Fann lite intressant läsning:
Citat:
While nolva and clomid are quite popular, they have several drawbacks. Firstly, both nolva and clomid show an affinity for increasing shbg. It should be noted that clomid raises levels of shbg more so than nolva. If you are not familiar with the effects of elevated shbg, let me help. When nolva and clomid increase lh and fsh, they stimulate more production of test in the testes. When shbg increases the test produced in the body tends to be bound test. As we know, this is detrimental to our goals. We want free test, which only occurs when levels of test are elevated, but shbg remains low.
Another drawback is that nolva and clomid are extremely hepatoxic. That makes them less than optimal for use as pct to a methyl compound. Combining a 3-5 week cycle of a methylated aas/ph/ps with a pct of 3-5 weeks of clomid and/or nolva would be very taxing on the liver.
Clomid also has another problem. It should only be used for a week at most. While it is superior at stimulating lh production, it also decreases sensitivity in the pituitary to Gnrh. This means that as use of clomid continues, the pituitary will produce less lh despite the increase in Gnrh.
Nolva's last drawback is due to its very nature. Since it only blocks estrogen receptors, it allows circulating estrogen to continue to exist. If used for pct of an aromatizing drug, levels of circulating estrogen would be greatly increased when nolva usage was discontinued. Again, this is a less than desirable characteristic, as one of our main goals was to limit estrogen induces sides.
Vet inte om det gäller alla SERMS, men AI verkar ju vara betydligt bättre för långvarigt bruk. Frågan är om det som påstås i inlägget stämmer eller inte.
Jag läste på en bröstcancer sida att AI var skadligare för hjärtat än SERM (nolva), men jag tolkar det som en konsekvens av att AI sänker östrogenet mer (antar att man vid behandling av bröstcancer också har som avsikt att krascha östrogenet ordentligt) och att östrogen har skyddande kardiovaskulära egenskaper?
Citat:
A study has found that while the aromatase inhibitors don’t increase the risk of fatal heart attacks or strokes, the medicines do increase the risk of less serious heart problems, such as an abnormal heart beat or pericarditis (swelling of the membrane surrounding the heart), compared to tamoxifen.
....
Aromatase inhibitors tend to cause fewer serious side effects than tamoxifen, such as blood clots, stroke, and endometrial cancer. But as this study suggests, aromatase inhibitors can cause more heart problems, as well as more bone loss (osteoporosis) and more broken bones, than tamoxifen, at least for the first few years of treatment.
Om man använder en mer moderat AI dos så man inte kraschar östrogenet, utan håller det på en frisk nivå, så kan man bortse från biverkningar som är direkt associerade till för lågt östrogen.
Hur påverkar AI LH och FSH? Läste att androstatriene som är besläktat med exemestane (aromasin) hämmar LH och fungerar som AR-antagonist (dvs hindrar testosteron från att bindas till androgen receptorer).
