Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why can't we just give steroids to people with muscular dystrophy?

trevorklee.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 128 posts

Re: Why can't we just give steroids to people with muscular dystrophy?

#81

Post by quantum_magpie »

captainmuon wrote: post #76
qwerty456127 wrote: post #71

I go further and wonder why don't we do that (steroids, growth hormones, sarms, everything) in advance as people reach certain age (and their natural secretion of the hormones falls below certain level). I feel inspired by Dr. Life and feel like starting taking hormones (from the black market, European doctors will never prescribe this officially) as I reach 50-60. AFAIK the growth hormone even rejuvenates the thymus…

Let's set aside the obvious, that it probably has a lot of downsides and doesn't work well (like shrinking testicles and heart problems from steroids). Our society has a real discomfort with "improving" "healthy" people. We make a clear, but somewhat artificial distinction between healthy and diseased, and the diseased people can get recognition and treatment but the healthy ones cannot. That's why there is often a b…

An excellent goal! I too hope that it will be possible to experiment and improve the performance of a human with tested, verified substances, known concentrations of active agents in them by legal means.

As it stands now, in my country in EU, not only it's impossible to legally take amphetamines for ADHD (only Concerta is allowed for children), it's actually forbidden to diagnose it in adults. So here I am, sitting with my 8/9 DSM-5 symptoms in inattention and the only thing I can do about it is go find a meth dealer!

Re: Why can't we just give steroids to people with muscular dystrophy?

#82

Post by qwerty456127 »

quantum_magpie wrote: post #81
captainmuon wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's set aside the obvious, that it probably has a lot of downsides and doesn't work well (like shrinking testicles and heart problems from steroids). Our society has a real discomfort with "improving" "healthy" people. We make a clear, but somewhat artificial distinction between healthy and diseased, and the diseased people can get recognition and treatment but the healthy ones cannot. That's why there is often a b…

An excellent goal! I too hope that it will be possible to experiment and improve the performance of a human with tested, verified substances, known concentrations of active agents in them by legal means. As it stands now, in my country in EU, not only it's impossible to legally take amphetamines for ADHD (only Concerta is allowed for children), it's actually forbidden to diagnose it in adults. So here I am, sitting w…

You probably don't need meth. I once tried meth out of panic when I had an overwhelming pile of work and really too little time to do it (I had to design and develop a comparably serious app from scratch alone in a week to production + do a lot of accounting-related paperwork). It helped great and I had no problem quitting (but it felt a way making me sure most of the people will so I strongly recommend to stay away from it). I tried amphetamine in about a month and it had almost no effect so I concluded the medicine I would have to be taking if legally could is Desoxyn.

A couple of years passed, my brain chemistry recovered from the damage (tolerance in particular) meth does and now a minuscule speck of black market amphetamine dissolved in the morning tea is enough for amazing, satisfying full-day productivity and happiness. And it is many orders of magnitude less harmful than meth is.

Don't take meth. Also don't take amphetamine if you can. An alternative I actually use when I really need productivity is simple nicotine in form of a vape - it's not nearly as good but also helps significantly (if you only use it a couple of months a year). But I still recommend everyone to avoid starting with nicotine either.

Re: Why can't we just give steroids to people with muscular dystrophy?

#83

Post by longlivedeath »

qwerty456127 wrote: post #71

I go further and wonder why don't we do that (steroids, growth hormones, sarms, everything) in advance as people reach certain age (and their natural secretion of the hormones falls below certain level). I feel inspired by Dr. Life and feel like starting taking hormones (from the black market, European doctors will never prescribe this officially) as I reach 50-60. AFAIK the growth hormone even rejuvenates the thymus…

> European doctors will never prescribe this officially

Google "hormone replacement therapy".

Re: Why can't we just give steroids to people with muscular dystrophy?

#84

Post by quantum_magpie »

qwerty456127 wrote: post #82
quantum_magpie wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An excellent goal! I too hope that it will be possible to experiment and improve the performance of a human with tested, verified substances, known concentrations of active agents in them by legal means. As it stands now, in my country in EU, not only it's impossible to legally take amphetamines for ADHD (only Concerta is allowed for children), it's actually forbidden to diagnose it in adults. So here I am, sitting w…

You probably don't need meth. I once tried meth out of panic when I had an overwhelming pile of work and really too little time to do it (I had to design and develop a comparably serious app from scratch alone in a week to production + do a lot of accounting-related paperwork). It helped great and I had no problem quitting (but it felt a way making me sure most of the people will so I strongly recommend to stay away…

Just to clarify, I'm not going to look up drug dealers and risk a charge forbidding any future international travel, etc. Also, if I would, it wouldn't be in the 'get high' dosage -- 20 mg for amphetamines, 10 mg for meth, typical dosage in ADHD medication would be the ceiling. Basically, legalizing them would allow me actual therapeutic experimentation.

I used to smoke 10 years ago, so going back to nicotine in this case is a big nono. :)

Re: Why can't we just give steroids to people with muscular dystrophy?

#85

Post by lazyjones »

qwerty456127 wrote: post #71

I go further and wonder why don't we do that (steroids, growth hormones, sarms, everything) in advance as people reach certain age (and their natural secretion of the hormones falls below certain level). I feel inspired by Dr. Life and feel like starting taking hormones (from the black market, European doctors will never prescribe this officially) as I reach 50-60. AFAIK the growth hormone even rejuvenates the thymus…

> European doctors will never prescribe this officially) as I reach 50-60.

In Austria you can get HGH from several normal doctors easily (even against "stress" or sleeplessness).

E.g. https://antiaging-wien.at/wachstumshormon-hgh/

Try to stay away from the black market...

> growth hormone even rejuvenates the thymus, the immune system (and may prevent cancer this way, if not over-used)

I believe it's generally thought that HGH will always speed up tumor growth, so you should not assume there are safe amounts to take. The safe way is to get regular screening.

Re: Why can't we just give steroids to people with muscular dystrophy?

#86

Post by atom-morgan »

dillondoyle wrote: post #34
vimy wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or BPC 157.

Has anyone here used it? Or TB-500? I have a tendon/pulley injury that doesn't seem to want to heal and I've been researching it. At least one relevant study. There is one Dr. in my area (a gyno of all things) that has a website promoting his practice using it. So has at least a sheen of professionalism. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21030672/

I used it once after I injured my shoulder doing straddle planches. I'm not sure exactly what was injured but it basically cured my shoulder overnight.

Re: Why can't we just give steroids to people with muscular dystrophy?

#87

Post by uCantCauseUCant »

nikita wrote: post #2

A different question. As someone who had to recover from Achilles tear and had to rebuild an atrophied calf muscle. Why don’t we just give anabolic steroids to people if their muscles atrophied after wearing a cast?

Because steroids attack the bone? And suppress the imune system and everything is connected with everything..

Re: Why can't we just give steroids to people with muscular dystrophy?

#88

Post by Broken_Hippo »

TurboHaskal wrote: post #74
slowmotiony wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not all steroids will immediately shut down your HPTA like test would. There are drugs like Oxandrolone (Anavar) which will not have this side effect assuming a low dose and relatively short term of use - it was originally prescribed for burn victims but nowadays you can get it prescribed in regular clinics for heavy injuries too.

Oxandrolone is amazing. It's such a same there's a stigma around these substances because this particular one could improve so many lives.

Am I missing something? Is there a stigma around using prescription drugs? I mean, sure there is a stigma for bodybuilding - but this drug is used for a variety of medical things. In other words, it is already used to improve lives.

And it seems there is good reason to have it be a prescription: Some of the side effects aren't wonderful and it would seem reasonable to at least get regular blood tests if you are taking it. It is just benefits sometimes outweigh the risks.

Re: Why can't we just give steroids to people with muscular dystrophy?

#89

Post by qwerty456127 »

quantum_magpie wrote: post #84
qwerty456127 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You probably don't need meth. I once tried meth out of panic when I had an overwhelming pile of work and really too little time to do it (I had to design and develop a comparably serious app from scratch alone in a week to production + do a lot of accounting-related paperwork). It helped great and I had no problem quitting (but it felt a way making me sure most of the people will so I strongly recommend to stay away…

Just to clarify, I'm not going to look up drug dealers and risk a charge forbidding any future international travel, etc. Also, if I would, it wouldn't be in the 'get high' dosage -- 20 mg for amphetamines, 10 mg for meth, typical dosage in ADHD medication would be the ceiling. Basically, legalizing them would allow me actual therapeutic experimentation. I used to smoke 10 years ago, so going back to nicotine in this…

Yes, I think all the substances should be legal for qualified medical use. Even the substances with serious adverse effects in cases in which they do more good than harm. But a patient should have a right to opt-out and ask for an alternative treatment when there actually is any harm probable to expect.

> forbidden to diagnose it in adults.

This is plain outrageous.

Re: Why can't we just give steroids to people with muscular dystrophy?

#90

Post by dimitar »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #10

I don't really understand. Clearly the muscles work to some extent, so isn't making more a lot better than doing nothing? > It’d be like if you had a construction project, and you found out that all of the wooden beams you were receiving from a supplier were rotten. Would you order more beams from that same supplier to fix the problem? If my other option is shrugging and doing nothing and being sad as the house falls…

Anabolic steroids have side-effects that increase with dosage, as they don't only affect muscle. Might for example fail the heart or the liver. It's not worth it, unless it's really effective (and its not in this case). I imagine even if it did work, doctors will prescribe only a small dosage and monitor closely the side effects.
Post reply on HN