Steroids in Sports
 

I really can't figure out why steroids should be such a big deal and be kept out of professional sports and the Olympics. It is estimated that only 1-10% of Olympic steroid using athletes are actually caught. Yet, the Olympic committee still has uber-draconic methods of trying to catch athletes.

Here's the thing, and pay close attention, because as crazy as this sounds, most people don't know this. Are you ready? STEROIDS DON'T MAKE ANYONE STRONGER OR FASTER. They don't, they improve one's ability to recover, they raise one's maximum muscle carrying capacity (not by a lot either), and they allow your body to assymilate more of the food you eat.

Here's the thing, athletes use all sorts of equipment, training techniques, supplements, food, etc., to improve and gain an advantage over their competitors. Greeks used to eat lion's hearts in hopes of gaining the lion's strength and courage. How is that any different from an athelte taking 1-test, Deca, or D-bol? In the last summer Olympics, an American swimmer competed using a top secret super slippery swimsuit. Didn't that give her an "unfair advantage"?

You could argue health issues, but most people don't know anything about steroids, let alone what the possible side effects can be. So one can't really argue against something that they know literally nothing about. If there is a qualified MD working with an athlete and coach, why shouldn't an athelete be allowed to use anything at their disposal to help increase their potential? When we go to see an athelete, we want to see the fastest, strongest, etc. So why should we put such a stigma on them for bringing us exactly what we're asking for?

One good reason is that most steroids are also quite simply illegal, unless prescribed by a doctor.

Another is that steroids, when used stupidly, can have very large negative side effects, and by allowing steroids sports organizations might actually become legally responsible for athletes taking them. ("it's impossible to compete without them, so clearly the org forced me to take them by allowing them, if I wanted to be able to do my job")

Also, steroids can make a HUGE difference. You, as a bodybuilder, should know that... with steroids you can break barriers you'd otherwise never break.

steroids are the difference between a routine fly ball and 70+ homeruns

The answer is simple, because it is an unfair advantage. 9 times out of 10, a steroid user will out-perform a non-user. There is no disputing this.

Please note the following:

How is the steroid issue any different from greecian athletes eating lion's hearts in the hopes of gaining the lion's strength and courage?

The only true unfair advantage is genetics. Some people are just built to be stronger and faster. Steroids allow an individual to attain their full potential, but they cannot go beyond what their genetics limits them to. If you want to talk about unfair advantage, then why not take it up with one's own DNA? That is truly the only unfair advantage that exists.

the difference is the greeks ate the lions hear hoping to gain it's strength and courage but in reality didn't gain anything. I don't know a lot about steroids or how much they can actually add to a persons strength, but here's a good example. Ken Caminette ( maybe spelled wrong ) was a pretty good baseball player who had had several good years. Then one year he does steriods and puts on an extra 15lbs of muscle and that year he has a career year and wins the MVP. After that he got hurt and stopped doing them as much and was never the same player.

they may not help you put on 50lbs of muscle but, at least in baseball, even 15lbs of muscle can be the difference between hitting 35 home runs and 50 or more home runs and to me, someone who loves the game, that's a big deal.

It's almost impossible to outperform someone that does steroids no matter how hard you'll work. Beside's that after a level it's a competition on who's willing to risk more his health and nothing else.

Muscle doesn't help you hit a ball better, practice does. I'm willing to bet that he used steroids for their ability to help him recover more quickly between games. Baseball players go from game to game and practice to practice so quickly that I have no doubt that they get really tired. The ability to recover quickly is undoubtedly an invaluable commodity to someone with such a work pace.

Why do you think most everyone in every field of sports uses steroids? To stay competitive.

The next evolution in steroids is something called "gene doping", which is a crude way of saying that a harmless virus in introduced to an athlete in order to alter their genetics. How are you going to detect something like that? Right now, they can't and they have hardly begun to figure out how to detect it. As it is, the drug testing groups are only able to find a VERY small percentage of steroid users, usually those who can't afford the best stuff available.

Face it, steroids aren't going to go away. Those who develope them are always one step ahead of those looking to detect them. Why not just learn to live with them and figure out how we can make them as safe as possible? :2 cents:

my question is, if i wanted just to get a bigger more cut build quicker and its only for my own appearance, what is wrong with taking steroids?

i got nothing to prove, i just want a better shaped body with less hard work.

i heard that steriods are dangerous and your body is in risk when taking steriods.

I thought that was a given. :)

Murder isn't going to go away either, but that still isn't a reason to legalize it. So, clearly, that argument doesn't hold.


As for allowing them in sports... once again, by doing that one pretty much makes steroids a requirement for practicing professional sports.

The steroids don't make anyone stronger or faster statement isn't entirely true.

A lot of the benefits of steroids don't necessarily come from your muscle tissue. There are also other factors that play a huge roll (hormones, etc).

Steroids like Equipoise and Halotestin increase your red blood cell count... in turn yeilding positive effects on the V02 max. Improving aerobic capabilities.

Why do you think EQ is primarily given to race horses?

Winstrol and other androgenic (DHT derived) steroids bind very well to the androgen receptor, promoting significant strength gains.

I've used steroids and can tell you these things from first hand as well as researched experience.

I think steroids are considered unfair in sports because some atheletes don't necessarily want to subject themselves to the side effects of steroids.

Sure things like gynocemastia (in men) can be prevented with the use of proper ancillaries but other androgenic sides (hair growth, acne, acceleration of MPB) can't effectively be controlled without the addition of even more substances (like higher doeses of finasteride) but even then, this will negatively effect the benefit of the steroid due to the restriction of DHT.

Anyway, for bodybuilding and aesthetic purposes I believe that certain steroids can be used relatively safely if the proper precautions are taken and the length of supression to the HPTA is minimal (8 week cycles).

Things like base line hormonal bloodwork should be done and after a proper post cycle treatment, testing should be done again to be sure that base line levels have returned to normal.

Got a little off target there, but steroids can enhance performance capabilities.

No other individual is deprived of life, liberty or property. An individual owns their life and should be allowed to do whatever they want to with it.

That's already the case. These athletes make shit loads of money by gaining a competetive edge no matter what.

In that case, do a cycle of whatever stack pleases you the most. Then spend the cycle watching television. At the end of that cycle, you will be no faster or stronger then you were to begin with. That is because steroids do not make anyone faster and stronger, they simply decrease recovery time, increase one's potential carrying capacity for muscle, and improve the assymilation rate of food eaten. Simply put, they are a training aid and nothing more.

This doesn't mean that everyone should go out and do them. I know a lot more about them then the average individual, but I am not comfortable enough with my knowledge to do a cycle of anything. These are substances that should only be used when one knows exactly what they're doing. I have no pity for the stupid kid in the Netherlands who died by injecting motor oil into his arms thinking he could get arms like Greg Valentino. "Oil in the arms" does not mean motor oil, it means synthol, which is a substance that most pros won't even mess with.

These days, it's just part of the job. When I was in the service, I had to get injected with all sorts of stuff on a regular basis. Every time I went overseas, I had to get injected with every vaccination under the sun. Yet, I had to do that so that I could keep doing my job should I get exposed to something that my body wasn't used to fighting, like anthrax. Of course, this didn't increase my performance in my job, but it was still one of those things that I HAD to do. I HAD to get injected with all the junk they put in front of me.

i would think one that they are dangerous for the body, two they offer and advantage to the taker what ever that may be and i beleive that all performers should be equal

I agree, but that is an entirely different argument altogether. I was merely pointing out that "Steroids aren't going to go away" is not a logically valid argument for legalizing them.

But right now, they are limited by the possibility of detection. Take that possibility away, and steroid use will increase immensely, making the gap between those who use and those who don't far wider.

But aside from that, what is preventing you from starting your own leagues where there is no testing for steroids? As a libertarian, it's a bit strange to criticize the decisions of organizations when you have the choice to just create competing organizations. Just let the free market do its job :glugglug

I say ban them

CET you know shit about steroids

As far as steroids and sports well its here to stay end of story all testing in the world will mean shit, its like they claim they test at the big bodybuilding shows, if you look at the size of the guys today you will know they dont test for shit.

One, they are only dangerous to people who have no clue what they're doing. Most professional athletes are surrounded by enough knowledgable individuals to not be in this category. Even so, it's their body. Why can't they do whatever they want to with their body?

Two, not everyone is on equal footing. Genetics plays a FAR greater role in advantages/disadvantages then steroids can. Besides, what's the difference between using a steroid to increase performance and using the newest and greatest shoe, swim suit, etc.?

Not cheating if everyone in that sport is doing them. Utilizing them(drugs) to there fullest is where the advantage is. The athletes can't compete with the ones on drugs so they simply follow by doing them. You are not competition to athletes using drugs unless your on them.

What? They always test bodybuilders! You don't know jack Escort Biz, Ronnie Coleman is Mr. Olympia and he got his gains from good eating, hard work and Designer Whey. It says so in the Designer Whey ad. They wouldn't lie would they?




:winkwink:

1. That ensures that only the wealthies athletes will be competitive.

2. Legalization does not necessarily mean increased usage. That is one of the main arugments for all prohibition groups, and I have never come across an example of it being proven true in history.

Whoa... Rilose? Long time no see. :glugglug

You know shit about me, but you're going to tell me what I am or am not knowledgable about. How arrogant is that? I'm not "steroid chemist", but I know more far more about them then the average individual. The average individual's knowledge about steroids is worse then the "Reefer Madness" crap that American society bought into in the early 20th century.

No, they don't test at bodybuilding shows and I wasn't talking about that. They do test in most other sports leagues, and they catch 1-10% of steroid users, depending on what league you're talking about. The olympics have far more steroid users they anyone would admit to, yet there they are, juicin and setting world records.

this is only half true. You are correct that muscle doesn't help you hit a ball. Practice does and if you don't have the eye and the agility to put the bat on the ball no amount of muscle will help you. Also, with the massive number of games they play being able to recover faster would be an invaluable thing.

But muscle does help you turn what would be a warning track pop-up into a home run. Look at baseball and look at all the guys that hit a lot of home runs. 90+% of them are big, strong guys (i'm not saying that they all do steroids, most probably don't ) if it was all technique Ichiro would lead the league in homeruns. Look at guys like A-Rod, Bonds, Giambi, Sosa, McGuire etc. look at them when they first came into the league and were good 30 home run a year hitters and compare those pics to when they started hitting more homeruns and the difference is obvious. Muscle and strength don't help you hit the ball, but they do help you hit the ball out.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

I don't have much respect for Ronnie. He's been trying to claim that he's natural for years. He used to tell people that he got so huge from MetRx MRPs. The guy's full of it and himself. At least guys like Lee Priest have the balls to just say, "Yeah, I juice. I do 2 cycles a year of . . . "

My guess is that you have limited experience and knowledge in regards to the AAS and performance enhancing drug subject.

I suggest you do some research before speculating on something you obviously know nothing about.

Sorry...I don't even remember you exactly ? Remind me please :)

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh:

CET this is true, stick to general nutrition and avoid the sports performance subject at all costs.

Far from true. Frequent use of steroids has serious health risks and pro athletes make heavy use of them. The number of knowledgable individuals that surround them don't mean anything since these athletes are live experiments. Monitoring blood and sugar levels, frequent exams, taking shields etc don't change the fact that frequent use of steroids and most kind of anabolics will damage your health. Andreas Munzer had individuals surrounding him but they didn't manage to prevent his death after the use of Erythropoietin. Griffith Joyner had the best doctors in her side and didn't manage to reach 40y.old.

Every people should be allowed to do whatever they want to their bodies like Dan Duchaine (the steroids guru) was doing....but that's all about it. By freely allowing steroids and anabolics in sports we pretty much force young people to follow this path. Sports are about improving your health, not harming your health.

I do not think Olympic Atheletes should be allowed to use illegal supliments in preperation for competition, its sort of like cheating on your SAT's, you may have done really well, but your results are skewed from what you would have naturally achieved..

Let alone half the people who use illegal supliments don't know what the fuck they're doing and end up fucking themselves up in the long run cutting their carreer and potentially their life short...

Name me ONE stack that will grow muscle for someone who does nothing but watch TV and eat snacks. I'll wait.

If you stick to the subject, then I'm sure we can have a great convo. If you want to be an ass, I'll be happy to introduce you to my ignore button.

You're off the subject as well. Weren't you talking about performance enhancement, not sitting and watching TV?

Anyway, just to help you get your foot in your mouth. Anavar is an anabolic steroid used as a post surgery aid and is also prescribed for building and preserving lean mass in "muscle wasting" aids patients. Many of these patients aren't able to excersize and are limited to just sitting and watching TV.

You can certainly fuck yourself up by not knowing what you're doing. There are lots of old school "roidaholics" that are now feeling the back lash of doing too many d-bol cycles for too long. D-bol is great at fucking up a liver PDQ, but it's also great for creating big muscles gains fast. D-bol can be used safely, but only for very brief periods, stacked with other things that will kick in at a later time (such as deca) and with a got post cycle stack that would include something like milk thistle.

As long as there's money or fame in sports, the athletes are going to do whatever they can to be a little bit better then the competition. That's just the nature of the beast.

My point, is that steroids aren't this boogie man that everyone thinks they are. There's way too much misinformation about them. They're permanently imbedded in sports, so maybe we should be concerned about making sure these athletes can use their gear smartly instead of persecuting them.

These are exactly my arguments for allowing them into professional sports. They're already there and they're not ever going to go away. If we take them out of the closet, then we can openly look after athlete's health and give them the best guidance possible.

I'm for them.



































j/k

Well technically, taking HGH (Human Growth Hormone) can....WILL, actually decrease bodyfat and increase muscle mass in almost every average healthed human correct. Noticed your a nutritional writer and my wife is a Pro Figure Athlete so these topics come up ! That is the only thing that will work while being a couch potatoe. That is your one stack you asked for...couple IU's of growth a day.

attn CET :

I guess I am refering to a hormone so I'm retarded..growth hormone is not a AS so I am a little of topic. I stand corrected !

This is true as well, but then GH isn't an anabolic steroid.

at least I replied before someone corrected me ;)

You are looking at things from the wrong perspective. I don't think that anyone here will argue the fact that a neuromuscular stimulis must be generated and an adaptation phase must also take place in order for an increase in strength and performance to occur. That's a given, but you must also consider what happens when particular anabolic androgenic steroids are included into the basic equation of training, nutrition and rest.

In general, androgens such as testosterone and dihydrotestosterone (DHT) do play a significant role in regards to strength. The impact of DHT on strength is more profound due to its impact on the Central Nervous System (CNS). Various parts of the brain are saturated in 5 alpha reductase (5AR) enzymes. Testosterone metabolizes into DHT via the 5AR. Basically, DHT amplifies the androgenic signal of testosterone and therefore increases neurological efficiency and resistance to physical and psychological stress, all of which are directly related to strength.


Jenetic

Lemme jump in here, I don't know much about steroids because I would never think about taking them.

However - you don't need to know much about steroids to know why they're wrong in sporting events. It's the basic principle that is the problem.

I know enough to know that there is too much inconclusive evidence about the long term health effects of steroids. Introducing something so pivotal to the body grants it an illegal status until there is that bit of solid evidence. Therefore, it is illegal.

And faced with these facts, although I believe one should have the free will to do whatever they want to their bodies, when it concerns massive organizations such as pro baseball (a privelege granted to athletes), and every other sport - it needs to be moderated and kept illegal because there are honest athletes who don't want to take a risk and subject their bodies to something potentially harmful.

That there is the reason it should be kept against regulations.

And besides - I believe in purity and natural means of athletic ability. Not lab rat experimental bullshit. Athleticism should be about one's natural ability without any other aids.

The point was, that steroids don't grow muscle on their own. Of course, all that will change if they can develope a good myostatin inhibitor.

Are you done acting like an ass yet?

You're talking about tissue repair, which is exactly what happens post workout. If there was no damaged tissue, then there would be no repair, let alone the building of new tissue.

This Is Your Nation on Steroids
Why does a performance-enhanced society scorn performance-enhanced athletes?
By JAMES PONIEWOZIK

Try 4 Issues of TIME magazine FREE!
Turn on a football game, and you'll see cheerleaders with seam-popping breast implants, aging sportscasters with suspiciously tenacious hairlines and commercials for pills that promise Olympian erections. Turn on the news, and you'll hear about how athletes have got the notion that it's O.K. to use artificial substances to improve their bodies. Appalling! Where would they get an idea like that?

On its face, the baseball steroid scandal is simple. Athletes who break the rules to win are cheaters. But ask why we have the rules in the first place, and you have to confront a basic irony. We decry performance-enhanced sports. Yet we live performance-enhanced lives.

We all know about Hollywood celebrities who get plastic surgery to extend their careers. (You want to see performance enhancement in sports, look courtside at a Lakers game.) But plastic surgery has become positively democratic. Businessmen get nipped and tucked to win promotions; other people, just to look hot. And there are plenty of other ways that we augment nature, medically, technologically and financially. The elderly can extend their sex lives beyond what God and their grandchildren imagined. Kids take expensive prep courses to ace tests that are supposed to measure inborn aptitude. Short but healthy children are given human growth hormone for their self-esteem. Adults take Ritalin to sharpen their senses. Pop singers have their vocals, ahem, "sweetened" with additional recorded tracks. Yet no one is threatening legislation against Ashlee Simpson.

So why are steroids the exception? One obvious answer is that sports are supposed to be fair in a way that life is not. But sports are full of institutionalized unfairness?ask anyone who's ever rooted against the Yankees. Olympic runner wins a gold medal because of blood doping: Cheater! Olympic team wins dozens of medals because it has tens of millions of dollars for training: U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.! In the steroid debate, what's often cited is fairness, not to current players but to the records of retired and dead ones. Yet middling athletes of today routinely outdo greats of the past thanks to legal advances in everything from nutrition to sports medicine to biodynamics to equipment. If Roger Bannister had the advantage of competing today, wouldn't he run better than a mere 3:59.4 mile?

Yes, but steroids are far more dangerous than, say, carb loading. That justification would be far more convincing if there were any evidence that fans and teams otherwise give two snorts about athletes' health. But that wouldn't explain how we tolerate, for example, football linemen larding up to heart-straining proportions and players hobbling themselves for life by "playing through the pain" (i.e., getting taped and numbed by the team doc). Or jockeys nearly killing themselves to drop weight. Or the very existence of boxing.

Of course, tainted Yankee Jason Giambi at least is an adult; teen athletes, however, have started using the same drugs the pros do. Again, setting a good example for kids is a noble argument?but one that society hardly heeds otherwise. If steroid scold John McCain were a woman, he might be pushing laws against plastic surgery among pop starlets, the better to save girls from deadly eating disorders. President George W. Bush denounced steroid use in the State of the Union. "It sends the wrong message?that there are shortcuts to accomplishment," said the Yale legacy student.

In the end, the steroid controversy may be less about what we want for athletes or children than about what we fear for ourselves. The performance enhancement of society promises to get only more radical, especially as genetic engineering grows more advanced. When people of means can buy sharper brains and stronger bodies for themselves or better genetic profiles for their kids, juiced-up athletes will be the least of our ethical worries. If Giants slugger Barry Bonds deserves an asterisk next to his home-run records, maybe we will deserve asterisks next to our salaries, our sexual conquests and our kids' SAT scores.

Our new power to transform ourselves raises the question of whether we are changing from nature's creation into man's invention. So we ask athletes to maintain an authenticity that we don't want to?to be museum pieces of purity. Is that hypocritical? Yes, because the fan-athlete relationship is inherently hypocritical: fans want sports heroes to be more admirable than the rest of us. We used to worship athletes for being mightier, faster, greater than we could imagine. The day may come when we gather in stadiums?with our bought-and-paid-for brains, bodies and libidos?and cheer on players for making do with less.

We were lovers. You forgot our relationsip that quickly!? Was it my breath? :sadcrying

maybe you missed this post by Jenetic

The only reason I brought up that argument (which really is a silly argument.), is because the average lay person actually believes it. Just read some of the posts in this thread defending that arugment.

BTW, NICE first post! :thumbsup