Scientific Proof that Caber Sucks for Your Body

[muscle_dysmorphia]

The January 4, 2007 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine includes a paper that documents a British study of more than 11,000 Parkinson's Disease patients. The study found that two ergot-derived drugs, Pergolide and Cabergoline, commonly used to treat Parkinson's Disease may increase the risk of leaky heart valves by up to 700%

"A total of 11,417 patients were included in the final cohort, all of whom had received at least two prescriptions for antiparkinsonian drugs and met all the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The mean age at entry into the study cohort was 69 years, and the mean duration of follow-up (from entry to exit from the study cohort) was 4.2 years. The numbers of patients taking dopamine agonists at any time during follow-up and the respective duration (person-years) of exposure during follow-up were as follows: 828 patients taking bromocriptine (1683 person-years), 61 taking lisuride (88 person-years), 931 taking pergolide (2031 person-years), 1228 taking cabergoline (1812 person-years), 492 taking pramipexole (648 person-years), and 993 taking ropinirole (1565 person-years). Patients may have been included in more than one of these categories of exposure because of changes in their use of dopamine agonists during follow-up. The total number of person-years of no exposure to dopamine agonists was 34,548. There were 7702 patients who were never exposed to any dopamine agonist during follow-up, accounting for 28,892 person-years. Cardiac-valve abnormalities were recorded for 81 patients in the study cohort, of whom 31 were validated as case patients with newly diagnosed cardiac-valve regurgitation.

Characteristics of 31 Case Patients with Cardiac-Valve Regurgitation, According to Use of a Dopamine Agonist. For one case patient, only 11 months of recorded data before the index date were available in the database. We included this case patient in the analysis, since the inclusion did not materially change the results of the analysis. Among the 31 case patients, 6 were currently exposed to pergolide, 6 were currently exposed to cabergoline, and 19 had no current or recent exposure to a dopamine agonist (Table 2). The resulting incidence rates of newly diagnosed cardiac-valve regurgitation were 30 per 10,000 per year for pergolide, 33 per 10,000 per year for cabergoline, and 5.5 per 10,000 per year for no exposure to any dopamine agonist.
A total of 666 controls who could be matched to the case patients were identified in the study cohort. Of these controls, 3 were excluded because of current use of multiple dopamine agonists, leaving 663 controls (Figure 1 and Table 1). The mean age of case patients and controls was 73 and 74 years, respectively. The primary diagnosis was Parkinson's disease in case patients (94%) and controls (86%). Except for current use of amantadine (Symmetrel, Endo Pharms), there was no significant difference in characteristics between case patients and controls (Table 1). Of the five case patients who were currently exposed to amantadine, three also had current exposure to cabergoline and one had current exposure to pergolide.

The rate of cardiac-valve regurgitation was elevated among patients who were currently exposed to either pergolide (adjusted incidence-rate ratio, 7.1; 95% CI, 2.3 to 22.3) or cabergoline (adjusted incidence-rate ratio, 4.9; 95% CI, 1.5 to 15.6) but not among those who were currently exposed to other dopamine agonists. For amantadine, the only concurrent medication found to have a significant association with cardiac-valve regurgitation, the adjusted incidence-rate ratio was 3.5 (95%, CI, 1.1 to 11.3). The adjusted incidence-rate ratios were particularly elevated for daily doses greater than 3 mg of pergolide (37.1; 95% CI, 5.1 to 270.6) and 3 mg of cabergoline (50.3; 95% CI, 6.6 to 381.4), as well as for a duration of use of 6 months or more.

Although current use of amantadine was the only other significant risk factor identified, the small number of case patients reduced the likelihood of the detection of additional risk factors of potential importance to the analysis. We therefore created a model that included body-mass index, smoking status, and the presence or absence of hypertension, diabetes, coronary heart disease, Parkinson's disease, restless legs syndrome, and hyperprolactinemia. In this analysis, the adjusted incidence-rate ratios were 6.0 (95% CI, 1.7 to 21.3) for pergolide and 6.9 (95% CI, 1.9 to 25.9) for cabergoline. The excess risks of cardiac-valve regurgitation for current use of pergolide and for current use of cabergoline were 33 and 21 additional case patients per 10,000 persons exposed per year, respectively. We did not have systematic clinical follow-up data on the case patients with cardiac-valve regurgitation identified in this analysis. One patient had echocardiographic evidence of regression of aortic regurgitation after discontinuation of cabergoline. Valve replacement was considered in another patient, who had been exposed to pergolide, but the procedure was not performed."

Source: ^ NEJM - Dopamine Agonists and the Risk of Cardiac-Valve Regurgitation Study.

[AlphaMaleDawg]

article is way too scientific to read. But good to know nonetheless

[SomeRandomGuy]

What does this mean?!

(adjusted incidence-rate ratio, 7.1; 95% CI, 2.3 to 22.3)

7.1 what? What does CI mean?

The adjusted incidence-rate ratios were particularly elevated for daily doses greater than 3 mg of pergolide (37.1; 95% CI, 5.1 to 270.6) and 3 mg of cabergoline (50.3; 95% CI, 6.6 to 381.4), as well as for a duration of use of 6 months or more.

I was taking .25mg Cabergoline every 3 days. I certainly wasn't taking 3mg. And I didn't take it longer than 6 months.

The study is for parkinson's patients. They probably take high, constant doses. I wonder how low (.25mg) doses every 3 days would affect someone. I guess it's just not safe, regardless...

[M302_Imola]

Seems hardly scientific with the word MAY in this statement: "may increase the risk of leaky heart valves by up to 700%"

[songdog]

Pepsi aint good for you either.Man the crap people come out with.When they say it will.And not use the word may.Then and only then will I think they know wat they are talkin about.To many wat ifs.Doses higher.All this comes into play bro.RELAX.Beacuse if the shit was bad.HP wouldve said so by now!!!!

[muscle_dysmorphia]

Pepsi aint good for you either.Man the crap people come out with.When they say it will.And not use the word may.Then and only then will I think they know wat they are talkin about.To many wat ifs.Doses higher.All this comes into play bro.RELAX.Beacuse if the shit was bad.HP wouldve said so by now!!!!

You're a follower, and a parrot. You're useless in this discussion, and have NO clue why you bothered to post.

I have no f***ing clue who HP is, but he is not some omniscient person. He's probably some 40 something year old bodybuilder who dropped out of college. Start questioning things for yourself, rather then just f***ing following blindly.

[muscle_dysmorphia]

Seems hardly scientific with the word MAY in this statement: "may increase the risk of leaky heart valves by up to 700%"

Uhhh.... they can't write an EXACT value (IE) it increases in the risk by 432%, because it's completely individual. You can't just "average" this stuff out man - to satisfy your need for an EXACT scientific percentage.

[JohnnyVegas]

Seems hardly scientific with the word MAY in this statement: "may increase the risk of leaky heart valves by up to 700%"

Real science is filled with "may" because it isn't definitive. They release their findings and observations realizing studies are not able to duplicate all conditions. Others will eventually do similar studies and over time a consensus will be built.

You will hear "does" in the news and on the Discovery channels because they know audiences want to feel like scientists know everything... which is the exact opposite of the truth.

[Bonaparte]

Sure, up to 700% sounds scary, but it isn't that big of a deal when you actually look at the numbers.

It just means that out of 10,000 geriatrics on high doses of Caber, 33 out of 10,000 developed some leaky valave issue (as opposed to 5.5 in 10,000 in the untreated group).

And this isn't new info at all, as many of use have known this for quite some time. It's all just a question of risk vs reward. Would I recomend that people take high doses of the stuff for life for no good reason? Hell no!
But if you don't respond well to other dopamine agonists and you need some Caber to keep your dick working and your nipples from leaking on cycle, then have at it!

[dosXX]

I was taking .25mg Cabergoline every 3 days. I certainly wasn't taking 3mg. And I didn't take it longer than 6 months.

The study is for parkinson's patients. They probably take high, constant doses. I wonder how low (.25mg) doses every 3 days would affect someone. I guess it's just not safe, regardless...

My thoughts exactly.

[muscle_dysmorphia]

Sure, up to 700% sounds scary, but it isn't that big of a deal when you actually look at the numbers.

It just means that out of 10,000 geriatrics on high doses of Caber, 33 out of 10,000 developed some leaky valave issue (as opposed to 5.5 in 10,000 in the untreated group).

And this isn't new info at all, as many of use have known this for quite some time. It's all just a question of risk vs reward. Would I recomend that people take high doses of the stuff for life for no good reason? Hell no!
But if you don't respond well to other dopamine agonists and you need some Caber to keep your dick working and your nipples from leaking on cycle, then have at it!

Definitely wasn't trying to imply that this was new information at all - I was just presenting the findings. The study was (2006-2007) I believe..

I agree with what you've said though.

I still stay clear of caber. a really low dose of exemstane throughout the cycle will keep both estrogen and prolactin in check.

... that said, I do feel for the guys that get harsh progesterone issues while on cycle. luckily that aint me though! lol

[scotty51312]

The study was done over a much longer period than an average 19nor cycle would be ran and a much higher dosage. If you want to get technical, studies on AAS have been linked to enlarged hearts particularly the left ventrical. But there are also studies that say the opposite. Low testosterone has all been assosiated with heart disease as well. Long term use of Nolvadex has been linked to a higher risk of cancer, Everything carries a risk. And there are thousands of contradicting studies out there, Bottom line is risk vs. reward and everything in moderation. Good article though

[Far from massive]

Suppose you ran the same test on the effects of 30 minutes of cardio 3 times per week? I am sure you would see at least a 1000% increase in heart failure and strokes..not to mention knees and hips. Seriously though, the affect of a drug on a group of elderly people is often not a good representation of its affect on young athletic individual...or even a 50 something midlife crisis fossil like me LOL

[MuscleScience]

Real science is filled with "may" because it isn't definitive. They release their findings and observations realizing studies are not able to duplicate all conditions. Others will eventually do similar studies and over time a consensus will be built.

You will hear "does" in the news and on the Discovery channels because they know audiences want to feel like scientists know everything... which is the exact opposite of the truth.

Thank you, somebody gets it. May, does, evidence to suggest, a growing amount of evidence to support. These are all words of science. Proof or prove is not a word of science. Nothing can every really be proven absolutely. We can only propose theory based on the best evidence at hand.

[songdog]

His name is Hawian Pride.He is a mod here.Yes I read that article long ago.No one takes those high doses.No need to.And not for very long.Posting up a article with your own personal views didnt help anyone.Only showed your knowledge or lack of.And you talk of parrotting

[sixey]

saw title and immediately got scared i was going to have to scrap my newly acquired and quite pricey human grade bottle of caber lol

after reading thread im not worried at all, phew

[muscle_dysmorphia]

His name is Hawian Pride.He is a mod here.Yes I read that article long ago.No one takes those high doses.No need to.And not for very long.Posting up a article with your own personal views didnt help anyone.Only showed your knowledge or lack of.And you talk of parrotting

you're literally a goof. learn some f***ing grammar and linguistics skills you child.

I stopped reading after the first 4 words, because I realized that you're clearly a 14 year old prepubescent boy. STFU and stop posting in my thread. You have NO useful insights, literally rubbish.

Go hang out with your cyber-homie "HP"????

jesus man.

[Matt]

you're literally a goof. learn some f***ing grammar and linguistics skills you child.

I stopped reading after the first 4 words, because I realized that you're clearly a 14 year old prepubescent boy. STFU and stop posting in my thread. You have NO useful insights, literally rubbish.

Go hang out with your cyber-homie "HP"????

jesus man.

Ok we do have a strict no flame policy here, its an important part of our rules...

Im sure a guy of your intelligence could put his point across in more civil way....

Btw HP isn't a mod or staff member here......