I hate to burst anyone’s bubble, and I’ve said this on here before. We are not going to find peer reviewed double blind placebo RAndom control studies on non-medical use of AAS compounds. No university IRB board would ever approve such a study. Most of the none-medical use studies are retrospective and are typically based on surveys and self reporting by users. Sometimes there’s a case study here or there but nothing that’s on the order or what say Merck would do for say a male contraceptive study. Almost all out knowledge is anecdotal and second or third order evidence EXTRAPOLATED from legitimate medical studies when said compounds were developed for medical uses.
GH cannot completely prove his point with high power empirical evidence. But neither can anyone else disprove him out of hand with evidence either.
And Yes, the burden of proof lays on the claim holder so scrutiny is good. The best we can do is debate each other based on what evidence we do have and live with the consequences good or bad knowing there is never going to be a complete answer.
Well not until China and Russia release thier State Sponsored doping data
