how bad actually is clen for ur heart?

[The Bear 79]

wow looks like i missed a fun debate..

well since clen is a beta2 agonist but its ingested, it will have some spill over onto the beta1 receptors on the heart.
in the cases where clen looked to be cardiac protective, its protective because of that spillover onto beta1 receptors on the heart which increases contractility and HR in those with a failing heart. So it made the heart work harder while taking the meds, then (skimmed over some of the papers indicated) it helps regenerate the heart muscle to a point but that is still in a failing heart. So in that case, it was used properly for its use and it has its benefits.
On the other hand, bber's usually dont have those kind of heart issues and already put alot of strain on their heart anyways (with their diets, heavy lifting, and general life style) so those are predisposed to heart issues will and can have problems while taking clen, due to the spill over on beta1 receptors.
Needless to say, in a healthy person, it is all dose dependent and how they react to the stimulant individually. People with heart failure will be able to take a much larger dose w/o the bad effects because its helping their heart beat more efficiently.. those w/o the heart issues it will make the heart work harder.
It prolly has its place to help with weight loss, and since its 2nd messanger is cAMP it prolongs the effects of glucagon which increases fat burining for energy. But with a crap diet, it prolly wont do much at all.

So, if u already hav heart problems, Clen is good, but if u hav a healthy / normal heart, Clen will giv u heart problems?

[Lemonada8]

Not will... It can but it's not 100% for sure will...

[terraj]

Death?

I know we've had this chat before, but I think a lot of your thoughts on it are because of coincidence.

Do you know that a lot of data on Clenbuterol is given to patients with chronic heart failure?

Why give a compound thats supposedly dangerous to the heart, to a patient with chronic heart failure?

So what about in conjunction with steroids usage. We are talking about BBs usage right?

I'm not going looking, but I did see a couple medical paper links Dante posted on the topic.

[dec11]

in what i posted discussed horses.
this isnt by any stretch of the imagination a medical statement im making, but if it can overtax a big animal like a horse, what can it not do to me?

[jimmyinkedup]

wow looks like i missed a fun debate..

well since clen is a beta2 agonist but its ingested, it will have some spill over onto the beta1 receptors on the heart.
in the cases where clen looked to be cardiac protective, its protective because of that spillover onto beta1 receptors on the heart which increases contractility and HR in those with a failing heart. So it made the heart work harder while taking the meds, then (skimmed over some of the papers indicated) it helps regenerate the heart muscle to a point but that is still in a failing heart. So in that case, it was used properly for its use and it has its benefits.
On the other hand, bber's usually dont have those kind of heart issues and already put alot of strain on their heart anyways (with their diets, heavy lifting, and general life style) so those are predisposed to heart issues will and can have problems while taking clen, due to the spill over on beta1 receptors.
Needless to say, in a healthy person, it is all dose dependent and how they react to the stimulant individually. People with heart failure will be able to take a much larger dose w/o the bad effects because its helping their heart beat more efficiently.. those w/o the heart issues it will make the heart work harder.
It prolly has its place to help with weight loss, and since its 2nd messanger is cAMP it prolongs the effects of glucagon which increases fat burining for energy. But with a crap diet, it prolly wont do much at all.

Clen is a slective beta agonist. Ive read several studies (and no i dont feel like looking for them) that showed while it has some affinity for b1 receptors it has virtually no agonist properties at the b1 receptor. Thats why its used to reverse airway obsruction. It can accomplish this effect with little cardiovascular impact. If it was a non selective beta agonist that would be a different story - but it isnt.

[Lemonada8]

Clen is a slective beta agonist. Ive read several studies (and no i dont feel like looking for them) that showed while it has some affinity for b1 receptors it has virtually no agonist properties at the b1 receptor. Thats why its used to reverse airway obsruction. It can accomplish this effect with little cardiovascular impact. If it was a non selective beta agonist that would be a different story - but it isnt.

That doesnt make sense... beta1 and beta2 have the same 2nd messanger cAMP. How can it be agonist for one and no agonist properties for the other? If beta selective were so selective for no cross activation, then why arent all asthma meds a pill? thats cuz they arent. They can modify it so its not as selective but there will be some cross activation. also, thermo genics is mainly beta3 receptor which clen is a thermogenic.

[jimmyinkedup]

That doesnt make sense... beta1 and beta2 have the same 2nd messanger cAMP. How can it be agonist for one and no agonist properties for the other? If beta selective were so selective for no cross activation, then why arent all asthma meds a pill? thats cuz they arent. They can modify it so its not as selective but there will be some cross activation. also, thermo genics is mainly beta3 receptor which clen is a thermogenic.

^^^ How can it not make sense - its called selective - not exclusive - look at the bigger picture and think about it for a minute. There are a slew of selective beta receptor agents (think beta blaockers). These agents exist for b1 - b2 - b3 receptors. Some are so selective ( even exclusive) that they are used in experimentation due to there extreme specificity. Also stop think in absolutes such as "no agonist" and stick to what i said "virtually no agonist" - ie - no clinically significant agonist activity. Also the same can be said for clens b3 agonist effects. While they exist it is to a lesser degree. Also just because cAMP is second messeneger for b1 and b2 far from means the same agonist activity is exerted on boith - you know that. I personally would say clens effects are primarily exerted on b2 ...then to a lesser extent b3 ...then minimally on b1 . Thats just my opinion - but I think its pretty damn sound based on science and experience.

[PecBounce]

Wow, you guys sound like mad scientist! lol good info though, mind=blown

[Lemonada8]

^^^ How can it not make sense - its called selective - not exclusive - look at the bigger picture and think about it for a minute. There are a slew of selective beta receptor agents (think beta blaockers). These agents exist for b1 - b2 - b3 receptors. Some are so selective ( even exclusive) that they are used in experimentation due to there extreme specificity. Also stop think in absolutes such as "no agonist" and stick to what i said "virtually no agonist" - ie - no clinically significant agonist activity. Also the same can be said for clens b3 agonist effects. While they exist it is to a lesser degree. Also just because cAMP is second messeneger for b1 and b2 far from means the same agonist activity is exerted on boith - you know that. I personally would say clens effects are primarily exerted on b2 ...then to a lesser extent b3 ...then minimally on b1 . Thats just my opinion - but I think its pretty damn sound based on science and experience.

this is just arguing sematics. Minamally b1 agonsim is going to differ between people, and the point i was trying to make is that those with a healthy heart are going to have more potential issues than someone with heart failure/heart contractility issues. Thats when it become dose dependent. The only real thing between people is that it will hit b2 receptors more than the other 2, but that doesnt stop it from hitting all of them.
And for the use in chronic heart failure, it does have a clinical significance because it does increase contractility of the heart making it beat stronger (in a weak heart)

[stevey_6t9]

I think clen is a great drug, it worked well for me even at a low dose. I remember mr.rose ran clen for 6 months at a time and got an ECHO and came back fine, but then clen also played a part in a certain famous somones death.

Not by any means saying its safe or not. Good arguements both sides though.

[terraj]

Clenbuterol and anabolic steroids: a previously unreported cause of myocardial infarction with normal coronary arteriograms.


Abstract
During the last 10 years, several cases of myocardial infarction associated with anabolic steroid use have been reported. Postulated mechanisms to explain this association have included changes in lipid levels, the fibrinolytic system, and platelet aggregation. Clenbuterol is a beta 2-agonist with anabolic properties that has not been seen previously with myocardial infarction. We report a case of myocardial infarction in an otherwise healthy 26-year-old body-builder who recently used clenbuterol and anabolic steroids. In this case, synergistic effects of the two agents seem likely to have played a role in the infarct. The normal coronary arteriograms before any anticoagulant or thrombolytic therapy strongly suggest coronary spasm as the mechanism of the infarct.



http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9715231

[jimmyinkedup]

Clen does the following:
b2 / b3 agonism - Gi-ERK1/2 (cardioprotective)
b1 agonism - induces b1 integrin (cardioprotective)
All b receptor agonism - stimulates angiopoietin 1 which is responsible for angiogenesis (growth of new blood vessels to damaged tissue)

All the above are responsible for cardioprotective activity.

Increased heart rate and contractile force can be caused by strenuous activity , stress , anxiety. Do you really think that comparing these effects to the ones stated above weigh the scale twords cardiac harm? Lets be real here. The "harmful" effects are one that people have every damn day - the protective effects are directly attributed to clens MOA. Gimme a break already.

[jimmyinkedup]

Also as I have often said here - anyone concerned with the safety issues of clen could simply offset them almost 100% by taking an ace inhbitor. If you cant get a presription - Hawthorne Berry is a actually a fairly effective ACE inhibitor.

[stevey_6t9]

Also as I have often said here - anyone concerned with the safety issues of clen could simply offset them almost 100% by taking an ace inhbitor. If you cant get a presription - Hawthorne Berry is a actually a fairly effective ACE inhibitor.

An ACE inhibitor.... for BP?

[Swifto]

wow looks like i missed a fun debate..

well since clen is a beta2 agonist but its ingested, it will have some spill over onto the beta1 receptors on the heart.
in the cases where clen looked to be cardiac protective, its protective because of that spillover onto beta1 receptors on the heart which increases contractility and HR in those with a failing heart. So it made the heart work harder while taking the meds, then (skimmed over some of the papers indicated) it helps regenerate the heart muscle to a point but that is still in a failing heart. So in that case, it was used properly for its use and it has its benefits.
On the other hand, bber's usually dont have those kind of heart issues and already put alot of strain on their heart anyways (with their diets, heavy lifting, and general life style) so those are predisposed to heart issues will and can have problems while taking clen, due to the spill over on beta1 receptors.
Needless to say, in a healthy person, it is all dose dependent and how they react to the stimulant individually. People with heart failure will be able to take a much larger dose w/o the bad effects because its helping their heart beat more efficiently.. those w/o the heart issues it will make the heart work harder.
It prolly has its place to help with weight loss, and since its 2nd messanger is cAMP it prolongs the effects of glucagon which increases fat burining for energy. But with a crap diet, it prolly wont do much at all.

I seriously have no idea where you come up with this nonsense sometimes.

Beta-2 receptors are also found in the heart. Beta-1 and beta-2 ar found in skeletal muscle and almost very organ as well.

Clens MOA, shown in this study examined clen's mechanism of action.

Jimmy has done a very good job at expaining it to you.

in what i posted discussed horses.
this isnt by any stretch of the imagination a medical statement im making, but if it can overtax a big animal like a horse, what can it not do to me?

Animals and humans have different amounts of beta-1, beta-2 and beta-3 in various tissue (skeletal, smooth, cardiac, etc...). So that makes no sense at all.

[Swifto]

This study stated "In conclusion, it would appear that unlike cardiac hypertrophy induced by other adrenergic agents, clenbuterolinduced cardiac hypertrophy is not associated with pathological changes and is physiological in terms of function, structure and gene expression."

[Lemonada8]

so what exactly did i say that was 'nonsense'? please point that out.

and rat huh? thought you didnt like those studies cuz ur not a rat... and "Animals and humans have different amounts of beta-1, beta-2 and beta-3 in various tissue (skeletal, smooth, cardiac, etc...)"
well as jimmy pointed out, there are many other factors that increase LV hypertrophy. were those rats undergoing strenous exercise, with heavy lifting? the fact that the heart increased in size 26% with out exercise is a shocking number anyways, what would happen when you add lifting (which is known to increase hypertophy)? an additive effect is what.
Also, physiological changes = increased heart size.. it doesnt become pathological untill something goes wrong.

and integrin, its for connecting the cell to the ECM and the b1 integrin is a important part in LV remodeling. Well in a HEALTHY heart, LV remodeling is not that good of a thing. all the studies showing its 'cardioprotective' is based on a failing heart. where the LV is NOT sufficient enough on its own. Same with the angiogensis, repair blood supply to "damaged tissue'. Angiogensis in a healthy heart isnt necessarily a good thing, and like ive said those who are predisposed to it, it can actually do damage.

[cro]

well this prety much sums up the clen thread . its ok to have a difference of opinion .as long as its justified by facts ,not assumptions.its good to see there are some people with a bit of knowledge on here ,dec11/swifto/jimmylink.i agree with dec on this 1.had a good friend run it and it scared the shit out of him,that was enough for me .hes run plenty of gear so i know its not just being paranoid.glad you knowledge monsters are here,and its good to see both sides....

[jimmyinkedup]

An ACE inhibitor.... for BP?

Sorry took so long to reply - had you on ignore for that stupid ass zyzz thread u posted in constantly. Anyway yes.

[dec11]

these seem to indicate danger.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17393901

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16127201

[dec11]

im not a doctor nor a vet and dont pretend to be one either, im not going say i understand all the terminology and sequences in those studies. if you ask any doctor or vet if there is danger associated in taking clenbuterol off licence do you think they are going to say 'go right ahead, its perfectly safe'?

every time a noob comes on this site and asks 'should i take clen'? does anyone ever mention the fact that if they have cardiac abnormalities (they might not even know if they have) that they could be taking a big risk?

as pointed out, the studies dont take into account for strenuous exercise such as weightlifting and progressive cardio exercise and combinations of AAS.

we point out the fact that AAS can have huge health implications 10 times a day, why isnt the same for clen?

IMO opinion (and ive used clen in varying diets on 7 diff occasions) clen doesnt significantly burn bf any faster than normal and therefore is an unnecessary risk to take.

[jimmyinkedup]

You know i didnt even want to post in this thread- I really didnt. It kind of makes me scratch my head when I see stuff like this. A substance villified when so many other substances people use are even more dangerous and they are entirely overlooked. I have read Nandi (rip) post several times how disturbing it is to him that the main cancern re: t3 is catabolism given its effects on cardiovascualr health. Lets face it - everything we do is cost/benefits (steroids , lifestyle, etc) but its time we move out of the broscience days of conclusions based on one study on horses and consider all the data avaiable at our disposal. To be honest , in my mind Swifto is a walking database of studies and his ability to interpret the data is amazing (unlike the majority who misinterpret it), I trust his conclusions implicitly and that really enough for me. However lets take a step back and look at this. We dont even have to get very scientific , we can use common sense:

1- Clen kills heart cells - Thats the broscience. The fact is i posted 3 cardioprotective factors that 100% indicate the opposite. Combine that with the final nail in the coffin : the data Swifto posted showing it is given to patients with a diseased heart - wel damn if this contention isnt dead i dont know what will kill it. Do u really think a medication that kills heart cells is given to patients with damaged hearts?

2- Clen enlarges the heart -its dangerous. Well lets look at that. How often do we use clen. 8 weeks a year? 12 weeks a year? Even 24 weeks ?There are ashtma patients that take b2 agonists for their entire lifetime - do you seriously think they are putting their lives in danger - shouldnt they all be dead from this? Shouldnt astmatics taking b2 agonists then have a dramtically decreased lifespan? Hell if we are saying people die from this it should be like 20-25 years less than the average). Also lets not kid ourselves - these people do not lead - nor are they told to lead, a sedentary lifestyle - so i dont wanna hear this oh we lift weights though crap. Do you really think medications that dangerously increase the size on the heart are used daily for an entire lifetime by probably millions around the world ?

Look - clen use is a personal decision - i just think it should be approached rationally. I am not opposed to caution - this can be accomplished via several methods. Dosage used , duration , supplementation or all 3. Again ive said it several times , an ace inhibitor (hawthorne berry supplement) would offset even the potential concerns. It help with BP and is even prescribed to people with left ventricular hyoperatrophy. If you want to use clen and be extra cautious pony up the $5-$10 bucks and take it.

I see clen as an ergogenic aid , that can be used safely and responsibly if one so chooses. We dont use it long duration. It isnt gonna kill your heart cells. Any potential concerns are easily offset by simple , prudent supplementation with ace inhbitor (which is in all probability unecessary imo). Its a personal choice - i say use some common sense when making it though. If only the concern expressed in this thread was given to every substance we ingest ....

[dec11]

You know i didnt even want to post in this thread- I really didnt. It kind of makes me scratch my head when I see stuff like this. A substance villified when so many other substances people use are even more dangerous and they are entirely overlooked. I have read Nandi (rip) post several times how disturbing it is to him that the main cancern re: t3 is catabolism given its effects on cardiovascualr health. Lets face it - everything we do is cost/benefits (steroids , lifestyle, etc) but its time we move out of the broscience days of conclusions based on one study on horses and consider all the data avaiable at our disposal. To be honest , in my mind Swifto is a walking database of studies and his ability to interpret the data is amazing (unlike the majority who misinterpret it), I trust his conclusions implicitly and that really enough for me. However lets take a step back and look at this. We dont even have to get very scientific , we can use common sense:

1- Clen kills heart cells - Thats the broscience. The fact is i posted 3 cardioprotective factors that 100% indicate the opposite. Combine that with the final nail in the coffin : the data Swifto posted showing it is given to patients with a diseased heart - wel damn if this contention isnt dead i dont know what will kill it. Do u really think a medication that kills heart cells is given to patients with damaged hearts?

2- Clen enlarges the heart -its dangerous. Well lets look at that. How often do we use clen. 8 weeks a year? 12 weeks a year? Even 24 weeks ?There are ashtma patients that take b2 agonists for their entire lifetime - do you seriously think they are putting their lives in danger - shouldnt they all be dead from this? Shouldnt astmatics taking b2 agonists then have a dramtically decreased lifespan? Hell if we are saying people die from this it should be like 20-25 years less than the average). Also lets not kid ourselves - these people do not lead - nor are they told to lead, a sedentary lifestyle - so i dont wanna hear this oh we lift weights though crap. Do you really think medications that dangerously increase the size on the heart are used daily for an entire lifetime by probably millions around the world ?

Look - clen use is a personal decision - i just think it should be approached rationally. I am not opposed to caution - this can be accomplished via several methods. Dosage used , duration , supplementation or all 3. Again ive said it several times , an ace inhibitor (hawthorne berry supplement) would offset even the potential concerns. It help with BP and is even prescribed to people with left ventricular hyoperatrophy. If you want to use clen and be extra cautious pony up the $5-$10 bucks and take it.

I see clen as an ergogenic aid , that can be used safely and responsibly if one so chooses. We dont use it long duration. It isnt gonna kill your heart cells. Any potential concerns are easily offset by simple , prudent supplementation with ace inhbitor (which is in all probability unecessary imo). Its a personal choice - i say use some common sense when making it though. If only the concern expressed in this thread was given to every substance we ingest ....

quite true and the studies mentioned do clear up alot of broscience.

im not on a who's right and who's wrong crusade, and god knows i was a crazy bastid when younger and took alot of substances i shouldnt have taken lol but there just is an element of doubt about clen for me. my doubts cant be proven as cases i relate to have variables, so for that reason i wont ram my thoughts down anyone's throat.

what have been your experiences on its ability to lower bf mate?

[jimmyinkedup]

duplicate .....

[jimmyinkedup]

im not a doctor nor a vet and dont pretend to be one either, im not going say i understand all the terminology and sequences in those studies. if you ask any doctor or vet if there is danger associated in taking clenbuterol off licence do you think they are going to say 'go right ahead, its perfectly safe'? The same thing could be said for AAS use though

every time a noob comes on this site and asks 'should i take clen'? does anyone ever mention the fact that if they have cardiac abnormalities (they might not even know if they have) that they could be taking a big risk? Does anyone mention it when it comes to aas use - because the same risks exist in that case

we point out the fact that AAS can have huge health implications 10 times a day, why isnt the same for clen?

IMO opinion (and ive used clen in varying diets on 7 diff occasions) clen doesnt significantly burn bf any faster than normal and therefore is an unnecessary risk to take.

While we disagree somewhat on clen and its potential effectiveness - overall I agree that prudence should be used before deciding to use any substance - regardless of what it is. I just think that the prudence should be based on real world risk/reward ....not hypothetical interpretation of equine studies. Im not being sarcastic - I pointed out the real world examples and widespread uses for such a medication above (credit to Swifto for pointing out heart patient use).
At any rate my point is if you consider the big picture we are closer together on this whole issue of prudent decision maling re: all substace use than I think it appears .....

[jimmyinkedup]

what have been your experiences on its ability to lower bf mate?

I have had pretty good success with it. I will say this when im on a keto diet is when clen really shines - for me keto with clen >keto without - no question. That being said I havent used it in a while and prob wont. Not for any reason other than I just dont have the urgency any more. If it takes me 4 weeks or 7 weeks to cut the bodyfat i wish too cut then so be it.

[dec11]

Clenbuterol and anabolic steroids: a previously unreported cause of myocardial infarction with normal coronary arteriograms.


Abstract
During the last 10 years, several cases of myocardial infarction associated with anabolic steroid use have been reported. Postulated mechanisms to explain this association have included changes in lipid levels, the fibrinolytic system, and platelet aggregation. Clenbuterol is a beta 2-agonist with anabolic properties that has not been seen previously with myocardial infarction. We report a case of myocardial infarction in an otherwise healthy 26-year-old body-builder who recently used clenbuterol and anabolic steroids. In this case, synergistic effects of the two agents seem likely to have played a role in the infarct. The normal coronary arteriograms before any anticoagulant or thrombolytic therapy strongly suggest coronary spasm as the mechanism of the infarct.



http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9715231

these seem to indicate danger.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17393901

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16127201

i'm by no means trying to carry on a sing song, but i feel i need to point out that these three contradictive examples from the same source as the pro aspects of clen seem to have been ignored in this debate.

[jimmyinkedup]

i'm by no means trying to carry on a sing song, but i feel i need to point out that these three contradictive examples from the same source as the pro aspects of clen seem to have been ignored in this debate.

Ok so one study clearly shows you should not inject heroin cut with clenbuterol.

The problem with the other 2 case studies is really just that - there are a total of 2. The other problem with them is if search for "steroid induced myocardial infarction" you will find tons of them. Off the top of my head there is a case study on a soccer player saying deca induced a myocardial infarction. Also they attribute steriod induced hepatoxicity to be a cause for myocardial infarctions. They have some thing called steroid induced myocardial toxicity. Not to mention the myocardial infartions attributed to some steroids adverse effects on cholesterol. Get the point ?

You should monitor BP on all cycles - if its high you should address it. These 2 people could very well have had dangerously high bp from their cycle and the addition of clen (which can raise bp - however many times after a few days it returns to normal btw) caused a heart attack. Is it clen that is the bad contributing factor? Is it the steroids? Is it the ignorance of cyclking without monitoring blood pressure? What was their diet like ? Did they have high BP before cycling ? Im not saying dont be smart and prudent - I am saying dont take 2 case studies and build the foundation of an argument , esp case studies with the potential flaws i just potined out. Damn you tell me the cause/effect and i virtually guarantee i can find you several case studies to back it....

Its a personal decision - I personally stand firmly behind my contentions in post # 62- but ultimately its a personal choice. The only thing I will add to post 62 is something I have done for so long I take it for granted - you should always monitor your BP - On cycle - off cycle - clen or not - period.

[dec11]

Ok so one study clearly shows you should not inject heroin cut with clenbuterol.

The problem with the other 2 case studies is really just that - there are a total of 2. The other problem with them is if search for "steroid induced myocardial infarction" you will find tons of them. Off the top of my head there is a case study on a soccer player saying deca induced a myocardial infarction. Also they attribute steriod induced hepatoxicity to be a cause for myocardial infarctions. They have some thing called steroid induced myocardial toxicity. Not to mention the myocardial infartions attributed to some steroids adverse effects on cholesterol. Get the point ?

You should monitor BP on all cycles - if its high you should address it. These 2 people could very well have had dangerously high bp from their cycle and the addition of clen (which can raise bp - however many times after a few days it returns to normal btw) caused a heart attack. Is it clen that is the bad contributing factor? Is it the steroids? Is it the ignorance of cyclking without monitoring blood pressure? What was their diet like ? Did they have high BP before cycling ? Im not saying dont be smart and prudent - I am saying dont take 2 case studies and build the foundation of an argument , esp case studies with the potential flaws i just potined out. Damn you tell me the cause/effect and i virtually guarantee i can find you several case studies to back it....

Its a personal decision - I personally stand firmly behind my contentions in post # 62- but ultimately its a personal choice. The only thing I will add to post 62 is something I have done for so long I take it for granted - you should always monitor your BP - On cycle - off cycle - clen or not - period.

if you read my first example you'll see that there was no indication that the male had taken heroin, his toxicology report was negative. the heroin thing was indicated at the end concerning other cases.

the 2nd is on a 17yr old male and no AAS were reported, infact the article states it was clenbuterol alone that contributed to his condition.


fair enough its only two cases, but how many do we not hear of?

[jimmyinkedup]

if you read my first example you'll see that there was no indication that the male had taken heroin, his toxicology report was negative. the heroin thing was indicated at the end concerning other cases.

the 2nd is on a 17yr old male and no AAS were reported, infact the article states it was clenbuterol alone that contributed to his condition.


fair enough its only two cases, but how many do we not hear of?

I apologize - I should have read abstracts more carefully - my bad. That being said it doesnt change the basic premise of my post at all. There are prob hundreds of case studies stating AAS are responsible for heart attacks ( i recalled like 4 or 5 off the top of my head) but you dont see people carrying on and on about those effects here. Somehow clen is this villified substance when there are in fact 2 case studies showing this effect and conversely alot of evidence , both scientific and real world , that it is in fact very safe. Speaking for myself I think ive pointed this out (others even better ie Swifto) and have emphasiszed in my posts that prudence must be exercised when deciding too use and while using any of these substances. Ive even offered suggestions to minimize percieved risks if you deem that necessary. If people are gonna kick scream and holler that clen is so unsafe and blah blah blah - i dont wanna see them post shit about using aas at all because the fact is if the crux of your argument is case studies showing potentital dangerous cardiac effects its no contest - steriods lose - hands down.

Like I said - Post #62 plus monitor you BP. End of thread for me.
Personal decision , however make it prudently and do not be hypocritical while doing so. Thats my position.
Wont be the first or last time you and I agree to disgree agreeably Dec !

[dec11]

I apologize - I should have read abstracts more carefully - my bad. That being said it doesnt change the basic premise of my post at all. There are prob hundreds of case studies stating AAS are responsible for heart attacks ( i recalled like 4 or 5 off the top of my head) but you dont see people carrying on and on about those effects here. Somehow clen is this villified substance when there are in fact 2 case studies showing this effect and conversely alot of evidence , both scientific and real world , that it is in fact very safe. Speaking for myself I think ive pointed this out (others even better ie Swifto) and have emphasiszed in my posts that prudence must be exercised when deciding too use and while using any of these substances. Ive even offered suggestions to minimize percieved risks if you deem that necessary. If people are gonna kick scream and holler that clen is so unsafe and blah blah blah - i dont wanna see them post shit about using aas at all because the fact is if the crux of your argument is case studies showing potentital dangerous cardiac effects its no contest - steriods lose - hands down.

Like I said - Post 62 plus monitor you BP. End of thread for me.
Personal decision , however make it prudently and do not be hypocritical while doing so. Thats my position.
Wont be the first or last time you and I agree to disgree Dec - but we can do so agreeably .

we certainly can, and to me its a discussion not an argument mate.

i'll just highlight the fact that although AAS and heart disease are linked for certain i feel that with AAS its a slow prolonged damage based on usage, duration and lack of precaution. i dont know for certain but i'll bet no-one has suffered a heart attack from one cycle. ive always highlighted dangers to ppl on here regarding AAS and infact worry myself about being on trt given my family back ground with heart disease.

with stimulants (just not clen) i feel it can be a more direct and quicker ill-effect if one is prone to that ill-effect. i rem back in the 'rave' era when certain amphetamines weren't available ephedrine (also known as speed balls) was often a substitute and there was afew incidents of heart attacks and i heard of a stroke also.

i think we've highlighted alot by this stage and ppl can make up their own minds on evidence for and against.

[dec11]

Sorry took so long to reply - had you on ignore for that stupid ass zyzz thread u posted in constantly. Anyway yes.

haha, l just noticed this post. poor old skip, put on ignore for the crime of mirin

[stevey_6t9]

haha, l just noticed this post. poor old skip, put on ignore for the crime of mirin

oh man that hurt my internet feelings bahaha.

i do want to know though, why alot of people including myself get heart pains when taking clen, its not from depleted taurine levels? or something else..

[jimmyinkedup]

oh man that hurt my internet feelings bahaha.

i do want to know though, why alot of people including myself get heart pains when taking clen, its not from depleted taurine levels? or something else..

Perhaps you feel the heart cells dying ...or ever since zyzz died of what was in all probabilty clen induced hear failure your heart is in fact broken .. thus the pain you feel. j/k *L*
I HAD too ...I couldnt help myself .......its payback for that damn thread yoiu tortured the whole board with!

[stevey_6t9]

Perhaps you feel the heart cells dying ...or ever since zyzz died of what was in all probabilty clen induced hear failure your heart is in fact broken .. thus the pain you feel. j/k *L*
I HAD too ...I couldnt help myself .......its payback for that damn thread yoiu tortured the whole board with!

Your right man, must be my broken heart. I need some bromance from you and dec11 to make it all better.

[cro]

lets keep it going 1000 views in 2 days

[Lemonada8]

1- Clen kills heart cells - Thats the broscience. The fact is i posted 3 cardioprotective factors that 100% indicate the opposite. Combine that with the final nail in the coffin : the data Swifto posted showing it is given to patients with a diseased heart - wel damn if this contention isnt dead i dont know what will kill it. Do u really think a medication that kills heart cells is given to patients with damaged hearts?

2- Clen enlarges the heart -its dangerous. Well lets look at that. How often do we use clen. 8 weeks a year? 12 weeks a year? Even 24 weeks ?There are ashtma patients that take b2 agonists for their entire lifetime - do you seriously think they are putting their lives in danger - shouldnt they all be dead from this? Shouldnt astmatics taking b2 agonists then have a dramtically decreased lifespan? Hell if we are saying people die from this it should be like 20-25 years less than the average). Also lets not kid ourselves - these people do not lead - nor are they told to lead, a sedentary lifestyle - so i dont wanna hear this oh we lift weights though crap. Do you really think medications that dangerously increase the size on the heart are used daily for an entire lifetime by probably millions around the world ?

Look - clen use is a personal decision - i just think it should be approached rationally. I am not opposed to caution - this can be accomplished via several methods. Dosage used , duration , supplementation or all 3. Again ive said it several times , an ace inhibitor (hawthorne berry supplement) would offset even the potential concerns. It help with BP and is even prescribed to people with left ventricular hyoperatrophy. If you want to use clen and be extra cautious pony up the $5-$10 bucks and take it.

I see clen as an ergogenic aid , that can be used safely and responsibly if one so chooses. We dont use it long duration. It isnt gonna kill your heart cells. Any potential concerns are easily offset by simple , prudent supplementation with ace inhbitor (which is in all probability unecessary imo). Its a personal choice - i say use some common sense when making it though. If only the concern expressed in this thread was given to every substance we ingest ....

Rebuttal for 1)
There is a wealth of studies out there showing the myotoxicity of clen and myocyte apoptosis. It has to do with increased sympathetics to the heart. Clen being a sympathomemetic drug, increases this stimulation. Also, as ive said before and seems to be overlooked, ALL of the studies posted for the support of clen being cardio protective is done on a DAMAGED heart. Much different than a healthy heart. In a healthy heart, combined with the increased muscle growth capacity (on cycle), and once again ive said this already *to those PREDISPOSED* this can cause issues, and probably is a large reason for the increasing deaths using Clen (at a younger age, combined with training, and high natural test/AAS cycle test levels)

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...mus.20407/full
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...02549/abstract
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...04.027482/full

Also, high levels of catecholamines is known to be cardio toxic, and with clen being a mimic of them and also increasing the release of catecholamines, you can induce that high levels of clen *in a healthy heart* can be cardiotoxic. Cardiotoxic = kills heart cells
so, no nail in the coffin b/c those studies were done on a failing heart. Healthy heart is totally different.

Rebuttal for 2)
Yes, enlargement of the heart can cause problems. Asthmatics usually dont take a oral B2 drug b/c of the potential cardio issues. Its an inhaler which increases the selectivity of the drug because it has to pass through the lungs before going systemic. So trying to compare heart hypertrophy between asthmatics vs clen users isnt really a good comparison.
Also, the MOA of clen, its not that good of a bronchodialtor. Asthmatics dont use long acting b2 agonists due to the sides of constant use, they are used in combination with other drugs that are basically immunosuppressive which helps calm the overactive nature of asthma. The main b2 agonists used by asthmatics are short acting, aka rescue inhaler. And there are plenty of studies showing the dangers of abuse of those inhalers (even though its local contact with the lungs, too much goes systemic.. and clen is systemic by nature sooo...).
Clen isnt even legal in the US. So what does that tell you about the benefits it has for bronchodialiting? if it was that good, it would be used more. But there are other drugs, and its long acting, and isnt that great of a dialaitor. It has better 'fat burning' properties due to b3 activation, along with some b1 activation. The amount of b1 activation is different between people, and in those (as ive said before) that are predisposed to it, can have some problems. And i would bet that those problems are augmented with those on a AAS cycle due to the 'muscle growth benefits' of the AAS, that those problems would present alot faster.

I seriously have no idea where you come up with this nonsense sometimes.

Still waiting on info about the 'Nonsense' swifto.... Please tell me what im saying is wrong.

[Lemonada8]

oh man that hurt my internet feelings bahaha.

i do want to know though, why alot of people including myself get heart pains when taking clen, its not from depleted taurine levels? or something else..

increased contractility. It is a 'heavy pounding' pain? that is in rhythm with your HR?
I took viagra once and got the same feeling, and since its a PDE inhibitor, it can prolong beta activation

[Swifto]

Rebuttal for 1)
There is a wealth of studies out there showing the myotoxicity of clen and myocyte apoptosis. It has to do with increased sympathetics to the heart. Clen being a sympathomemetic drug, increases this stimulation. Also, as ive said before and seems to be overlooked, ALL of the studies posted for the support of clen being cardio protective is done on a DAMAGED heart. Much different than a healthy heart. In a healthy heart, combined with the increased muscle growth capacity (on cycle), and once again ive said this already *to those PREDISPOSED* this can cause issues, and probably is a large reason for the increasing deaths using Clen (at a younger age, combined with training, and high natural test/AAS cycle test levels)

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...mus.20407/full
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...02549/abstract
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...04.027482/full

Also, high levels of catecholamines is known to be cardio toxic, and with clen being a mimic of them and also increasing the release of catecholamines, you can induce that high levels of clen *in a healthy heart* can be cardiotoxic. Cardiotoxic = kills heart cells
so, no nail in the coffin b/c those studies were done on a failing heart. Healthy heart is totally different.

Rebuttal for 2)
Yes, enlargement of the heart can cause problems. Asthmatics usually dont take a oral B2 drug b/c of the potential cardio issues. Its an inhaler which increases the selectivity of the drug because it has to pass through the lungs before going systemic. So trying to compare heart hypertrophy between asthmatics vs clen users isnt really a good comparison.
Also, the MOA of clen, its not that good of a bronchodialtor. Asthmatics dont use long acting b2 agonists due to the sides of constant use, they are used in combination with other drugs that are basically immunosuppressive which helps calm the overactive nature of asthma. The main b2 agonists used by asthmatics are short acting, aka rescue inhaler. And there are plenty of studies showing the dangers of abuse of those inhalers (even though its local contact with the lungs, too much goes systemic.. and clen is systemic by nature sooo...).
Clen isnt even legal in the US. So what does that tell you about the benefits it has for bronchodialiting? if it was that good, it would be used more. But there are other drugs, and its long acting, and isnt that great of a dialaitor. It has better 'fat burning' properties due to b3 activation, along with some b1 activation. The amount of b1 activation is different between people, and in those (as ive said before) that are predisposed to it, can have some problems. And i would bet that those problems are augmented with those on a AAS cycle due to the 'muscle growth benefits' of the AAS, that those problems would present alot faster.



Still waiting on info about the 'Nonsense' swifto.... Please tell me what im saying is wrong.

You wont have to wait much longer. I am not at home but will reply when I return.

I will say one thing though. Your logic is backwards. I cant see the studies you just posted as I'm on my phone and dont have the time.

But I dont see how you have come to the conclusion something that causes cell death, apoptosis, etc... In HEALTHY tissue and then when its administered to NON-HEALTHY tissue has the OPPOSITE effect, its beyong me. Even an idiot can understand that doesnt make sense, but I am also aware jesus parted the red sea.

Please be patient, I will address all your points.

[mjt]

Hi. With all the mixed opinions, mixed data, and variations from person to person it might be wise to just watch your diet, up the cardio not pushing it to hard. I find cardio has been the best way for me to lose weight. It might now come off FAST, but it comes off just fine. Good Luck with your decision.