DHT Prevents Prostate Cancer And May Even Treat It

[vulture]

Some of the T would probably go to estrogen, but if you remember the 2 recent human studies with advanced prostate cancer, direct injections of T into the prostate induced remission in everybody and nobody got worse event though their E also increased.

Haidut, but according Peat and you it seems that serum estrogen isn't a reliable way to measure estrogen, but in such studies they usually only rely on it, not in tissue Estrogen. Have you seen a case of someone with isolated high E (no high Prolactin or any other impaired metabolism marker) and no health issues?

BTW, do you think injecting T directly into the prostate would simply transform most of it into DHT due to it's tissue "receptor" composition?
Wouldn't it be the same to increase DHT substancially and the prostate would absorb lots of it anyway?
Maybe they are making a "novell" way instead of simply trying good old DHT.

 

[Obi-wan]

Some of the T would probably go to estrogen, but if you remember the 2 recent human studies with advanced prostate cancer, direct injections of T into the prostate induced remission in everybody and nobody got worse event though their E also increased.

That was a trial done at John Hopkins Hospital University School of Medicine by Sam Demmeade. I read the study. It was also done while the patients were on Lupron (like Firmagon). So it was done while blocking FSH...It was also high T

 

[haidut]

Haidut, but according Peat and you it seems that serum estrogen isn't a reliable way to measure estrogen, but in such studies they usually only rely on it, not in tissue Estrogen. Have you seen a case of someone with isolated high E (no high Prolactin or any other impaired metabolism marker) and no health issues?

BTW, do you think injecting T directly into the prostate would simply transform most of it into DHT due to it's tissue "receptor" composition?
Wouldn't it be the same to increase DHT substancially and the prostate would absorb lots of it anyway?
Maybe they are making a "novell" way instead of simply trying good old DHT.

Those are all good points. Usually, tissue estradiol (E2) rises with higher T. The tissue-produced estrogen is usually estrone (E1) and that one is very rarely measured. The long-term systemic "reservoir" of estrogen is estrone sulfate (E1S) and that one is almost never measured, at least not in men, even though it is known to be predictor of prostate cancer progression and mortality.
https://raypeatforum.com/community/threads/test-for-estrogenic-activity-and-prostate-cancer.7886/
It is assumed that E2 is a good biomarker of tissue estrogen, but in men it is usually only a biomarker of gonadal activity or exogenous T administration. So, we don't know what the tissue E1 (or any estrogen for that matter) was in that study.
Your point about T injections and conversion in the prostate is exactly the one I made in the thread where the study was posted - i.e. the industry continues to claim that DHT is evil and causes prostate cancer, but the prostate is primarily a DHT-producing organ. This is exactly why drugs like Finasteride are used - to inhibit the high production of DHT in the prostate. So, injecting T into the prostate will metabolize mostly into DHT, as has been proven in countless experiments during the design and testing of drugs like Finasteride. In fact, this is probably the most reliable method of raising DHT levels - i.e. injecting a DHT precursor like T (or DHEA or androsterone) in a tissue/organ with high expression of 5-AR. Applying it to the skin is another good example and is well-known that topical T or DHEA administration raises DHT levels. But the industry is so desperate to conceal that the DHT hypothesis is wrong that it will go to ridiculous lengths and invent absurd stories to the contrary. For example, the proposed benefit of T in that study was explained as due to conversion into estrogen without mentioning that aromatase expression in prostate is very low, especially when compared to 5-AR. The high expression of 5-AR in prostate has been repeatedly touted as a proof DHT is causative for prostate cancer, and as a rationale for using 5-AR inhibitors which target prostate and brain more than any other organ/tissue. So, until serious evidence to the contrary is presented, the prostate cancer study is a blockbuster proof that T/DHT are therapeutic for prostate cancer, and not causative.

 

[vulture]

Those are all good points. Usually, tissue estradiol (E2) rises with higher T. The tissue-produced estrogen is usually estrone (E1) and that one is very rarely measured. The long-term systemic "reservoir" of estrogen is estrone sulfate (E1S) and that one is almost never measured, at least not in men, even though it is known to be predictor of prostate cancer progression and mortality.
https://raypeatforum.com/community/threads/test-for-estrogenic-activity-and-prostate-cancer.7886/
It is assumed that E2 is a good biomarker of tissue estrogen, but in men it is usually only a biomarker of gonadal activity or exogenous T administration. So, we don't know what the tissue E1 (or any estrogen for that matter) was in that study.
Your point about T injections and conversion in the prostate is exactly the one I made in the thread where the study was posted - i.e. the industry continues to claim that DHT is evil and causes prostate cancer, but the prostate is primarily a DHT-producing organ. So, injecting T into it will metabolize mostly into DHT and this is probably the most reliable method of raising DHT levels - i.e. injecting a DHT precursor like T (or DHEA or androsterone) in a tissue/organ with high expression of 5-AR. Allying it to the skin is another good example and is well-known that topical T or DHEA administration raises DHT levels. But the industry is so desperate to admit that the DHT hypothesis is wrong that it will go to ridiculous lengths and invent absurd stories to the contrary. For example, the proposed benefit of T in that study was explained as due to conversion into estrogen without mentioning that aromatase expression in prostate is very low, especially when compared to 5-AR. The high expression of 5-AR in prostate has been repeatedly touted as a proof DHT is causative for prostate cancer, and as a rationale for using 5-AR inhibitors which target prostate and brain more than any other organ/tissue. So, until serious evidence to the contrary is presented, the prostate cancer study is a blockbuster proof that T/DHT are therapeutic for prostate cancer, and not causative.

What do you think about administering DHT to rats with bacterial prostatitis?
What's would be the inmune impact of androgens along with conventional antibiotics treatment?
I have read conflicting info on androgens effects on the inmune system, and seems that a lot of the times prostate problems are due to bacteria in the urinary tract.

 

[haidut]

That was a trial done at John Hopkins Hospital University School of Medicine by Sam Demmeade. I read the study. It was also done while the patients were on Lupron (like Firmagon). So it was done while blocking FSH...It was also high T

There was a second study that confirmed the findings of the first one. The first one I mentioned above was with 16 people split between Washington University and JHU. The second was a single case study performed only at JHU that you mention. The second one was with high dose.
https://raypeatforum.com/community/...testosterone-can-treat-prostate-cancer.13882/

The first one used a single injection of 400mg TP over a course of 28 days.
Effect of bipolar androgen therapy for asymptomatic men with castration-resistant prostate cancer: Results from a pilot clinical study
"...Preclinical data supported a pilot study in which 16 asymptomatic CRPC patients with low to moderate metastatic burden were treated with testosterone cypionate (400 mg intramuscular; day 1 of 28) and etoposide (100 mg oral daily; days 1 to 14 of 28)."

These 400mg TP a month amount to 14mg-15mg TP daily, which is considered quite low and in fact sometimes insufficient to treat even hypogonadism. Typical IM doses of TP for hypogonadism or bodybuilding purposes are in the range 300mg-600mg a week. The first study also did not use any LH/FSH inhibitors. I find it odd to even add such an inhibitor considering T administration in high doses will drive LH/FSH into the ground by itself. The only reason I can think of adding such in inhibitor is to use the highly beneficial effects of the study to justify the existence of the expensive LH/FSH inhibitor, since the benefits would not be attributable only to TP when other drugs are administered. This is criminally manipulative, but it only delays the inevitable - i.e. admission that T is therapeutic for cancer (something that was well-known back in 1950s and 1960s). But don't expect anybody to go to jail for that 50-year long fraud, and if T therapy is ever approved expect it to be combined with one of these expensive DNA synthesis or LH/FSH inhibitors to keep the doubt alive whether it is really T that is beneficial or something else.
See my discussion with @vulture above. Only an imbecile would argue that T injections directly into the prostate would not involve conversion into DHT. The even dumber statement (from study authors in the popular press) is that the benefit was due to estrogen conversion (even though it was not measured). Yeah, maybe if you inject T into adipose tissue. But not when injected into the prostate. Even if there there is NO conversion into anything else, T is still a potent androgen agonist and is claimed to be almost as bad as DHT for prostate health. So, why the benefit??
The travesty is complete. I am making a very concerted effort to not despise my doctor friends who have reached the point of claiming they eat margarine instead of butter because it has "less calories", avoiding sucrose because it triggers more insulin release than bread/starch, going for 6-mile runs only fasted to increase GH maximally, arguing that estrogen is only relevant for females while prescribing AI drugs to bodybuilder patients with gyno, etc. There is a reason doctors have the highest suicide rate of any profession, especially the rich ones who have no loans. That level of cognitive dissonance would kill anybody. I think this also explains to a degree the skyrocketing suicide rate in society in general. All people look up to role models in times of trouble and if those role models (doctors being a universal one around the world) are crumbling faster than even regular people than this can cause nation-wide depression wave.

 

[haidut]

What do you think about administering DHT to rats with bacterial prostatitis?
What's would be the inmune impact of androgens along with conventional antibiotics treatment?
I have read conflicting info on androgens effects on the inmune system, and seems that a lot of the times prostate problems are due to bacteria in the urinary tract.

There was a very interesting study I posted in one other thread as a response to somebody else. It showed that a combination of DHEA and DHT restored old rats' immune system parameters back to young adult levels. Each steroid on its own had benefits but also negative effects, and the combination of both was optimal. DHT on its own can shrink the thymus in high doses, so combining with progesterone or DHEA (which protect the thymus) would probably be a better approach. See below.
https://raypeatforum.com/community/...sterone-for-lab-r-d.12614/page-60#post-349510

 

[Regina]

There was a second study that confirmed the findings of the first one. The first one I mentioned above was with 16 people split between Washington University and JHU. The second was a single case study performed only at JHU that you mention. The second one was with high dose.
https://raypeatforum.com/community/...testosterone-can-treat-prostate-cancer.13882/

The first one used a single injection of 400mg TP over a course of 28 days.
Effect of bipolar androgen therapy for asymptomatic men with castration-resistant prostate cancer: Results from a pilot clinical study
"...Preclinical data supported a pilot study in which 16 asymptomatic CRPC patients with low to moderate metastatic burden were treated with testosterone cypionate (400 mg intramuscular; day 1 of 28) and etoposide (100 mg oral daily; days 1 to 14 of 28)."

These 400mg TP a month amount to 14mg-15mg TP daily, which is considered quite low and in fact sometimes insufficient to treat even hypogonadism. Typical IM doses of TP for hypogonadism or bodybuilding purposes are in the range 300mg-600mg a week. The first study also did not use any LH/FSH inhibitors. I find it odd to even add such an inhibitor considering T administration in high doses will drive LH/FSH into the ground by itself. The only reason I can think of adding such in inhibitor is to use the highly beneficial effects of the study to justify the existence of the expensive LH/FSH inhibitor, since the benefits would not be attributable only to TP when other drugs are administered. This is beyond sinister, but it only delays the inevitable - i.e. admission that T is therapeutic for cancer (something that was well-known back in 1950s and 1960s). But don't expect anybody to go to jail for that 50-year long fraud, and if T therapy is ever approved expect it to be combined with one of these expensive DNA synthesis or LH/FSH inhibitors to keep the doubt alive whether it is really T that is beneficial or something else.
See my discussion with @vulture above. Only an imbecile would argue that T injections directly into the prostate would not involve conversion into DHT. The even dumber statement is that the benefit was due to estrogen conversion. Yeah, maybe if you inject T into adipose tissue. But not when injected into the prostate. Even if there there is NO conversion, T is still a potent androgen agonist and is claimed to be almost as bad as DHT for prostate health. So, why the benefit??
The travesty is complete. I am making a very concerted effort to not despise my doctor friends who have reached the point of claiming they eat margarine instead of butter because it has "less calories", avoiding sucrose because it triggers more insulin release than bread/starch, going for 6-mile runs only fasted to increase GH maximally, arguing that estrogen is only relevant for females while prescribing AI drugs to bodybuilder patients with gyno, etc. There is a reason doctors have the highest suicide rate of any profession, especially the rich ones who have no loans. That level of cognitive dissonance would kill anybody. I think this also explains to a degree the skyrocketing suicide rate in society in general. All people look up to role models in times of trouble and if those role models (doctors being a universal one around the world) are crumbling faster than even regular people than this can cause nation-wide depression wave.

"eat margarine instead of butter because it has "less calories", avoiding sucrose because it triggers more insulin release than bread/starch, going for 6-mile runs only fasted to increase GH maximally".
This describes my brother-in-law to a T. (and not the T we know and love). Only, he also takes statins, an SSRI and avidly no salt; no sugar. He's shiny bald and mega-authoritarian. He's a hospital administrator who loves rubbing elbows with other high-status authoritarians - especially Drs. I wish him the best. I really do.

 

[haidut]

"eat margarine instead of butter because it has "less calories", avoiding sucrose because it triggers more insulin release than bread/starch, going for 6-mile runs only fasted to increase GH maximally".
This describes my brother-in-law to a T. (and not the T we know and love). Only, he also takes statins, an SSRI and avidly no salt; no sugar. He's shiny bald and mega-authoritarian. He's a hospital administrator who loves rubbing elbows with other high-status authoritarians - especially Drs. I wish him the best. I really do.

I would not spend much time around your brother-in-law if I were you. These people have a way of draining the life out of anybody around them. How's your sister's health since she married him?

 

[Regina]

I would not spend much time around your brother-in-law if I were you. These people have a way of draining the life out of anybody around them. How's your sister's health since she married him?

circling the drain.
I have to stay with them when I visit my Mom. Hilarious the last time, as they had a "brilliant" cancer Dr over for dinner. I was expected to kiss the ring. He held forth at the table that environment had zero impact on cancer. It is all genes. He offered to get me right in for the "finest" imaging in the world. He said he would agree to see me before I left. I said, "Oh, no thanks." My sister and husband were appalled at me.

 

[vulture]

I find it odd to even add such an inhibitor considering T administration in high doses will drive LH/FSH into the ground by itself. The only reason I can think of adding such in inhibitor is to use the highly beneficial effects of the study to justify the existence of the expensive LH/FSH inhibitor, since the benefits would not be attributable only to TP when other drugs are administered.

"Think badly and you'll nail it" says a proberb.

There was a very interesting study I posted in one other thread as a response to somebody else. It showed that a combination of DHEA and DHT restored old rats' immune system parameters back to young adult levels. Each steroid on its own had benefits but also negative effects, and the combination of both was optimal. DHT on its own can shrink the thymus in high doses, so combining with progesterone or DHEA (which protect the thymus) would probably be a better approach. See below.
https://raypeatforum.com/community/...sterone-for-lab-r-d.12614/page-60#post-349510

My lab rat seems to have developed, aside from hypogonadism and some other crappy things, some kind of prostate infection or inflammation. I think I will give him Mesterolone + Pansterone anyway along with D-Mannose, MB and cranberry juice. Urine culture was negative (which is not a reliable test anyway)...and I'm really far from liking to get anything else from a whitecoat than a DRE or a PSA just to asses prostate status, even if they tell me I have cancer or whatever else that will not get solved with simple antibiotics, I don't care, I rather taking a risk on something different like Mesterolone and exploring an insteresting posibility than just leaving my rat in their hands again, they've proven to be almost useless seeing the forest instead a tree...at least I think he's gonna have a lot of fun before things get nasty, if they do.

I'll soon see which way I take. I hope to gather money to run a LH test

 

[Vinero]

There was a second study that confirmed the findings of the first one. The first one I mentioned above was with 16 people split between Washington University and JHU. The second was a single case study performed only at JHU that you mention. The second one was with high dose.
https://raypeatforum.com/community/...testosterone-can-treat-prostate-cancer.13882/

The first one used a single injection of 400mg TP over a course of 28 days.
Effect of bipolar androgen therapy for asymptomatic men with castration-resistant prostate cancer: Results from a pilot clinical study
"...Preclinical data supported a pilot study in which 16 asymptomatic CRPC patients with low to moderate metastatic burden were treated with testosterone cypionate (400 mg intramuscular; day 1 of 28) and etoposide (100 mg oral daily; days 1 to 14 of 28)."

These 400mg TP a month amount to 14mg-15mg TP daily, which is considered quite low and in fact sometimes insufficient to treat even hypogonadism. Typical IM doses of TP for hypogonadism or bodybuilding purposes are in the range 300mg-600mg a week. The first study also did not use any LH/FSH inhibitors. I find it odd to even add such an inhibitor considering T administration in high doses will drive LH/FSH into the ground by itself. The only reason I can think of adding such in inhibitor is to use the highly beneficial effects of the study to justify the existence of the expensive LH/FSH inhibitor, since the benefits would not be attributable only to TP when other drugs are administered. This is criminally manipulative, but it only delays the inevitable - i.e. admission that T is therapeutic for cancer (something that was well-known back in 1950s and 1960s). But don't expect anybody to go to jail for that 50-year long fraud, and if T therapy is ever approved expect it to be combined with one of these expensive DNA synthesis or LH/FSH inhibitors to keep the doubt alive whether it is really T that is beneficial or something else.
See my discussion with @vulture above. Only an imbecile would argue that T injections directly into the prostate would not involve conversion into DHT. The even dumber statement (from study authors in the popular press) is that the benefit was due to estrogen conversion (even though it was not measured). Yeah, maybe if you inject T into adipose tissue. But not when injected into the prostate. Even if there there is NO conversion into anything else, T is still a potent androgen agonist and is claimed to be almost as bad as DHT for prostate health. So, why the benefit??
The travesty is complete. I am making a very concerted effort to not despise my doctor friends who have reached the point of claiming they eat margarine instead of butter because it has "less calories", avoiding sucrose because it triggers more insulin release than bread/starch, going for 6-mile runs only fasted to increase GH maximally, arguing that estrogen is only relevant for females while prescribing AI drugs to bodybuilder patients with gyno, etc. There is a reason doctors have the highest suicide rate of any profession, especially the rich ones who have no loans. That level of cognitive dissonance would kill anybody. I think this also explains to a degree the skyrocketing suicide rate in society in general. All people look up to role models in times of trouble and if those role models (doctors being a universal one around the world) are crumbling faster than even regular people than this can cause nation-wide depression wave.

Do you really think those doctors seriously eat margarine instead of butter and avoid sucrose and run fasted to increase GH etc?
Maybe they tell to do that to other people, but are aware themselves that those things are toxic. They must see the bad result of these recommendations on a daily basis.
Remember about the prostate cancer docters Ray has mentioned that were asked what they would do if they were diagnosed with prostate cancer themselves.
Most of them said they would do nothing.

 

[haidut]

Do you really think those doctors seriously eat margarine instead of butter and avoid sucrose and run fasted to increase GH etc?

Unfortunately, I am close enough with them to know they actually do these things. When I mentioned that margarine and butter have the same calories per gram of fat (because any fat has 9 calories per gram) they were floored. When I showed them the glycemic load/index of sucrose and bread they thought I was making a fake website just to mess with them. But the link was from Harvard Medical School so they had to accept it. The amount of ignorance in the medical profession is astounding. These people know next to nothing outside their very narrow specialty for which they study 12+ years. One of them is a radiologist and does avoid ionizing radiation, but sleeps with his phone next to his head and has chronic migraines at the same spot the phone sits. I am afraid to even suggest he may be developing a meningioma or something worse. Another one is an orthopedic surgeon and uses estrogen cream to "protect" his bones from his habit of running 6 miles 5 days a week, because estrogen is "anabolic for the bone". Well, apparently not so since he developed osteopenia and now osteoporosis in less than 5 years at the tender age of 44. So, now he runs fasted to increase GH and "recover" his lost bone tissue. Doesn't even want to hear about vitamin D/K, aspirin, or even HRT even though his T is below 200. When I bring up that his estrogen use and exhaustive exercise can bring about hypogonadism he laughs like a madman, in higher-pitched voice than his sister. A third one is an endocrine neurologist and prescribes AI to male patients with gyno every day yet continues to publish articles on benefits of estrogen for neurodegenerative disease and advises a company developing a unisex estrogen patch. I wish they were fooling me but I am afraid that is what many/most doctors do. I have seen others too, so it's not just these 3 fools.

 

[boxers]

Do you have any references for that?

Anecdotal, other forum... who knows, if they did cause hair loss, whats the reasoning

 

[vulture]

Anecdotal, other forum... who knows, if they did cause hair loss, whats the reasoning

So, you have no serious reason to state something and also want to know why it is like you just stated without serious reasons?

 

[boxers]

So, you have no serious reason to state something and also want to know why it is like you just stated without serious reasons?

What do you mean?

Tons of people talk about hair loss from DHT drugs... its very common side effect..
There no studies, so of course its all forum talk.

hair lines got wrecked from DHT?. Winstrol and hairloss... is it really that bad??

Comparative studies on level of androgens in hair and plasma with premature male-pattern baldness. - PubMed - NCBI

 

[haidut]

What do you mean?

Tons of people talk about hair loss from DHT drugs... its very common side effect..

I think most of them talk about risk of hair loss, since that is what they read online and their doctors told them. But actual studies with even high dose (125mg daily) DHT in humans did not observe any hair loss or prostate enlargement.
I would not discount even anecdotal reports of hair loss from androgens. It's just that in most/all such cases the person is typically using something else as well (e.g. some kind or aromatizable steroid for "bulking", beta agonist, etc) so it is really hard to judge what actually caused the hair loss. Again, AFAIK human studies with controlled usage of only DHT-derived steroids did not report hair loss. If somebody has references showing hair loss please share.

 

[boxers]

"haidut,But actual studies with even high dose (125mg daily) DHT in humans did not observe any hair loss or prostate enlargement.
.

That's what im talking about... Im all for DHT not causing hair loss. Im not sure if winstrol, proviron, anavar act differently though.

Also a lot of guys dont complain about hair loss until PCT or even past that. (cortisol, estrogen, prolactin) So it is very difficult to pin point the cause like you stated. The general consensus is though still is DHT = hair loss

 

[MrSmart]

I think most of them talk about risk of hair loss, since that is what they read online and their doctors told them. But actual studies with even high dose (125mg daily) DHT in humans did not observe any hair loss or prostate enlargement.
I would not discount even anecdotal reports of hair loss from androgens. It's just that in most/all such cases the person is typically using something else as well (e.g. some kind or aromatizable steroid for "bulking", beta agonist, etc) so it is really hard to judge what actually caused the hair loss. Again, AFAIK human studies with controlled usage of only DHT-derived steroids did not report hair loss. If somebody has references showing hair loss please share.

The best test for the DHT theory would be administration of testosterone coupled with aromatase inhibitors. There would obviously still be a lot of confounding variables, but it's the one of the better ones. Straight DHT or Trenbolone or any of the others are not exactly the same.

 

[boxers]

The best test for the DHT theory would be administration of testosterone coupled with aromatase inhibitors. There would obviously still be a lot of confounding variables, but it's the one of the better ones. Straight DHT or Trenbolone or any of the others are not exactly the same.

Maybe just use proviron by itself?

 

[Obi-wan]

There was a second study that confirmed the findings of the first one. The first one I mentioned above was with 16 people split between Washington University and JHU. The second was a single case study performed only at JHU that you mention. The second one was with high dose.
https://raypeatforum.com/community/...testosterone-can-treat-prostate-cancer.13882/

The first one used a single injection of 400mg TP over a course of 28 days.
Effect of bipolar androgen therapy for asymptomatic men with castration-resistant prostate cancer: Results from a pilot clinical study
"...Preclinical data supported a pilot study in which 16 asymptomatic CRPC patients with low to moderate metastatic burden were treated with testosterone cypionate (400 mg intramuscular; day 1 of 28) and etoposide (100 mg oral daily; days 1 to 14 of 28)."

These 400mg TP a month amount to 14mg-15mg TP daily, which is considered quite low and in fact sometimes insufficient to treat even hypogonadism. Typical IM doses of TP for hypogonadism or bodybuilding purposes are in the range 300mg-600mg a week. The first study also did not use any LH/FSH inhibitors. I find it odd to even add such an inhibitor considering T administration in high doses will drive LH/FSH into the ground by itself. The only reason I can think of adding such in inhibitor is to use the highly beneficial effects of the study to justify the existence of the expensive LH/FSH inhibitor, since the benefits would not be attributable only to TP when other drugs are administered. This is criminally manipulative, but it only delays the inevitable - i.e. admission that T is therapeutic for cancer (something that was well-known back in 1950s and 1960s). But don't expect anybody to go to jail for that 50-year long fraud, and if T therapy is ever approved expect it to be combined with one of these expensive DNA synthesis or LH/FSH inhibitors to keep the doubt alive whether it is really T that is beneficial or something else.
See my discussion with @vulture above. Only an imbecile would argue that T injections directly into the prostate would not involve conversion into DHT. The even dumber statement (from study authors in the popular press) is that the benefit was due to estrogen conversion (even though it was not measured). Yeah, maybe if you inject T into adipose tissue. But not when injected into the prostate. Even if there there is NO conversion into anything else, T is still a potent androgen agonist and is claimed to be almost as bad as DHT for prostate health. So, why the benefit??
The travesty is complete. I am making a very concerted effort to not despise my doctor friends who have reached the point of claiming they eat margarine instead of butter because it has "less calories", avoiding sucrose because it triggers more insulin release than bread/starch, going for 6-mile runs only fasted to increase GH maximally, arguing that estrogen is only relevant for females while prescribing AI drugs to bodybuilder patients with gyno, etc. There is a reason doctors have the highest suicide rate of any profession, especially the rich ones who have no loans. That level of cognitive dissonance would kill anybody. I think this also explains to a degree the skyrocketing suicide rate in society in general. All people look up to role models in times of trouble and if those role models (doctors being a universal one around the world) are crumbling faster than even regular people than this can cause nation-wide depression wave.

Anything after the pilot study. Are more being scheduled?