Steroids

How Washington Lost the War on Muscle

Steroid users hustle to stay one rep ahead of the law.

|

Reason

When Ned decided to try anabolic steroids for the first time, his goal was to "be bigger and look better." He had friends who used, and they seemed no worse for wear. The college sophomore was already training smart and eating right. "I felt like the pieces were in place to accelerate the process," he says looking back. That left the question of acquisition: He knew he could use the internet to illegally buy drugs from overseas, or he could invest some social capital in befriending a muscle-bound gym regular who might be able to hook him up. Still, he hesitated, until a fellow lifter revealed that he could obtain the same drug—testosterone, the paterfamilias of anabolic steroids—legally.

If Ned could convince an M.D. that he had low testosterone, he could walk away with script in hand. Then he would be able to pick up clean, accurately labeled "test" from his local pharmacy in broad daylight, instead of braving the black market. He'd avoid the risks of drugs passed hand-to-hand, which might be under-dosed, mislabeled, or dirty. And buying directly from an Indian or Chinese lab (which probably supplied the American gym vendor anyway) poses all those risks plus the additional possibility of criminal charges—including prison time—if U.S. Customs intercepts your package and conducts a "controlled delivery."

"I'd estimate the majority of controlled deliveries I've seen have involved quantities that are consistent with personal use," criminal defense attorney Rick Collins writes in Legal Muscle, his 2002 doorstopper on U.S. anabolic steroid laws. "A band of government agents will lie in wait until you make the horrific mistake of accepting your mail. Then, like a plague of locusts, they'll descend upon the sanctity of your home, ransacking it from roof to basement."

User surveys say that more than half of men who buy drugs for physique and performance enhancement do so on the internet black market, despite the fact that buying steroids without a prescription is a crime in every state and a federal offense. Yet those same surveys also suggest that the number of recreational steroid users who acquire their drugs legally may have tripled in the last 10 years.

What, exactly, are these people chasing? Some men want to look in the mirror and be blown away by their own sheer mass. Other men want to feel as virile and physically capable at 50 as they did at 18. Strength athletes—powerlifters and strongmen, professional and amateur alike—want to amplify their natural abilities. But contrary to popular media, the vast majority of steroid-using men are are not athletes, but regular working stiffs who like how they look and feel on "gear."

Ned, who asked me not to share his real name, is one of those people. He's happily married, employed in academia, and as conscientious about his health as he is about his appearance. He represents a growing demographic of people who are using internet message boards, publicly available research data, and licensed doctors to tweak their bodies, take control of their decisions, and build forbidden muscle in a post-prohibition world.

EXPERIMENTATION The use of anabolic steroids to build strength and muscle goes back to the middle of the 20th century and a company called Ciba Pharmaceuticals. Ciba conducted much of the early research into testosterone-based drugs, giving its compounds to American doctors and encouraging them to perform informal studies on their patients. The company published these findings in books such as 1948's Refresher Course on Male Hormone Therapy, which contains testosterone case studies for every condition then under the sun, from congenital eunuchoidism to same-sex attraction. (The eunuchs developed facial hair; the gay men thirsted even harder after other dudes.)

One of Ciba's doctors was the Maryland physician John Ziegler. According to his personal papers and records, obtained by Auburn University's John D. Fair for a 1993 report in the Journal of Sports History, Ziegler gave testosterone first to patients known to benefit from its anabolic qualities, such as burn victims. Testosterone's primary medical value is its ability to promote tissue growth. It increases red blood cell count, bone mineral density, and the number of satellite cells in muscle tissue. That means new skin for burn victims, bigger guns for lifters, and faster recovery for pretty much everyone. But testosterone is also androgenic: It stimulates the secondary sexual characteristics we associate with adult males, causing increased sebaceous gland activity and body hair, thickening of the vocal chords, prostate enlargement, and penis (or, in the case of women, clitoris) growth.

Ziegler likely knew about the anabolic effects, which is why he soon began giving the drugs to weightlifters at a gym in Silver Spring, Maryland, to see how the drug affected healthy people. This made him the first physician in the U.S. to administer testosterone not to repair, but to enhance. When members of the U.S. Olympic team attended the 1954 World Weightlifting Championships in Vienna, Austria, they did so with Ziegler in tow and Ciba's drugs coursing through their veins. It wasn't exactly an unfair advantage. Legend has it that Soviet lifters had been taking huge doses of testosterone for so long that their prostates were engorged and they needed catheters to urinate.

DEMONIZATION Three decades after steroids began to proliferate through the gyms of the developed world, "roid rage" became the new reefer madness. There was two-time Super Bowl Champion Steve Courson's 1985 Sports Illustrated interview, in which he said steroids wrecked his heart. Then Canadian sprinter Ben Johnson tested positive for the anabolic steroid stanozolol following the 1988 Summer Olympics, where he'd beaten the American phenom Carl Lewis in the 100-meter finals. In April 1989, Olympic sprinter Diane Williams tearfully described to a U.S. Senate committee how the steroids that made her one of the fastest women in the 1984 Olympics also made her clitoris grow uncomfortably large.

The Judiciary Committee report accompanying the 1990 Steroid Trafficking Act was chock full of still more anecdotal evidence that steroids were permeating every corner of American life: a mild-mannered cop in Oregon who began juicing and then shot a shop owner for no apparent reason, a normally happy teenager found dead of a suicide next to the weight set in his garage after three years of using, "an obsessed steroid user" who felt so empowered by the exogenous hormones pumping through his body that he asked a friend to film him as he drove his car into a tree at 40 miles per hour.

Until 1988, steroids could be purchased over the counter. Relatively cheaply, too, thanks to chemist Russell Marker's discovery in the 1940s that two types of wild yam indigenous to Mexico—barbasco and cabeza de negro—could be synthesized into sex hormones.

A few critics warned Congress against making steroids illegal. "The medical facts do not support scheduling," Edward Langston of the American Medical Association told a Senate committee in the spring of 1989. "First, anabolic steroids have an accepted use in the treatment of several medical conditions. Second, abuse of steroids does not lead to physical or psychological dependence."

The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) also opposed adding anabolic steroids to the Controlled Substances Act. At a 1988 hearing, the DEA's Gene Haislip argued that steroids did not share the "principally psychoactive" quality of other scheduled drugs, and were mostly used "to develop muscles, to increase physical performance, and perhaps simply to look good and appear to be more attractive to the opposite sex." Haislip also didn't want to add to the DEA's workload. "We do, in fact, have our hands full with some other problems."

But both Congress and sporting bodies saw steroids as a problem. And so in 1990, when Congress added anabolic steroids to the Controlled Substances Act, they were put in Schedule III, rather than Schedule I or II. That's a crucial distinction, because unlike drugs labeled Schedule I—a category that contains marijuana, psilocybin, and LSD, among others—doctors can prescribe, pharmacists can sell, and patients can legally possess Schedule III drugs.

In 1988, domestic sales of legal testosterone were roughly $18 million, according to a 2002 Institute of Medicine survey. By 1999, the market was $100 million. Between 1999 and 2002, the number of testosterone prescriptions written in the U.S. each year more than doubled, from 648,000 to 1.75 million. From 2010 to 2013, the number of men filling testosterone prescriptions jumped from 1.2 million to 2.2 million. Today, the prescription testosterone market is worth more than $2 billion, and is expected to crest at $3 billion by the end of the decade. In its attempt to purge anabolic steroids from American culture, Congress paved the way for them to become an unremarkable fixture in the country's medicine cabinets.

MEDICALIZATION Abbott Pharmaceuticals' Androgel, released in 2000, was the industry's first successful attempt to market testosterone as a prescription drug for men with "low T." Thanks to those efforts (and the internet), the target audience of men in their 50s, 60s, and 70s can essentially self-diagnose with the help of the ADAM questionnaire. (ADAM is an acronym for Androgen Deficiency in the Aging Male. The list of questions includes "Are you sad or grumpy?" and "Are your erections less strong?")

Prior to Androgel's approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), testosterone deficiency was not a condition most Americans knew about. Nor did they know a doctor could prescribe them testosterone. Today, millions of Americans are on testosterone therapy—anabolic steroids by a less objectionable name—and the medical community is waging an internecine war over who should get it and why.

On one side are the restrictionists. In the April 2015 Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, Thomas Perls of Boston Medical Center and David J. Handelsman of the University of Sydney deemed the "mass marketing of testosterone coupled with the permissive prescribing of testosterone for common, nonspecific, aging-related symptoms" to be "disease mongering." That same year, the FDA announced that "testosterone is being used extensively in attempts to relieve symptoms in men who have low testosterone for no apparent reason other than aging" and that "the benefits and safety of this use have not been established."

According to a drug use review commissioned by the FDA, 71 percent of the legal testosterone products sold in the U.S. between 2009 and 2013 were topical preparations such as Androgel, itself the best-selling testosterone product in the United States.

Whether or not all these men "need" testosterone is difficult to say, because the definition of who qualifies for the therapy varies by doctor and specialty. Most doctors now agree that testosterone levels in men decline with age, and that testosterone deficiency is comorbid with—meaning it occurs alongside and correlates with—other health problems, like obesity. There's even some evidence that American men are experiencing a generational decline in testosterone. But what should be done about these age-related declines, if anything, is a contentious topic.

A post-adolescent male's serum testosterone level is considered normal if a blood test reveals anything between 300 and 1,000 nanograms per deciliter (ng/dl). The Endocrine Society, the leading professional organization for clinicians working in hormonal medicine, takes the most conservative stance on testosterone prescribing. That means encouraging doctors to test their patients on two different days when the patient is healthy, since viral infections, sleeplessness, stress, and corticosteroids can all suppress testosterone levels. Any patient with serum testosterone levels at or even just slightly above 300 is "normal" under the Endocrine Society guidelines. Then again, so is a patient with testosterone levels that are three times higher.

Facing off against the restrictionists are doctors who take a broader view. "There is almost no other blood test that has that wide a range," says Abraham Morgantaler, a Boston urologist and faculty member at Harvard Medical School. An early pioneer of testosterone therapy, Morgantaler does not approve of giving it "for non-medical treatment," and he discourages patients from using testosterone he hasn't prescribed them. (Using two or more testosterone drugs simultaneously is called "stacking," and it's popular among bodybuilders.) Yet even with these stringent standards, he faces an uphill climb in convincing other doctors that "there's an enormous number of men who are walking around with undiagnosed testosterone deficiency."

"Most endocrinologists deal with diabetes and thyroid problems," Morgantaler explains. "That's 98 percent of their practice. They're unfamiliar and uncomfortable with low testosterone." That lack of familiarity may mean the average endocrinologist won't test for "free" testosterone (which is the amount of serum testosterone available for the body to use) or for androgen insensitivity (being less sensitive to androgens, says Morgantaler, means "if two people have the same testosterone levels, one of them will be fine, and the other will be symptomatic").

Some doctors will commence treatment for a patient who is on the low side of normal, and some will not. Some doctors will prescribe 200 milligrams of testosterone a week; some, like Morgantaler, believe it's unnecessary in most cases to exceed 100 mg a week; others will prescribe only 50 mg weekly. Some doctors encourage patients to use the gel preparation, while others only provide a patch, an implanted pellet, or injections. Of the latter, some use biweekly injections and some use weekly injections. Some doctors allow patients to inject themselves; others require an office visit. Some doctors will prescribe testosterone to women—who can also be deficient—while many more will not.

In short, testosterone-prescribing practices vary wildly. And that fractured landscape presents an arbitrage opportunity for recreational users who have done their homework.

MOTIVATION The best evidence we have that patients are using testosterone therapy for performance enhancement—what some doctors call "non-medical" use—comes from the patients themselves.

A 2007 survey of nearly 2,000 anabolic steroid users revealed both motivations for use and methods of drug acquisition. The study, published in the Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, was conducted by psychologists Jason Cohen and Jack Darkes, criminal defense attorney Rick Collins, and pathologist Daniel Gwartney. The four men used steroid message boards, mass email lists, and muscle-magazine ads to recruit anabolic steroid users for an anonymous survey on what drugs they use and why.

The study, which had the largest sample size of any survey yet conducted of anabolic steroid users, found that 45 percent of respondents held at least a bachelor's degree and 83 percent were employed. Fifty percent made between $40,000 and $100,000 a year, and 25 percent made between $100,000 and $300,000 a year. More than 700 participants had jobs in banking, law, engineering, or computer science, while 112 worked in health care and 77 identified as members of law enforcement, as private security, or as first responders.

A study of 231 anabolic steroid users that was published by the Mayo Clinic in 2016 paints practically the same picture. "Most were white, were older than 25 years, were employed with above average income, and had received a formal education beyond high school," the authors wrote.

The users' motivations were not what we've come to expect from media reports about anabolic steroids. On a ranked scale, the Cohen study found that professional bodybuilding and professional sports were of little to no importance, while increasing strength, muscle mass, confidence, and appearance all ranked at the very top. ("Attract sex partners" was smack dab in the middle.) The Mayo Clinic study found similar motives.

Both surveys, along with a 2006 poll of 500 anabolic steroid users conducted by doctors at University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), share the same inherent methodological weakness: While online surveys are an acceptable way to capture the sentiments of specific groups, they don't necessarily provide comprehensive data about everyone using steroids non-medically. Cohen and company could not "completely rule out" that "the use of an Internet survey strategy could have [led] to an over-sampling of those with higher education and socio-economic status."

The authors of the Mayo Clinic study write, however, that "the association of increasing age with higher incomes, being married, and being self-employed are also consistent with trends observed in the broader U.S. population (as indicated in 2010 U.S. Census data), which suggests that the current survey provides a demographically appropriate representative sample of the population."

Even in the absence of more conventional polling—which is difficult to carry out due to the legal status of many of these drugs—it's safe to assume that the vast majority of people who use steroids do so for the same reason another person might get plastic surgery, take a prescribed weight-loss drug, or join a gym: They want to feel better and to look better.

COLLABORATION Nearly half of all steroid users still buy drugs online, according to the Mayo Clinic, UCLA, and Cohen studies. But those reports also show a clear increase in prescription testosterone use. The UCLA doctors found that 11 percent of users get their testosterone from a doctor; in the Cohen study, the figure was 6 percent. In the Mayo study, conducted roughly 10 years later, nearly 28 percent were using prescription testosterone.

The rise among anabolic steroid users reflects the incredible role that the internet has played not only in providing men with access to illegal muscle drugs but also in educating them about how to obtain them legally. On dozens of online forums, steroid users have access to each other and to a wealth of clinical data going back decades.

There are threads dedicated to crashing your natural testosterone level in order to qualify for a prescription (getting drunk, barely sleeping, and using illegally acquired steroids will all do the trick). There are dosage instructions for "ancillary" drugs such as aromatase inhibitors, which block the conversion of excess testosterone to estrogen (the process by which steroid users develop gynecomastia, or "gyno"—an increase in glandular tissue under the nipple commonly called "man boobs"). There are discussions of post-cycle therapy, a timed cocktail of prescription drugs that restores natural testicular function. While the vast majority of the substances discussed in these forums have been extensively tested in human beings and are approved by the FDA, none of them were designed to benefit non-medical users of anabolic steroids. Men have pieced together their off-label usefulness over decades, drawing on peer-reviewed papers and on trial and error.

"I've used several different compounds, both as a responsible user and as an idiot teenager," says a D.C.-based software engineer who asked me to identify him as Matt, "and I've watched the underground knowledge of steroids blossom over the years with the advent of popular online communities that are geared toward performance enhancement." Forums like T Nation (the t stands for testosterone) and websites like PubMed, a clearinghouse for clinical research hosted by the National Institutes of Health, have been "key for recreational users like myself."

Matt started using steroids in high school while playing football. He continued to use them on and off for years—fathering two children with his wife between drug cycles—until complications from a vasectomy forced him to go on testosterone replacement therapy. "I ended up with a honeydew for a nutsack" after infection set in, he says. "Three months of missed work and two surgeries later, I had low testosterone."

Users like Matt have watched the muscle drug ecosystem evolve away from the "bro science" of the '80s and '90s and toward a collective research project focused on balancing the pursuit of an ideal physique with the desire to live a normal lifespan, start a family, and have a stable career.

"Before everyone was on the internet, you basically had to be in a hardcore powerlifting gym for months or years to find a connection. But the stereotypical gym dealer is a dying breed, and besides, these days most of those guys just buy the stuff online and then mark it up anyway." Meanwhile, people who want to know exactly what they're taking go to a doctor.

As a result of this shift to the web, where "lifetime users and lifetime researchers make themselves available," Matt says he and his compatriots are "much more informed and more concerned about learning how to use these compounds safely."

They share logs of their cycles—the length of time users are "on" steroids—documenting the changes in their appearance as well as side effects, such as acne, hair loss, and gyno. They share dosing regimens in search of feedback, and they challenge people to back up their claims with links to peer-reviewed research. Newbies are routinely told to have their blood tested before, during, and after their cycles, and teenagers are told to wait until they've reached full maturity.

The result is a pool of knowledge, both clinical and anecdotal, that far exceeds what most medical students learn about anabolic steroids during four years of medical school.

Yet there are still risks involved. Steroid users have each other, but they often lack professional medical guidance. In the 2006 UCLA survey, 91 percent of respondents said "they would prefer to use [anabolic steroids] legally under the direct supervision of a knowledgeable physician," but only 37 percent had ever discussed their drug use with a doctor. While the Mayo Clinic survey found that 69 percent of respondents regularly see a physician, participants weren't asked whether they disclose their steroid use during visits.

This remains the Achilles' heel of steroid prohibition. All three surveys found that most users take anabolic steroids in dosages that far exceed what a testosterone therapy doctor would prescribe, and are also likely using other muscle-building or weight-loss drugs, some of which—like the industrial chemical DNP, an ingredient in explosives—are categorically dangerous even in small amounts.

The majority of participants in each survey reported getting blood work done for their cholesterol levels, red blood cell counts, and liver health, something that's easier than ever in the age of private lab tests. But increased physician involvement would go a long way toward protecting user health. "I've done five cycles over the course of 10 years. In hindsight, I know that most of what I took was not safe, in the sense that I had no way of knowing what it was, whether it was 'clean,' whether the dose was correct," Ned, the academic who began using in college, wrote in an email.

Even still, it's hard to deny that the internet has made testosterone use both safer and more effective. In the process, the net has helped it go mainstream. Few people know that better than Chris Shugart, the chief content officer at T Nation and a leading voice for expanding testosterone access in order to provide "a safe and legal boost."

When he first started advocating for non-medical use of testosterone therapy, Shugart says the practice was "associated with steroid users, drug cheats, and 'roid rage.'" But today, "there are low-T centers and men's health clinics right next to Whole Foods and Super Cuts that routinely prescribe testosterone."

ACTUALIZATION Drug policy reformers almost never include muscle drugs in their reform agendas, perhaps because comparatively few people are busted for steroid trafficking. In 2015, federal judges sentenced 6,468 methamphetamine offenders, 6,166 cocaine offenders, 3,543 marijuana offenders, and 2,744 heroin offenders, but only 50 steroid offenders. That's 50 people too many, but it's not a number around which you can build a protest movement.

Ordering drugs off the black market poses a risk, regardless of how well-informed the buyers may be, but adverse reactions to anabolic steroids aren't a public health problem so far. Testosterone will never inspire the same cultural panic as, say, opioids, because the negative effects of testosterone use—arterial sclerosis, tumor growth, liver disease—tend to occur over years, if not decades, and only with certain compounds and dosages. Congress could mitigate those effects by rescheduling steroids and allowing doctors to prescribe them for non-medical purposes, but doctors aren't clamoring for that power and federal lawmakers have shown little interest in re- or descheduling anything.

As long as legal restrictions on steroid use remain, there will still be raids and arrests. The Justice Department will continue to add new formulations to the Controlled Substances Act just as quickly as chemists create them. Steroid users will still suffer bodily harm from dirty drugs and sloppy dosing protocols. In the absence of further clinical trials—highly unlikely since testosterone is off-patent—a divided medical community will continue to bicker about the safety and efficacy of the stuff even as millions of men use it.

But in a way, the war on steroids has already been won and the users are the victors. The internet is not going away, nor is the human desire to tweak and enhance the body. As we advance toward a future in which people are ever more modifiable, the things steroid users do will seem less strange.

Some once-potent arguments have already lost their luster. The mass proliferation of testosterone therapy has all but extinguished the idea that steroids make men uncontrollably violent. (With more than 2 million legal users roaming around, there should have been a noticeable uptick in violent crime if the stereotypes were true.) And the cultural objections about vanity are even less compelling. If the increase in Type II diabetes and other diseases associated with sedentary habits and junk food tells us anything, it's that Americans could stand to be far more vain about their bodies.

Steroid users have learned to think for themselves—to figure out what works for them and what doesn't; to weigh risks and rewards; and to aggressively investigate a lie that federal legislators had tried to push at gunpoint, in the idea that using steroids to get leaner and stronger would ruin their lives and compromise their characters.

Matt's occasional online purchases make him a criminal, but they have not made him less of a husband, a worse software engineer, or a bad father. Just the opposite, in fact: "Steroid use has motivated me to work out more, it's made me leaner, helps me sleep better and feel better. It's also kept my sex life very much alive and active," he wrote. "I have few regrets."

Advertisement

NEXT: Is the proposed 'border adjustment' tax unconstitutional?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Besides which, baseball has really lost its mojo since testing became policy. The game may be more “classical”, but it seems to be going back to the days of watching the lawn grow again.

    1. I’m making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.

      This is what I do.,.,.,.,.. http://www.careerstoday100.com

  2. The government:
    That same year, the FDA announced that “testosterone is being used extensively in attempts to relieve symptoms in men who have low testosterone for no apparent reason other than aging” and that “the benefits and safety of this use have not been established.”
    The real world:
    On dozens of online forums, steroid users have access to each other and to a wealth of clinical data going back decades.
    Any questions?
    Side note; there are no peer reviewed double blind federal government studies that prove the sun rises in the east, but plenty of anecdotal reports. Who ya gonna believe?

  3. Awesome. Elizabeth Nolan Brown is still whining because she just can’t understand why some people in her profession would block her on Twitter just because she’s a psychopathological liar who likes to publicly defame people.

    What a sick, fucked up bitch.

  4. Testosterone treatment is heavily advertised on conservative talk radio. Gun safes, gold and limp dicks.

  5. “the benefits and safety of this use have not been established”

    You could say the same thing about chocolate ice cream. It’s safe, but there’s no scientifically-established benefits and look at the hazards like obesity, diabeetus, stained clothing and brain freeze. Shouldn’t government do something about this? Think of the children!

  6. Thank Joe Biden, a subhuman piece of rat dung, for this. Seriously, look it up, Biden is the scum who pushed this legislation through against the advice of almost everyone who was even somewhat knowledgeable on the subject. I hope that piece of shit dies a slow and horribly painful death. I will totally enjoy that.

    1. Sessions too. Dip fuck.

  7. I get paid 99.00 bucks every hour for work at home on my laptop. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my good friend HUe is earning 22.00k /monthly by doing this job and she showed me how. Try it out on following website

    …… http://www.Prowage20.com

  8. Besides which, baseball has really lost its mojo since testing became policy. The game may be more “classical”, but it seems to be going back to the days of watching the lawn grow Kodi For Android.

  9. I am, in general, in favor of legalization of all drugs, with minimal regulation. This is simply because the government should not be granted that much authority over us, and when it is it exercises it badly.

    That said, I have had personal and unpleasant experience with steroids. My Lady was prescribed too much steroid for too long for a misdiagnosed breathing problem. It screwed her up in a number of (pretty well documented, study-wise) ways, and getting her off of it was slow hell. In fact, she’s stolen a very low maintenance dose, and probably will never be totally off the stuff.

    Now, steroids being strictly regulated didn’t prevent that. And outlawing them entirely probably wouldn’t have prevented that particular doctor from screwing up my wide’s health. He was a twit. I don’t want stricter regulation; I want a shift in liability law such that I could sue not for money but for the opportunity to spend ten minutes in a room with the idiot with a tire iron.

    But the over-regulation of steroids should not be allowed to create a backlash of ‘steroids are wonderful;’ bullshit. They are powerful drugs, that have strong side effects (because they have strong effects). Handle with care, and watch out for the steroid equivalent of “Legalizing Pot will save all our problems” crap.

    1. That said, I have had personal and unpleasant experience with steroids. My Lady was prescribed too much steroid for too long for a misdiagnosed breathing problem. It screwed her up in a number of (pretty well documented, study-wise) ways, and getting her off of it was slow hell. In fact, she’s stolen a very low maintenance dose, and probably will never be totally off the stuff.

      CSP please assure that you and Riggs are talking about the same class of drugs. There are anabolic (androgenic) steroids, which are illegal, that, with greater or lesser specificity, work on muscle and sex-specific tissues. Then there are (adrenal) glucocorticosteroids which are legal, with prescription, that treat all manner of inflammation (from asthma to tendonitis). I believe you have the two confused.

      For the record, IME, corticosteroids are by far more dangerous and there are way more licensed professionals in need of a good tire-iron refresher on their proper use. There was a while when orthopedists and trainers were (ab)using them to keep kids on the field. Pro-sports organizations now frown heavily on the practice, but there are still plenty of ‘normal patient’ doctors willing to take that shortcut.

      All of the above, however, lends to your point albeit from a slightly different angle; if you don’t know the difference between corticosteroids and anabolic steroids you should probably consult one or more doctors before partaking.

      1. There may be a difference between anabolic steroids and glucocorticosteroids (hell, there clearly is), but that difference is NOT that glucocorticosteroids are harmless. I am not an expert on drugs, but the strong impression I got from extensive reading during my Lady’s withdrawal is that nearly ALL steroids have strong effects, much stronger than many doctors in practice are fully aware of (the poor bastards have an awful lot to keep up on, and Federal Paperwork tends to get the nod, because they will go to jail if they screw it up)

        1. but that difference is NOT that glucocorticosteroids are harmless.

          Sorry if I wasn’t clear, I believe this precisely opposite. More to the point, I think you’d have to do some pretty dumb things, repeatedly, in order to hurt yourself with anabolic steroids. Glucocorticosteroids, OTOH, are routinely fucked up by medical professionals in a single dose/cycle.

          1. Grr… this *precisely*. For many reasons corticosteroids are more dangerous than anabolic steroids, IMO.

  10. “That said, I have had personal and unpleasant experience with steroids. My Lady was prescribed too much steroid for too long for a misdiagnosed breathing problem….”

    I don’t think that’s the kind of steroids this article is talking about. You’re referring to a corticosteroid.

    http://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-gu…..eroids-101

    This was a very well-written article that addressed the topic pretty thoroughly in balanced manner. Quite refreshing. Anabolic steroids, taken at intelligent doses with proper diet and exercise, are extraordinary for improvements in quality of life.

    Would have liked the article to also tough on the increasing use of GH for anti-aging, quality of life purposes. Also an extraordinary drug that has been unfairly vilified.

    Thanks for the good article.

    1. I gather, from expensive reading, that ALL steroids, used carefully and for the right reasons, can bring about enormous improvements in quality of life. But the strength of that effect, sadly, means that taken carelessly or for the wrong reasons they can screw you up the way Pol Pot screwed up Cambodia.

      1. I can’t disagree with what you say, but I suppose the same thing can be said for aspirin.

        It’s my opinion that the doping scandals in major league sports are a significant reason that steroids have been vilified because they are deemed to be cheating. Emery boards are also cheating, and yet we clearly understand that they have their proper place in American life.

        The challenge with anabolic steroids is that they greatly affect your hormone profile, and because they are so effective in providing significant improvement in performance, it creates huge incentives for high school athletes to take them (i.e., abuse them) to get that Division I college scholarship. No doubt, 16 year old kids should not be taking anabolic steroids when they are in the midst of puberty.

        Unfortunately, this abuse my youngsters snags everyone in the same dragnet, and all the 40-80 year old men to whom such drugs provide extraordinary improvements in quality of life get labeled as criminals. I’d rather they de-schedule anabolic steroids and keep the rules in place (at least in the high school and college level) with strict penalties for kids and schools for doping.

  11. Not sure why anybody should care if an athlete wants to potentially ruin his future for a better present.

    Steroids mean jack to me.

    1. don’t you mean “JACKED UP”?

  12. …he could obtain the same drug?testosterone, the paterfamilias of anabolic steroids?legally.

    But that ain’t bona fide!

    1. Thank you for recognizing my “O Brother” reference.

  13. Hehe… I got a copy of WAR around 1995, and used many of the safer substances listed — I’m 6’2″ and went from 165 lbs to 200+ lbs without gaining any fat. It was lifechanging in so many ways, mainly related to not looking like a walking gantry tower. Today I probably could have gotten a script, but the grey market was it then. Gave it up before I turned 30, managed to keep most of my gains over the years since without anything not sold on Amazon.

    Of course in those days on the commercial there was mostly only creatine (which does nothing except pump you up for muscle tears). Today we have tribulus and all the precursors plus stuff like Halotest, plus arginine and other things that can spike your GH, so if you’re not really hardcore you have a lot more options.

    1. I got a copy of WAR around 1995

      Which was still a decade behind Dan Duchaine.

      which does nothing except pump you up for muscle tears

      This is idiotic. Creatine has been shown to have all kinds of physical and psychological effects, injury potentiation is not one of them. If creatine did do that, dozens of steroids are far more effective/egregious about exacerbating the exact same phenomenon.

      Tribulus has been repeatedly shown to be junk. There are people out there with disposable income who may fall into some weird ‘high responders’ group… more power to them. The average person, OTOH, is not going to see any effect from Tribulus.

      Arginine is a terrible ‘drug’. Your body, for eons of evolution, has adapted to tearing the molecule apart and expelling it. You can get a (few) one-off rises in HGH from various amino acids, but your body readily adapts to consuming them as fuel because that’s what it’s always done.

      Halotest is an unequivocal anabolic/androgenic steroid and, IMO, a bad one at that.

      1. The trib studies are a lot like the vitamin C studies — low doses in young healthy people show no effect, but higher doses are effective for many people in certain common situations.

        Now, is trib anything like Sustanon or Deca Durabolin or Dianabol? No, not even in the same league. But it does bump your endogenous test.

        Arginine is just an amino acid. It has been shown to promote vascularity and to be generally mildly anabolic. Should be avoided when sick because it also probably promotes growth in infectious agents. Glutamine has been used to similar effect.

        Halo is not 17aa like Winstrol or Anadrol or Dianabol, so I’m not sure on what basis one would consider it all that bad.

        1. Halo is not 17aa like Winstrol or Anadrol or Dianabol, so I’m not sure on what basis one would consider it all that bad.

          You clearly know little about what you are speaking. Your entire post is cluttered with biochemical garbage but this statement is the most ill-informed. Halotestin is 17-? activated and therefor will be metabolized by the liver. Moreover, 17-? activation is not the only way you make a steroid toxic. Specifically, Halotestin contains a fluorine making it a halogenated organic (thus *Halo*) and is a class of chemicals more taxing to the liver. Additionally, Halotestin, despite being a nominally anabolic/androgenic steroid, is a glucocorticoid agonist. The last two of these being rather unique to Halotestin (among AAS).

          On top of all of this, widespread anecdote places Halo rather ‘low’ on the anabolic end of the spectrum (possibly as the result of glucocorticoid agonism) , meaning that you have to take higher doses of to attain the same gains as more anabolic compounds.

          I’m not one to wholly subscribe to the notion that any/all steroid use inherently damages your liver and am pretty much in favor of people having the freedom to liquefy their livers in order to get bigger and stronger. However, if I had to choose one steroid that I considered to be the closest thing to poison, Halo would be it.

          1. You have no idea what you’re talking about. You don’t even know what 17aa means — 17-alpha-alkylated, because of the alkali group.

            I did make one type above — HaloTEST is 17aa. HaloPLEX is methylated androstenedione, and can be bought on Amazon.

            I’m not bothering to read further, your ignorance is your problem and you seem to be roid raging. Good luck with that,

            1. You have no idea what you’re talking about. You don’t even know what 17aa means — 17-alpha-alkylated, because of the alkali group

              The drug is orally active or activated and it’s made so by an alkyl (carbon chain) group. Alkali is relatively unrelated to what’s being stated here. This is 100-200 level collegiate organic chemistry.

              You confused Haloplex with Halotest, you deserve a routing.

              1. Your comment is so epically stupid it earns one last reply.

                Yes, I made a typo in the name of a product I bought several years. Sorry the lack of rigor in my aimless anecdote so distressed you.

                Yes, alkali for alkyl is a typo. “Activated” from you is just stupid. Also stupid: Dan Duchaine makes WAR obsolete.

                1. Yes, I made a typo in the name of a product

                  Yes, alkali for alkyl is a typo.

                  Two typos that change the fundamental semantics of your statements (that you correct only after refuting my syntactically/semantically correct statements) and I’m the one with a reading/writing comprehension problem?

                  The visitors/audience on these forums are generally smarter than you’re giving them credit for.

      2. This is idiotic. Creatine has been shown to have all kinds of physical and psychological effects, injury potentiation is not one of them. If creatine did do that, dozens of steroids are far more effective/egregious about exacerbating the exact same phenomenon.

        The question was never studied in any rigorous detail, but anecdotally among BBs if you enjoy muscle pulls go nuts. Yes, other things can do this too, but many of them also promote muscle growth. The whole concept of “pump up your ATP-ADP axis” was, to use your phrase, idiotic but various idiots still believe it.

        1. The question was never studied in any rigorous detail, but anecdotally among BBs if you enjoy muscle pulls go nuts.

          I presume this to mean among BBs in your gym or in the circles you run in and, again, this is more disinformation. If you suffer frequent muscle pulls, the problem is, among strength coaches, generally regarded as either a technique or preparation issue and wouldn’t be exacerbated by creatine. Or at least not exacerbated in a way that (e.g.) Anadrol wouldn’t exacerbate 10-fold. The most ‘legitimate’ claims of muscle pulls associated with creatine come from regulatory bodies who, after banning steroids, felt the need to march down the list of chemical boogeymen.

          Among lifters, strength athletes, athletes in general, personal trainers and strength coaches… moreover, among biologists and biochemists creatine isn’t questioned. Unlike your false analogy above, creatine is more like exogenouse testosterone and vitamin C than tribulus. It acts directly in/on your physiology and ingesting or injecting it leads to direct and measurable, dose-dependent, increases. Precisely dislike tribulus which repeatedly shows nothing resembling any sort of dose-dependence or similarly predictable physiological response.

          1. Creatine as a bodybuilding supplement is effectively useless and just tends to cause more muscle tears. At GNC they would tell you it was the hot new way to build muscle, among the fairly serious BBs (people who weren’t afraid of a gram/day of test) I knew it was considered a bad joke, at best something to tell the newbs you were doing to hide the fact you were using something else.

            Lots of trainers swear by homeopathics too. There are enough myths and pseudoscience to support about any position on anything, so feel free to believe whatever you want.

            1. As for the source… there were few very discreet, invitation-only online BB groups in the 1990s, comprised of hundreds of people were at least semi-serious about BB (some competing) and had a lot of experience with various cycles. Maybe they were all wrong, but I doubt it.

              As for “biologists and chemists” there is not even a proposed chemical or biological mechanism by which replenishing ATP would cause your muscles to grow — but it’s still a great sell to the newbs.

              1. As for “biologists and chemists” there is not even a proposed chemical or biological mechanism by which replenishing ATP would cause your muscles to grow — but it’s still a great sell to the newbs.

                Wow… just wow. Some trolls have said some pretty brainless things but this is breathtaking in it’s willful ignorance.

                You may as well have said there’s no proposed chemical or biological mechanism by which replenishing caloric reserves causes muscles to grow.

                1. Right, because if you stop taking creatine the results are the same as if don’t eat anything.

                  Epic fail.

                  1. Right, because if you stop taking creatine the results are the same as if don’t eat anything.

                    If you stop producing creatine or deplete your body of creatine phosphate the results are the same as if you don’t eat anything, yes. Now, we’re covering 100-level biochemistry.

        2. On top of the strict muscular effects, the mechanisms by which creatine is postulated to work should produce other physiological and even cognitive effects besides simple mass retention. Not unsurprisingly these effects have been independently demonstrated. This is the case not in obscure Acta Retracta and niche scandinavian and soviet physiology journals but widely-read, mainstream, and field/flagship journals like Neurology.

          The fact that you tout arginine and glutamine supplements as though they do something exceedingly significant while poo pooing creatine really suggests that you have little understanding of the biochemistry at work. The average person consumes excessive amounts of arginine and glutamine eating a ‘normal’ diet and they are even copious in vegeterian, vegan, and other similarly nutrient depleted diets. Creatine, OTOH, is completely lacking from a vegetarian diet. A plain use-case where supplementation would and does make *perfect* sense just as if you were to give someone suffering from scurvy a vitamin C supplement.

          1. The fact you read ” exceedingly significant” into “now we have some legal stuff that kinda works” tells me your reading comprehension is terrible. Yes, taking an amino acid on its own can have different effects than consuming it as part of something else.

            I’m not wasting any more time reading your nonsense, but I’ll leave you with two of the many studies on arginine.

            https:/ /www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3151442/
            http:/ /www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S2255497115000981

            1. me your reading comprehension is terrible.

              No one wrote the phrase “now we have some legal stuff that kinda works”. I wrote ‘Halotest’, you read HaloPLEX.

              You offer the internet equivalent of zero evidence that creatine has anything to do with muscle pulls or tears and, instead, offer data that confirms widely-known amino acid supplementation protocols. The use and efficacy of amino acid supplements is well older than steroid use/abuse but, I guess they wouldn’t talk about history on your 90s-era bodybuilding forums (or you wouldn’t read it).

              1. No, I wrote Halotest, you copied it, I explained it was a typo.

                You offered zero evidence of anything. Thanks for some brief entertainment in your flailing around roid-raged about… something or other. Goodbye, enjoy your massive gains on creatine (snicker).

  14. “…That stuff’ll shrink your testicles, but there’s bad side effects too.”
    L

  15. “…That stuff’ll shrink your testicles, but there’s bad side effects too.”
    L

  16. gives you a great opportunity to earn 98652$ at your home.If you are some intelligent you makemany more Dollars.I am also earning many more, my relatives wondered to see how i settle my Life in few days thank GOD to you for this…You can also make cash i never tell alie you should check this I am sure you shocked to see this amazing offer…I’m Loving it!!!!

    ====== http://www.Prowage20.Com

  17. gives you a great opportunity to earn 98652$ at your home.If you are some intelligent you makemany more Dollars.I am also earning many more, my relatives wondered to see how i settle my Life in few days thank GOD to you for this…You can also make cash i never tell alie you should check this I am sure you shocked to see this amazing offer…I’m Loving it!!!!

    ====== http://www.Prowage20.Com

  18. I gather, from expensive reading, that ALL steroids, used carefully and for the right reasons, can bring about enormous improvements in quality of life. But the strength of that effect, sadly, means that taken carelessly or for the wrong reasons they can screw you up the way Pol Pot screwed up Cambodia.

    Sent from FanInviter Review
    Sent from ImprovPal Review

  19. Today steroids are banned in some countries. The use and buy steroids are secretly taking place on the internet

  20. Check out how to watch the 2017 Miss Universe online. Read on for details on watching the competition via live stream.

  21. Find out how to watch the Golden Globes, which officially kick off … The ceremony will be broadcast live on NBC from 8 P.M. to 11 P.M. EST.
    Welcome To Watch 24/7 Online Golden Globes Live Stream: Watch 75th Annual Golden Globes Awards 2018 Show HD TV Coverage With Instant Easy access …

  22. That’s almost twice what the network streamed in the 2018 Winter games — just over 1,000 hours of footage, which also marked the first time that every event was streamed online. The 2018 streaming coverage will include live simulcasts of network programming, three streaming-only digital shows, as well read this: Pyeongchang Winter Olympics Opening ceremony live stream

  23. New South Wales Blues are one victory away from winning the State of Origin series for just the second time in 12 years and face off with the Queensland Maroons in Game 2 at ANZ Stadium in Sydney on Wednesday. Another way to live stream NRL matches is to use Foxtel’s streaming applications. Every game apart from the grand final and State of Origin is broadcast on Foxtel, so you can use either Foxtel Now or the Foxtel App. If you already have Foxtel, then the Foxtel App is the one for you. If not, sign up for Foxtel …

  24. In the UK, BBC holds the rights for Wimbledon Coverage and broadcasts are split between its channels BBC1 and BBC2. BBC then distributes ad-free feeds to worldwide media. While in the United States the entire TV Broadcast is given to ESPN. Tune into ESPN and ESPN2 for the Live stream of Wimbledon Coverage while the …

  25. Thanks

  26. Watch FIFA world cup 2018 Russia live streaming, Want to Watch football tournament live? Watch fifa world cup live matches here and Get updated fifa live match score here.

  27. You guys are writing some Amazing tips. This article really helped me a lot. Thanks for sharing this.
    World cup live stream indian time

  28. The 118th US Open Golf Championship, to be held June 11-17, 2018, at Shinnecock Hills Golf Club in Southampton, N.Y, live here https://www.golf-usopen.com/ free to watch.
    https://web.facebook.com/2018USOpenGolf/
    https://twitter.com/USOpenGolf2018/
    https://www.instagram.com/usopengolf2018

  29. You are right and thanks for your post!

  30. OK fine, Now this is the best one which i wanted to share with you. Follow this https://wc2018live.org website for getting more information about WorldCup 2018

  31. The 2018 FIFA World Cup in Russia is the 21st edition of the single biggest tournament for the single biggest sport on the planet. FIFA World Cup Live Stream is just around the corner which will be taking place in Russia from June to July 2018. … first time in history FIFA World Cup will have extensive online streaming on rights holder websites and mobile apps. Get FIFA World Cup Opening Ceremony Live Stream online available now.

  32. If you need to know more about how to pga championship Get the best way to Watch live online TV coverage of watch golf us open live championship, schedule, leaderboard and enjoy it on your iPhone, android, iPad, and iPod touch.

  33. Watch British Open 2018, Open Golf 2018 Ticket, the 147th Open Championship, held 19?22 July 2018 at Carnoustie Golf Links in Angus,
    The 147th Open in 2018

  34. nfl 2018 live stream, Game day, NFL news, video highlights,
    fantasy football, Live coverage, schedules, source.

    https://www.facebook.com/SuperBowl2020/
    https://twitter.com/NFLGamesLive/
    https://www.facebook.com/nflgamesonline/

  35. National Football League 2018, Game day, NFL news, video highlights,
    fantasy football, Live coverage, schedules, source.
    nike nfl uniforms

  36. The 2018 NFL TV schedule on FOX, NBC, CBS, ESPN and NFL Network. The season gets underway September 6 with the Eagles hosting Atlanta in the annual …

  37. Complete golf coverage on ESPN.com, including tournament schedules, results, news, highlights, and more from ESPN.

  38. The experimentation you quoted “”The use of anabolic steroids to build strength and muscle goes back to the middle of the 20th century and a company called Ciba Pharmaceuticals. Is that true. AFL Grand Final event live

  39. Catch up on your favorite MLB Network HD shows. See what’s on MLB Network HD and watch On Demand on your TV or online!

  40. What time do the UFC 229 live on? Can I watch UFC 229 live on VIPBox for free. Khabib Nurmagomedov vs Conor McGregor press conference for UFC 229, start time, date and live online streaming and more.
    main ufc fight tonight
    main ufc fight tonight

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.