Melanotan BEWARE MT2

dazc


i do understand your point mate, but for lots of people they simply see it as something that gives you a nice dark tan.  As per the original post, many believe that its close to being licencesed.  it will never get a licence imo.  This rumour had to start somewhere, my bet is makers/sellers.

most of the bodybuilding drugs have or used to have clinical uses, are well studied and understood, so i dont think you can put melanotan in the same category as these, and again to attempt do so when talking about side effects is creating this image of it being a clinical product. 

it is also, in terms of wider availability and use, a very new peptide.  so there isnt even any longterm user evidence or user experience, let alone study.  So there is absoloutely no way, you can say or even imply that it is safe or likely to be safe longterm.  A lack of evidence of problems is no proof that there is non.

we will have to agree to disagree on this.  Its obvious to me that its actions are far far greater than just giving a tan. noone, especially yourself can imply that its likely to be safe long term.

Just to be clear, im not saying it definately isnt safe either, just that the risk is unknown and unquantifiable.  People using need to be aware of that,  but frequently its said or implied that it is, or is likely to be safe.

Nowhere have I implied that usage of the melanotan peptides is generally safe particularly in their unlicensed and unregulated forms and particularly given the lack of fully regulated sources for them.  In fact I am sooner one to be upfront about health risks in taking these peptides. If this wasn't the case Governmental health agency warnings about the peptides would not figure so prominently in the forums I operate about them.
My bias encompasses the desire that these peptides get a fair shake. I am sure that it happens frequently enough even here in these forums that forum users develop health issues relative to their body building regimens and then start to question some aspect of their regimen. In their questioning I am also sure that in a number of cases given health issues are falsely attributed to some aspect of a given regimen. It is the nature of the beast, failure is human. The problem in this is two fold. 1. The person may discount some serious health issue completely unrelated to their regimen and just chalk it up to bad luck stemming from the regimen and thereby leave themselves open to what could be a relatively light issue easily taken care of if caught in time to mushrooming into some life-threatening issue that is difficult to treat at a late stage. and 2. That aspect of their regimen begins to develop a false reputation or a drug that forms part of that regimen is falsely implicated. 

-Scott

but regularly members also talk about health problems they have had directly attributed to using other drugs.  And these are KNOWN  to be directly because of their use.  IE abcess, gynocomastia, raised blood pressure, hairloss.  Directly and without question attributable to the use of steroids.  Also longer term effects that may or may not be as other factors become an issue such as lifestyle.  These effects are widely talked about and openly acknowledged.

so users make a fair decision basen on actual knowledge..

yet anytime someone reports something that could be attributed to melanotan, someone like your self will post up stating in a factual manner that there is no evidence.  your post was very dismissive to even the idea, read the opening lines again.  i notice that you edited your post since you originally made it. 

anyway i think the point has been sufficiently debated, i dont wish to be seen as argumentative, thats not the case at all, i just happen to see it from the other end of the spectrum to you.  But then im also bias free, even though i have indeed used it, and may even do so again again precomp, in very limited amounts and doses.

daz

dazc


but regularly members also talk about health problems they have had directly attributed to using other drugs.  And these are KNOWN  to be directly because of their use.  IE abcess, gynocomastia, raised blood pressure, hairloss.  Directly and without question attributable to the use of steroids.  Also longer term effects that may or may not be as other factors become an issue such as lifestyle.  These effects are widely talked about and openly acknowledged.

so users make a fair decision basen on actual knowledge..

yet anytime someone reports something that could be attributed to melanotan, someone like your self will post up stating in a factual manner that there is no evidence.  your post was very dismissive to even the idea, read the opening lines again.  i notice that you edited your post since you originally made it. 

anyway i think the point has been sufficiently debated, i dont wish to be seen as argumentative, thats not the case at all, i just happen to see it from the other end of the spectrum to you.  But then im also bias free, even though i have indeed used it, and may even do so again again precomp, in very limited amounts and doses.

daz

Fair enough. I will say however that even though I may address others with my bias, everything that folks report (both the bad and the good) in the forums I operate is left in place to serve as reference points for future discussion. I am nearly 100% sure that Howmuch self-diagnosed his affliction as stemming from melanotan II usage as a result of finding the previous "Robbie" thread that I linked to in my initial post in this thread. If a pattern develops over the years then it is likely to become more and more evident this way.

I'll finish with this explanation for you:
Perhaps you are not aware of it but naturally occurring Melanocyte Stimulating Hormones and their synthetic analogs have been extensively studied going back decades. Melanotan-1 was first described in 1980 and melanotan II shortly afterwards. Human trials of melanotan-1 have been ongoing since 1991 and continue to this day and it will likely be approved (under its generic name 'afamelanotide') for an initial indication (EPP) either this year or next year. Melanotan II has had 3 published human trials itself and an additional one reported in New Zealand media. The scientists who performed these trials didn't just blindly go bounding forward with these drugs. They based the trials upon preclinical studies both in vitro and in vivo in multiple animals before ever exposing humans to them (as required by FDA law). So while yes the question of long term effects remains to be answered there is still a history of scientific study supporting their safety up until this point particularly for melanotan-1. That said the issue of provenance combined with the possibility of adulteration or counterfeiting remains very much at issue (which is equally the case with any drug anyone is using that hasn't been acquired through fully legal, prescription channels).

-Scott

hi mate, would actually be interested in reading those studys or extracts of them to further my own knowledge, do you have links if they are publically viewable?

dazc


hi mate, would actually be interested in reading those studys or extracts of them to further my own knowledge, do you have links if they are publically viewable?

Most of the published studies on the melanotan peptides are cited in the wikipedia articles about them. As for the melanocyte stimulating hormone studies just go to Pubmed and search on "melanocyte stimulating hormone" or "MSH" also search on Mac E. Hadley (ME Hadley) as well as Aaron B. Lerner (AB Lerner) for studies going back to the 60s.

-Scott

I think we have to remember that we often play the "AAS and HGH are well studied" card far too often.

The truth is, there are VERY LITTLE studies that look at AAS use at the doses bodybuilders use (ie. supraphysiological doses).  Some of them massive doses that seem common.  Yet we all just stick to the basic side-effects and do the same that people are doing with MTII - dismiss other side effects as not possible as no evidence etc.

But show me the studies on humans where >1g test is being injected per week and the person never comes off and cruises etc?  Show me the studies combining the use of tren, deca, and test along with orals?  Show me the studies where HGH is used with combination of AAS?  You'll find the odd one of bodybuilders/athletes where they have been allowed to look at things like heart muscle issues etc but these are inconsistent, and in n numbers of like 1, which no real conclusions can be made from, just like MTII use similarly.

Ironically though, MTI and MTII use by bodybuilders should not exceed the doses used in clinical trials, so data from these studies CAN be directly compared with bber use.  AAS and HGH use though is actually more hazy in many respects.

I've seen one study on combined AAS and HGH use looking at left ventricular hypertrophy and it concluded that weight training increased slightly, AAS + weight training also increased, but add in HGH and left ventricular hypertrophy went up quite significantly.  Yet most on these and other forums consider HGH to be a relatively "safe" drug.

Now I'm not encouraging the use of drugs/peptides not yet approved for human use and cleared completely clinical trials, but I'm trying to make the point that its not as simple as "we have studies of these drugs."  Like I said - there is probably more evidence and studies carried out with melanotan use a a dosage BBers would use than there is the cocktail of drugs and supraphysiological amounts (combined with other POM meds such as AIs, SERMs, etc) that BBers regularly take and deem as safe as they are all "approved drugs" (yet never really tested for a length of time at high doses due to ethical reasons).

mcl

mad_cereal_lover
 
dismiss other side effects as not possible as no evidence etc.

not something i do myself mate, im quite vocal about the risks and side effects of AAS use.
 
 

dazc

mad_cereal_lover
 
dismiss other side effects as not possible as no evidence etc.

not something i do myself mate, im quite vocal about the risks and side effects of AAS use.
 
 

That wasn't aimed at you mate, just a general thing that happens all over bbing forums, unfortunately!

mcl

yeah it definately does!  people like to kid themselfs that steroids or gh have no risks or heath effects, when its very obvious that they do!

i think its the ostrich approach, where people refuse to believe that the mega doses they run have any real risk, it would be nice if that was the case!