ExcelMale
Menu
Home
What's new
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Videos
Lab Tests
Doctor Finder
Buy Books
About Us
Men’s Health Coaching
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Clinical Use of Anabolics and Hormones
Clinical Use of Anabolics and Hormones
Nandrolone for Mood | Feeling much Better..
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="DS3" data-source="post: 222562" data-attributes="member: 18514"><p>Fortunately, I neither stated a claim nor falsely represented scientific information. In fact, the opposite has occurred. My position has remained that <em>we do not know</em> when we cross into the threshold of ‘danger’ on TRT. The scientific evidence provided from the burdened party (you) has always been arcane rodent studies with extrapolated findings.</p><p></p><p>As I’ve said before, the cardiovascular event has left a less than objective mark, resulting in a heavily biased research methodology.</p><p></p><p>There is no question that a threshold that represents entry into a <em>danger zone</em> on TRT exists. However, scientific evidence to-date does not elucidate its location.</p><p></p><p>This parties position: We don’t know when we enter into a danger zone. There aren’t enough human studies to determine this.</p><p></p><p>Your Position: Anything above reference range (physiological) is putting one at risk. PROVE IT with applicable data.</p><p></p><p>#cuttheshit</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DS3, post: 222562, member: 18514"] Fortunately, I neither stated a claim nor falsely represented scientific information. In fact, the opposite has occurred. My position has remained that [I]we do not know[/I] when we cross into the threshold of ‘danger’ on TRT. The scientific evidence provided from the burdened party (you) has always been arcane rodent studies with extrapolated findings. As I’ve said before, the cardiovascular event has left a less than objective mark, resulting in a heavily biased research methodology. There is no question that a threshold that represents entry into a [I]danger zone[/I] on TRT exists. However, scientific evidence to-date does not elucidate its location. This parties position: We don’t know when we enter into a danger zone. There aren’t enough human studies to determine this. Your Position: Anything above reference range (physiological) is putting one at risk. PROVE IT with applicable data. #cuttheshit [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Share this page
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Sponsors
Forums
Clinical Use of Anabolics and Hormones
Clinical Use of Anabolics and Hormones
Nandrolone for Mood | Feeling much Better..
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top