Talk:Trenbolone

message: What the **** is going on with this "usage in bodybuilding"-rubbish? This shouldn't be a how-to for a usage by humans, since it's forbidden for human use at least in some countries! So there's quite a chance that there are negative side effects and therefore an encyclopedia shouldn't be a guide how to use such substances.
Think about it, now people knows something about this steroid and then they know what the hell they are shooting in to there body´s, its better knowing in steed off they shoot them selves with some shit and die of it ??? Nikolaj Hegaard pedersen. Denmark, Randers 
*You are wrong. The drug is also used in this way. Just because something can be illegal in some countries information should not be available?? It is not "a guide", it is merely presenting common dosages in bodybuilding usage. More information and expansion are what made/makes Wikipedia so good. The side effects of using the drug are clearly presented. I am re-adding the information one last time before a request for mediation.
P.S. Exactly what mistakes are you reffering to? Cavell 04:37, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Usage in Bodybuilding

message: I don't want to get in the insane discussion above about what content belongs in the article. However, I am concerned by phrasings such as  "dosages should commonly be split into injections at least once every two days." By saying it should be done, the article moves to instructions, which are not encyclopedic, and more importantly is encouraging illegal behaviour. Perhaps "dosages are commonly split" etc. would be more appropriate. --64.235.198.242 (talk) 10:18, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Style

message: It seems like this could open the doors to discuss many related issues.  Since the drug is not approved for human use there won't be verifiable data that supports a particular amount as being a "normal" dose.  Drugs approved for use do even use the term "normal" with respect to dosing.  Anabolic steriod use associated with illicit use of the drugs results in blood levels above what is considered either normal physiologically, or medically indicated for some reason.  So the likelihood of locating such information for the sake of reference seems unlikely.
In my opinion, WP should approach this subject carefully because what is considered "standard" in terms of clinical evidence between human use and non-human use.  Remember too that agriculture makes the non-human category more complex.  
FDA approval is required when a manufacturer seeks to put a certain claim on a label.  (By omitting such claims, makers of a nutritional supplement have usually avoided the need to seek approval).
On the other hand, if the numerous websites that sell such products are considered as "verifiable", perhaps such marketing information can be used as a means of removing bias.  WP may then wish to consider whether or not there are legal risks by quoting information from an online pharmacy.  Consider, for example, using information about Viagra from a site that claims to sell it but had no connection at all with Pfizer. Would this pose either legal risk or reflect a lack of neutrality?
In general the question not answered by WP policy, I don't think, is what constitutes "verifiable".  That is, information collected by what are genreally considered unethical means are not accepted as "clinical" evidence.  Not accepting such information would be prohibited by medical ethics. If it already exists, it would still be unacceptable if it is not replicable today.  Where does WP sit regarding this?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kernel.package (talk • contribs) 01:26, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Although the study does not test for aromatization in humans, I could not find a study that did. If you know of such a study please include it in the article. I am not a doctor, but from what I understand a rise in LH in a castrated mammal suggests a non-castrated mammal could expect a rise in estrogen levels. If you want to edit the article with cites to various research and medical literature please do, constructive editing is what Wikipedia is all about. Legion211 (talk) 16:05, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV and required citations 

message: Whoever wrote this part of the article: " Trenbolone has proven popular with anabolic steroid users as some believe it is not metabolized by aromatase or 5α-reductase into estrogenic compounds such as estradiol, or into DHT; however, studies on this are mixed with some studies showing a potential increase in both" has misinterpreted the studies they cited for that. Specifically references 8 and 9. Especially the latter.
"At the time of castration, two groups of animals were given implants of either 45 mg OE2 or 200 mg TBA. Another group received equivalent to 30 mg daily injections of DHT." Different groups were given different drugs. It would be incorrect to use this as reference to suggest Trenbolone can increase estradiol or DHT, as that is not what was found.
Reference 8 does not suggest this at all. It's a study looking at Trenbolone as a potential alternative or adjunct to testosterone therapy. There is zero mention made of Trenbolone stimulating an increase in Oestradiol or DHT.
Furthermore this would smack in the face of the far more numerous studies suggesting that trenbolone explicitly is not metabolized by aromatase or 5-aR - another point, this is not a belief held by illicit drug users, it's a fact stated in various research and medical literature on the drug.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.179.88.61 (talk) 08:15, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Although the study does not test for aromatization in humans, I could not find a study that did. If you know of such a study please include it in the article. I am not a doctor, but from what I understand a rise in LH in a castrated mammal suggests a non-castrated mammal could expect a rise in estrogen levels. If you want to edit the article with cites to various research and medical literature please do, constructive editing is what Wikipedia is all about. Legion211 (talk) 16:05, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Research

message: Since trenbolone is both a veterinary drug and a bodybuilding drug (legal or not), doesn't it make sense to discuss these two uses in separate sections? Kortoso (talk) 17:12, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use and effects 

message: Can anyone explain the commercial source of Trenbolone -- i.e., if it is an entirely synthetic substance or if it is extracted from animals? Bricology (talk) 15:08, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Production and source