Testosterone therapy is increasingly used for postmenopausal and surgically menopausal women, despite controversy. Limited data supports its use in premenopausal women. Androgens are crucial for bone and muscle mass, mood, well-being, and libido in young women. Androgen deficiency can occur due to conditions like hypothalamic amenorrhea, premature ovarian failure, oophorectomy, premenstrual syndrome, acquired immunodeficiency wasting syndrome, adrenal insufficiency, and hypopituitarism, or medications like oral estrogen, oral contraceptives, and corticosteroids. Symptoms of testosterone deficiency are often nonspecific, and current measurement techniques are inaccurate. Few studies have explored testosterone therapy in premenopausal women, and long-term safety and effectiveness data are lacking. Common side effects include hirsutism and acne, which reverse when treatment stops. Testosterone regimens specifically for women aim to maintain normal levels and clarify the therapy’s effects.

Steroids are generally categorized into corticosteroids and anabolic steroids. Corticosteroids are often prescribed by doctors to reduce inflammation and treat conditions like lupus and asthma. They are different from anabolic steroids, which are synthetic hormones that enhance muscle production and prevent muscle breakdown, often used by bodybuilders and athletes. In many countries, including the United States, using anabolic steroids without a prescription is illegal. Androstenedione, an anabolic steroid, is used by athletes to build muscle, but high doses can lead to significant health issues. Steroid abuse can cause liver tumors, heart attacks, hair loss, and reproductive organ damage, and may also lead to aggressive behavior.

Research indicates that testosterone supplementation in men can cause muscle fiber hypertrophy. Testosterone is vital for male puberty, influencing muscle strength, facial hair growth, and voice deepening. Anabolic steroids increase testosterone levels, promoting muscle growth but posing long-term health risks. Misconceptions about steroids include the belief that they don’t affect growth; however, adolescents who abuse steroids may not reach their full height. Steroid abuse is not limited to specific individuals; teenagers and those concerned about their performance or appearance may also misuse them.

How Steroids Work

Anabolic steroids affect metabolism in every cell, causing complications like altered lipid metabolism in the liver and desired effects like muscle growth in other cells. Proper training and nutrition are essential for building muscle and minimizing fat gain. Steroids can be taken orally or injected, stimulating proteins that build muscle tissue. Without a prescription, steroids can cause serious health issues, including cancer, liver tumors, jaundice, high blood pressure, and severe acne.

Athletes use anabolic steroids to gain strength, muscle mass, endurance, speed, and power. For example, Barry Bonds, a Major League Baseball player, reportedly used steroids, increasing his muscle mass and weight. Male hormones like testosterone drive changes during male adolescence, such as hair growth and increased aggressiveness. Steroids have both anabolic and androgenic effects, impacting sexual characteristics and behavior.

Steroids Are Dangerous

Using steroids without a prescription constitutes abuse and can lead to severe health problems. Legal, doctor-prescribed steroid use is safe, but abuse is dangerous due to its illegality and potential health risks, some of which may be permanent. Steroid abuse can negatively impact the reproductive system, causing impotence in men and menstrual and fertility issues in women. Illegal steroid doses are significantly higher than medical doses.

Abusing steroids also carries legal risks, including fines, jail time, and exclusion from sports events. For instance, athletes who fail drug tests may face severe consequences. Steroids can cause early fusion of bone plates, stunting growth. Improper injection practices can lead to infections like HIV or Hepatitis. Steroid abuse can also cause hair loss, high blood pressure, and increased aggression or ‘Roid Rage.’

• Burns, Jim. “Steroids: Worth the Risk?” Campus Life’s Ignite Your Faith, November/December.
• Kroichick, Ron. “Book Traces Bond’s Steroids Use to McGwire-Sosa HR Race.”
• Willey, Warren. “Better Than Steroids.” Trafford Publishing, 1st edition, 2007.

Studies show that men who train for 20 weeks and receive 600 mg of testosterone enanthate weekly gain an additional 8 kg of fat-free mass. However, doctors at the University of California found that similar gains can be achieved with lower doses over a shorter period. Their 1999 study, published in JAMA, involved 22 HIV patients who were given either 20 mg of oxandrolone daily or a weekly injection of 100 mg of testosterone enanthate for 8 weeks.

The participants trained for one hour, three times a week, performing six upper body and three lower body exercises at 80% of their one-rep max. After 8 weeks, the oxandrolone group gained nearly 8 kg of fat-free mass and experienced greater strength increases than the testosterone-only group, with bench press and leg press improvements of 20 kg and 30 kg, respectively. They also lost slightly more fat.

The researchers concluded that high doses over long periods are unnecessary for significant gains; similar results can be achieved with lower doses in a shorter time frame. However, the oxandrolone-testosterone regimen was not without side effects. One patient in the oxandrolone group had liver issues, and blood tests showed decreased endogenous testosterone, LH, and FSH production.

Despite some participants taking retroviral medications, these did not affect the steroid outcomes. The study concluded that resistance training combined with moderate androgen doses, including oxandrolone, significantly increased lean mass and strength more than resistance training with physiological testosterone replacement alone in eugonadal HIV-infected men with previous weight loss.

JAMA 1999 Apr 14; 281(14): 1282-90.

An interesting 2004 study from the University of Southern California explored the effects of oxandrolone on men over sixty. Researchers administered a daily dose of 20 mg of oxandrolone to thirty healthy men for twelve weeks to observe its impact. This study raises questions about the benefits of giving androgens to non-exercising individuals.

Oxandrolone: Relatively Safe

Oxandrolone is considered one of the safest oral anabolic steroids, partly due to its resistance to metabolism.

Study Overview

The goal was to determine if male hormones could counteract age-related declines in muscle mass and strength. Thirty men, aged sixty and over, were selected. Twenty received oxandrolone, and ten received a placebo for twelve weeks, without engaging in weight training. The participants were re-evaluated twelve weeks after the treatment ended.

Results

Muscle measurements showed significant growth in the oxandrolone group, particularly in the thigh muscle cross-sectional area. However, much of this gain was lost twelve weeks post-treatment. Lean body mass, which includes muscle mass, increased during the course but also declined significantly after stopping oxandrolone.

Muscle strength improvements were observed in exercises like the leg press, lat pulley, leg extension, and chest press, but these gains also largely disappeared after twelve weeks. However, reductions in fat mass were more lasting, with significant decreases during the course that persisted twelve weeks later.

Health Monitoring

The researchers monitored liver enzymes, cholesterol, LH, and the prostate cancer marker PSA, finding no alarming changes. Despite the lack of weight training, which often helps maintain steroid-induced muscle gains, and the absence of post cycle therapy (PCT) to boost endogenous testosterone production, the study found oxandrolone had a limited lasting impact on muscle mass and strength.

Sources:

J Appl Physiol. 2004 Mar;96(3):1055-62.
Medical study: twelve weeks on deca 15.01.2009
Recovery from mild nandrolone use takes six months 13.12.2008

A study conducted at the Centro de Andrologia e Urologia in Porto Alegre, Brazil, involving 125 men with low testosterone levels and reduced libido, found that a moderate dose of the fertility drug Clomid could be beneficial. The participants had testosterone levels ranging from 300-400 nanograms per deciliter, which are considered low-normal by medical standards (normal range: 200-1200 ng/dL).

Traditionally, testosterone products have been prescribed for such conditions, providing short-term relief but potentially leading to long-term side effects like skin irritation, gynecomastia, and testicular atrophy. In contrast, Clomid, or clomiphene citrate, acts as an anti-estrogen by signaling the brain to increase steroid hormone levels, thereby stimulating testosterone production in the testes.

Clomid not only has fewer side effects compared to testosterone therapy but is also more cost-effective. A study by researchers at Rush University estimated that Clomid treatment costs less than one-third of testosterone treatments.

To evaluate Clomid’s effectiveness, the Brazilian researchers administered a daily dose of 25 mg of clomiphene citrate to their subjects for 3-6 months. The results showed a nearly doubled testosterone level in the men, with no adverse effects on cholesterol levels observed. In fact, Clomid slightly improved cholesterol levels among the participants.

The treatment also alleviated sexual problems reported by most men, particularly those under seventy. Among participants over seventy, approximately half experienced improvements with Clomid, while the other half did not show significant changes.

“Our findings demonstrate that a daily dose of 25 mg clomiphene citrate effectively boosts endogenous testosterone production over a short-term period,” conclude the Brazilian researchers. “No serious adverse events were reported during the study, suggesting that this medication could be a viable therapeutic option for men experiencing symptomatic testosterone deficiency.”

Sources:

Int Braz J Urol. 2012 Jul;38(4):512-8.
Daily dose 25 mg Clomid doubles men’s testosterone levels 05.11.2012
Study shows Clomid is suitable for hormone therapy 08.12.2011

In the late 1980s, the US military conducted experiments involving anabolic steroids on soldiers, including a comparative study on the effects of Deca and testosterone. The study aimed to determine which steroid was more effective.

Nandrolone, structurally similar to testosterone but lacking a C19 methyl group, differs in its conversion to estradiol and its interaction with the androgen receptor, making it less likely to cause feminizing effects. Animal studies suggest nandrolone has a stronger anabolic effect than testosterone.

The study involved thirty physically active soldiers, including cyclists, weightlifters, and runners, divided into four groups. Group 1 received weekly injections of 100 mg testosterone enanthate (Delatestryl) for six weeks, while Group 2 received 300 mg. Group 3 received 100 mg nandrolone decanoate (Deca-Durabolin) weekly, and Group 4 received 300 mg of Deca.

Results indicated that at lower doses (100 mg per week), Deca produced greater muscle mass and fat reduction compared to testosterone. However, at higher doses (300 mg per week), testosterone showed similar muscle gains but more significant fat loss and greater improvement in strength compared to Deca.

Blood analysis showed higher testosterone and estradiol levels in the testosterone groups, increasing the risk of side effects like gynecomastia. Nandrolone, despite its androgenic properties, can also act as an estrogen due to its interaction with estradiol receptors.

At lower doses, Deca had fewer negative effects on testicular volume and sperm production compared to testosterone. However, the differences diminish at higher doses.

In conclusion, non-homeopathic doses favor testosterone for greater effectiveness, while Deca may appear safer at lower doses but poses risks at higher doses, as indicated by recent animal studies on vascular health.

Sources:

J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 1991;40(4-6):607-12.