Smoking increases muscle growth?

I am sick of everyone assuming that smoking will destroy your cycle... that's right, rampage76 is on a rampage... rather, m16a2 now

http://www.ast-ss.com/research/breaking/b-r_7-16-00.asp

SMOKING WILL DESTROY YOUR HEALTH, but not ruin your cycle. :eek:

I smoke an occasional cigarette too. I should stop and I can... when I feel that I can't stop, is when I WILL stop.

Read the article. I don't like that this might encourage non-smokers to take up a detrimental habit, but knowing the facts is important.

mind you that was done in 2000.. im sure if you search again you will find many new studies done since then that will contradict that ..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m16a2

I am sick of everyone assuming that smoking will destroy your cycle... that's right, rampage76 is on a rampage... rather, m16a2 now

http://www.ast-ss.com/research/breaking/b-r_7-16-00.asp

SMOKING WILL DESTROY YOUR HEALTH, but not ruin your cycle. :eek:

I smoke an occasional cigarette too. I should stop and I can... when I feel that I can't stop, is when I WILL stop.

Read the article. I don't like that this might encourage non-smokers to take up a detrimental habit, but knowing the facts is important.

---

Smokers picking up a detrimental habit? As if smoking was benign in the first place. There are alot of bros that have given up addictions in their lives and have used bodybuilding (Yes, AS too) as a way to fill the void.

Trying-to-Get-Huge is one of those bros amongst many others. You can try to justify your habit, but quitting is something to be encouraged not something to be frowned on because it could "encourage non-smokers to take up a detrimental habit" Well, thats JMHO.

Heres the thread
http://forums.steroid.com/showthread...47#post1105247

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeefCakeStew

Smokers picking up a detrimental habit? As if smoking was benign in the first place. There are alot of bros that have given up addictions in their lives and have used bodybuilding (Yes, AS too) as a way to fill the void.

Trying-to-Get-Huge is one of those bros amongst many others. You can try to justify your habit, but quitting is something to be encouraged not something to be frowned on because it could "encourage non-smokers to take up a detrimental habit" Well, thats JMHO.

Heres the thread
http://forums.steroid.com/showthread...47#post1105247

---

No need for a flame, especially one that doesn't make sense. Of course, I advocate everyone stopping smoking. I just frown upon the common notion that smoking will ruin a cycle. There are facts out there that suggest the opposite and I don't think it is fair to tell someone who doesn't know better, that the reason to quit smoking is to build muscle and support their cycle. Quit smoking because smoking is harmful to your body < sure that is a valid statement. But get it right at least.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeefCakeStew

Smokers picking up a detrimental habit? As if smoking was benign in the first place. There are alot of bros that have given up addictions in their lives and have used bodybuilding (Yes, AS too) as a way to fill the void.

---

P.S. don't make AS sound like it a safe alternative to other addictions. First off, I think AS could have its own addictive qualities. Secondly, even if used 'correctly' AS are not completely safe. We do harm to our bodies in return for what we get out of it. I don't regret being here for one minute, but I realize that this isn't some wonder drug without any risks.

Ask a doctor what is safer, smoking cigarettes, or sticking a 1.5 inch 23 gague needle filled with synthetic hormones every 1-4 days for 3-4 months. Answers would depend on the doc, but if you limit the consensus to the time period, AAS would be worse, HANDS DOWN. Smoke for 3-4 months and stop, your body will completely heal itself, whereas AS doesn't offer the same guarantee.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m16a2

P.S. don't make AS sound like it a safe alternative to other addictions. First off, I think AS could have its own addictive qualities. Secondly, even if used 'correctly' AS are not completely safe. We do harm to our bodies in return for what we get out of it. I don't regret being here for one minute, but I realize that this isn't some wonder drug without any risks.

Ask a doctor what is safer, smoking cigarettes, or sticking a 1.5 inch 23 gague needle filled with synthetic hormones every 1-4 days for 3-4 months. Answers would depend on the doc, but if you limit the consensus to the time period, AAS would be worse, HANDS DOWN. Smoke for 3-4 months and stop, your body will completely heal itself, whereas AS doesn't offer the same guarantee.

---

No flame from me bro....I see the point you're trying to get across about cigarettes.
I also think it's a well known fact many ppl on this board have turned from a problem with drugs or alcohol,to this new drug of choice.albeit,it a healthier alternative,but in fact they are doing some sort of damage and putting themselves at a risk.having an addictive personality can be rough for some ppl.When they leave this game,they find something else to become addicted to,whether it's healthy or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m16a2

No need for a flame, especially one that doesn't make sense. Of course, I advocate everyone stopping smoking. I just frown upon the common notion that smoking will ruin a cycle. There are facts out there that suggest the opposite and I don't think it is fair to tell someone who doesn't know better, that the reason to quit smoking is to build muscle and support their cycle. Quit smoking because smoking is harmful to your body < sure that is a valid statement. But get it right at least.

---

Points well taken. I understood your post as advocating the use of Cigs as a means of boosting natural hormones--not merely stating that there is scientific evidence that rides against the grain. Thus, the negative tone in my response.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeefCakeStew

Points well taken. I understood your post as advocating the use of Cigs as a means of boosting natural hormones--not merely stating that there is scientific evidence that rides against the grain. Thus, the negative tone in my response.

---

Funny isn't it..how something so deadly can still have some value to a person...I've read many article and studies about this.Interesting,but I'll still pass on the cigs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m16a2

I don't like that this might encourage non-smokers to take up a detrimental habit, but knowing the facts is important.

---

Thats where I went wrong. I read portion as saying non-smokers (those encouraged to quit) might pick up a detrimental habit. WTF!!!, I thought.

So in response to that, I wrote a response along these lines, Quitting smoking should be encouraged not condemned because it could lead to detrimental habits. I encouraged bodybuilding as a healthy alternative, but I put parenthesis around AS too highlight that yes AS is ofen used with bodybuiliding (not a plus, right?). I didn't mean to imply that its health risks weren't as bad as cigs or any worse for that matter.

I used Trying to Get Huge as an example, basically saying it is possible to give up bad addictions like cigs and alchohol and replace those addiction with BB, which overall can do good things for someones life.

Again. Shouldn't have been a flame. Just an bad interpretation and an not so thorough reply. Shames on me. :blushbig: :doh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeefCakeStew

Thats where I went wrong. I read portion as saying non-smokers (those encouraged to quit) might pick up a detrimental habit. WTF!!!, I thought.

So in response to that, I wrote a response along these lines, Quitting smoking should be encouraged not condemned because it could lead to detrimental habits. I encouraged bodybuilding as a healthy alternative, but I put parenthesis around AS too highlight that yes AS is ofen used with bodybuiliding (not a plus, right?). I didn't mean to imply that its health risks weren't as bad as cigs or any worse for that matter.

I used Trying to Get Huge as an example, basically saying it is possible to give up bad addictions like cigs and alchohol and replace those addiction with BB, which overall can do good things for someones life.

Again. Shouldn't have been a flame. Just an bad interpretation and an not so thorough reply. Shames on me. :blushbig: :doh:

---

No worries bro, I see how you misread it. My wording is incorrect anyways. That's what happens when you go out and have a few drinks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Da Bull

Funny isn't it..how something so deadly can still have some value to a person...I've read many article and studies about this.Interesting,but I'll still pass on the cigs.

---

Yeah. Irony it's what puts the comedy in life.

i need to start smoking so i can have black lungs and hack and cough in the morning, man i have been missing out, also the occasional heroin shot makes u bigger too.... :banana:

Smoking has got to be the worst health choice a person can make in their life. The reasons to quit are numerous, but any one of them should suffice.

cigs make your teeth yellow :)

this "study" is garbage. yes, smoking may boost androgen levels but that doesn't prove that it increases muslce growth. it's not just high androgen levels that cause muscle growth/development.

i learned about this in medical school. lets say you have a study proving that "increasing caffeine intake can increase the amount of time you can study". that doesn't mean you can automatically say "increasing caffeine intake causes better grades". you see the jump people try to make here when interpreting these studies? the time spent studying more could be of lesser quality and they may be tired by exam time. you have to look at all the other factors.

another example: if drug A decreases cholesterol levels in a certain study, doctors won't prescribe it based on only that. it needs to be proven that drug A is beneficial to one's health by lowering risk for heart attacks, strokes, etc. the outcome being measured in a study needs to be important.

E.T.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnabolicAlien

this "study" is garbage. yes, smoking may boost androgen levels but that doesn't prove that it increases muslce growth. it's not just high androgen levels that cause muscle growth/development.

i learned about this in medical school. lets say you have a study proving that "increasing caffeine intake can increase the amount of time you can study". that doesn't mean you can automatically say "increasing caffeine intake causes better grades". you see the jump people try to make here when interpreting these studies? the time spent studying more could be of lesser quality and they may be tired by exam time. you have to look at all the other factors.

another example: if drug A decreases cholesterol levels in a certain study, doctors won't prescribe it based on only that. it needs to be proven that drug A is beneficial to one's health by lowering risk for heart attacks, strokes, etc. the outcome being measured in a study needs to be important.

E.T.

---

damm Aliens...and all this time I thought you creatures only knew about anal probing. :lol:

I'm not even going to bother reading the replies......
That "study" is compeletely irrelevant to anyone on a cycle, as your endogenous androgen production is effectively ceased.
Now, more importantly, smoking greatly reduces lung capacity and therefore oxygenation. When you're exerting max effort, proper gas exchange (removal of carbon dioxide in exchange for oxygen) is one of THE most crucial factors. reduced lung capacity drastically reduces oxygenation of muscles and facilitates premature fatigue, thus preventing maximal workload.

Clearly, smoking is advantageous to athletes, that's why all the elite athletes are chain smokers :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m16a2

P.S. don't make AS sound like it a safe alternative to other addictions. First off, I think AS could have its own addictive qualities. Secondly, even if used 'correctly' AS are not completely safe. We do harm to our bodies in return for what we get out of it. I don't regret being here for one minute, but I realize that this isn't some wonder drug without any risks.

Ask a doctor what is safer, smoking cigarettes, or sticking a 1.5 inch 23 gague needle filled with synthetic hormones every 1-4 days for 3-4 months. Answers would depend on the doc, but if you limit the consensus to the time period, AAS would be worse, HANDS DOWN. Smoke for 3-4 months and stop, your body will completely heal itself, whereas AS doesn't offer the same guarantee.

---

I have read it like this. WHen you smoke in your teens and 20's, your body is young, strong, heals rapidly, if you smoke in your 20's and quit for good on your 30th birthday, you leave with almost no damage because all is healed. As you travel into your 30's, 40's and 50's, etc, each succeeding year your body isnt as likely to heal up the damage from smoking this smoking in your 30's causes 4 times the damage that it did as compared to smoking in your 20's. Smoking in your 40's causes 4 times the damage as it did compared to your 30's, and same is true with ever progressing worsening damage as you get older. It is so bad in your 40's and 50's that you might not be able to reverse all the damage from smoking, so basically if you smoke, try to quit while you are young enough to reverse the damage you've caused. After 45, you can quit but still carry lingering damage in your old age.

I could presume the damage caused from "excessive" steroid use is similarly age dependant although with "smart dosing", keeping it low and reasonable its probable that steroids can have a beneficial effect on your health, provided no cancers get involved. As we know, steroids can cause tumors to go into rapid growth mode just like it can your muscles. Otherwise the primary dangers from steroid use is the high blood pressure, high cholesterol, high triglicerides, possible problems from feminizing while masculinizing at same time (high female and male hormones combinations at same time), etc. All these things can cause profound problems as we get older.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by einstein1905

I'm not even going to bother reading the replies......
That "study" is compeletely irrelevant to anyone on a cycle, as your endogenous androgen production is effectively ceased.
Now, more importantly, smoking greatly reduces lung capacity and therefore oxygenation. When you're exerting max effort, proper gas exchange (removal of carbon dioxide in exchange for oxygen) is one of THE most crucial factors. reduced lung capacity drastically reduces oxygenation of muscles and facilitates premature fatigue, thus preventing maximal workload.

---

Yeah... what he said! lol

Im not evan going to waste my time on that smoking link..not a flame bro

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m16a2

I smoke an occasional cigarette too. I should stop and I can... when I feel that I can't stop, is when I WILL stop.

---

hhhmmm....how many lifetime smokerz in the making have I heard say that...lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by einstein1905

I'm not even going to bother reading the replies......
That "study" is compeletely irrelevant to anyone on a cycle, as your endogenous androgen production is effectively ceased.
Now, more importantly, smoking greatly reduces lung capacity and therefore oxygenation. When you're exerting max effort, proper gas exchange (removal of carbon dioxide in exchange for oxygen) is one of THE most crucial factors. reduced lung capacity drastically reduces oxygenation of muscles and facilitates premature fatigue, thus preventing maximal workload.

Clearly, smoking is advantageous to athletes, that's why all the elite athletes are chain smokers :rolleyes:

---

You know the respect I have for you and your opinion. What you said is 100% correct. However, weight training is anaerobic excercise that wouldn't be affected by a decreased VO2 threshold. Of course if you have asthma or something it would be a different story since even normal activity would be difficult. For endurance training, that makes sense, but I don't see why it would have an impact on strength training.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m16a2

You know the respect I have for you and your opinion. What you said is 100% correct. However, weight training is anaerobic excercise that wouldn't be affected by a decreased VO2 threshold. Of course if you have asthma or something it would be a different story since even normal activity would be difficult. For endurance training, that makes sense, but I don't see why it would have an impact on strength training.

---

It's an anaerobic excercise with respect to each respective set, yes, but the workout as a series of successive sets relies greatly on efficient gas exchange. Although you're not "working" between sets, you are restoring ATP supplies, thus requiring a terminal electron receptor to do so most efficiently....oxygen serves that role. In the absence of sufficient oxygen (and thus an overabundance of CO2), the muscle becomes acidic, which alters normal physiology, thus making for a less than optimal environment, and vital energy is expended attempting to rectify this shift to acidity.
I will grant that nicotine itself has value, but not smoking, when you look at it as a total picture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by einstein1905

It's an anaerobic excercise with respect to each respective set, yes, but the workout as a series of successive sets relies greatly on efficient gas exchange. Although you're not "working" between sets, you are restoring ATP supplies, thus requiring a terminal electron receptor to do so most efficiently....oxygen serves that role. In the absence of sufficient oxygen (and thus an overabundance of CO2), the muscle becomes acidic, which alters normal physiology, thus making for a less than optimal environment, and vital energy is expended attempting to rectify this shift to acidity.
I will grant that nicotine itself has value, but not smoking, when you look at it as a total picture.

---

Well stated. I agree with what your saying. My only argument is that we are talking about a minuscule difference. I don't see this having a noticable difference, while in theory it is sound and true. However, I am limiting my reasoning to the assumption that the person is not a chronic smoker. If I broaden my assumption, then what you are saying is not only sound in theory, it is absolutely true in all virtues. You can't keep lifting if you are coughing up a lung. And if your Vo2 capacity is so diminished that you can't even breath between sets, then your body is going to increase the rate of breathing to get rid of the excess co2. Once the rate of exchange turns negative and the co2 levels are increasing more than they are being lowered through respiration, then your muscles will turn acidic causing the muscle to tense up and get sore. That is all simple biology. I guess the noticable difference would depend on the damage that smoking has done to your O2 receptors (alveoli).

p.s. This should be enough reason for anyone to quit to cease from smoking cigarettes.