Opinion: "For Science", "TRT+" or "Cruising" is Just Junkie Copium Not Harm Reduction

CoolRick

CoolRick

Well-known member
Trusted Member
Let me preface this by saying that my own belief is what another individual does with their body is their business, but I have every right to voice how I feel about the subject.

I'm getting pretty tired of people dressing up obvious poly-drug abuse as "self-experimentation for science" or "hormone optimization" like it's something healthy for themselves and for society. This post comes in light of a recent thread posted with an individual supposedly using 1750mg of tren per week.

fangedparabolan

Thread 'Redacted'

Edit:

I have decided to remove this post and anyone who wishes to discuss proper medical harm reduction is free to reach out via the dms i would love to discuss and share!

I had hoped for an intellectual discussion ranging from trt to trt+ to rec lifters to compatative athletes on various doses on the results and the methods of harm reduction utalized along with which drugs should be utalized by which populations when, why, and where and how to productively go about using them and how to attain them from medical professionals in order to prevent the degradation of the brain...
  • Love
  • Like

Quite often I'll see someone post a stack with say 250mg/ week of test with 100mg of mast or primo + a laundry list of peptides calling it "TRT+" like it's some mild therapeutic protocol. These are full on cycles people. The same goes for people using this type of thing or more for a "cruise".

Then comes the culture of the social media talking heads with their "experiments for science" and their disciples. These guys aren't scientists running a clinical trial, and they aren't practicing harm reduction by slamming unstudied research chemicals and numerous ancillaries, they're just abusing gear and using mental gymnastics to avoid calling it what it is.

How do I know that's what it is you may ask? Because these "experiments" are in search of a solution for a problem that doesn't exist. These cycles that exist now are beyond absurd and are not required. In what world does anyone need 1750mg of tren? Or an endless list of compounds?

"But Rick, now we learned what works and what doesn't"


None of these guys are healthier with all their protocols and "wonder" ancillaries. Don't believe me? High level "in the know" pro bodybuilders have the average age of mortality of 45 years old. So my question is, aren't these pros on the bleeding edge of science already and taking all the "right" things?

Closing thoughts

IMO bodybuilding is now a freakshow of epic proportions fueled by insecurity and drug addiction, more so than ever. It's becoming all too normal to see the average Joe copy the nonsense I get a glimpse of on social media. A lot of which is spilling over into this forum, a place where I've known maturity and sanity to be the prevailing approach. I implore everyone who has any sense to weigh out what you're doing, get back to basics and study what people historically did before any bozo with a computer and a camera could make clickbait for profit.

If you’re going to run heavy cycles and play fast and loose with your health, that's your choice as an adult, but at least have the self-respect to drop the pseudo-intellectual shield and own what you're doing. Anything else is pathetic. But then again, what else can one expect from a junkie?

Feel free to leave your comments, concerns or rude remarks.

Peace ✌️
 
I think if it aint doctor prescribed, it aint really trt, and the 1750mg of tren, you'd probably get the same benefit from 400-500 imo. If all the labs came back perfect, something seems a little off.
 
BIGNEWF said:
I think if it aint doctor prescribed, it aint really trt, and the 1750mg of tren, you'd probably get the same benefit from 400-500 imo. If all the labs came back perfect, something seems a little off.
Click to expand...
The amount of ancillary drugs required to keep bloods and psychological health “in check” will come with their own consequences.
Let’s say everything goes good during the experiment, the consequences post experiment are still yet to be determined, and there is no timeline when to expect that to happen.
For me personally, risk vs reward isn’t there. That fellas has way more to loose out of this deal than anyone in the world stands to gain from it.
1 person on that much tren will not be viewed as anything of value to the medical community. Might just reinforce the reason they decide to discontinue the drug for pharmaceutical use.
 
CoolRick said:
Let me preface this by saying that my own belief is what another individual does with their body is their business, but I have every right to voice how I feel about the subject.

I'm getting pretty tired of people dressing up obvious poly-drug abuse as "self-experimentation for science" or "hormone optimization" like it's something healthy for themselves and for society. This post comes in light of a recent thread posted with an individual supposedly using 1750mg of tren per week.

fangedparabolan

Thread 'Redacted'

Edit:

I have decided to remove this post and anyone who wishes to discuss proper medical harm reduction is free to reach out via the dms i would love to discuss and share!

I had hoped for an intellectual discussion ranging from trt to trt+ to rec lifters to compatative athletes on various doses on the results and the methods of harm reduction utalized along with which drugs should be utalized by which populations when, why, and where and how to productively go about using them and how to attain them from medical professionals in order to prevent the degradation of the brain...
  • Love
  • Like

Quite often I'll see someone post a stack with say 250mg/ week of test with 100mg of mast or primo + a laundry list of peptides calling it "TRT+" like it's some mild therapeutic protocol. These are full on cycles people. The same goes for people using this type of thing or more for a "cruise".

Then comes the culture of the social media talking heads with their "experiments for science" and their disciples. These guys aren't scientists running a clinical trial, and they aren't practicing harm reduction by slamming unstudied research chemicals and numerous ancillaries, they're just abusing gear and using mental gymnastics to avoid calling it what it is.

How do I know that's what it is you may ask? Because these "experiments" are in search of a solution for a problem that doesn't exist. These cycles that exist now are beyond absurd and are not required. In what world does anyone need 1750mg of tren? Or an endless list of compounds?

"But Rick, now we learned what works and what doesn't"


None of these guys are healthier with all their protocols and "wonder" ancillaries. Don't believe me? High level "in the know" pro bodybuilders have the average age of mortality of 45 years old. So my question is, aren't these pros on the bleeding edge of science already and taking all the "right" things?

Closing thoughts

IMO bodybuilding is now a freakshow of epic proportions fueled by insecurity and drug addiction, more so than ever. It's becoming all too normal to see the average Joe copy the nonsense I get a glimpse of on social media. A lot of which is spilling over into this forum, a place where I've known maturity and sanity to be the prevailing approach. I implore everyone who has any sense to weigh out what you're doing, get back to basics and study what people historically did before any bozo with a computer and a camera could make clickbait for profit.

If you’re going to run heavy cycles and play fast and loose with your health, that's your choice as an adult, but at least have the self-respect to drop the pseudo-intellectual shield and own what you're doing. Anything else is pathetic. But then again, what else can one expect from a junkie?

Feel free to leave your comments, concerns or rude remarks.

Peace ✌️
Click to expand...
Also can’t forget there’s some young 18 years old kid, reading the tren experimental post and thinking 1750mg of tren is a normal thing to do.
 
@CoolRick
You would love a moron by the name of chase irons! Lolol

He made his mark by pushing large amounts of peds, mostly test and gh, but to the extreme. Like 5g of test and 20iu of gh extreme if i remember correctly, could be more or slightly less. The whole time he would preach how he was still healthy and doesnt get why people get unhealthy while blasting blah blah blah. He would give his solutions for staying "healthy" while blasting and cruising with large quantities. Then after he made fortunes with coaching, middleman deals, discord group, a peptide brand, he decided to go actual trt.

Even this jackass had to tone his shit down to real trt before he would meet his demise. He could no longer practice the bullshit he preached but he made a forune off of anyone who fell into his trap.

Bodybuilding has always been a freak show. The thing that changed was that golden era times we were told that only the top level guys actually took steroids and everyone else was able to get thier physiques naturally. Fast forward to today and people now know that the whole fitness industry is built on peds. So knowing that normalized it. Well if they are all on gear and look healthy then thier has to be a magical formula to doing it healthy. So everyone begins to preach they know the formula and rationalize the risks. Spreading the issue further.

Now what you say about "junkies".....
A lot of guys and even girls that are now juice junkies used to be or had an issue with substance abuse in the past and steroids and fitness has become a better way for them to get thier dopamine fix. While still dangerous, they are far better off then they were in thier previous addictions. The risks are still there for over doing the peds but most of the time they learn when too much ia too much and how to combat side effects with other drugs to prolong the use without approaching severe harm as fast.

So if a gear junkie is rationalizing by bullshitting about trt+ or hrt+ and how they know how to do it healthy, just remember that that junkie may have already been dead if they continued in thier previous addiction. Be mindful of that. We all have a history that lead us to where we are today.
 
@DeeKnows not to minimize your other points but thanks for the chase irons info, heard the name but never really knew anything about him, the world is so big now, partly a function of age maybe but so many "big" people I don't know. Experts and authorities that have gained that status based on a touch of entertainment value and follower numbers dragging in the sheep
 
CoolRick said:
Exactly why I made this thread.

I can't sit idle and let echo chambers that seek to normalize that kind of thing exist with no real pushback.
Click to expand...
I would love to see the "bro" Reddit comments on a guy saying he's doing 1750 a week of Tren 😂

None of these guys are competing either... So what the heck is with so much Tren...
 
BIGNEWF said:
I think if it aint doctor prescribed, it aint really trt, and the 1750mg of tren, you'd probably get the same benefit from 400-500 imo. If all the labs came back perfect, something seems a little off.
Click to expand...
Leaving health out of it because of course it will suffer I can assure you 400-500 tren is not where benefits are maxed out. Risk reward etc is a different story of course. Labs also don’t always tell the whole story.
 
Ok, I'm happy to be the unpopular opinion here....
No disrespect to @CoolRick at all, I think we're looking at this from different angles
First of all, definitions.

TRT is replacement level only. That is all. For me that's going to be 125mg of test, and that's it. Anything else is a cycle.

I think we need to differentiate those experimenting on themselves solely for the purpose of seeing how they, as an individual, react to things versus those who experiment to test the efficacy of something for the purposes of the greater knowledge base.

I think you're (perhaps) restating the purpose of this inquiry as framing it as an excuse to do a shitload of drugs and claim it's science. I agree that this is often the case with these things, but here I think the purpose has been clearly stated and the amount of tren used is largely irrelevant. An enormous amount of work has gone into the Actual deep dive to state and understand the action more specifically, the harms of tren. This here, isn't exactly an experiment on tren. It's an experiment to find what works to ameliorate the damage that tren can do. This seems important, and due to the fact that no legit pharmaceutical or government agencies are doing any research at all on harm reduction on these compounds, that falls to people like Molecular, or Kurt Havens, or anyone else who would undertake these experiments - where once again, it is not to learn the upper limits of tren use, it is to mitigate the damage of not only tren, but all anabolics at even lower cycle dosages.

Yes, bodybuilding is often a freak show. And thanks to access to much more information, both correct and incorrect, the graveyards are filling up with tombstones that say "He did his own research". I agree that reckless self experimentation is a bane of this sport, and medical science in general, but I think we are talking about different animals here.

I can't speak to the personal motivations of the person in the tren experiment, but I think the objective motivations of the experiment are clear.

Yes, if this turns out to find some legit ancillaries that help, then some people will use that as an excuse to do more drugs. Not the point, really. The information will be without restraints. Some people will be turned away by what we have learned tren does to the brain, others will implement harm reduction protocols.

I'm happy to have the information that this might provide us. It may come at a cost of the experimenter's health, (we can call him the Marie Curie of Tren if you like) , but it will hopefully illuminate some things that we previously had no knowledge of. That is of great value.

EDIT: I should add that many clinical experiments use high dosages of the compound in question because you are looking for a robust response, both from the drug in question and the protocols used to deal with it. If you're testing toxicity, you need to be running enough to actual be in the range of unequivocal toxicity to see of the management protocols have a measureable effect. That's why the tren (in this case) is as high as it is.

That's a bit rambling, but I hope it makes some sense.

PS. I hope you people aren't so critical when I post my 36 cinnamon buns in 1 hour experiment to test the thermogenic properties of cinnamon on fat loss.

With respect to all,
S.
 
Last edited:
BIGNEWF said:
and the 1750mg of tren, you'd probably get the same benefit from 400-500 imo
Click to expand...
No.

And thats not to say I dont agree with the intent of this thread. I 110% do.

However, lets not attempt to challenge one extreme position with nonsense on the other side though.

Steroid use comes with associated health risks. One should be informed and make choices knowing there will always be consequences.

Generally speaking, more will always lead to increases in risks.

Harm reduction strategies are not equal to prevention and should never be confused or presented as such.

Nevertheless, they should be considered by all whom choose to use aas.

What that looks like and what is effective can vary. In the extreme case that is being referred to, the member is speaking to strategies that no one has access to and the original research attempt seems lost in advocation of acceptance and not what it's seemed original intent was for.

Thats where these threads can become incredibly difficult to navigate.

At least in my opinion.
 
gondar1 said:
@DeeKnows not to minimize your other points but thanks for the chase irons info, heard the name but never really knew anything about him, the world is so big now, partly a function of age maybe but so many "big" people I don't know. Experts and authorities that have gained that status based on a touch of entertainment value and follower numbers dragging in the sheep
Click to expand...
To contrast what Chase has done with other efforts....Chase's "experiments" ie, the 5g of test per week, and the 50 ius of Gh etc.....I'd say those are more like stunts out of curiosity, rather than actual data gathering experiments. I think this kind of thing should be differentiated with legitimate inquiries with harm reduction in mind.

In my view, the problem is, as stated by @CoolRick and others, is that people will assume all kinds of shit not in evidence when replicating these things. Like safety. Safety was not the goal of these stunts, upper limit exposure was and "Can I get away with it" is not much of a science-based approach. It's entertainment with downstream harm potential for the naive audience.
 
it just seems completely useless to me. if you want to test ancillaries etc. to see how to mitigate damage when using a compound, why in the hell would you need to take 1750mg to do so. it’s such an unrealistic dose. “these drugs help mitigate risks at this dose absurd dose” cool. no one in their right mind are replicating this.

at the end of the day, you’re a small sample size of people injecting UGL drugs and taking your own individual responses to these protocols and using it as gospel. that’s not how studies are conducted.
 
DeeKnows said:
@CoolRick
You would love a moron by the name of chase irons! Lolol

He made his mark by pushing large amounts of peds, mostly test and gh, but to the extreme. Like 5g of test and 20iu of gh extreme if i remember correctly, could be more or slightly less. The whole time he would preach how he was still healthy and doesnt get why people get unhealthy while blasting blah blah blah. He would give his solutions for staying "healthy" while blasting and cruising with large quantities. Then after he made fortunes with coaching, middleman deals, discord group, a peptide brand, he decided to go actual trt.

Even this jackass had to tone his shit down to real trt before he would meet his demise. He could no longer practice the bullshit he preached but he made a forune off of anyone who fell into his trap.

Bodybuilding has always been a freak show. The thing that changed was that golden era times we were told that only the top level guys actually took steroids and everyone else was able to get thier physiques naturally. Fast forward to today and people now know that the whole fitness industry is built on peds. So knowing that normalized it. Well if they are all on gear and look healthy then thier has to be a magical formula to doing it healthy. So everyone begins to preach they know the formula and rationalize the risks. Spreading the issue further.

Now what you say about "junkies".....
A lot of guys and even girls that are now juice junkies used to be or had an issue with substance abuse in the past and steroids and fitness has become a better way for them to get thier dopamine fix. While still dangerous, they are far better off then they were in thier previous addictions. The risks are still there for over doing the peds but most of the time they learn when too much ia too much and how to combat side effects with other drugs to prolong the use without approaching severe harm as fast.

So if a gear junkie is rationalizing by bullshitting about trt+ or hrt+ and how they know how to do it healthy, just remember that that junkie may have already been dead if they continued in thier previous addiction. Be mindful of that. We all have a history that lead us to where we are today.
Click to expand...
I've heard of him. I was thinking of people like Vigorous Steve and his merry band of idiots which includes the likes of Chase Irons and Leo and Longevity. Leo is who I believe popularized the whole science justification trend. He's dead now of course.

Now to your point on the lesser of two evils, for the sake of the topic on addiction, I'd have to disagree that it's appropriate. Now for what's best for the individual for the long term and what they do with their life? By all means they should do what is best for them that's none of my business. I'm no saint, I've used anabolics and I think they can be part of an overall healthy lifestyle that balances quality of life and longevity.
 
Slartibartfast said:
Ok, I'm happy to be the unpopular opinion here....
No disrespect to @CoolRick at all, I think we're looking at this from different angles
First of all, definitions.

TRT is replacement level only. That is all. For me that's going to be 125mg of test, and that's it. Anything else is a cycle.

I think we need to differentiate those experimenting on themselves solely for the purpose of seeing how they, as an individual, react to things versus those who experiment to test the efficacy of something for the purposes of the greater knowledge base.

I think you're (perhaps) restating the purpose of this inquiry as framing it as an excuse to do a shitload of drugs and claim it's science. I agree that this is often the case with these things, but here I think the purpose has been clearly stated and the amount of tren used is largely irrelevant. An enormous amount of work has gone into the Actual deep dive to state and understand the action more specifically, the harms of tren. This here, isn't exactly an experiment on tren. It's an experiment to find what works to ameliorate the damage that tren can do. This seems important, and due to the fact that no legit pharmaceutical or government agencies are doing any research at all on harm reduction on these compounds, that falls to people like Molecular, or Kurt Havens, or anyone else who would undertake these experiments - where once again, it is not to learn the upper limits of tren use, it is to mitigate the damage of not only tren, but all anabolics at even lower cycle dosages.

Yes, bodybuilding is often a freak show. And thanks to access to much more information, both correct and incorrect, the graveyards are filling up with tombstones that say "He did his own research". I agree that reckless self experimentation is a bane of this sport, and medical science in general, but I think we are talking about different animals here.

I can't speak to the personal motivations of the person in the tren experiment, but I think the objective motivations of the experiment are clear.

Yes, if this turns out to find some legit ancillaries that help, then some people will use that as an excuse to do more drugs. Not the point, really. The information will be without restraints. Some people will be turned away by what we have learned tren does to the brain, others will implement harm reduction protocols.

I'm happy to have the information that this might provide us. It may come at a cost of the experimenter's health, (we can call him the Marie Curie of Tren if you like) , but it will hopefully illuminate some things that we previously had no knowledge of. That is of great value.

EDIT: I should add that many clinical experiments use high dosages of the compound in question because you are looking for a robust response, both from the drug in question and the protocols used to deal with it. If you're testing toxicity, you need to be running enough to actual be in the range of unequivocal toxicity to see of the management protocols have a measureable effect. That's why the tren (in this case) is as high as it is.

That's a bit rambling, but I hope it makes some sense.

PS. I hope you people aren't so critical when I post my 36 cinnamon buns in 1 hour experiment to test the thermogenic properties of cinnamon on fat loss.

With respect to all,
S.
Click to expand...
I appreciate you taking the time to write a detailed response. I'm happy to have someone put a different perspective, it allows myself and others to unpack what's happening here in greater depth.

I skimmed through that video a while back. All it does is validate what we already know about tren. Namely it has a lot of negative side effects. That's been known for a long time so nothing really new there.

As far as restating the approach, I'm not. I'm looking at it from the way an engineer stress tests a system. They don't go for some abitrary number to start stress testing, they go incrementally until something breaks.
The problem with that is harm from AAS is cumulative over time. A one time study on a few people isn't enough to establish long term effects and the findings will be way too unreliable to be useful IMO. Not to mention the steroids themselves aren't what kill people so it's not like they're trying to find the LD50 or something.

Now maybe that's what these individuals are doing and I haven't seen it. If that's the case forgive me for not giving it the time of day to investigate as I think the experiment however legitimate it is is beyond stupid.

Why do I think it's stupid? Imagine the study was with alcohol or crack or cocaine instead. What are we trying to figure out here? How best to abuse these things so someone can keep abusing them for a long time? Who is this even for? In these questions lies a much more insidious answer that is hidden behind the science facade. Hint: It's for the addict/ abuser to keep abusing.

*EDIT* I should add that I wholeheartedly reject that any of these people are doing this for some sort of altruistic purpose.

Now maybe that's the point to push the limits for a one time freakshow. Fine. But don't dress this up like it's for health. Race engines usually have to be rebuilt after every race. You can't rebuild a human like that.

On the flip side if we want real harm reduction why not have studies to show people how little you can use and get amazing results? Why don't we work on reshaping what we define as amazing from a more holistic view?
 
Last edited:
CoolRick said:
Why do I think it's stupid? Imagine the study was with alcohol or crack or cocaine instead. What are we trying to figure out here? How best to abuse these things so someone can keep abusing them for a long time? Who is this even for? In these questions lies a much more insidious answer that is hidden behind the science facade. Hint: It's for the addict/ abuser to keep abusing.

Now maybe that's the point to push the limits for a one time freakshow. Fine. But don't dress this up like it's for health.
Click to expand...
Ok. I think I see our difference here. I think we've both made points that are reasonable for people to consider.

I've got a bias, (which I'll explain) but here's just a final thought or two...Multiple things can be true about what's going on here at once. It can and likely will be contributing to abusive drug taking. I agree with you there. It will also, if conducted intelligently with oversight, likely improve our knowledge on the action or effectiveness of the proposed ancillaries. Is this worth it? I can only say that if they're willing and properly informed, the data will be useful. "Worth it" seems more like a personal decision.

I agree that this might just be a better crackpipe, one that comes loaded with ethical issues. My bias is that as a child I had an intense curiosity about how things worked. My stepfather used to put a fucking lock on the toolbox to keep me out of it. I had a habit of taking apart the appliances, the speakers, other tools...anything I didn't understand was coming apart. I'm still like this and accordingly have a wild range of hobbies.

I see this experiment as data collection that is worth it. I'm not blind to the ethical concerns you raise, in fact I agree with you. I think we differ on the utility of it all.

Lol. I feel like we're in the ethical territory of looking over Dr. Mengele's records, or the experimental data from Japanese Unit 731. "Sure, this all came at the expense of unimaginable cruelty and suffering, but shouldn't we keep the data?" :(

It's a good discussion. (y)
 
Slartibartfast said:
Ok. I think I see our difference here. I think we've both made points that are reasonable for people to consider.

I've got a bias, (which I'll explain) but here's just a final thought or two...Multiple things can be true about what's going on here at once. It can and likely will be contributing to abusive drug taking. I agree with you there. It will also, if conducted intelligently with oversight, likely improve our knowledge on the action or effectiveness of the proposed ancillaries. Is this worth it? I can only say that if they're willing and properly informed, the data will be useful. "Worth it" seems more like a personal decision.

I agree that this might just be a better crackpipe, one that comes loaded with ethical issues. My bias is that as a child I had an intense curiosity about how things worked. My stepfather used to put a fucking lock on the toolbox to keep me out of it. I had a habit of taking apart the appliances, the speakers, other tools...anything I didn't understand was coming apart. I'm still like this and accordingly have a wild range of hobbies.

I see this experiment as data collection that is worth it. I'm not blind to the ethical concerns you raise, in fact I agree with you. I think we differ on the utility of it all.

Lol. I feel like we're in the ethical territory of looking over Dr. Mengele's records, or the experimental data from Japanese Unit 731. "Sure, this all came at the expense of unimaginable cruelty and suffering, but shouldn't we keep the data?" :(

It's a good discussion. (y)
Click to expand...
Yes that's exactly what I was going for. Going beyond my obvious issues with the absurdity of the experiment itself and tbh the direction of bodybuilding and PED use in general, my main issue is the posturing around such topics, ideas, philosophy etc. Stated cleanly, I'm not against experimentation, I'm against the posturing that ultimately gets contorted by junkies to justify doing something.

I see this experiment as useless in that the data will be too muddy to derive anything from it and thus result in little to no actionable let alone reliable information. Put simply, there are too many variables. In that particular tren experiment posted on here the scientist(?) is listing a laundry list of supplement, diet variables and other medications. How anyone can take this particular experiment seriously is beyond me. Not to mention it's highly unrealistic and doesn't represent a practical real world use case for the drug. At best, that experiment whether the findings are good or bad are only going to be true for that individual with all those variables at that one time. They are not even replicatable on that one individual due to but not limited to age, prior usage, cumulative damage etc.

I'm known as the mad scientist of the family and I love to experiment but there are things that I deem unethical to share publicly. These individuals don't seem to have a good grasp on the downstream effects of their influence or maybe they do and they have a savior complex idk. But hey, it's all about that click bait.

I agree, great discussion.(y)
 
Last edited:
Slartibartfast said:
Ok. I think I see our difference here. I think we've both made points that are reasonable for people to consider.

I've got a bias, (which I'll explain) but here's just a final thought or two...Multiple things can be true about what's going on here at once. It can and likely will be contributing to abusive drug taking. I agree with you there. It will also, if conducted intelligently with oversight, likely improve our knowledge on the action or effectiveness of the proposed ancillaries. Is this worth it? I can only say that if they're willing and properly informed, the data will be useful. "Worth it" seems more like a personal decision.

I agree that this might just be a better crackpipe, one that comes loaded with ethical issues. My bias is that as a child I had an intense curiosity about how things worked. My stepfather used to put a fucking lock on the toolbox to keep me out of it. I had a habit of taking apart the appliances, the speakers, other tools...anything I didn't understand was coming apart. I'm still like this and accordingly have a wild range of hobbies.

I see this experiment as data collection that is worth it. I'm not blind to the ethical concerns you raise, in fact I agree with you. I think we differ on the utility of it all.

Lol. I feel like we're in the ethical territory of looking over Dr. Mengele's records, or the experimental data from Japanese Unit 731. "Sure, this all came at the expense of unimaginable cruelty and suffering, but shouldn't we keep the data?" :(

It's a good discussion. (y)
Click to expand...
My dad used to cut the plug ends off the cords when I took things apart, but it didn’t stop me, I just cut the end off an extention cord he didn’t use and things were powered again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top