired tissue specificity, this term would become legitimate for the first time. In the meantime, all androgens should, for the sake of clear thinking, be termed simply androgens.

 

[Deleted member 43589]

For some reason I can't get into TNation any more. I have no idea what my password or user name is because it was well over 15 years ago I set up my account.

Anyway here is anther good article that explains the difference in the androgenic and anabolic properties our drugs of choice....

Difference Between Androgenic and Anabolic | Definition, Characteristics, Function

What is the difference between Androgenic and Anabolic? Androgenic substances promote the development of secondary male characteristics; anabolic substances

pediaa.com