Reply
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast
Results 211 to 240 of 271
  1. #211
    Are you Driven? Sldge's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2007
    Location: New York, United States
    Age: 44
    Posts: 8,524
    Rep Power: 33535
    Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    Sldge is offline
    Originally Posted by EMISGOD View Post
    They shouldn't do that...it's a seriously nasty compound...it has almost no upside for the person it is being administered to at high doses...it takes very, very little for the upsides...
    Oh I know all about it
    Matt Cahill
    www.DrivenSports.com
    www.drivensports.co.uk
    Reply With Quote

  2. #212
    It's later than you think EMISGOD's Avatar
    Join Date: Aug 2006
    Location: The Shadow World, Valhalla, Norway
    Posts: 15,723
    Rep Power: 20087
    EMISGOD is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) EMISGOD is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) EMISGOD is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) EMISGOD is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) EMISGOD is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) EMISGOD is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) EMISGOD is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) EMISGOD is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) EMISGOD is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) EMISGOD is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) EMISGOD is a splendid one to behold. (+10000)
    EMISGOD is offline
    Originally Posted by Sldge View Post
    Oh I know all about it


    Remind me to keep a close eye on you...
    Ongoing Journal: http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=106420991

    Come here and open your mouth, S103/Syntrax, I gotta take a piss: http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=3569901
    Reply With Quote

  3. #213
    Thanks for the board Ryan Estopell's Avatar
    Join Date: Jul 2004
    Location: Southern Cal
    Age: 54
    Posts: 2,300
    Rep Power: 2147
    Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000)
    Estopell is offline
    I won't be using this, I'm not sure why anyone would take such a chance with a know carcinogen just to get a boost when there's so many other options.
    Reply With Quote

  4. #214
    four left turns to go... nni's Avatar
    Join Date: Jan 2005
    Posts: 22,997
    Rep Power: 27353
    nni has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) nni has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) nni has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) nni has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) nni has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) nni has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) nni has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) nni has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) nni has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) nni has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) nni has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    nni is offline
    Originally Posted by Estopell View Post
    I won't be using this, I'm not sure why anyone would take such a chance with a know carcinogen just to get a boost when there's so many other options.
    because it is safe in the doses and form used. but to each his own.
    www.placebro.net

    This is a bandit's life, it comes and goes and thems the breaks.
    Reply With Quote

  5. #215
    Thanks for the board Ryan Estopell's Avatar
    Join Date: Jul 2004
    Location: Southern Cal
    Age: 54
    Posts: 2,300
    Rep Power: 2147
    Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000)
    Estopell is offline
    Depends on your definition of safe. I suppose you could argue one cigarette a day is safe. But would you?
    Reply With Quote

  6. #216
    Actual Pharmacist Bane's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2002
    Location: Greece
    Posts: 5,699
    Rep Power: 18115
    Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000)
    Bane is offline
    Originally Posted by Estopell View Post
    Depends on your definition of safe. I suppose you could argue one cigarette a day is safe. But would you?
    The way i have been taught to see it nothing pharmacodynamical is safe. It's just a matter of whether the benefits outweight the risk
    Reply With Quote

  7. #217
    Actual Pharmacist Bane's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2002
    Location: Greece
    Posts: 5,699
    Rep Power: 18115
    Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000)
    Bane is offline
    Originally Posted by nni View Post
    because it is safe in the doses and form used. but to each his own.
    Any actual clinical human data on this apart from Matt's testimony?
    Reply With Quote

  8. #218
    game over DRP7's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2005
    Posts: 5,739
    Rep Power: 0
    DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    DRP7 is offline
    Originally Posted by Estopell View Post
    Depends on your definition of safe. I suppose you could argue one cigarette a day is safe. But would you?
    No, I wouldnt!

    Tob Control. 2005 Oct;14(5):315-20.

    Health consequences of smoking 1-4 cigarettes per day.

    Bjartveit K, Tverdal A.
    National Health Screening Service, Oslo, Norway. kjell.bjartveit@chello.no

    OBJECTIVES: To determine the risk in men and women smoking 1-4 cigarettes per day of dying from specified smoking related diseases and from any cause. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: Oslo city and three counties in Norway. PARTICIPANTS: 23,521 men and 19,201 women, aged 35-49 years, screened for cardiovascular disease risk factors in the mid 1970s and followed throughout 2002. OUTCOMES: Absolute mortality and relative risks adjusted for confounding variables, of dying from ischaemic heart disease, all cancer, lung cancer, and from all causes. RESULTS: Adjusted relative risk (95% confidence interval) in smokers of 1-4 cigarettes per day, with never smokers as reference, of dying from ischaemic heart disease was 2.74 (2.07 to 3.61) in men and 2.94 (1.75 to 4.95) in women. The corresponding figures for all cancer were 1.08 (0.78 to 1.49) and 1.14 (0.84 to 1.55), for lung cancer 2.79 (0.94 to 8.28) and 5.03 (1.81 to 13.98), and for any cause 1.57 (1.33 to 1.85) and 1.47 (1.19 to 1.82). CONCLUSIONS: In both sexes, smoking 1-4 cigarettes per day was associated with a significantly higher risk of dying from ischaemic heart disease and from all causes, and from lung cancer in women. Smoking control policymakers and health educators should emphasise more strongly that light smokers also endanger their health.
    Reply With Quote

  9. #219
    Actual Pharmacist Bane's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2002
    Location: Greece
    Posts: 5,699
    Rep Power: 18115
    Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000)
    Bane is offline
    Originally Posted by :P View Post
    No, I wouldnt!
    Omg. You mean using harmful substances at lower doses than the average joe can actually be harmful too?

    SAY IT ISN'T SO
    Reply With Quote

  10. #220
    Are you Driven? Sldge's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2007
    Location: New York, United States
    Age: 44
    Posts: 8,524
    Rep Power: 33535
    Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    Sldge is offline
    Originally Posted by Estopell View Post
    Depends on your definition of safe. I suppose you could argue one cigarette a day is safe. But would you?
    I dont think so.

    Originally Posted by Bane View Post
    Any actual clinical human data on this apart from Matt's testimony?
    Memory improvement without toxicity during chronic, low dose
    intravenous arecoline in Alzheimer's disease
    Timothy T. Soncrant, Kathleen C. Raffaele, Sanjay Asthana, Annamaria Berardi, P. Pearse Morris,
    and James V. Haxby
    Unit on Pharmacology and Pharmacokinetics, Laboratory of Neurosciences, National Institute on Aging,
    National Institutes of Health 10/6C103, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
    Received September 9, 1992 / Final version December 1, 1992
    Attached Files
    Matt Cahill
    www.DrivenSports.com
    www.drivensports.co.uk
    Reply With Quote

  11. #221
    Actual Pharmacist Bane's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2002
    Location: Greece
    Posts: 5,699
    Rep Power: 18115
    Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000)
    Bane is offline
    Originally Posted by Sldge View Post
    I dont think so.



    Memory improvement without toxicity during chronic, low dose
    intravenous arecoline in Alzheimer's disease
    Timothy T. Soncrant, Kathleen C. Raffaele, Sanjay Asthana, Annamaria Berardi, P. Pearse Morris,
    and James V. Haxby
    Unit on Pharmacology and Pharmacokinetics, Laboratory of Neurosciences, National Institute on Aging,
    National Institutes of Health 10/6C103, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
    Received September 9, 1992 / Final version December 1, 1992
    Study on Alzheimer patient's with continious i.v. perfusion and a peripheral cholinergic antagonist for 2 weeks? I have 2 more like this, sorry this won't do
    Reply With Quote

  12. #222
    Are you Driven? Sldge's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2007
    Location: New York, United States
    Age: 44
    Posts: 8,524
    Rep Power: 33535
    Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    Sldge is offline
    Originally Posted by Bane View Post
    Study on Alzheimer patient's with continious i.v. perfusion and a peripheral cholinergic antagonist for 2 weeks? I have 2 more like this, sorry this won't do
    Maybe not for you but it does for me. Using an antagonist wouldnt stop the side effects you think it would cause at low doses. Here is a study showing constant use at a low dose (even on IV) for 2 weeks straight was safe. It has nothing to do with them being Alzheimer patients or not.
    Matt Cahill
    www.DrivenSports.com
    www.drivensports.co.uk
    Reply With Quote

  13. #223
    Actual Pharmacist Bane's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2002
    Location: Greece
    Posts: 5,699
    Rep Power: 18115
    Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000)
    Bane is offline
    Originally Posted by Sldge View Post
    Maybe not for you but it does for me. Using an antagonist wouldnt stop the side effects you think it would cause at low doses. Here is a study showing constant use at a low dose (even on IV) for 2 weeks straight was safe. It has nothing to do with them being Alzheimer patients or not.
    So we are administering on CNS-cholinergic deficient people a cholinergic agonist while at the same time shutting off all peripheral effects of the administered drug and noone gets an adverse effect= Arecoline is safe on healthy people when given orally.
    Yes I am sure this will do for YOU
    Reply With Quote

  14. #224
    Are you Driven? Sldge's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2007
    Location: New York, United States
    Age: 44
    Posts: 8,524
    Rep Power: 33535
    Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    Sldge is offline
    Originally Posted by Bane View Post
    So we are administering on CNS-cholinergic deficient people a cholinergic agonist while at the same time shutting off all peripheral effects of the administered drug and noone gets an adverse effect= Arecoline is safe on healthy people when given orally.
    Yes I am sure this will do for YOU
    Youre original problem with Arecoline was that you feel it causes cancer among a host of other things. These would still be present even if a antagonist were used. This study shows that low dose during short term use is safe in humans, plain and simple.

    So you think that low dose oral use would result in MORE side effects then on a low dose IV for continious use during a 2 week period?

    The peripheral effects can also be handled by using other compounds in conjunction with arecoline, which is also shown in this study.
    Matt Cahill
    www.DrivenSports.com
    www.drivensports.co.uk
    Reply With Quote

  15. #225
    Actual Pharmacist Bane's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2002
    Location: Greece
    Posts: 5,699
    Rep Power: 18115
    Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000)
    Bane is offline
    Originally Posted by Sldge View Post
    Youre original problem with Arecoline was that you feel it causes cancer among a host of other things. These would still be present even if a antagonist were used. This study shows that low dose during short term use is safe in humans, plain and simple.

    So you think that low dose oral use would result in MORE side effects then on a low dose IV for continious use during a 2 week period?

    The peripheral effects can also be handled by using other compounds in conjunction with arecoline, which is also shown in this study.
    I guess if a suspected carcinogen does not cause cancer in 2 weeks this is a really good marker it is not carcinogenic

    You should really spend more time rewriting toxicology textbooks
    Reply With Quote

  16. #226
    Are you Driven? Sldge's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2007
    Location: New York, United States
    Age: 44
    Posts: 8,524
    Rep Power: 33535
    Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    Sldge is offline
    Originally Posted by Bane View Post
    I guess if a suspected carcinogen does not cause cancer in 2 weeks this is a really good marker it is not carcinogenic

    You should really spend more time rewriting toxicology textbooks
    All I have been talking about is low dose Arecoline use for the short term not chronic use of a high dose. For exactly what Ive been talking about Arecoline has been shown to be safe, whether you want to believe it or not.

    You really should spend more time reading them.
    Matt Cahill
    www.DrivenSports.com
    www.drivensports.co.uk
    Reply With Quote

  17. #227
    Actual Pharmacist Bane's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2002
    Location: Greece
    Posts: 5,699
    Rep Power: 18115
    Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000)
    Bane is offline
    Originally Posted by Sldge View Post
    All I have been talking about is low dose Arecoline use for the short term not chronic use of a high dose. For exactly what Ive been talking about Arecoline has been shown to be safe, whether you want to believe it or not.

    You really should spend more time reading them.
    Gimme a study on healthy people using what you consider low dose oral arecoline for a month and I will believe it.

    I have spent enough time reading them before I got my degree and i still refresh them from time to time but i have to admit, the view of toxicology that salesmen have when they want to market their potentially addictive stuff never ceases to amaze me
    Reply With Quote

  18. #228
    Are you Driven? Sldge's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2007
    Location: New York, United States
    Age: 44
    Posts: 8,524
    Rep Power: 33535
    Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    Sldge is offline
    Originally Posted by Bane View Post
    Gimme a study on healthy people using what you consider low dose oral arecoline for a month and I will believe it.

    I have spent enough time reading them before I got my degree and i still refresh them from time to time but i have to admit, the view of toxicology that salesmen have when they want to market their potentially addictive stuff never ceases to amaze me
    Bane I dont have to give you anything nor am I looking for you to give it your thumbs up. I believe earlier on in this thread a low dose was quoted by the FDA. You are choosing to look at it one way and one way only. There are a few studies showing it to be safe in low dose use, why you think it would somehow be worse in healthy people as oppossed to "non-healthy" people is beyond me.

    As do I and I test the material and I use the material for months upon months. Your saleman mantra might have more of an effect if you yourself didnt work for one. Save it for the people who dont know what they are talking about.
    Matt Cahill
    www.DrivenSports.com
    www.drivensports.co.uk
    Reply With Quote

  19. #229
    Thanks for the board Ryan Estopell's Avatar
    Join Date: Jul 2004
    Location: Southern Cal
    Age: 54
    Posts: 2,300
    Rep Power: 2147
    Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000) Estopell is just really nice. (+1000)
    Estopell is offline
    Aren't there also studies that show significant increases in blood pressure and a negative effect on protein synthesis?
    Reply With Quote

  20. #230
    Education + Dedication uhockey's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2004
    Location: Ohio
    Age: 40
    Posts: 23,621
    Rep Power: 55412
    uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    uhockey is offline
    Originally Posted by Estopell View Post
    I won't be using this, I'm not sure why anyone would take such a chance with a know carcinogen just to get a boost when there's so many other options.
    Other options.......like ephedrine which is cardiotoxic and terribly nonselective in its adrenergic action?

    There is a toxic dose for nearly everything and as Matt has detailed, there is no evidence that arecoline is carcinogenic on its own. There is evidence that the charcoal everyone is using to cook their meat each summer is, though.
    My place in here at bb.com is as a fitness enthusiast and recommendations do not represent medical advice. Please consult your examining physician for all medical concerns.

    I'm not a "rep," and most "reps":
    1) are no more credentialed than you. 2) have no input and no understanding of their product formulations. 3) are merely paid in free product from the company they represent.

    http://www.drivensports.co.uk/
    http://www.getds.com/
    Reply With Quote

  21. #231
    Perma-Bulk haiz69's Avatar
    Join Date: Apr 2006
    Location: Washington, District Of Columbia, United States
    Age: 33
    Posts: 14,925
    Rep Power: 10054
    haiz69 is a name known to all. (+5000) haiz69 is a name known to all. (+5000) haiz69 is a name known to all. (+5000) haiz69 is a name known to all. (+5000) haiz69 is a name known to all. (+5000) haiz69 is a name known to all. (+5000) haiz69 is a name known to all. (+5000) haiz69 is a name known to all. (+5000) haiz69 is a name known to all. (+5000) haiz69 is a name known to all. (+5000) haiz69 is a name known to all. (+5000)
    haiz69 is offline
    Originally Posted by uhockey View Post
    Other options.......like ephedrine which is cardiotoxic and terribly nonselective in its adrenergic action?

    There is a toxic dose for nearly everything and as Matt has detailed, there is no evidence that arecoline is carcinogenic on its own. There is evidence that the charcoal everyone is using to cook their meat each summer is, though.
    I just read something that said more exposure to light at night reduces melatonin production and is correlated with increased breast cancer rates. Turn those night lights off ladies.
    NSCA-CSCS and CPT
    Currently Pursuing A Doctor of Physical Therapy Degree
    Reply With Quote

  22. #232
    Actual Pharmacist Bane's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2002
    Location: Greece
    Posts: 5,699
    Rep Power: 18115
    Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000)
    Bane is offline
    Originally Posted by uhockey View Post
    Other options.......like ephedrine which is cardiotoxic and terribly nonselective in its adrenergic action?

    There is a toxic dose for nearly everything and as Matt has detailed, there is no evidence that arecoline is carcinogenic on its own. There is evidence that the charcoal everyone is using to cook their meat each summer is, though.
    Ephedrine at least has gazillion of studies detailing every effect, good or bad and is proven to be effective.

    If I ever bring up the argument "Hey, X you are using every day is also toxic" please someone shoot me. You know Mike, a few years ago we used to laugh when pu12 made such arguments.



    Sleep time for me, goodnight all
    Reply With Quote

  23. #233
    Education + Dedication uhockey's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2004
    Location: Ohio
    Age: 40
    Posts: 23,621
    Rep Power: 55412
    uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    uhockey is offline
    Bane, you're choosing to be narrowminded and as such I have no reason to further debate with you on this topic. I respect your opinons, but I do not agree with them in this case, at all. I was simply making a point against what estopell was saying about there being better and safer options......its not true.

    The only sure fire 'safe' method for weight loss is hard work, a clean diet, and burning more calories than you intake......and some people on this site even manage to do that at a toxic level.
    My place in here at bb.com is as a fitness enthusiast and recommendations do not represent medical advice. Please consult your examining physician for all medical concerns.

    I'm not a "rep," and most "reps":
    1) are no more credentialed than you. 2) have no input and no understanding of their product formulations. 3) are merely paid in free product from the company they represent.

    http://www.drivensports.co.uk/
    http://www.getds.com/
    Reply With Quote

  24. #234
    Actual Pharmacist Bane's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2002
    Location: Greece
    Posts: 5,699
    Rep Power: 18115
    Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000)
    Bane is offline
    Originally Posted by uhockey View Post
    I was simply making a point against what estopell was saying about there being better and safer options......its not true.
    You really believe there are not better options in the safety/efficiency factor for fat loss from a 30min lived cholinergic agonist that is a spuspected carcinogen and a potent addictive substance?
    Reply With Quote

  25. #235
    Education + Dedication uhockey's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2004
    Location: Ohio
    Age: 40
    Posts: 23,621
    Rep Power: 55412
    uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    uhockey is offline
    The efficacy is clearly longer than 30 minutes when utilized as a part of this formula, as noted by the multiple testers experiencing 6+ hours of appetite suppression.

    Once again, there is no evidence that arecoline, 100% seperated from the rest of the quid is carcinogenic.

    Ditto on the 'potent addictive' potential.

    IMO, and perhaps this is just me, but I would prefer it over the myriad of products out there which non-selectively stimulate the beta2 receptors at the heart while simultaneously ignoring vasoconstriction leading to significant raise in blood pressure.

    We at DS believe Adrenalean to be quite safe, or else we'd have not released it.
    My place in here at bb.com is as a fitness enthusiast and recommendations do not represent medical advice. Please consult your examining physician for all medical concerns.

    I'm not a "rep," and most "reps":
    1) are no more credentialed than you. 2) have no input and no understanding of their product formulations. 3) are merely paid in free product from the company they represent.

    http://www.drivensports.co.uk/
    http://www.getds.com/
    Reply With Quote

  26. #236
    game over DRP7's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2005
    Posts: 5,739
    Rep Power: 0
    DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    DRP7 is offline
    Originally Posted by uhockey View Post

    Once again, there is no evidence that arecoline, 100% seperated from the rest of the quid is carcinogenic.
    well, there is evidence that arecoline, even when 100% separated from the rest of the quid is indeed -at least indirectly- involved in carcinogenic pathways.

    vvv

    J Biol Chem. 2004 Dec 3;279(49):50676-83.
    The induction of prostaglandin E2 production, interleukin-6 production, cell cycle arrest, and cytotoxicity in primary oral keratinocytes and KB cancer cells by areca nut ingredients is differentially regulated by MEK/ERK activation.

    Chang MC, Wu HL, Lee JJ, Lee PH, Chang HH, Hahn LJ, Lin BR, Chen YJ, Jeng JH.
    Team of Biomedical Science, Chang-Gung Institute of Technology, Kwei-Shan, Taoyuan, Taiwan.

    There are about 200-600 million betel quid (BQ) chewers in the world. BQ chewing is one of the major risk factor of hepatocarcinoma, oropharyngeal, and esophagus cancers in Taiwan, India, and Southeast Asian countries. Thus, the precise molecular mechanisms deserve investigation. We used cultured primary keratinocytes and KB cells, RT-PCR, flow cytometry, Western blotting, and ELISA to evaluate whether alterations in early gene expression is crucial in the carcinogenic processes of BQ. We observed the induction of c-Fos mRNA expression in human gingival keratinocyte (GK) and KB carcinoma cells by areca nut (AN) extract and arecoline. A maximal increment in c-fos gene expression was shown at about 30 min after challenge. AN extract (100-800 microg/ml) and arecoline (0.1-0.8 mM) also stimulated ERK1/ERK2 phosphorylation with a maximal stimulation at 5-10 min of exposure. Pretreatment by U0126 (30 microM), a MEK inhibitor, markedly inhibited the c-Fos, cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2), and IL-6 mRNA expression of the KB epithelial cells. In addition, U0126 and PD98059 (50 microM) also decreased AN extract- and arecoline-associated PGE2 and IL-6 production in GK and KB cells. However, U0126 by itself arrested the cells in G0/G1 phase, but was not able to prevent AN- and arecoline-induced cell death or apoptosis. In contrast, U0126 enhanced the AN-induced apoptosis of KB cells. AN ingredients thus play a significant role in the pathogenesis of oropharyngeal cancer by activation of MEK1/ERK/c-Fos pathway, which promotes keratinocyte inflammation, cell survival, and affects cell cycle progression.
    another study found also the induction of the protooncogene c-jun by arecoline (Ho et al., Oral Oncol. 2000 Sep;36(5):432-6)


    However, to my knowledge, these pathways are of relevance (with regards to carcinogenesis) ONLY when repeatedly or chronically activated. In case that arecoline does not activate any other pro-oncogenic pathways beside those mentioned above, I believe that a short term use at reasonably low doses would not create any relevant cancer risk in normal healthy subjects.

    However, the issue of carcinogenesis can become emergent when subjects have additional risk factors, such as alcohol and tobacco consumption or are otherwise exposed to carcinogens. In such cases, every and any additional exposure - even to that of arecoline - should be avoided.

    In sum, it appears to me that the short-term use of Arecoline probably may not be problematic in healthy individuals that follow a healthy lifestyle. But all those who are at an elevated cancer risk should be aware of the potentially dangerous pathways that are being activated by Arecoline.


    Originally Posted by uhockey
    We at DS believe Adrenalean to be quite safe, or else we'd have not released it.
    I wish this would become the motto of all supplement companies.
    Last edited by :P; 02-21-2008 at 07:56 AM.
    Reply With Quote

  27. #237
    game over DRP7's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2005
    Posts: 5,739
    Rep Power: 0
    DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) DRP7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    DRP7 is offline
    here some more interesting reading on temporal aspects of c-fos expression and induced cell-transformation:

    Cell transformation requires an extended period of Fos expression

    To determine the time course of morphological
    reversion, transformed LI-3c-fos cells were exposed to IPTG
    for different periods of time. Reversion of cell transformation
    was found to occur gradually over a period of 3 days (Fig. 3A).
    The transformed cells partially reverted following exposure to
    IPTG for 1 day. Complete conversion of the culture to a
    normal phenotype required approximately 3 days of treatment.
    To investigate the time course of cell transformation by Fos,
    we first generated reverted L1-3c-fos cells by growing the
    _ Jun transformed cells in the presence of IPTG (100 FxM) for 3 days.
    Cell transformation was then initiated by removing IPTG from
    the medium. As shown in Fig. 3B, induction of cell transformation
    by Fos also occurred slowly. Full transformation required
    up to 3 days of culture in the absence of IPTG.
    Transient removal of IPTG from the reverted cell cultures for
    3m0in to 12 h was insufficient to trigger transformation.
    However, partial transformation did occur when cells were
    deprived of IPTG for a period o1f to 2 days. Interestingly,
    addition of IPTG at any time during the transition invariably
    abrogated the transformation process. These results indicate
    that cell transformation requires a continuous period of Fos
    expression of approximately 3 days.
    quoted from: Mol Cell Biol. 1994 Jun;14(6):4295-310


    what I would like to know is the temporal dynamics of c-fos / c-jun expression induced by Arecoline. In other words: is c-fos expression upregulated only as long as arecoline is floating around or does arecoline induce a c-fos expression that lasts beyond the physical presence of the inductor. this I don't know.

    On a side note: there are strong interactions between c-fos pathway and the arachidonic acid cascade. thus, the combination of increased c-fos /c-jun expression (by arecoline) and other pro-inflammatory factors may have strong synergistic effects on inflammation and cell transformation.
    Reply With Quote

  28. #238
    Actual Pharmacist Bane's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2002
    Location: Greece
    Posts: 5,699
    Rep Power: 18115
    Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Bane is a splendid one to behold. (+10000)
    Bane is offline
    Originally Posted by uhockey View Post

    Once again, there is no evidence that arecoline, 100% seperated from the rest of the quid is carcinogenic.
    There are some 10s in vivo and in vitro studies showing otherwise
    Reply With Quote

  29. #239
    Are you Driven? Sldge's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2007
    Location: New York, United States
    Age: 44
    Posts: 8,524
    Rep Power: 33535
    Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Sldge has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    Sldge is offline
    You feel its not safe and we feel it is, nothing is going to change that. You are choosing to read a very select few studies in one manner only. We have read all the studies and gone over the info for almost a year. As Mike already posted had we not felt it were safe we would not have released it. Its still very simple, dont buy the product if you dont agree with our position..
    Matt Cahill
    www.DrivenSports.com
    www.drivensports.co.uk
    Reply With Quote

  30. #240
    Education + Dedication uhockey's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2004
    Location: Ohio
    Age: 40
    Posts: 23,621
    Rep Power: 55412
    uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) uhockey has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    uhockey is offline
    Originally Posted by :P View Post
    well, there is evidence that arecoline, even when 100% separated from the rest of the quid is indeed -at least indirectly- involved in carcinogenic pathways.

    vvv



    another study found also the induction of the protooncogene c-jun by arecoline (Ho et al., Oral Oncol. 2000 Sep;36(5):432-6)


    However, to my knowledge, these pathways are of relevance (with regards to carcinogenesis) ONLY when repeatedly or chronically activated. In case that arecoline does not activate any other pro-oncogenic pathways beside those mentioned above, I believe that a short term use at reasonably low doses would not create any relevant cancer risk in normal healthy subjects.

    However, the issue of carcinogenesis can become emergent when subjects have additional risk factors, such as alcohol and tobacco consumption or are otherwise exposed to carcinogens. In such cases, every and any additional exposure - even to that of arecoline - should be avoided.

    In sum, it appears to me that the short-term use of Arecoline probably may not be problematic in healthy individuals that follow a healthy lifestyle. But all those who are at an elevated cancer risk should be aware of the potentially dangerous pathways that are being activated by Arecoline.




    I wish this would become the motto of all supplement companies.
    I wouldn't recommend alcohol and tobacco consumption, personally.

    And, as noted by the sorts of cancers implicated (oral and esophageal) these effects are indeed likely due to consistent exposure to chewing betel. As for the hepatocellular, I'd like to see demographics regarding alcohol consumption as well as Hepatitis serotiters considering the predominance of HepC in asian countries (the primary chewers of BQ.)
    My place in here at bb.com is as a fitness enthusiast and recommendations do not represent medical advice. Please consult your examining physician for all medical concerns.

    I'm not a "rep," and most "reps":
    1) are no more credentialed than you. 2) have no input and no understanding of their product formulations. 3) are merely paid in free product from the company they represent.

    http://www.drivensports.co.uk/
    http://www.getds.com/
    Reply With Quote

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts