Clenbuterol and the cost of cutting: A brief report comparing self-reported side effects of clenbuterol consumption to anabolic-androgenic steroid compounds
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Clenbuterol, while not classified as an anabolic-androgenic steroid (AAS), is commonly used alongside AAS for aesthetic purposes due to its thermogenic effects. Comparisons of its side effect profile relative to AAS remain limited. This study aimed to examine the side effects between participants classified as consuming either AAS and clenbuterol (clenbuterol group) or AAS without clenbuterol (AAS group). Methods The sample ( N = 1146) was drawn from the 2024 Global Drug Survey, and comprised solely males reporting either AAS only ( n = 949), or AAS and clenbuterol ( n = 197), in the previous 12 months. Binary logistic regression analyses assessed associations between use of compound type (clenbuterol group vs. AAS group) and four self-reported side effects: negative impact on heart, restlessness/irritability, irrational excitability, and rapid mood fluctuation. Age was included as a covariate in all models. Results The clenbuterol group had significantly higher odds of reporting negative impacts on their heart (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.76, p < .001), rapid mood fluctuations (aOR = 1.73, p = .010), and irrational excitability (aOR = 1.61, p = .032) compared to the AAS group. Conversely, clenbuterol consumption was not a significant predictor of restlessness/irritability (aOR = 1.36, p = .122). Conclusions Men consuming clenbuterol alongside AAS report higher rates of side effects than those consuming AAS alone. These findings underscore the need for targeted health promotion messaging regarding clenbuterol consumption for physique enhancement.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it