Forum combing/mining - I want advice please

I understand that the mods like @axolotl and @awor as well as many on the the forum repeatedly warn people against taking substances of any kind, as there is a risk of adverse effects, and who is struck by the effects is inherently unpredictable at this stage. There are many cases of supplements and drugs having no effect several people for it only to hit one person heavily. The notion of permanent worsening also, entirely understandably, makes the experienced members of this forum extremely hesitant to recommend suffers try anything at all, new or already attempted by other members.

The fact of the matter is that many people will be trying to take different things to improve their state.
Warning people against taking anything and expecting them to follow this advice is an unrealistic hope for even the most optimistic of members issuing advice.

I feel that it may be of service to list which substances have the highest benefit to risk ratios based on experiences of forum members.

I understand that nobody wants to endorse a substance that may well harm somebody, but I feel that providing people a list of relatively low-risk things to try may be of real benefit, especially to new members.

In the next week I plan to employ somebody to comprehensively analyse archived posts and compile a list of substances, dosage (if provided), and outcomes.

This is something which as not yet been done. The survey which went up last year only captures a small fraction of the historical data available on this forum.

The process to comb through previous forum posts is arduous, and this will come at significant personal expense to me, but it’s something which I think should have been done ages ago, and it’s high-time it’s finally documented in a way whereby a newcomer, or even a forum veteran can see the lists of substances.

Before I post the job request, I want feedback as to what should be gleaned from the prior posts. I already mentioned substance, dosage, number of doses, effect (positive, negative or unchanged).

Hopefully this will prevent the rote phrase, 'people have gotten bad reactions to substance X, so don’t risk taking it’.
Or, “once somebody took substance Y and killed themselves. Don’t even think about it.”

Instead, the conversation will be something alone the lines of, ‘10 people have tried this substance. 2 of them reported improvements, 5 were unchanged and 1 got significantly worse’.

I want feedback please.


That is a great idea!

1 Like

Not quite. Often people report that they feel better when taking substances which have anti androgenic properties. We are aware of those substances causing worsening in patients, even after feeling better.

So while it may seem that there are many warnings, you can ultimately do this simple test: is it antiandrogenic? If yes, then it may harm you.

The problem (and I do not have the understanding that Awor and Axo have) is that people treat different substances WITH THE SAME PROPERTIES as distinct things. Really, it doesn’t matter if it’s a powder, an oil, a mushroom, whatever else, the anti androgenic properties are likely one of the most, if not the most important factors to us. As such you may as well consider a number of substances recommended as being helpful by how anti androgenic it is. For that reason, I think an analysis of forum posts is unlikely to yield the data you want, that’s without accounting for the posts being written so inaccurately.

When I signed up here, I remember being confused about why people would talk about “some” or “a lot” when talking about things as a treatment. Not grams or milligrams. “A good amount”. I asked one guy half a dozen times to say how much baking soda he was taking every day, he kept dodging or refusing to answer. You will find big holes in any data you extract.

Then you will find that some people are more sensitive than others. Knowing if you are one of the sensitive people or not is likely impossible at this point until we know more about what’s happening.

You’ll also be logging data of people who have lied or deliberately misled. Sometimes it’s because they want to sell something, sometimes that they are just malevolent and cruel, some I don’t know their motivations for claiming to have a cure when they categorically do not.

I recognise why you’re doing this and I used to think that this sort of cataloguing could be helpful, but I think the data isn’t good enough and/or is poisoned by people who have acted in bad faith. I think you’re a decent guy @orthogs sorry I can’t be more enthusiastic about your project. I hope it doesn’t cost you too much.

Ps, you can apply the same criticism of substances which raise, rather than lower levels too.


I think that most of us got hit by the same reason, but the implications on the hormones, in my opinion, are personal and varies.

This is why some substance benefit with one and deteriorate the other. Everytime i read recovery post/someone who claims some substance to benefit with him, im searching for symptoms and bloodworks to check the similarity.

So many time people with “pfs” taking some unknown substnace and feel better, and than you checking the profile and see they only had low libido. Research based people opinion is problamtic and probably will not work for you.

But just for you know, as much as i know, tribulus, along with many adverse effects have been related to a lot of recoveries.

Thanks @Greek. You raise good points.

1 Like