The Case For Legalizing Steroids
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-08-2013, 01:06 AM (This post was last modified: 03-08-2013 01:10 AM by Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver.)
The Case For Legalizing Steroids
http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmith/2...al-sports/

I'm amazed how much passion this issue elicits. Whether it was Jose Conseco's book Juiced or Lance Armstrong being stripped of his 7 Tour De France titles because of his doping, a lot of people out there just think of the use of any kind of performance enhancement in sports as simply unfair.

A lot of Gen Xers remember this stupid Afterschool Special, A Body To Die For. It featured a young Ben Affleck as an aspiring teenage athlete seduced by steroids and eventually succumbs to a fatal heart attack in the following predictable classic object lesson:





There is an athletic competition. Persons A through Z compete and do well - except Person X. Person X couldn't hack it. Person X is a loser.

But there's hope for Person X. There are powerful new chemicals called STEROIDS. They can make you bigger - and stronger. Why, just after a week on the juice, Person X not only excelled in the athletic competition, but he broke 3 world records! It's amazing just how much his game improved!

But there's a dark side to STEROIDS as well! Person X's face and back were covered and scarred in acne. He grew hair all over his body and completed it with bitch tits. He went through wild mood swings and violent 'roid rages' all while his body was rotting from within by kidney and liver failure! His addiction to these STEROIDS alienates him from his own family and he knocked out his own girlfriend over a trivial matter and then one day, he had a massive heart attack and died. Parents: Tell your kids about STEROIDS! That they can kill! Don't let it happen to YOUR child!

The media, concerned parents groups, like the Taylor Hooton Foundation, and politicians just love that message.

And the professional athletes and suburban gym rats alike who actually use steroids see that bullshit and just shake their heads as it has absolutely no basis in reality!

I won't sit on the fence about this. Steroids are drugs. Misuse and abuse of ANY kind of drug can have side effects and can possibly be dangerous.

But as someone who has used steroids as part of a medically perscribed regiment on a regular basis for the past twenty years, I can tell you these drugs don't match up with ANY of the bullshit in these PSAs.

The most commonly used steroid in sports is testosterone. It's the male sex hormone, which stimulates the skeletal muscle to build mass and repair damage quicker. It does have a few side effects in large doses like gynecomastia (bitch tits), tenderness around the site of injection, body hair growth, an acceleration of baldness, if baldness runs in the family, and testicular atrophy. Many of these are reversible, if the testosterone use is stopped. And only orally administered testosterone in high dosages has been associated with liver problems. 'Roid Rages' are complete bullshit and I have never witnessed this in juicers.

Whether one decides to use steroids on a recreational bases should be up to the individual and the individual's medical doctor. Based on my own experiences, I see no reason that a health adult athlete, who wants to improve his/her game, cannot or should not take steroids, provided this is done on a controlled, medical basis.

But isn't that cheating?

Well, define cheating to me. Is someone, who is naturally athletic, cheating if they are competing against an unathletic person? What about someone who is using a new type of sports equipment with superior performance? Does that qualify as cheating?

What about people who have LASIK eye surgery to improve their vision? Is that cheating in a game like golf? Or an athlete taking a cortisol shot to reduce inflammation in their joints? Is that cheating?

I got news for you, boys and girls. At least 80% of all professional athletes are either directly using steroids or similar banned performance enhancing drugs. So much so that it's very difficult to enter into collegiate or professional sports if you do not use these drugs. And it's not like juicers don't work hard to get where they are. Steroid use alone won't make you a stellar athlete; you're still gonna have to bust your ass in the gym or football pitch for several hours a day, several days a week to keep up with your peers.

Yabut drugs are dangerous.

1) Not necessarily, if you take them in a controlled fashion under the direction of a medical doctor.

2) Everything in life has risks.

Professional sports as a rule are high risk environments. Each year athletes are seriously injured, maimed - even die - in athletic competitions. You, the fans, don't care because you want to watch these larger than life people doing larger than life things.

And also at some point in life people need to be left to make their own decisions as to how to manage their affairs and accept the consequences which go along with them. Using performance enhancement drugs to become a better athlete has some risks associated with it. Then again so does this.





And this as well.....





Then there's this guy





So should the state outlaw these activities because someone could possibly be injured or killed while doing them?

It's your body and your life. You should be able to decide what happens with it, but you should also accept the consequences when things go wrong as well.

Sports are a dynamic, demanding, continually evolving challenge from humans which require bigger and bigger risks and rewards. In the future, I expect, we will see genetically engineered athletes and other amazing ways to push the boundaries of competition even farther. And it's what we as a people want. I just don't understand how some of the efforts to attain this could be considered cheating.

"IN THRUST WE TRUST"

"We were conservative Jews and that meant we obeyed God's Commandments until His rules became a royal pain in the ass."

- Joel Chastnoff, The 188th Crybaby Brigade
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver's post
03-08-2013, 04:40 AM (This post was last modified: 03-08-2013 04:45 AM by GirlyMan.)
RE: The Case For Legalizing Steroids
Girly's fellas went into early retirement going on 7 years now. So I take exogenous testosterone to make up for them. Am I cheating? Yeah, I'm cheating biology and old age.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-08-2013, 05:48 AM
RE: The Case For Legalizing Steroids
(03-08-2013 04:40 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Girly's fellas went into early retirement going on 7 years now. So I take exogenous testosterone to make up for them. Am I cheating? Yeah, I'm cheating biology and old age.

The difference being that you are not taking them for a particular advantage over anyone else, or on some egotistical initiative. Your treatment is medically prescribed and/or recommended, is it not? Steroids are legal for medicinal use.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Logica Humano's post
03-08-2013, 10:47 AM
RE: The Case For Legalizing Steroids
I used to look down on athletes who used steroids to train faster, but after reading about genes in the Olympics, I changed my mind.

From multiple studies it seems that Olympic athletes are not just good from practice; they tend to have certain genes in common with others who excel in their sport. In some cases, 100% of all medalists shared specific genes. These genes are not common, they include ones that occur in something like 5% of the population or less, and have an effect on muscles, bones, the heart... different things which directly affect performance.

So, seeing the trends, it seemed to me that the only way to win is to be blessed with certain genes. If you aren't, you won't win, as shown by the fact that 100% of the medalists were.

This turns the Olympics from a showcase of talent and hard work into a depressing affair, where you are repeatedly shown how you will never excel at a sport no matter how much you try because, according to statistics, someone else who happens to be born for the sport will beat you every time. You will never be a gold medalist.

Sadcryface2

I would never use them and do not endorse them, but I just don't care about people who cheat with steroids any more.

If something can be destroyed by the truth, it might be worth destroying.

[Image: ZcC2kGl.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-08-2013, 01:20 PM
RE: The Case For Legalizing Steroids
I am far more interested in seeing how far we can stretch the limits of human athletic performance through whatever means necessary rather than giving much of a shit about a level playing field for individual athletes. I wanna see an 8 second 100m dash. I wanna see a 3 minute mile run. Big Grin

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
03-08-2013, 02:26 PM
RE: The Case For Legalizing Steroids
I think if you take part in a sport, that stipulates that you are not allowed to use steroids (or any other performance enhancing methods) as the rules, then of course this should be followed.

If people wish to use steroids then they should be able to, but take part in their own sports which rules allow them (I agree with girlys statements as I believe this would be some interesting viewing in a league of its own)

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-08-2013, 04:34 PM
RE: The Case For Legalizing Steroids
(03-08-2013 02:26 PM)bemore Wrote:  If people wish to use steroids then they should be able to, but take part in their own sports which rules allow them (I agree with girlys statements as I believe this would be some interesting viewing in a league of its own)

The sport of powerlifting does this already. They call the ones that don't juice "raw" and they have their own division to compete in. The differences between the "raw" and "juiced" records is rather significant.

Squat - 606 lbs "raw" 1025 lbs "juiced"
Bench - 452 lbs "raw" 810 lbs "juiced"
Deadlift - 689 lbs "raw" 901 lbs "juiced"

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-08-2013, 10:39 PM (This post was last modified: 03-08-2013 10:44 PM by DeepThought.)
RE: The Case For Legalizing Steroids
I've been trying to get my hands on ostarine for a while now. I'm thinking of hiring someone to make it and paying via escrow, making sure the product is tested in an independent lab to be 99.9% pure and the correct isomer before they get payment.

It works without raising natural testoserone levels and actually displaces DHT so it can stop things like male pattern baldness. It is far more selective for muscle and bone tissue than other organs so there is less benign prostate hypertrophy.

This way I can improve athletic performance, have an easier time staying lean, and have fewer side effects. It has a long 24hr half life and can be taken orally. This, so far is my performance enhancing drug of choice. Not that I ever plan to compete professionally in anything.

“Forget Jesus, the stars died so you could be born.” - Lawrence M. Krauss
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-08-2013, 10:50 PM (This post was last modified: 03-08-2013 10:54 PM by DeepThought.)
RE: The Case For Legalizing Steroids
If there is a drug around that would make me smarter with minimal or controllable risks and the government deemed it illegal.

In cases like that.. fuck the government with a giant dildo wrapped in barbed wire. I would take it anyway.

People should be responsible for their own health. Empower people instead of treating them like little children.

Does anyone know a dealer that can hook me up with some NZT?

“Forget Jesus, the stars died so you could be born.” - Lawrence M. Krauss
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-08-2013, 04:31 PM
RE: The Case For Legalizing Steroids
One might note that high-level competition in any field is necessarily and inevitably a genetic lottery, other factors being levelled out by the time such heights are reached. A quantifiable variable (such as would be influencing performance in such a venue) would be expected to follow a broadly normal distribution. As with any trait...

The effect of "performance enhancing" substances (a nebulously defined category if any is) is generally multiplicative - relative rather than absolute. So not just a general shift of the distribution's centre but a skew towards the high tail. Use of any substance supposed to produce a positive effect is as old as competition, though we are rather better at it these days. Some universal percentage gain in ability would indeed improve the average, but it would likewise further stratify the upper echelons. But no. Cases like Lance Armstrong and Alex Rodriguez show that hardly anyone even pretends to be surprised to learn a secret long tacitly acknowledged, when it comes to elite athletes. People trying to be the best will do anything they think will aid them. Perhaps one might observe that the biochemists entreated to produce new methods are far better compensated than are the regulators tasked with limiting their use.

An interesting topic, to be sure.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: