Performance enhancers

[buckjohnson]

Just watch an ESPN doc 30 for 30 about Ben Johnson being stripped of his Olympic gold medal in the 100m. The ironic (maybe not ironic but def some irony about it) is that all but one of the finalists in that race later was caught and banned for using PE's.

Why is it that in professional sports PE's are banned? Other professions do not banned them, porn stars use them, the military use them. If my accountant needs a line of coke to get through my tax return, I am ok with it (it is his risk, his license) People use PE's all the time, but it is only sports that there is criminal, paper, and reputation stigma attached. If Lance needs doping to climb a hill on a bike my car could not climb, I am ok with that. Pro Golfers now cannot take beta blockers because a SE is calming their "nerves".

I have a libertarian approach. Live and let live, ingest what you need to get through the day, the pain, the stress, whatever.

[broncofan]

Good thread. And good question. I can think of some problems, but I'm not sure what the ultimate answer should be. First, if there are rules and some are breaking them and others are not then it's a matter of fair play. Clearly being on the juice or EPO is a huge advantage.

But then why not make it legal? I think it's because then you'd have to use the stuff in order to compete and it's extraordinarily bad for you. People wouldn't be able to play baseball professionally unless they were willing to pump themselves full of steroids and deal with the potential adverse effects including carcinogenicity. Even blood dopers can be very harmful. You may say, well you don't have to use it in order to compete, but in practical terms you do. At the professional level even a small difference in performance can be huge. So, you'd be putting enormous pressure on people to do things that will shorten their life span.

BTW, in academic environments, amphetamine use has long been a problem.

But I suppose with lax enforcement or with the problems of detection the same pressures exist. Didn't Barry Bonds use the juice because he couldn't stand to see less talented baseball players cheating and getting better results? So, if some people are cheating and getting away with it then the pressure is there for reasonably honest people to cheat too. So, there is no good answer. Maybe legalizing it is more honest but you have to admit it leads to problems too. Legalizing it would mean that all professional athletes had to sign on to using roids just to compete in their sport.

[Kevin Dong]

Poor guy. Feel bad for him and Lance Armstrong. Those guys got the book thrown at them, meanwhile everyone else is doping too. I don't get it.

[Prospero]

If its a sportingcompetition isn't using a performance enhancing drug rather the same as being given a privileged advance glimpse of the answers in an important examination? It gives you an unfair advantage in the sport.

[broncofan]

If its a sportingcompetition isn't using a performance enhancing drug rather the same as being given a privileged advance glimpse of the answers in an important examination? It gives you an unfair advantage in the sport.
From what I've seen it creates an unbelievable advantage for those using v. those not. Part of sports is about finding ways to make the most of whatever physical limits you have. Physicality matters and in some sports more than others but you make the skilled technician obsolete when you allow roid abuse. Size and strength become the predominant commodities The Michael Chang's and Spud Webb's of the world disappear.

At least part of the enjoyment of sports is the illusion (unless it's more than that) that people have more to offer than their innate gifts.

[Avers]

All good PE-s are artificial testosterone level enchancers. This is an answer to this question.

[Dino Velvet]

It gives you an unfair advantage in the sport.

Also unfair to the heroes of the past who were clean but would now have their records erased. Also possible some people having a "more is better" attitude really abusing the drug causing health problems. Lastly, I don't believe athletes need to live the life of a monk but kids are paying attention and I don't want to set that type of example for them.

[freedom]

Interesting thread and one close to my heart, ex-athlete and degree in human physiology.

My personal take follows Buck's. The fact is over the last 4 decades some athletes have benefited hugely from cutting edge use of drugs while most others have not. The determining factor has not been innate talent or work ethic but the technical resources, and institutional complicity, of the place where you grew up. It is no surprise that the most prolific drug use has come from countries that have the capability to invest in these biotech fields, USA, Russia, China, Germany... This is deeply unfair to those from less industrialised, and less vested in sporting glory, nations.

Addressing the common rejoinder, "but we'll force our young people to kill themselves young just to compete", this isn't actually true. The performance increases from substances like steroids and EPO etc follow the law of diminishing returns. The majority of improvement comes from the first increments, falling to nothing indeed becoming counter-productive at higher and higher doses. The dose to improve performance is below the dose shown to cause harm. And the fact is athletes who are devoted enough to compete on the world stage do LOTS of things that are legal but detrimental to long-term health. I remember being a teenage runner and discovering that female runners training at the required level often stop having periods because the body can't afford the resources... The key point is if these things were legal then every athlete would be able to be supervised by physicians ensuring that extreme (harmful) levels of these substances are not used, and monitoring the secondary effects without pre-text.

I recommend the books of Charlie Francis, Ben Johnson's coach, who after the shit fell apart came clean with the full paradigm he used for his athletes in the 80's, ensuring he would be persona non grata in coaching circles from then on. They forced me to question my previously held belief that drug use in sport was "evil".

[Prospero]

I am clearly missing something here. i thought sport and athletics were about the natural and perhaps honed strength, skill, endurance and other physical qualities of individuals working alone or in teams. Once you introduce chemicals or drugs into the equation you are putting artificial elements into play. It is no longer athlete A it is athlete A who has taken X Y and Z. What a tragedy that we spoil the natural element of sport like this..

[freedom]

Is a high protein diet natural? What about weight training for sports other than weightlifting? The evidence that highly competitive people will use any possible advantage goes all the way back to the classical world. We have written records of the potions and techniques that the original Olympic athletes used!

Athletes will do whatever they can, at the moment only a minority have access to the resources required to compete. The only way natural talent can shine through is for an even playing field to be provided to all... IMHO :confused:

[Prospero]

Because people have cheated in the past doesn't make it right today, surely? But weight training for sports other than weightlifting is still naturally enhancing your own body. Like running ten miles a day or going to the gym so you are more fleet of foot on the tennis court.

But taking medication or drugs designed to enhance your physique or performance is the line I think it is wrong to cross.

[freedom]

My point was that the line of what's "natural" is arbitrary, you ignored the nutrition issue. There are plenty of things athletes put down their mouth because they improve performance that are in no way natural (in so far as coming naturally from food).

It's not a question of people cheating in the past, athletes will cheat in the now and future because they will do anything to be the best. Legalise drugs and its an even playing field, keep them illicit and only a few can win...

[broncofan]

I think steroids change the nature of the competition. I would like to see athletes that are human-like, rather than those who have taken synthetic hormones to turn into extra-human freaks.

I disagree that there is that slippery a slope between nutrition and artificial hormones. Sure, blood doping can be done with one's own blood, but you have to extract your own blood and then re-inject it. All rules involve line-drawing. I don't see anything arbitrary about drawing the line at epo, androgens, and blood re-injections.

And the athletes might not be killing themselves in the short-term but high levels of androgens are carcinogenic. I've also heard it's not good for athletes to have high hematrocrit counts, which results from blood doping. Athletes who have used stimulants have gone into cardiac arrest. I don't think performance enhancers would cause a public health emergency, but if I were a professional athlete I would not want to have to use them to compete.

[Jericho]

Where do you draw the line with Performance Enhancers?
Like Billy Connelly said of the 10K, I'll have a motorbike, that'll enhance my fukkin performance. My mate wants a gold medal, too, I'll fit it with a sidecar!

[Dino Velvet]

Saturday Night Live Weekend Update: All Drug Olympics
http://www.hulu.com/watch/4090

[Kevin Dong]

I agree with freedom - what is natural anymore? Are protein powders natural?

How about birth control for women - thats a steroid too. Did you know insulin is one of the most anabolic substances in the world? Steroids. Blah blah blah. Let them juice their fucking brains out. I don't want to see twigs running around playing fucking patty cake with each other.

Dear John Witherspoon: "Steroids" - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgopPV3a8wM)

[broncofan]

I agree with freedom - what is natural anymore? Are protein powders natural?

How about birth control for women - thats a steroid too. Did you know insulin is one of the most anabolic substances in the world? Steroids. Blah blah blah. Let them juice their fucking brains out. I don't want to see twigs running around playing fucking patty cake with each other.


No disrespect to you and freedom. Legitimate viewpoints but here's my rebuttal anyway.

I don't put much in the natural/unnatural distinction. It's a red herring and has very little explanatory power. Some of the most dangerous substances in the world are natural and some very harmless ones are synthesized. All the substances you mentioned have an on-label use. In the case of insulin, it's something that saves lives. Even testosterone is effective for people with hypogonadism. The issue is whether something is harmful if not used for medical purposes.

I think there's a big difference between someone using insulin because they don't want to end up in a diabetic coma and someone juicing because they want to be a great athlete. You guys are essentially saying that because there are legit uses for hormones and because the distinction between that which is processed and that which isn't doesn't always hold, everyone should get to use whatever substance they want.

I have an elderly friend with kidney failure who takes erythropoeitin to dope his blood. Surely this argues for widespread use of epo in cycling. Why should he get to use it and not Lance Armstrong;)?

[cadillac]

steroids do not replace talent..bottom line ..you can suck at sports take steroids be stronger and still suck..people think its a miracle drug ..it isnt..and people who have no experience with them shouldnt speak as if they do..i have used them for years ..so i have a pretty good idea of what they really are and can do ..its a choice

[broncofan]

steroids do not replace talent..bottom line ..you can suck at sports take steroids be stronger and still suck..people think its a miracle drug ..it isnt..and people who have no experience with them shouldnt speak as if they do..i have used them for years ..so i have a pretty good idea of what they really are and can do ..its a choice
You sound like a winner. How come nobody had come close to breaking the single season homerun record for decades, then both Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa did in the same season?

Nobody is saying these guys did not have talent. They do. I think what it fairly obvious is that without steroids AND talent Mark McGwire would not have hit 70 home runs in a season. I'm sorry but someone is not disqualified from talking about steroids just because they don't inject them.

[Dino Velvet]

How come nobody had come close to breaking the single season homerun record for decades, then both Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa did in the same season?

Nobody is saying these guys did not have talent. They do. I think what it fairly obvious is that without steroids AND talent Mark McGwire would not have hit 70 home runs in a season. I'm sorry but someone is not disqualified from talking about steroids just because they don't inject them.

Yep. A fly ball to the warning track can be turned into a home run with more strength/bat speed making the ball travel an additional 20 feet or so.

[broncofan]

Yep. A fly ball to the warning track can be turned into a home run with more strength/bat speed making the ball travel an additional 20 feet or so.
These were all good players before roids but common sense says it makes a difference. 37 years between McGwire and Maris. Then the record went by 9 home runs. You don't have to have used the stuff to know that this is statistically unlikely without something changing. But I think almost everyone in the thread at least acknowledges they make a difference.

[amberskyi]

I agree with freedom - what is natural anymore? Are protein powders natural?

How about birth control for women - thats a steroid too. Did you know insulin is one of the most anabolic substances in the world? Steroids. Blah blah blah. Let them juice their fucking brains out. I don't want to see twigs running around playing fucking patty cake with each other.

Dear John Witherspoon: "Steroids" - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgopPV3a8wM)

so we should ignore all the adverse effects? like here take this,it will help you win but dont expect to live a long healthy life

[cadillac]

i understand your point ..but someone who cant hit the ball, can do roids forever ..it wont change coordination, timing etc..it helps recovery and strength...your 100% right..but these players have to put time in and work hard ..take roids on monday and your awesome on wednesday..thats not how it goes ..im not disqualifing anyones opinion,but unless you have used them {for long periods of time } its hard to understand how they work..i have very close friends in the martial art mma world who actively use roids ..and guess what. roid user vs. roid user with talent = roid user without talent looses to talent everytime but i do see your point and its valid and respected ..

[Dino Velvet]

These were all good players before roids but common sense says it makes a difference. 37 years between McGwire and Maris. Then the record went by 9 home runs. You don't have to have used the stuff to know that this is statistically unlikely without something changing. But I think almost everyone in the thread at least acknowledges they make a difference.

There's something special about baseball. It's sad and disappointing to me when guys like Hank Aaron and Roger Maris have to take a back seat to players willing to juice like Bonds, McGuire, and Sammy Sosa.

My all-time favorite player since I was a kid was Nolan Ryan. The Ryan Express was clean but was one fireball throwing intimidating gunslinger. Heard he was amazingly strong on leg extension for quads. Wonder if he squatted much.

Never fear a man named Robin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuGp2ZRGIqI

[GrimFusion]

i understand your point ..but someone who cant hit the ball, can do roids forever ..it wont change coordination, timing etc..it helps recovery and strength...your 100% right..but these players have to put time in and work hard ..take roids on monday and your awesome on wednesday..thats not how it goes ..im not disqualifing anyones opinion,but unless you have used them {for long periods of time } its hard to understand how they work..i have very close friends in the martial art mma world who actively use roids ..and guess what. roid user vs. roid user with talent = roid user without talent looses to talent everytime but i do see your point and its valid and respected ..

Let's say both MMA fighters have the same amount of talent and both train for five hours every day. Match for match they tie up; one wins, then the other wins, on-and-on like that until one of the two fighters starts taking steroids. Six months later, the roided fighter wins every match while the fighter that doesn't take performance enhancers loses each match. That sounds like competitive edge to you? Sounds like cheating to me.

[giovanni_hotel]

Steroids should be banned in all athletic competitions because they give an athlete an UNFAIR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE. Period.
I was a D1AA football recruit in HS, clean. If I had juiced in HS, I would IMO have been one of the top prospects in my state and probably recruited by most of the top 20 D1A programs.

I know I could have taken at least 2/10ths of a second off my 40yd dash time and improved all my natural power lifts, (squat/BP) by a minimum 100#.

Calling a glass of milk a performance enhancing supplement is like describing a sharpened pencil as a portable data processing device.

Steroids turn average athletes into great athletes, and great athletes into supermen.
At some point we're no longer watching sports anymore and it's all just another choreographed form of professional wrestling. All entertainment, no sport at all.

What's sad is that international track and field has been engaged in chemical warfare for decades and most fans just aren't aware of it.

I can't tell you how many former HS and college track athlete friends of mine who look at Usain Bolt's times in the 100m tell me no human being can run that fast naturally. Maybe Bolt is that one genetic freak the sport of track elevates as one of its true superstars, or maybe he's this generation's Carl Lewis/Flo Jo/Ben Johnson.

I would hate to think we legalize all PEDs and force athletes to compete at an artificially inflated baseline of performance just to keep pace with the juicers.

Sport ultimately is supposed to be a test of someone's ability to overcome and triumph over one's own mental limitations and physical barriers. The spectacle of a great athletic performance is the byproduct of an athlete's will defeating the weakness of his body and mind.

If everyone is one the gear, it would be like watching the X-Men movies. Cool powers and special effects, but none of it is real.

[freedom]

ok there appears to have been a breakdown in communication so I'll reiterate from first principles.

1. People cheat. The kind of "win at all costs" mentality that is required for an elite athlete means they will do what ever they can to reach the top. Normal people don't spend 8hrs a day training, but champions do.

2. Cheating is not caught. We need only look at the Lance Armstrong saga to realise that the organisations tasked with catching drug use are well behind in the arms race... Lance was able to dope on an epic scale for over a decade and only failed 1 drug test.

The corollary of these two premises is that there will be a persistent minority who use drugs to reap the greatest rewards and everyone else will be 2nd class. But they will do so in secret. Stop the prohibition and all athletes will be at an equal footing with respect to what they put in their bodies.

Again I point out that the doses for performance enhancement are well below the doses that cause long term harm. And a fortiori being in the open, physicians will be able to supervise.

My point is simply one of equality. Sport should be based on how's most talented and has worked the hardest, not on who has access to the best back alley chemist.

:-)

[Kevin Dong]

What people don't get is that EVERYONE is using performance enhancing drugs. Every player, in every professional sport - short only of soccer, MAYBE. Every single athlete in the Olympics is using, every guy in the NFL is using, NBA, even fucking Golf players take pills and get corrective laser eye surgery. I went to a Canadian university with a mediocre football program even for Canada's standards, and even there the whole team juiced. Division III football in the US? Juiced. Had friends on the team. Basketball in the USA? Players are taking IGF1LR3 , HGH, and clenbuterol. You are all kidding yourselves if you think there's anyone in professional sports not using something.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkL1T-CZPfs

[giovanni_hotel]

Everyone isn't juicing. Too many are, but there are still genetic freaks who don't need supplements to compete.

People who think EVERYONE in sports is juicing are delusional.

[Kevin Dong]

Everyone isn't juicing. Too many are, but there are still genetic freaks who don't need supplements to compete.

People who think EVERYONE in sports is juicing are delusional.

no you're just uneducated on the subject as is the rest of the general population

[Donkey]

As usual, Dong is right.

[giovanni_hotel]

Right. There's still a difference between 'many', 'most' and 'all'.

All pro and amateur athletes in every major sport aren't on the gear.

[Donkey]

^ Stop being pedantic. His point is correct.

[giovanni_hotel]

When you talk about PEDs, you never say ALL because it makes you sound alarmist.

For instance there's a great deal of anecdotal evidence that many NFL players go on a cycle early in their career to put on more weight. They may do a cycle over the summer to put on 25 #, then hopefully with legal supplementation and weight training keep 10-15# of that weight throughout the season.

People who say all lead others to believe pro athletes are on multiple cycles of PEDs all year round when that isn't true.
If you're a 190# WR in HS, gaining 20# naturally in college over four years is normal. That player is unlikely to try juice because he doesn't need it.

Yes pro athletes use juice. In some sports the number may be close to half, maybe 60-65%. But all of them?? No.

[Donkey]

Again, stop being pedantic. You sound like an idiot.

[bluesoul]

I am clearly missing something here. i thought sport and athletics were about the natural and perhaps honed strength, skill, endurance and other physical qualities of individuals working alone or in teams. Once you introduce chemicals or drugs into the equation you are putting artificial elements into play. It is no longer athlete A it is athlete A who has taken X Y and Z. What a tragedy that we spoil the natural element of sport like this..

i'm with you. it's more surprising to me that some people consider it normal to take drugs and participate in sporting competitions. i was always under the impression that the whole point of being an athlete had everything to do with training (hard) and eating healthy and competing a lot

[cadillac]

i agree ,almost all use them..and the general population is unaware and clueless about them...

[buckjohnson]

Dong I think you are wrong. There is no empirical evidence tha pro basketball players take PED's, and a as former street and organized basketball player, never saw anyone take anything, ever!!! Most cats are scared of needles, cost is prohibitive, benefits limited, and most importantly, the best players don't do it.



no you're just uneducated on the subject as is the rest of the general population

[buckjohnson]

why?



My point is simply one of equality. Sport should be based on how's most talented and has worked the hardest, not on who has access to the best back alley chemist.

:-)

[freedom]

why?

why should talent and hard work be the deciding factors....? Are you kidding me?!
:confused:

[broncofan]

Freedom,
I understand what you're saying. I'm not pretending your arguments are not compelling. There are detection problems and this leads to cheating and inequality. Here's my problem, and you may be able to clear it up.

First, as has been said in here, if everyone is cheating you will have some players who are better than others, because all other things equal skill and talent will be decisive (this is the good part). But the players who are not quite as good despite using steroids might have an incentive to try to use higher doses. I know you said that higher doses are not more beneficial, and the effective reasonable doses are not as dangerous. But you know human nature as well as I do I'm sure. If someone is getting beaten they will push the envelope. They will take higher doses (whether effective or not), they will take stimulants, they will dope their blood. It's easy to say that any line drawing is a bit arbitrary and we can have equality by allowing full access, but with the competitive nature of sports, people will take dangerous doses. Just my opinion and the proper rebuttal maybe is that with freedom of choice, they sort of make their own bed if they make a stupid choice like that.

Second, Giovanni and Prospero have both brought up this point that I want to elaborate on a little bit. The nature of sports changes with the addition of anabolic components. Part of the joy of watching sports for me is that you have two human beings competing, doing the best they can with what they have. People want to identify with their sports heroes and that is very difficult to do when they take on extremely unnatural proportions. Humans are not the strongest or the fastest or the most agile animals. But part of the enjoyment of sports is the element of willpower, of thought, of competitive desire people bring to a competition. I think hormones dilute that.

[freedom]

Very well reasoned Bronco, I can't find fault with what you say. At this middle point I suppose personal judgement becomes the factor.

For me I rankle at the unfairness of the few having access to technology that others do not. But I recognise your aesthetic argument, in a perfect world there would be no drugs and that would make me happy.

However, I'm a pragmatist and there are drugs so now Pandora is out of her box what is the least bad solution?