Testosterone too dangerous for older men – trial stopped

[chipdouglas]

http://www.ergo-log.com/testosteronetrialstopped.html

What's to think about this ?

[Bulldog]

Originally Posted by chipdouglas

http://www.ergo-log.com/testosteronetrialstopped.html

What's to think about this ?

Absolutely nothing. I'm pretty sure we discussed this very topic a month or so ago.

[pmgamer18]

Yes they gave unhealthy men over the aged of 65 for six months 10 grams of Testim. The men were all ready sick and it takes a long time for one to plug up and need bypass surgery.

More crap from the Gov. that don't like men on Testosteone.

[seekonk]

Originally Posted by Bulldog

Absolutely nothing. I'm pretty sure we discussed this very topic a month or so ago.

Yes, I think the conclusion was that some of the doses were inappropriate, and there was no control of E2. Elevated E2 would explain the observed bloating and cardiovascular issues.

[seekonk]

Originally Posted by pmgamer18

More crap from the Gov. that don't like men on Testosteone.

I don't think this is justified. The researchers who conducted the study clearly wanted the study to succeed and were very clearly surprised when it did not. They would have benefited much more careerwise from a successful study.

This can be much more easily explained by simple incompetence. Why does everything have to be a conspiracy?

From the abstract of the study itself, they caution that: The small size of the trial and the unique population prevent broader inferences from being made about the safety of testosterone therapy. These are hardly the words of the rabid anti-testosterone freaks you are making them out to be.

[asdf1533]

Plus, if I remember correctly they did nothing to monitor and control E2. Frustrating to say the least. If they are going to go to the trouble to test these types of things (which I am glad they do), they should take the time to be sure they are doing a comprehensive job. It would have been nice to see results than meant something.

[LowT]

Originally Posted by seekonk

I don't think this is justified. The researchers who conducted the study clearly wanted the study to succeed and were very clearly surprised when it did not. They would have benefited much more careerwise from a successful study.

This can be much more easily explained by simple incompetence. Why does everything have to be a conspiracy?

From the abstract of the study itself, they caution that: The small size of the trial and the unique population prevent broader inferences from being made about the safety of testosterone therapy. These are hardly the words of the rabid anti-testosterone freaks you are making them out to be.

Cookies.

[Bulldog]

Originally Posted by LowT

It was pointed out the test was involded with a company making SARMS. Direct competitors to direct T supplementation.

This was designed to fail.

We have a winner!

[seekonk]

Originally Posted by LowT

It was pointed out the test was involded with a company making SARMS. Direct competitors to direct T supplementation.

This was designed to fail.

There are too many serious accusations and character assassinations being thrown around by people who don't really know all that much about the issue.

Anybody who has been involved in original research will understand that this accusation is preposterous. This is simply not how any researcher who cares about his own future thinks.

This research was not done by a SARM company. It was done by academics at BU.

Extraordinary accusations require extraordinary evidence. Please provide your sources.

[LowT]

Originally Posted by seekonk

There are too many serious accusations and character assassinations being thrown around by people who don't really know all that much about the issue.

Anybody who has been involved in original research will understand that this accusation is preposterous. This is simply not how any researcher who cares about his own future thinks.

This research was not done by a SARM company. It was done by academics at BU.

Extraordinary accusations require extraordinary evidence. Please provide your sources.

I have deleted my post because I don't feel like getting into this again and it's already been hashed out here multiple times. I will concede that my accusation was unfounded and I did not have enough info to make it.

I will add though, that I am suspicious of motives in a study that seemed from the get go to be such a bad idea. (giving large amounts of T to old, sedentary sick people and then failing to monitor and control E2)

You have stated that they wanted this to succeed. This seems to be a clear scientific bias if so and I'm wondering where you came to this conclusion?