Bigtex
VIP Member
- Aug 14, 2012
- 1,936
- 3,101
This has got to be one of the biggest hits on the use of testosterone I have ever read. It is so full of bullshit that I had to start laughing. This guy got ripped off buying steroids and if he injected 3 times a day for two years, he still looks like shit.
www.dailymail.co.uk
It took a long time to find this mention of a study -
Windfeld-Mathiasen J, Heerfordt IM, Dalhoff KP, Andersen JT, Horwitz H. Mortality Among Users of Anabolic Steroids. JAMA. 2024;331(14):1229-1230. doi:10.1001/jama.2024.3180
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
What a weak ass observation study with absolutely NO evidence of causality. Go figure, seems to match the rest of this silly story. First off, this study did not just investigate the use of testosterone, it investigated the use of all anabolic steroids. Yet the writer of this article used this study to prove his point.
Study Population 1,189 AAS users, 59,450 controls, mean age 27.4 years.
The results revealed significant differences in mortality between AAS users and controls. The study included a mean age of 27.4 years (SD, 6.9) at baseline. During the follow-up, 33 deaths occurred among AAS users compared to 578 among controls. The causes of death for AAS users were detailed as follows: 17 unnatural (primarily accidents), 16 natural (most prevalent were cancer and cardiovascular disease), and 0 unknown. For controls, the breakdown was 334 natural, 208 unnatural, and 36 unknown.'
An “increased risk” of 300% would imply a quadrupling of risk, which is not supported by the data. So once again, this article is supported by bullshit claims from a shady research article published in Jama.
Observational studies are generally considered weaker evidence compared to experimental studies like randomized controlled trials (RCTs). As an observational study, it cannot establish causality, meaning other factors (e.g., risk-taking behavior, concurrent substance use) may contribute to the observed mortality differences. There are other studies that have shown, other drugs used with anabolic steroids seems to be the cause of unnatural risks. Risk taking is also a big factor.
Man, 32, on the brink of death after taking popular medication
A bodybuilder was left fighting for his life after years of abusing a drug, with experts warning that more people could be at risk.
Zak Wilkinson, 32, spent more than two years using steroids, splashing £35,000 ($46475.80 US) on the performance enhancing drugs, injecting himself up to three times daily.
On March 23 2022, the father of one's gruelling steroid regime finally caught up with him when he started having seizures, vomiting and sweating profusely.
At first, doctors thought he could be suffering from meningitis, but quickly realised the fits were caused by his steroid use.
Doctors said Mr Wilkinson was fortunate to avoid suffering long term neurological damage after being left non-verbal for days.
'It could still all affect me later on, and I'm probably going to be on constant medication for the rest of my life,' says Mr Wilkinson.
'I now have PTSD, body dysmorphia, a diagnosed eating disorder, regular flashbacks, and I'm having rehabilitation for trauma. I've also now become epileptic due to the coma.'
He has a meeting with his treatment team twice a week, and also has to take anxiety, sleeping, and epilepsy medication, as well as attend frequent appointments for brain scans and blood tests.
"A landmark study published last year by Danish researchers found steroid users have an almost 300 per cent increased risk of death within two decades."
It took a long time to find this mention of a study -
Windfeld-Mathiasen J, Heerfordt IM, Dalhoff KP, Andersen JT, Horwitz H. Mortality Among Users of Anabolic Steroids. JAMA. 2024;331(14):1229-1230. doi:10.1001/jama.2024.3180
Mortality Among Users of Anabolic Steroids - PMC
This cohort study investigates mortality and cause of death among a large cohort of androgenic anabolic steroid users, compared with a control group, in Denmark from January 3, 2006, to March 1, 2018.
What a weak ass observation study with absolutely NO evidence of causality. Go figure, seems to match the rest of this silly story. First off, this study did not just investigate the use of testosterone, it investigated the use of all anabolic steroids. Yet the writer of this article used this study to prove his point.
Study Population 1,189 AAS users, 59,450 controls, mean age 27.4 years.
The results revealed significant differences in mortality between AAS users and controls. The study included a mean age of 27.4 years (SD, 6.9) at baseline. During the follow-up, 33 deaths occurred among AAS users compared to 578 among controls. The causes of death for AAS users were detailed as follows: 17 unnatural (primarily accidents), 16 natural (most prevalent were cancer and cardiovascular disease), and 0 unknown. For controls, the breakdown was 334 natural, 208 unnatural, and 36 unknown.'
An “increased risk” of 300% would imply a quadrupling of risk, which is not supported by the data. So once again, this article is supported by bullshit claims from a shady research article published in Jama.
Observational studies are generally considered weaker evidence compared to experimental studies like randomized controlled trials (RCTs). As an observational study, it cannot establish causality, meaning other factors (e.g., risk-taking behavior, concurrent substance use) may contribute to the observed mortality differences. There are other studies that have shown, other drugs used with anabolic steroids seems to be the cause of unnatural risks. Risk taking is also a big factor.