www.culturesforhealth.com/calcium-chloride.html. is that the right stuff to buy?

I'd really see what happens to poor Something first Knightbird Patience is a virtue

knightbird111 (imported) wrote: Sat Nov 24, 2012 8:14 pm www.culturesforhealth.com/calcium-chloride.html. is that the right stuff to buy?

No. Product should be sterile and injectible and 10% and come from a medical supply house, eg. pharmacy.

Not sure where as I have not researched possible sources.

There are contraindications, meaning if you are taking other medications, have certain medical conditions, allergies, etc. etc. you should not use the product.

It is a tad more complex than Everclear.

nullorchis (imported) wrote: Sat Nov 24, 2012 10:15 pm There are contraindications, meaning if you are taking other medications, have certain medical conditions, allergies, etc. etc. you should not use the product.

It is a tad more complex than Everclear.

Well compared to pretty much any drug I've ever read the label on, the calcium chloride warning information is pretty tame:

CONTRAINDICATIONS

In cardiac resuscitation, the use of calcium chloride is contraindicated in the presence of ventricular

fibrillation.

If neonates are required, or expected to require, treatment with calcium-containing IV solutions,

including continuous calcium-containing infusions such as parenteral nutrition, ceftriaxone

sodium injection is contraindicated because of the risk of precipitation of ceftriaxone-calcium.

A small number of cases of fatal outcomes in which a crystalline material was observed in the lungs and

kidneys at autopsy have been reported in neonates receiving calcium-containing fluids and ceftriaxone.

In some of these cases, the same intravenous infusion line was used for both calcium-containing fluids

and ceftriaxone and in some a precipitate was observed in the intravenous infusion line. At least one

fatality has been reported in a neonate in whom calcium-containing fluids and ceftriaxone were

administered at different time points via different intravenous lines; no crystalline material was observed

at autopsy in this neonate. There have been no similar reports in patients other than neonates.

WARNINGS

This solution is suitable only for intravenous use. Calcium chloride solution injection into muscle or into

subcutaneous or perivascular tissue may cause severe necrosis and sloughing. Intravenous injections of

this drug must be made with great care to avoid leakage into the perivascular tissue.

This product contains aluminum that may be toxic. Aluminum may reach toxic levels with prolonged

parenteral administration if kidney function is impaired. Premature neonates are particularly at risk

because their kidneys are immature, and they require large amounts of calcium and phosphate solutions,

which contain aluminum.

Research indicates that patients with impaired kidney function, including premature neonates, who

receive parenteral levels of aluminum at greater than 4 to 5 mcg/kg/day accumulate aluminum at levels

associated with central nervous system and bone toxicity. Tissue loading may occur at even lower rates

of administration.

CALCIUM CHLORIDE

INJECTION, USP 10%

Rx Only

CALCIUM CHLORIDE

INJECTION, USP 10%

Rx Only

These warnings don't even really apply to us -- the first one is related to using it in people in the middle of a heart attack, the second warning is for newborn infants with a continuous drip to not use it with ceftriaxone sodium. The third is for long term use for people who have prexisting kidney problems: The aluminum issue with kidneys is when used chronically (not what we're doing) and the aluminum builds up and you already have kidney impariment. And the necrosis of tissue is actually what we want to have happen.

Even aspirin has more warnings than this.

nullorchis (imported) wrote: Sat Nov 24, 2012 7:27 am Also the studies document sperm, not testosterone.

Behavior is noted as being changed, so reduction of testosterone may be the likely cause.

What are you talking about? Every paper I linked to has charts showing the reduction in testosterone and mention it several times.

From the study on cats:

At the 60th day post-injection, cat testes were collected and showed complete testicular necrosis and

replacement by fibrous tissue; very low sperm counts; and reduction of serum testosterone by at least 70% in 20%

dose.

From the study on dogs:

Relative organ weight, epididymal sperm count, plasma and intratesticular

SplitDik (imported) wrote: Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:07 am concentrations of testosterone,

testicular activities of D5,3h-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase (D5,3h-HSD), 17h-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase (17h-HSD), glutathione peroxidase (GPx), glutathione S-transferase (GST) and superoxide dismutase (SOD) and testicular contents of glutathione (GSH) and glutathione disulphide (GSSG) and the ratio of GSH/GSSG, all were declined in each of the calcium chloride treated groups in comparison to the control group

From the study on goats:

Plasma

SplitDik (imported) wrote: Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:07 am concentrations of testosterone

were decreased in a graded manner (P < 0.01) at

doses from 10 to 40 mg calcium chloride treatments in comparison to treated controls.

There are really good charts in these showing drastic between 70% and 90% reduction in testosterone at the highest dose.

SplitDik (imported) wrote: Sun Nov 25, 2012 2:31 am What are you talking about? Every paper I linked to has charts showing the reduction in testosterone and mention it several times.

All the reports I've read state reduced testosterone levels, and total elimination of sperm. Attack dog and working dog trainers want that aspect. Beef and goat meat producers want a little testosterone for growth.

I rather like the idea of having male characteristics and no testicles, which is what these injections may offer me. Or to put it differently, greatly reduced organs with some benefit of a low dose of testosterone. Maybe after they shrink, my physician may 'suggest' removal. If the reduced organs don't affect me in any way, I may just be happier with them 'then'.

artisticlicense (imported) wrote: Sun Nov 25, 2012 2:46 am All the reports I've read state reduced testosterone levels, and total elimination of sperm. Attack dog and working dog trainers want that aspect. Beef and goat meat producers want a little testosterone for growth.

I rather like the idea of having male characteristics and no testicles, which is what these injections may offer me. Or to put it differently, greatly reduced organs with some benefit of a low dose of testosterone. Maybe after they shrink, my physician may 'suggest' removal. If the reduced organs don't affect me in any way, I may just be happier with them 'then'.

The studies do make it look like you can "dial it in" how much castration you want -- the charts show that the effect on testosterone and testicle size are very dose-dependent.

The only caution in this idea of partial castration though is that most of the studies were done after a set period (like 60 days), but one study checked testosterone at 45 days then 60 days and it is important to note that all dose levels showed further decrease in testosterone between those times. I think it is possible that all doses would eventually achieve full castration and full elimination of the testicle, with smaller doses just doing it more slowly. This is because the action of this method is that the salt stays in the testicle and continues to "pickle" it preventing regrowth. So it may just keep on working on whatever remains.

In other words, over more time the evidence points to total castration not partial.

In addition to the main objective of reducing testosterone there are Considerations of possible side effects :

infection,

epididymitis

granuloma

vas deferens abscess,

vesicular gland abscess,

vasovenous fistula,

testicular necrosis leading to gangrene,

arteriovenous fistula,

pulmonary embolism,

endocarditis,

scrotal skin necrosis

Fournier's disease

hydrocel

.............

one must consider the possibility that a study may not report on exclude patients (cats, dogs, goats) that developed conditions that made further study of sperm and testosterone not possible. It has been known for studies to trend data so that the data presented leads to the results that were sought in the first place.

Successful results leads to more studies, more testing, which keeps people funded and employed.

Funding a study of human men who seek such chemical castration could lead to definitive conclusions.

There are places in the world more likely to permit such studies. Not likely to happen in the US, except perhaps underground, like with Dr. A or something.

self injection with results posted on a place like EA would be a start, but certainly not clinical or verifiable or anything you could depend on.

There are people out there who will claim they got great results with no consequences just so they can convince others to do something that may not be safe.

Sadists via the printed word.

SplitDik (imported) wrote: Sun Nov 25, 2012 2:55 am The studies do make it look like you can "dial it in" how much castration you want -- the charts show that the effect on testosterone and testicle size are very dose-dependent.

The only caution in this idea of partial castration though is that most of the studies were done after a set period (like 60 days), but one study checked testosterone at 45 days then 60 days and it is important to note that all dose levels showed further decrease in testosterone between those times. I think it is possible that all doses would eventually achieve full castration and full elimination of the testicle, with smaller doses just doing it more slowly. This is because the action of this method is that the salt stays in the testicle and continues to "pickle" it preventing regrowth. So it may just keep on working on whatever remains.

In other words, over more time the evidence points to total castration not partial.

So would 0.5cc of 33% Calcium chloride (mixed with 0.5cc of 180 proof ethanol), be a good place to start? Because 33% is a much higher dosage than the 20% that was increasingly effective over a 60 day period, so would you say that even 0.5cc might get results? i can't inject too much, because it squirts out nowadays.

They don't really hurt anymore and are (edit: almost) back to their normal size... what's worrying though is they're not really numb anymore. I'm worried it might've done nothing, or is that normal? :S