steroid use ...
Replies
-
I think that it's subjective to a point. Tiger Woods got Lasik. Depth perception is a big factor in golf. So by getting Lasik, did he attain an unfair advantage over his peers? Had he just kept the eyesight he had, would he have attained the status as a pro as he has now?
I think they're assuming competitions. If you are claiming you are clean to compete against other people who are, it would be cheating. If you are using them because you want to be bigger and you just workout for you, eh, that's your business.How am I cheating anyone? I train for myself, compete in no sports, not governed by any bodies. You cant say hey you're bigger than me you're cheating. Cheating what?
And I'm assuming (based on what they are), the side effects would be more severe in younger teens since they can inhibit development. Of course, you know what they say about assumptions...
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I had LASIK done. It gave me normal eyesight. No different than glasses. Would glasses also be cheating?
I do believe it is still cheating in competition even if "everyone" is doing it so long as the rules are there against it and there is a possibility of being penalized .
0 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »
I think that it's subjective to a point. Tiger Woods got Lasik. Depth perception is a big factor in golf. So by getting Lasik, did he attain an unfair advantage over his peers? Had he just kept the eyesight he had, would he have attained the status as a pro as he has now?
I think they're assuming competitions. If you are claiming you are clean to compete against other people who are, it would be cheating. If you are using them because you want to be bigger and you just workout for you, eh, that's your business.How am I cheating anyone? I train for myself, compete in no sports, not governed by any bodies. You cant say hey you're bigger than me you're cheating. Cheating what?
And I'm assuming (based on what they are), the side effects would be more severe in younger teens since they can inhibit development. Of course, you know what they say about assumptions...
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I had LASIK done. It gave me normal eyesight. No different than glasses. Would glasses also be cheating?
I do believe it is still cheating in competition even if "everyone" is doing it so long as the rules are there against it and there is a possibility of being penalized .
Some times people get Lasik and their vision is better than normal (20-15 or so). Since it is putting that person at higher than their potential, would that be cheating?
0 -
Athletes can have a leg-up on others in the field of play in various ways, but unless it's regulated and determined to be illegal, we can't really consider it cheating, per se. Despite my very enthusiastic cheering for Pistorius, this exact issue did cross my mind. Was there an unfair advantage, despite the obstacles he obviously overcame to get to his level of athleticism? No need for outrage for the suggestion, please. I mean absolutely no disrespect for what he accomplished (before the fall). How do you fairly compare runners in that particular competition? With modern science comes plenty of controversy.0
-
3dogsrunning wrote: »
I think that it's subjective to a point. Tiger Woods got Lasik. Depth perception is a big factor in golf. So by getting Lasik, did he attain an unfair advantage over his peers? Had he just kept the eyesight he had, would he have attained the status as a pro as he has now?
I think they're assuming competitions. If you are claiming you are clean to compete against other people who are, it would be cheating. If you are using them because you want to be bigger and you just workout for you, eh, that's your business.How am I cheating anyone? I train for myself, compete in no sports, not governed by any bodies. You cant say hey you're bigger than me you're cheating. Cheating what?
And I'm assuming (based on what they are), the side effects would be more severe in younger teens since they can inhibit development. Of course, you know what they say about assumptions...
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I had LASIK done. It gave me normal eyesight. No different than glasses. Would glasses also be cheating?
I do believe it is still cheating in competition even if "everyone" is doing it so long as the rules are there against it and there is a possibility of being penalized .
Some times people get Lasik and their vision is better than normal (20-15 or so). Since it is putting that person at higher than their potential, would that be cheating?
It is still within the realm of normal vision.0 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »
I think that it's subjective to a point. Tiger Woods got Lasik. Depth perception is a big factor in golf. So by getting Lasik, did he attain an unfair advantage over his peers? Had he just kept the eyesight he had, would he have attained the status as a pro as he has now?
I think they're assuming competitions. If you are claiming you are clean to compete against other people who are, it would be cheating. If you are using them because you want to be bigger and you just workout for you, eh, that's your business.How am I cheating anyone? I train for myself, compete in no sports, not governed by any bodies. You cant say hey you're bigger than me you're cheating. Cheating what?
And I'm assuming (based on what they are), the side effects would be more severe in younger teens since they can inhibit development. Of course, you know what they say about assumptions...
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I had LASIK done. It gave me normal eyesight. No different than glasses. Would glasses also be cheating?
I do believe it is still cheating in competition even if "everyone" is doing it so long as the rules are there against it and there is a possibility of being penalized .
Some times people get Lasik and their vision is better than normal (20-15 or so). Since it is putting that person at higher than their potential, would that be cheating?
You can achieve that 20/15 vision with glasses also by getting a slightly stronger prescription.0 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »
I think that it's subjective to a point. Tiger Woods got Lasik. Depth perception is a big factor in golf. So by getting Lasik, did he attain an unfair advantage over his peers? Had he just kept the eyesight he had, would he have attained the status as a pro as he has now?
I think they're assuming competitions. If you are claiming you are clean to compete against other people who are, it would be cheating. If you are using them because you want to be bigger and you just workout for you, eh, that's your business.How am I cheating anyone? I train for myself, compete in no sports, not governed by any bodies. You cant say hey you're bigger than me you're cheating. Cheating what?
And I'm assuming (based on what they are), the side effects would be more severe in younger teens since they can inhibit development. Of course, you know what they say about assumptions...
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I had LASIK done. It gave me normal eyesight. No different than glasses. Would glasses also be cheating?
I do believe it is still cheating in competition even if "everyone" is doing it so long as the rules are there against it and there is a possibility of being penalized .
Some times people get Lasik and their vision is better than normal (20-15 or so). Since it is putting that person at higher than their potential, would that be cheating?
It is still within the realm of normal vision.
Then you get into "what is normal?". A 40 year old male may take steroids which will get him back to his testosterone levels of when he was 25? Would that be normal? Wouldn't glasses just be "taking you back" to a younger age with your eyesight?
I'm just playing devil's advocate here.
0 -
It's the same as it ever was in any competitive endeveour - "If you're not cheating, you're not trying hard enough."
And it will always be that way.
0 -
In RE to your average Joe/Jane gym rat...fitness junkie type of person I would say that steroid use is for the most part non-existent...I'm sure there are some people that do it, but I would say the vast majority of fitness junkies are simply into fitness for the sake of health and fitness and the benefits of using would not be worth the costs...
It is a different story altogether when you're talking about athletes...and unfortunately some young aspiring athletes trying to break into the professional level of whatever their sport is. It seems that many of them will do just about anything to gain an edge...not to mention the benefits to recovery when you're putting in the kind of training volume those guys put in to even consider the possibility of going pro.
In that RE, I'm not talking about the high school football player or whatever...I don't know if it's an issue at that level...I'm talking about guys that are basically on the cusp of either going pro or hanging it up and discarding their dreams.0 -
I used steroids while working out, and lost weight quickly while my muscles still look good. Corticosteroids, against a massive asthma attack. I read some reviews that people gained weight on them, but that was not the case for me. Oh, not what you asked
0 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »
I think that it's subjective to a point. Tiger Woods got Lasik. Depth perception is a big factor in golf. So by getting Lasik, did he attain an unfair advantage over his peers? Had he just kept the eyesight he had, would he have attained the status as a pro as he has now?
I think they're assuming competitions. If you are claiming you are clean to compete against other people who are, it would be cheating. If you are using them because you want to be bigger and you just workout for you, eh, that's your business.How am I cheating anyone? I train for myself, compete in no sports, not governed by any bodies. You cant say hey you're bigger than me you're cheating. Cheating what?
And I'm assuming (based on what they are), the side effects would be more severe in younger teens since they can inhibit development. Of course, you know what they say about assumptions...
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I had LASIK done. It gave me normal eyesight. No different than glasses. Would glasses also be cheating?
I do believe it is still cheating in competition even if "everyone" is doing it so long as the rules are there against it and there is a possibility of being penalized .
Some times people get Lasik and their vision is better than normal (20-15 or so). Since it is putting that person at higher than their potential, would that be cheating?
It is still within the realm of normal vision.
Then you get into "what is normal?". A 40 year old male may take steroids which will get him back to his testosterone levels of when he was 25? Would that be normal? Wouldn't glasses just be "taking you back" to a younger age with your eyesight?
I'm just playing devil's advocate here.
Good point. Guys with low testosterone are getting put on HRT to get their testosterone up to "normal" levels. I am seeing guys in the gym who are getting put on doctor supervised HRT and they are making significant gains, yet their hormone levels are still in "normal" ranges. Since their hormone levels are now in "normal" ranges, are they cheating?
0 -
I am a competitive bodybuilder. I purposefully compete in natural shows because they do polygraphs and drug tests which discourage people from using and it creates a more level playing field. In competitions that are not tested many/most competitors use steroids. That is their level playing field.
Beyond competing it's all risk versus reward. If they want to use them to develop size or strength they accept responsibility for the fact that there are risks and what they are doing is probably illegal. That's on them. I personally know many people who have used or currently use steroids for physique or performance enhancement.0 -
I think steroids or test or any performance enhancers are and probably always have been far more prevalent then most people think.
While young athletes are probably most at risk to be set up to want to use these, I don't think they make up the majority of the steroid users in the united states.
I honestly feel that, especially after the internet, the majority of steroid users are probably late 20 to early 50 year old men with money to burn. the few men (or the wives there of) that have admitted to me that they use, are over 40 and started using over 400 -
They are still prevelant at my lifting gym. Also they are used frequently in bjj and muay thai. I don't use them but if someone else wants to it's their health so I don't really care0
-
I am not "in the conversation" on this issue and would like to have a general picture - based on what you've observed and heard among younger athletes at the gym - about steroid use. Is this finally taboo now - or is it still an issue in certain circles? I'm not considering using steroids and have a valid reason for my inquiry. I think this is a good audience to ask and gather decent, real-world answers about the prevalence of steroids among young people. Thanks in advance. Moderators, hopefully I'm not breaking any rules by asking about this.
... what's wrong with it? As with anything, dosing, moderation, and a lot of knowledge can go a long way.
Should young kids be doing it? No. Should trained individuals with experience in the gym, who are already working hard, and have defined goals try it? Why not?
Besides, at the college level, if you're not taking it, you're not going to have any chance to go from college sports to pro.0 -
I enjoyed this clip by Lee Priest talking about his steroid use.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0Z_rpapUMA 0 -
If I were a young athlete, one of my reasons for not using might be that eventually I'll be elite enough to be regulated/tested/caught/penalized for using it. Not the best reason to avoid using steroids, of course, but certainly something to consider ...
Those tests are easy to avoid, and really... the only ones getting "caught" are the ones being turned in by their team mates or coaching staff. Generally because they're world class a-holes, like barry bonds.0 -
This is such a loaded question because to some people the subject is still very much taboo. How often do you still here talk about somebody's physique and hear, "oh he must be on steroids" with a negative connotation? Personally I don't care if somebody is on them or not, I feel that they can be cycled safely. Also, they are not magic and just because somebody takes them doesn't mean they are going to blow-up in size and shed all their body-fat; they still have to do everything correctly just as a non-user would.
Professionally speaking steroids are definitely not limited to bodybuilding and can be found in all major sports and even CrossFit. Did people really think all of those super-lean men and women that could move the amount of weight they do did it without PED's; it's more wide-spread then most people think. There was actually a lot of talk over the last two years about rules cracking down on PED use in CF. When it comes to team-sports however, I don't think it matters at all. Niner mentioned Barry Bonds and that is a great example. Steroid use does not give one the hand-eye coordination to hit a 95mph fastball. If you can't hit a fastball of that velocity, you're not going to hit it with a 1,500dcl total testosterone level either. Skill and strength are not related. Steroids just make those with talent better. What's even worse is that the older baseball players that might have some degree of hypogonadism can't even take it therapeutically or risk getting banned.
Anybody that is curious about this should watch the movie "Bigger, Stronger, Faster." It's really a well-done documentary about steroid use.0 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »
I think that it's subjective to a point. Tiger Woods got Lasik. Depth perception is a big factor in golf. So by getting Lasik, did he attain an unfair advantage over his peers? Had he just kept the eyesight he had, would he have attained the status as a pro as he has now?
I think they're assuming competitions. If you are claiming you are clean to compete against other people who are, it would be cheating. If you are using them because you want to be bigger and you just workout for you, eh, that's your business.How am I cheating anyone? I train for myself, compete in no sports, not governed by any bodies. You cant say hey you're bigger than me you're cheating. Cheating what?
And I'm assuming (based on what they are), the side effects would be more severe in younger teens since they can inhibit development. Of course, you know what they say about assumptions...
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I had LASIK done. It gave me normal eyesight. No different than glasses. Would glasses also be cheating?
I do believe it is still cheating in competition even if "everyone" is doing it so long as the rules are there against it and there is a possibility of being penalized .
Some times people get Lasik and their vision is better than normal (20-15 or so). Since it is putting that person at higher than their potential, would that be cheating?
It is still within the realm of normal vision.
Then you get into "what is normal?". A 40 year old male may take steroids which will get him back to his testosterone levels of when he was 25? Would that be normal? Wouldn't glasses just be "taking you back" to a younger age with your eyesight?
I'm just playing devil's advocate here.
Good point. Guys with low testosterone are getting put on HRT to get their testosterone up to "normal" levels. I am seeing guys in the gym who are getting put on doctor supervised HRT and they are making significant gains, yet their hormone levels are still in "normal" ranges. Since their hormone levels are now in "normal" ranges, are they cheating?
If we are talking competition, then yes. From my traithlon-based perspective, you can NOT get a therapeutic use exception (TUE) for simply having "low-T". It is nearly impossible to get one, in fact, for supplemental testosterone. Yet many amateurs get the prescriptions for it and continue on competing because they don't test amateurs. That *is* cheating.
If you are doing this for your own personal gain, and not competing in anything, then I couldn't care less. However if you are racing against me and I somehow find out you are using something, there will be trouble.0 -
I am a competitive bodybuilder. I purposefully compete in natural shows because they do polygraphs and drug tests which discourage people from using and it creates a more level playing field. In competitions that are not tested many/most competitors use steroids. That is their level playing field.
Beyond competing it's all risk versus reward. If they want to use them to develop size or strength they accept responsibility for the fact that there are risks and what they are doing is probably illegal. That's on them. I personally know many people who have used or currently use steroids for physique or performance enhancement.
Even the all natural shows still have plenty of ped usage though because the steroid makers are usually ahead of the curve.
0 -
I am a competitive bodybuilder. I purposefully compete in natural shows because they do polygraphs and drug tests which discourage people from using and it creates a more level playing field. In competitions that are not tested many/most competitors use steroids. That is their level playing field.
Beyond competing it's all risk versus reward. If they want to use them to develop size or strength they accept responsibility for the fact that there are risks and what they are doing is probably illegal. That's on them. I personally know many people who have used or currently use steroids for physique or performance enhancement.
Even the all natural shows still have plenty of ped usage though because the steroid makers are usually ahead of the curve.
I understand that. I do know people compete at natural shows that are not natural (I've seen obvious examples at a few shows). Yes, that's cheating and people are always going to try to cheat.0 -
Yeah but it makes sportsNo_Finish_Line wrote: »I assumed this post would be full of Americans all bashing steroids as that's the picture we seem to get of your mentality of them over here. Glad I was wrong.
In England noone could really care less about steroids. I've been pulled over in my car by police and had a tub on me which they gave back. Still got speeding ticket though..
We all talk openly in the gym, work, etc about them and noone is bothered.
A lot of the side effects are humongously exaggerated by people who have absolutely no knowledge whatsoever about them.
To the people who think they're a cheat, well I train just as much if not more than everyone else, muscles recover quicker meaning you can hit them harder and train them more times a week. I eat like food is going out of fashion.
I train for myself to look good, nothing else. However I choose to get there is my choice.
how long have you been using them for.
One miss conception I had in high school was that all you had to do was inject yourself and you would get ripped. lol not true.
I've been tempted many times to try something. hell if it was legally made and you knew for sure that what you paid for was actually what you were getting then it would be extremely tempting.
can't really articulate why I want to avoid them, perhaps its social programming.
around 4 years, however I was researching them for 2 years before finally taking the plunge. I'm glad I waited, because by then I knew how to train and diet right.
I am uncommon within the steroid circle as I rarely ever use bulking steroids,( he says as on them now) as I've been much bigger than in my pic and i did not look good for it. Being that i only train for how i look i do use a lot of cutting steroids but manage the diet so i still gain whilst cutting. A lot of my bulking is natural. The difference between cutting with and without steroids i will admit is far and away one of the best things about them.
0 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »
I think that it's subjective to a point. Tiger Woods got Lasik. Depth perception is a big factor in golf. So by getting Lasik, did he attain an unfair advantage over his peers? Had he just kept the eyesight he had, would he have attained the status as a pro as he has now?
I think they're assuming competitions. If you are claiming you are clean to compete against other people who are, it would be cheating. If you are using them because you want to be bigger and you just workout for you, eh, that's your business.How am I cheating anyone? I train for myself, compete in no sports, not governed by any bodies. You cant say hey you're bigger than me you're cheating. Cheating what?
And I'm assuming (based on what they are), the side effects would be more severe in younger teens since they can inhibit development. Of course, you know what they say about assumptions...
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I had LASIK done. It gave me normal eyesight. No different than glasses. Would glasses also be cheating?
I do believe it is still cheating in competition even if "everyone" is doing it so long as the rules are there against it and there is a possibility of being penalized .
Some times people get Lasik and their vision is better than normal (20-15 or so). Since it is putting that person at higher than their potential, would that be cheating?
It is still within the realm of normal vision.
Then you get into "what is normal?". A 40 year old male may take steroids which will get him back to his testosterone levels of when he was 25? Would that be normal? Wouldn't glasses just be "taking you back" to a younger age with your eyesight?
I'm just playing devil's advocate here.
Good point. Guys with low testosterone are getting put on HRT to get their testosterone up to "normal" levels. I am seeing guys in the gym who are getting put on doctor supervised HRT and they are making significant gains, yet their hormone levels are still in "normal" ranges. Since their hormone levels are now in "normal" ranges, are they cheating?
If we are talking competition, then yes. From my traithlon-based perspective, you can NOT get a therapeutic use exception (TUE) for simply having "low-T". It is nearly impossible to get one, in fact, for supplemental testosterone. Yet many amateurs get the prescriptions for it and continue on competing because they don't test amateurs. That *is* cheating.
If you are doing this for your own personal gain, and not competing in anything, then I couldn't care less. However if you are racing against me and I somehow find out you are using something, there will be trouble.
and it's basically retarded that you can't get a TUE for medically supervised trt. What happens when you have low t, aside from the obvious difficult nature of achieving and maintaining athletic performance, is it also heavily impacts your moods and emotions. The "getting strong" portion of the therapy is nice, but whatever, the not sitting in a dark room with a pistol in your mouth portion of the therapy is really where it shines.
If the competitor is being put back to a normal range, and can compete with the rest of his competitors in a normal manner, then there is no reason for it to be stigmatized.0 -
I am a competitive bodybuilder. I purposefully compete in natural shows because they do polygraphs and drug tests which discourage people from using and it creates a more level playing field. In competitions that are not tested many/most competitors use steroids. That is their level playing field.
Beyond competing it's all risk versus reward. If they want to use them to develop size or strength they accept responsibility for the fact that there are risks and what they are doing is probably illegal. That's on them. I personally know many people who have used or currently use steroids for physique or performance enhancement.
Even the all natural shows still have plenty of ped usage though because the steroid makers are usually ahead of the curve.
I understand that. I do know people compete at natural shows that are not natural (I've seen obvious examples at a few shows). Yes, that's cheating and people are always going to try to cheat.
I really don't get why you would do this. What is the point, at all, of cheating like this when there is a openly acknowledged way to compete while doping?
*sigh*
0 -
There are sports where steroid use isn't really a problem at all. By that I mean that, no one has a problem with it and everyone does it, like bodybuilding, powerlifting and strongman (at the higher levels, the newbs usually aren't into using AAS yet). I really don't think that this is bad for the sport either because spectators aren't interested in seeing "an even playing field of natural athletes", they are interested in seeing "freaks". People being freakishly huge and strong is what supports the sport financially and, without steroids, that level of size and power is just not obtainable.
With that being said, I understand that there are some sports that don't want the participants using AAS and I understand why as well; however, there are always going to be people who find a way to get a leg up on the competition. Even without AAS use there are still peptide hormones which are extremely difficult to test for. There are short acting steroids which leave almost no metabolite profile to be tested for. There are now people experimenting with genetically modifying viruses who will change your DNA in such a way that you will no longer produce myostatin (an inhibitory hormone which interrupts the M-Tor pathway, halting muscle protein synthesis) or SHBG (sex hormone binding globulin, binds with free floating testosterone to make it inactive). This would be nearly impossible to test for as well. Insulin is also commonly used by athletes to increase performance. This is obviously a practice that is far more dangerous than any dosage of anabolic steroids.
At a certain point, if you step back and look at what banning steroids in sports has caused, it becomes apparent that just letting the athletes use steroids openly would probably be safer than the ridiculous measures people have gone to in order to mimic their effects.0 -
I am a competitive bodybuilder. I purposefully compete in natural shows because they do polygraphs and drug tests which discourage people from using and it creates a more level playing field. In competitions that are not tested many/most competitors use steroids. That is their level playing field.
Beyond competing it's all risk versus reward. If they want to use them to develop size or strength they accept responsibility for the fact that there are risks and what they are doing is probably illegal. That's on them. I personally know many people who have used or currently use steroids for physique or performance enhancement.
Even the all natural shows still have plenty of ped usage though because the steroid makers are usually ahead of the curve.
I understand that. I do know people compete at natural shows that are not natural (I've seen obvious examples at a few shows). Yes, that's cheating and people are always going to try to cheat.
I really don't get why you would do this. What is the point, at all, of cheating like this when there is a openly acknowledged way to compete while doping?
*sigh*
Gain an edge? I wouldn't see it as an accomplishment. To beat natural people in a natural show while using steroids. I think some people just have to win and that plastic trophy is worth more than morals.
In the fall I will be competing in a show that is not designated natural. I know that the playing field is not level since I am natural, but I am making that decision.0 -
Anavar is pretty much an open secret among gym-goers in my area (I'm from the UK) Most users in my area now seem to go for cutting agents for that shredded look, rather than bulking on Test-E and Dbol (I've observed that it tends to be doormen who use the bulking 'roids in the gyms that I've trained at.)0
-
There are sports where steroid use isn't really a problem at all. By that I mean that, no one has a problem with it and everyone does it, like bodybuilding, powerlifting and strongman (at the higher levels, the newbs usually aren't into using AAS yet). I really don't think that this is bad for the sport either because spectators aren't interested in seeing "an even playing field of natural athletes", they are interested in seeing "freaks". People being freakishly huge and strong is what supports the sport financially and, without steroids, that level of size and power is just not obtainable.
With that being said, I understand that there are some sports that don't want the participants using AAS and I understand why as well; however, there are always going to be people who find a way to get a leg up on the competition. Even without AAS use there are still peptide hormones which are extremely difficult to test for. There are short acting steroids which leave almost no metabolite profile to be tested for. There are now people experimenting with genetically modifying viruses who will change your DNA in such a way that you will no longer produce myostatin (an inhibitory hormone which interrupts the M-Tor pathway, halting muscle protein synthesis) or SHBG (sex hormone binding globulin, binds with free floating testosterone to make it inactive). This would be nearly impossible to test for as well. Insulin is also commonly used by athletes to increase performance. This is obviously a practice that is far more dangerous than any dosage of anabolic steroids.
At a certain point, if you step back and look at what banning steroids in sports has caused, it becomes apparent that just letting the athletes use steroids openly would probably be safer than the ridiculous measures people have gone to in order to mimic their effects.
As someone pointed out above though, if you have competitions that are clean and competitions that allow steroids, why compete in the clean competitions if you use?
From your post, I find it a little intimidating and sad because I wouldn't mind trying my hand at a powerlifting competition if I can get my lifts up. But, if everyone else is going to be using, it's rather intimidating and disappointing.0 -
There are sports where steroid use isn't really a problem at all. By that I mean that, no one has a problem with it and everyone does it, like bodybuilding, powerlifting and strongman (at the higher levels, the newbs usually aren't into using AAS yet). I really don't think that this is bad for the sport either because spectators aren't interested in seeing "an even playing field of natural athletes", they are interested in seeing "freaks". People being freakishly huge and strong is what supports the sport financially and, without steroids, that level of size and power is just not obtainable.
With that being said, I understand that there are some sports that don't want the participants using AAS and I understand why as well; however, there are always going to be people who find a way to get a leg up on the competition. Even without AAS use there are still peptide hormones which are extremely difficult to test for. There are short acting steroids which leave almost no metabolite profile to be tested for. There are now people experimenting with genetically modifying viruses who will change your DNA in such a way that you will no longer produce myostatin (an inhibitory hormone which interrupts the M-Tor pathway, halting muscle protein synthesis) or SHBG (sex hormone binding globulin, binds with free floating testosterone to make it inactive). This would be nearly impossible to test for as well. Insulin is also commonly used by athletes to increase performance. This is obviously a practice that is far more dangerous than any dosage of anabolic steroids.
At a certain point, if you step back and look at what banning steroids in sports has caused, it becomes apparent that just letting the athletes use steroids openly would probably be safer than the ridiculous measures people have gone to in order to mimic their effects.
As someone pointed out above though, if you have competitions that are clean and competitions that allow steroids, why compete in the clean competitions if you use?
From your post, I find it a little intimidating and sad because I wouldn't mind trying my hand at a powerlifting competition if I can get my lifts up. But, if everyone else is going to be using, it's rather intimidating and disappointing.
I competed in powerlifting in 2014. One of my meets was APF/AAPF and one was WPC/AWPC. There were both natural lifters and lifters on steroids at the meet. They were lifting at the same time, but not against each other.
It was fun to watch the men and women who use lift. It was also nice to compete against MOSTLY natural lifters (I'm sure some were not, but they didn't blow anyone else away with their lifts). Everyone pretty much walked away happy.0 -
The issue with simply saying "have at it" and let everyone use what they want, is that eventually the drug use will get pushed too far and people will die. Sure these things can be used in a safe manner, but if everyone uses it, then the risks of bad side effects for one person could be catastrophic.
See what happened to Tom Simpson for an example of what happens when doping becomes deadly, because the doping itself becomes the arms race.0 -
There are sports where steroid use isn't really a problem at all. By that I mean that, no one has a problem with it and everyone does it, like bodybuilding, powerlifting and strongman (at the higher levels, the newbs usually aren't into using AAS yet). I really don't think that this is bad for the sport either because spectators aren't interested in seeing "an even playing field of natural athletes", they are interested in seeing "freaks". People being freakishly huge and strong is what supports the sport financially and, without steroids, that level of size and power is just not obtainable.
With that being said, I understand that there are some sports that don't want the participants using AAS and I understand why as well; however, there are always going to be people who find a way to get a leg up on the competition. Even without AAS use there are still peptide hormones which are extremely difficult to test for. There are short acting steroids which leave almost no metabolite profile to be tested for. There are now people experimenting with genetically modifying viruses who will change your DNA in such a way that you will no longer produce myostatin (an inhibitory hormone which interrupts the M-Tor pathway, halting muscle protein synthesis) or SHBG (sex hormone binding globulin, binds with free floating testosterone to make it inactive). This would be nearly impossible to test for as well. Insulin is also commonly used by athletes to increase performance. This is obviously a practice that is far more dangerous than any dosage of anabolic steroids.
At a certain point, if you step back and look at what banning steroids in sports has caused, it becomes apparent that just letting the athletes use steroids openly would probably be safer than the ridiculous measures people have gone to in order to mimic their effects.
As someone pointed out above though, if you have competitions that are clean and competitions that allow steroids, why compete in the clean competitions if you use?
From your post, I find it a little intimidating and sad because I wouldn't mind trying my hand at a powerlifting competition if I can get my lifts up. But, if everyone else is going to be using, it's rather intimidating and disappointing.
Try a USAPL meet, they don't even allow a TUE. So most of the lifters will be currently natural.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions