Steroids -- What's so bad about them?

mikeybok · Post by **mikeybok** » Mon Aug 13, 2007 7:23 pm

We were talking about the Yout's risking their health to gain a competitive advantage. Which is why tobacco is a bad example. Eye surgery is more along the same lines in my opinion.

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Mon Aug 13, 2007 7:58 pm

The funny thing is the youths who break the rules could care less what the rules/morals/etc are.

They are out to get paid.

High School and College many times do not have the money (and it's not cheap) to random test for drugs.

~Lance

Royal Slave · Post by **Royal Slave** » Mon Aug 13, 2007 8:32 pm

Originally posted by Ugly Yellow Tomatoes:
We were talking about the Yout's risking their health to gain a competitive advantage. OK, now that I know we don't care about them ruining their health so long as it's not with the intent of gaining a competitive advantage ...

mikeybok · Post by **mikeybok** » Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:22 am

lol ... let me restate. In this discussion ... we are debating the concern that gaining the competitive advantage is causing youts to ruin (or at least risk) their lives and health.

Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
The funny thing is the youths who break the rules could care less what the rules/morals/etc are.
It is pretty funny ... but of course ... it IS the reason we need to help in this area ... because teenagers have the judgment of ... well ... teenagers!!!

Royal Slave · Post by **Royal Slave** » Tue Aug 14, 2007 9:38 am

Originally posted by Ugly Yellow Tomatoes:
lol ... let me restate. In this discussion ... we are debating the concern that gaining the competitive advantage is causing youts to ruin (or at least risk) their lives and health. ... which still doesn't address the issue the columnist is discussing, since steroids are widely regarded as effective, non-threatening training aids when used properly.

mikeybok · Post by **mikeybok** » Wed Aug 15, 2007 2:09 am

Originally posted by Royal Slave:
... which still doesn't address the issue the columnist is discussing, since steroids are widely regarded as effective, non-threatening training aids when used properly. lol ... widely regarded as non-threatening? By who ... the tobacco companies ... The steroid manufactures? How many parents would give their children steroids because their non-threatening?

I don't consider any prescription medication as non-threatening. I consider steroids less safe than prescription medication. We are leaving facts for fiction here.

Thanks for bringing up the topic. It was fun. I'm done with this one.

Big Mike

Atlas · Post by **Atlas** » Wed Aug 15, 2007 3:12 am

Having not been in the steroid arena for about 15 years.... (used to lecture at local HS's and had an article published)... they cannot be "used properly" for "effective" training aides.

They were developed for other medical conditions. That's when they are "used properly". The athlete uses doses not at prescribed levels to gain athletic advantage.

williamhare · Post by **williamhare** » Wed Aug 15, 2007 4:31 am

What about cryogenics? Presumably, to me anyway,
Ted's (Williams) Uncracked Head isn't suspended from the ceiling of a room regulated at 60 below
just for kicks. The world's greatest hitter will
again be asked to hit someday, right?
HMan83

Royal Slave · Post by **Royal Slave** » Wed Aug 15, 2007 7:35 am

Originally posted by Atlas:
Having not been in the steroid arena for about 15 years.... (used to lecture at local HS's and had an article published)... they cannot be "used properly" for "effective" training aides. I'm no expert, and as such I have not yet decided where I really stand on this issue, but people I know who know steroids better than I disagree with your assertion.