15 ms·
The Exercise Pill
- nathandegrave 9y agoHere is a guide I found that is the most comprehensive I've seen. Hope it's helpful: http://www.sarmstore1.com/what-are-sarms http://www.sarmstore1.com/what-are-sarms
- grzm 9y agoThat site constantly reloads itself.
- imoldfella 9y ago"After the age of forty, all of us, even the athletic, lose about eight per cent of our muscle mass each decade, with a further fifteen-per-cent decline between the ages of seventy and eighty. " This has not been my experience. I have added pretty substantial muscle mass between the ages of 48 and 55 with fairly conventional weight lifting and diet with no PED's. My back squat has gone from 185 to 385 (pounds)and my deadlift from 265 to 465. 40 seems way too early to start packing it in.
- yathern 9y agoCongrats on the gains! Though of course you are just an anecdote. But I'm curious how much of this muscle mass loss is due to biological changes vs lifestyle changes.
- chrisseaton 9y agoWell it does say 'all of us', so a single anecdote does disprove it. I think the original commentator was pointing out the sloppy writing.
- matt4077 9y agoYeah. The article's sentence also fails to account for people dying, who lose much more than 8% of muscle mass, and really stupid robots reading the article, who lose none of their muscle mass, but will have trouble understanding that, sometimes, language is ambiguous and requires a modicum of contextual reasoning, or else every sentence would require dozens of qualifications and would read like a regulation on insurance law.
- jaggederest 9y ago"There may exist at least one person who may have lost muscle mass over time."
- stevenwoo 9y agoI think my exercise and physiology textbook stated an age related decline in muscle mass happens in everyone after about 40 without a concerted program of strength training to stave it off.
- imoldfella 9y agoThat certainly sounds more credible. I encourage all the HN'ers north of 40 to try weightlifting. We have members older than myself seeing good results.
- bduerst 9y agoThis metric is without targeted anaerobic exercise like weightlifting. Decreases in hormones and neurotransmitters result in the body maintaining less muscle mass, even with aerobic exercise.
- nscalf 9y agoAs far as I know, there really isn't too much risk associated with hormone replacement therapy. If you add that into the mix, I'd be surprised to see any significant shifts over the human lifespan.
- orbitur 9y agoDoesn't your body produce even less if you supplement, leading to problems if you quit?
- nscalf 9y agoSo as far as I understand, the answer to that is really "it depends". I'm not a doctor, I just find this stuff interesting. If you do it properly, I think you can supplement things like testosterone in a sustainable way, you'll have to cycle on and off the drugs to prevent long term damage to your body's ability to produce endogenous hormones, and then you'll take things that decrease side effects of the doping. For example, a lot of fighters get caught taking drugs that decrease the estrogen production in the body, rather than actually getting caught taking steroids. Leagues ban steroids AND things that are used in coordination with steroids to increase the ability to enforce the steroid ban. Now, I would argue that even if it does cause a long term dependency, it should be viewed, for the average person, the same way heart pressure medication is viewed. You have a medical condition, and this is a prescription you'll take for the rest of your life, but it will make you live a longer, healthier life.
- aqme28 9y agoWithout changing your lifting regimen? I find that hard to believe.
- mlevental 9y ago2x improvement in 7 years? there's nothing unbelievable about that?
- berdon 9y ago2x improvement just depends on where you start in relation to where you have been. If you haven't lifted legs heavily for a while you'll have to start lower but you'll quickly regain that lost grown. Well, you'll regain the lost ground faster than you'll go up past your old max.
- 0xbear 9y agoBy definition, to lift heavier weight one has to change their lifting regimen.
- beat 9y agoThe regimen isn't really the amount of weight involved. It's how often you do it, how many reps, etc. For example, I'm doing interval training - something like, say, 10 chest presses, 10 lateral pulls, 30 seconds of crunches, and repeat this cycle three times. Then go to the next cycle, which might be something like incline pushups, bicep curls, and squats, again 3x. If I were to change to, say, 5 reps at maximum weight just one time(heavy strength train), that would be a change in regimen.
- 0xbear 9y agoThat’s not a lifting regimen. You don’t need crunches if you’re doing heavy squats or deadlifts. You don’t need bicep curls at all. And chest press must be balanced with barbell rows. As to how many reps, I only do 10 or more reps during warmup. From there on out it’s 5 reps per set or so, and at the end I do a few heavy singles at about 85-90% of PR.
- CryoLogic 9y agoThere have been a number of top level powerlifters in their 40's. Most of these studies don't study people with solid diet and training routines.
- noarchy 9y agoThis holds for bodybuilding, too, though that is admittedly a very subjective (appearance-based) sport compared to powerlifting where there are real numbers by which to compare everyone. Dexter Jackson placed 4th at this year's Mr. Olympia at age 47. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dexter_Jackson_(bodybuilder)#Contest_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dexter_Jackson_(bodybuilder)#C...
- 0xbear 9y agoThey all take PEDs though.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- jessriedel 9y agoYou're misinterpreting the statement. It is obviously not claiming that muscle mass follows a specific trajectory regardless of all other factors. It is claiming that muscle mass follows a statistical trajectory holding other factors constant. It's as if someone said that a car coasting to a stop slows by roughly 1% of speed every second and you tried to refute this by pointing out that if you hit the accelerator it goes faster.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- philipkglass 9y agoThere seem to be basically two arguments against "exercise pills." 1) Self-discipline is virtuous in and of itself. We shouldn't develop alternative ways to control weight and/or maintain muscle tone without controlling food intake and exercise, because that undermines the tangible rewards of virtue. 2) Biology is extremely complicated, and the drug that keeps you compact and muscular in your 40s might end up promoting the growth of cancerous tumors all over your body in your 60s. (As happened to the older mice who received high doses of GW501516.) I don't agree at all with the first argument. The second one is alarming enough that I'm not going to be the first or even the millionth person in line to obtain these compounds through grey-market channels and dose myself. Similarly, I would love a drug cocktail that prevents the unwanted physical effects of aging, but I'll let other people blaze a trail with human trials (clinical or self-experimentation.)
- arnarbi 9y ago> I don't agree at all with the first argument What if some of the commonly known positive effects of exercise, such as battling depression, are actually psychological effects of that discipline and motivation rather than physical fitness? I find it hard to argue this can't be the case.
- lagadu 9y agoNobody is suggesting that a pill should replace exercise in all scenarios; most of us do it because it's damn enjoyable which is why there are so many different forms. Depression is a problem that would exist regardless, the difference is that with a pill existing depressive people would only be depressed instead of depressed and suffering from the other problems caused by lack of exercise.
- philipkglass 9y agoThen that would be another point in favor of actually exercising, if the pills don't hit enough of the same biological systems to mimic the anti-depressive effect. I'm not rejecting any benefits of exercise that can be empirically demonstrated. I just want to distinguish "X has historically been the best way to achieve Y" from "X is virtuous, and should not be neglected even if technical progress provides easier ways to achieve Y." There is virtue in working hard to achieve good outcomes, but not in working harder than actually necessary to achieve those same outcomes. (If you want to do things a harder way than strictly necessary because it's a fun pastime for you, that's fine too. Then the experience itself rather than the end state is what you are seeking.)
- zeveb 9y agoI imagine that, if successful, this could make more money than Viagra. I'd happily pay several hundred dollars a month to have a fit body without ever exercising.
- kolbe 9y agoIt's existed for a very long time, but still hasn't fully taken off. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199607043350101 http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199607043350101
- zerr 9y agoDoes it also have the same health benefits as exercises?
- kolbe 9y agoDepends on the benefit. It will decrease fat, increase strength and increase muscle mass. I don't know about VO2 max or lactic threshold stuff, though.
- toomanybeersies 9y agoClenbuterol will increase your VO2 max, so will EPO.
- mjhoyer 9y agowill also make your heart rate go through the roof even when sitting still.
- bagacrap 9y agoIt (supraphysiological doses of testosterone, meaning more than any human produces naturally) causes cancer, hair loss, interferes with endogenous hormonal function, and entails many other deleterious side effects that exercise does not. It will increase aerobic capacity by increasing red blood cell count but too much added viscosity of the blood also poses a health risk. So this is rather different from "exercise in a pill".
- kolbe 9y agoSteroids have been known to do this for decades (if not centuries) http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199607043350101 http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199607043350101
- thomascgalvin 9y ago> Mice that had been given large doses of the drug over the course of two years (a lifetime for a lab rodent) developed cancer at a higher rate than their dope-free peers. Tumors appeared all over their bodies, from the tongue to the testes. > ... > Since then, he has developed a less potent version that he hopes will also be less toxic. So yeah, this isn't exactly ready for mass consumption.
- kolbe 9y agoWhereas the link between anabolic steroids and cancer is pretty weak. If someone is interested in getting fit (or fit looking) with pills, we already have some pretty good stuff out there. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3827559/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3827559/
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- cgh 9y agoYes, low dosages (200 mg/week) of eg testosterone enthanate will make most guys over 35 feel ten years younger. Bodybuilders would laugh at such low dosages as this is far less than one would take on a typical cycle, but the benefits are undeniable, with few negatives. However, it's illegal unless prescribed.
- icelancer 9y agoPretty much. For anyone interested in how anabolic-androgenic steroids got banned in the USA, check out Bigger, Faster, Stronger - The Side Effects of Being American for a much fairer viewpoint than your high school counselor shoved on to you. tl;dr: Steroids were banned due to non-scientific scares equivalent to "poison in candy" arguments around Halloween. The inconvenient truth is that we already have the fountain of youth [0] - it's injectable long-ester testosterone, which is cheap, easily obtainable, and safe [1]. EDIT: I see you said "pills." While safe-ish, they're much more dangerous due to liver toxicity. Injectable testosterone is much more effective, cheaper, and safer. [0]: For men. For women, the results are different and comes with worse side effects. [1]: Safe is a relative term. But exogenous test use done correctly is very, very safe. And compared to the alternatives that are sold, like prohormones, they're orders of magnitude safer.
- ravenstine 9y agoI have a feeling such a pill would go the way of testosterone which, even though it could be safely administered to people who don't necessarily have "Low T" to positive ends, is still only a treatment for those who desperately need it. People on the low end of whatever arbitrary, non-standard serum testosterone scale often don't get treatment because they are technically "normal", which completely disregards the benefit someone can see from being brought to the high-end of the scale. Likewise, an exercise pill might only be given to those who are morbidly obese rather than mostly sedentary office workers who would rather get more work done than dedicate another hour every day towards mindless exercise.
- rblatz 9y agoThere are plenty of clinics that specialize in just what you are talking about. I believe they commonly call themselves balanced hormone clinics. I also think that is a common thing they do in anti-aging clinics.
- cwkoss 9y agoUS law currently allows the prescription of methamphetamine (Desoxyn) for extreme obesity.
- JamesBarney 9y agoOne of the reasons for this is testosterone treatment is associated with higher rates or cardiovascular disease.
- icelancer 9y agoWhile true, this is not the reason testosterone was banned. The AMA argued vociferously against banning it, in fact.
- JamesBarney 9y agoYou're 100 percent right. I was just explaining why some doctors are reluctant to prescribe it. The fact it's banned is total bullshit. There are no testosterone addicts in the same way there are cocaine or heroin addicts. It doesn't have any societal harm, and it's risks aren't any worse than maintaining a poor diet.
- lend000 9y agoFascinating -- as much as I enjoy to be active and stretch out, I imagine the benefits of sustained exertion could be entirely replaced by an artificial mechanism. This would be a nice time saver, and if it provides the same good feelings that you get after a good workout, then health in an active person could even be improved by preventing the need for heavy exertion and focusing on stretching and movement. This could reduce joint stresses and put more hours in the day. Very excited to see the effects of this drugs in humans.
- corpMaverick 9y agoCan we at least have a pill that makes you want to exercise?
- Domenic_S 9y agoZoloft (half-joking).
- andai 9y ago5-15ug of LSD ought to do it! Traditional stimulants (methylphenidate, amphetamine) work pretty well too.
- comicjk 9y ago"Preworkout" (sugar and caffeine) products are basically this, as long as your caffeine tolerance is not too high.
- cgh 9y agoAnd beta-alanine. The tingly feeling is like a signal to get moving. https://examine.com/supplements/beta-alanine/ https://examine.com/supplements/beta-alanine/
- toomanybeersies 9y agoAmphetamines and heavy metal music will work.
- chiefalchemist 9y ago"...There are a handful of other contexts where a short course of an exercise pill could be extremely useful..." Missing from the list that followed has: people wearing VR goggles (e.g., Oculus Rift) and never leaving their bed or sofa. The Matrix isn't as far fetched as it used to be :)
- 0xbear 9y agoBefore the exercise pill, it’d be good to have a pill which helps with exercise. For instance strengthens the ligaments without destroying flexibility too much. Or boosts endurance without having horrible side effects, stuff like that. Seems like an easier problem than an all encompassing “exercise pill”.
- maaaats 9y agoYeah, I don't care much for a pill replacing exercise. A pill giving me the ability to exercise without all my ails though...
- icelancer 9y agoThis is called testosterone.
- rjeli 9y agonandrolone (deca) is used for joint health
- sn9 9y agoIf you look at sports like Olympic weightlifting and gymnastics, you'll see that strength and flexibility aren't fundamentally opposed. You can develop both concurrently.
- xpaulbettsx 9y agoFor anyone considering buying this (which was me until 5mins ago) read https://www.reddit.com/r/steroids/comments/6477mr/compound_experience_saturday_gw501516_cardarine/dg0sq37/ https://www.reddit.com/r/steroids/comments/6477mr/compound_e... The important bit: > In animal trials, there are dose equivalence calculations you have to do first. Since rats were used in the study you have to divide their dosage by 6.2 for the human equivalence. So the 5 mg/kg/day for males and 3 mg/kg/day for females works out to 0.806 mg/kg/day and 0.484 mg/kg/day, respectively. For example, a 115 lb female would have an equivalent dosage of ~25 mg. That's a whole lot closer to the doses some of you are taking. > In the study, cancer was seen even in rats on the lowest dosage. For all we know, they could have gotten cancer at lower doses too.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- deepnotderp 9y agoAlso, fwiw, (iirc) they observed huge benefits to exercising even when GW and AICAR were taken in tandem, so it's probably most useful as an exercise amplifier.
- bbarn 9y agoMy biggest barrier to staying healthy isn't motivation or willpower, it's time. A lot of us waste a lot of time sitting in offices when more hours there don't make us more effective or productive at what we do. Give me some of that time back to go on 2-3 hour bike rides every day, and I suspect I'd be happier, and find some way to be more productive.
- always_good 9y ago> My biggest barrier to staying healthy isn't motivation or willpower, it's time. To be fair, if you had more willpower, you'd be more willing to exercise in what limited time you do have. So it's fundamentally a willpower limitation.
- nightfly 9y agoThis is a very arrogant and insensitive thing to say. Work hours + commute + family obligations doesn't leave a lot (or any) time for many people. And you have the gall to imply they don't have the "willpower" to commit the remaining time they have left to yet another chore.
- ericmcer 9y agoI mean time seems to be the default excuse for failing to do many things, but it is not literally the reason. You can exercise in only 5-10 minutes a day. they don't have the "willpower" to commit the remaining time they have left to yet another chore. Wouldn't them having remaining time, and spending it in another way, imply that it is a matter of will?
- always_good 9y agoWe like to think that exercise takes much time, but the reality is that it's just an inconvenience. In fact, the more time we pretend it takes to exercise, the easier it is to disqualify it from our agenda. It is a willpower issue for the majority of us on this forum who have it well off compared to most people. You have to make time for it just like you have to make time to budget vegetables into your diet when it's more convenient to eat fast food on the way home. It's your health. That you think it's insensitive for me to point this out just shows that there are some health issues, like obesity, that are taboo subjects. But we're not at the dinner table.
- Steko 9y agoAnother interesting report about a drug that 'melts away fat in arteries': https://www.abdn.ac.uk/news/11280/ https://www.abdn.ac.uk/news/11280/
- ineedasername 9y agoThe TL;DR: 1) Causes cancer. Of, like, everything. TFA put it more eloquently: "From the tongue to the testes" 2) So, shelved. 3) Less toxic versions under research; color me interested! (you know, everything causes cancer anyway) 4) Social implications!
- jax711 9y agoI actually used to take GW50156. Since it's a research drug companies in the US can sell it for "research" purposes. Yes I know it gives cancer, but the doses that were used in the study for mice were astronomical. It's the equivalent of doing the ld50 of a drug.
- icelancer 9y agoI knew this was about GW50156. A version of this article has been published every six months or so in various outlets. GW50156 is widely available via research chemical sites and various underground bodybuilders/powerlifters/athletes are using it + peptides + various other drugs to skirt AAS testing. I think you will find the self-reported side effects and gains of GW50156 to be.... much different than stories like this one portray.
- gadders 9y agoIt is amazing the chemicals and hormones that bodybuilders will put into their body to build muscle or cut body fat. They really are the original body hackers.
- KKKKkkkk1 9y agoWell, that kind of reminds me how in the 90s the media published articles saying that Prozac is about to make sadness disappear, and our society is about to turn into a Brave New World. Turns out it was just stealth marketing.
- scottlocklin 9y agoWhenever numskull journalists write the phrase "exercise pill" they're talking about growth hormone secretagogues or anabolics. This one is an anabolic SARM; a particularly nasty one that seems to be pretty carcinogenic. Note that people who take SARMs or regular anabolic steroids look pretty good, but they're certainly not achieving any real health benefits. Long term use nets you cardiovascular problems and eventual chemical castration. Anyone who would tout taking this as some kind of supplement is insane. Soylent arguably more healthy.
- totallynotcool 9y ago>and eventual chemical castration. That's a little over the top. Proper dosing- TRT levels- and regular blood work can keep some of the issues at bay.
- Mz 9y agoOne of the things that exercise does for you is it helps your body take out the trash. I see no means for a pill to replicate that function. Without that, it seems pretty obvious that there will be negative long term consequences to getting your "exercise" in pill form. This is how this works: Lymph is basically the clear part of the blood with stuff like red blood cells removed. One piece of the lymphatic system is powered by the heart. But lymph is also called interstitial fluid. It exists throughout the body. It circulates, moving back and forth between tissues and your blood. When it moves back to your blood, it takes waste products with it, leaving behind cleaner, healthier tissue. These wastes mostly get removed when you urinate. Physical activity dramatically increases the rate at which lymph gets moved back to the blood. I have seen figures anywhere from 3 to 8 times as fast as when you are sedentary. Walking a whole lot, sometimes hours a day, has played a big role in my healing journey. I believe this increased cleansing process is a key detail as to why that has helped.
- gadders 9y ago>>“If you’ve been to London, then you know,” Bill Hayes, a writer and photographer who is at work on a history of exercise, told me. “The driver sits at the front and drives the bus, and the conductor hops on and off the bus and climbs up and down the stairs taking tickets and getting people to their seats.” Er, not for a long while. It's all Oyster cards now. Bus conductors went ages ago.
- AElsinore77 9y agoThere's a lot of discussion here about "virtue" and "self-discipline" - I'd like to offer an interesting possibility that "discipline" is not about motivation or willpower, but is actually an intellectual exercise of avoiding motivated reasoning in the mind. The simplest example: I resolve to wake up in the morning to run before work. However, when I wake, I feel exhausted. "You need more rest; you can always make it up tomorrow," I might think to myself. If I accept this as a reason to stay in bed, I am falling to motivated reasoning; I am believing as fact an excuse made by my mind looking for a way out of discomfort. I can rest easy when I believe my excuse. I can rest easy when I can say "I have plenty of discipline, I just needed to rest today." Exercise is merely one of many ways to illuminate your logical fallacies to yourself. The fallacy of motivated reasoning is what causes alternative facts - the mind can always come up with a reason to avoid the discomfort of getting out of bed, just like it can come up with reasons to avoid the discomfort of saying "I was wrong."