how bad actually is clen for ur heart?

[Lemonada8]

back to insults huh? Congrats for really showing who the twat is.

Whats infuriating is someone who thinks they are a complete bad azz on the fvckin internet and doesnt know shit about ANS pharmacology, cardiac remodeling, and whatever other topic is included in this thread.

hmm what did you say, imma pull out the bolded statements.

Your sole purpose is to be right - not be accurate and you will argue till hell freezes over - slipping in ignorant innacurate statements everyt step of the way - its infuriating.
*insult

I merely pointed out that you seemed to be ingnoring the fact that clen is a selective beta agonist - which discounted many of your contentions in that post
*irrelevant due to IVE ALREADY SAID THAT, and the point is that ORAL beta 2 selective is going to hit beta 1 receptors in high enough doses. (go back and read, ive said that already a few times i believe)

Yeah fvck if what you say is accurate - better to try to appear be correct and save face than to be humble and learn something
*insult

Nice - real nice - you twat
*insult, yet you fail to acknowledge that you know what catecholeamines are. You think oh its bad no matter what... Sry nice try but WRONG.

right-die from ASTHMA symptoms-not cardiac necrosis or LV hyperatrophy. You have no fvcking ethics whatsoever to stoop to being this misleading
*insult
btw, its LV hypertrophy, not hyperatrophy. Cardiac cell apoptosis/necrosis doesnt shrink the heart, it enlarges it b/c it become fibrous which, over time if enough occurs, can cause contractility issues.
Yet this is still a 2 way street, cuz clen increases angiogensis so in those fibrous cells it would be getting blood flow somewhat halting that from happening. But like ive said *when in combination with AAS* muscle grows faster than blood vessels, so the rate of angiogensis doesnt keep up with the hypertrophy of the heart you get less bloodflow to the heart, and when it reaches a point in some people it = myocardial infarction aka loss of blood flow.
It works in those needing LV contractility increase, mainly cuz thats due to a natural lack of blood flow and the angiogensis isnt trying to outcompete with the growth of muscle tissue. So like ive said from the start, in a diseased heart its beneficial but a healthy heart it can be problematic, more so if on AAS.
Yes, those deaths are more related to asthma, but are they the same doses as people taking clen? doubtful. You act like they are perfectly safe, yet with extended use it increases death rates.

you ignorant twat EVERY med i mentioned is avail and prescribed in pill form as well
*insult, after failing to understand i NEVER said its not available in pill form, i was pointing out how difference in administeration of the medicine affects the sides. But you didnt see that, you saw " oh its in pill form also not just inhaler i know that".. blah blah blah. Another FAIL on understanding the point, just seeing a argueable point and spewing insults combined with NO REAL INSIGHT. Congrats. So, listen to your own damn advice and *ill use ur quote* "Yeah fvck if what you say is accurate - better to try to appear be correct and save face than to be humble and learn somethin"

Funny how you choose to repeatedly ignore my summations re the topic which put everything into perspective , show how foolish this fear mongering is in the big picture ,and even offer suggestions for helpful supplementation if u are paranoid.havent touched this one... but a herbal ACE inhibitor cant hurt anyways. does it have much of an effect on this issue? doubtful I guess you cant acknowledge that because in some sense it shows the lack of prudence in your entire argument and god forbid u concede that fact and learn something. another insult

Your contribuions and misinformation perpitrated in this thread are right up there with your "winstrol wont do anything in women since they dont have dht receptors" idiotic statementyup that was pretty dumb... but im positive i acknowledged how dumb that statement was in a post later on in that thread. Puts a damper on your "be humble" suggestion, cuz well ive already shown that i am when presented with actual knowledge in a debate/topic. Instead you offer insults..

Put it in perspective huh? well the funny thing is that you cant offer any scientific knowledge in defense of what you are saying, and cant/dont offer a rebuttal in mechanisms on how issues occur. that combined with insults... OoOo just cuz i can talk(type) angrly means im right.
And mis information huh? all you have rebutted me with is insults and attacks, NO MISINFORMATION WHATSOEVER. So what does that leave? i retort with scientific knowledge and u give me insults. FAIL.

Performance-enhancing substances in sport and exercise By Michael S. Bahrke - check out in google books chapter 4.
http://www.fasebj.org/content/16/2/135.full - info about cardiac remodeling
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16060696 - if you dont believe what i am saying... here you go, pretty much word for word. And thats with inhaled, what happens when its oral? it has to go systemic before gettin to the lungs, so Increased possibilities of issues.

Inhaled beta2-adrenoceptor agonists: cardiovascular safety in patients with obstructive lung disease.

Although large surveys have documented the favourable safety profile of beta(2)-adrenoceptor agonists (beta(2)-agonists) and, above all, that of the long-acting agents, the presence in the literature of reports of adverse cardiovascular events in patients with obstructive airway disease must induce physicians to consider this eventuality. The coexistence of beta(1)- and beta(2)-adrenoceptors in the heart clearly indicates that beta(2)-agonists do have some effect on the heart, even when they are highly selective. It should also be taken into account that the beta(2)-agonists utilised in clinical practice have differing selectivities and potencies. beta(2)-agonist use has, in effect, been associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, cardiac arrest and sudden cardiac death. Moreover, patients who have either asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease may be at increased risk of cardiovascular complications because these diseases amplify the impact of these agents on the heart and, unfortunately, are a confounding factor when the impact of beta(2)-agonists on the heart is evaluated. Whatever the case may be, this effect is of particular concern for those patients with underlying cardiac conditions. Therefore, beta(2)-agonists must always be used with caution in patients with cardiopathies because these agents may precipitate the concomitant cardiac disease.

[jimmyinkedup]

back to insults huh? Congrats for really showing who the twat is.

Whats infuriating is someone who thinks they are a complete bad azz on the fvckin internet and doesnt know shit about ANS pharmacology, cardiac remodeling, and whatever other topic is included in this thread.

Lemon it is impossible to get anywhere with you other than "you are right" When you say something and someone corrects you - you merely say oh well it doesnt matter because xyz. If you make a claim that you use to form a key part of your argument and then someone proves it inaccurate - you say yeah but so what because blah blah blah. Its all one jusitfication after another - all about you being "right" instead of about what is ultimately, in the big picture of this discussion, correct. I hoenstly wonder if you even read the responses to your posts entirely - if you did you surely would not say some of the fooish things you do (ie: your comments re: my knowledge of catecholamines), It goes to a point of 2 case studies becomeing "the increasing number of deaths from clen" and studies showing astmatics that use long acting b2 agonist die of (drumroll please) ........asthma. For christs sake. Its just ridiculous. Look at the study you just posted - its retarded - it says that those with copd and asthma need to be careful with taking b2 agonist because the DISEASE amplifies the impact b2 agonists have on the heart. Christ between that statement there and the last line you quoted you virtually shot 1/2 the agruiments you made in this thread right in the foot! You cant argue science with someone when everytime you prove a main point they make untrue they totally change the relevance of said contention or point. It to the point you are so wrapped up in being right you dont even realize when you contradict yourself later on in the discussion! What was once a significant point in your argument then becomes insiginificant. Its ridiculous.
I'll be honest - i dont care what you think. I stand firmly by my contentions, im going to re post the cliffs right now -them im out. I cannot , nor will I agrue with you any longer. Not because i feel I lack the intelectual ability to do so , but because I feel it is an exercise in fultitilty given the way you change the foundations of your contentions or supporting points once they are proven wrong. As a result of that the argument/discuassion would never end. It would only end for you if you left thinking you were right and everyone said so.

Cliffs:
To All:
*Look if you think clen is dangerous - dont take it.
*If you want to use it with caution dosage and duration of course play a role. Also cycling usage may be prudent- ie: 2 weeks on -2 weeks off.
*If you want to use EXTRA caution take it with an ace inhibitor (if not prescription then hawthorne berry supp).
*You should always monitor BP at all times - off cycle , on cycle , clen - no clen . It may be the single most prudent preventive measure we can do in this lifestyle (prob in any lifestyle to be honest)

Ill say this - if I was forced to choose -id use clen over T3 when it comes to adverse cardiac effects. Id use it over DNP for overall safety. Hell based on Lemons catecholamine BS it safer than ephedrine.
Of course we need to keep in mind we are using it in conjunction with AAS - its easy to pick clen and villify it - easier than taking an honest look at all the substances we use and what they can or could do and make the decision to use or not on the same criteria by which we judge clen as "unsafe" or "dangerous". Trust me you start applying the criteria used by those to say clen is dangerous or deadly to other substances we use you would no be touching several of them (like almost all) or at the very least you would be forced to be honest and say yeah i know but i choose to use them anyway. Clen - just like most anything - in the abscence of prexisting condition (like untreated hypertension) or serious medical pre disposition - used prudently is fine imo.

Try to argue those cliffs lemon. (rhetorical device there)

[Huge_Brah]

Of course we need to keep in mind we are using it in conjunction with AAS

What if you just want to use clen by itself? I guess it would be safer?

[Lemonada8]

What if you just want to use clen by itself? I guess it would be safer?

Thats what i would go with, or use during PCT to help keep gains and not gain any estro-releated weight (due to low hormone levels)
i wouldnt use it on a cycle, unless there were no issues before. So for a first time, i wouldnt use on a cycle.
but thats my opinion.
Take precautions, listen to your body, dont start huge thinkin you can back off, start small and go upward *in regards to doses*