Comments on: Steroids Are Not Bad

By: just right

just right — Wed, 16 Mar 2011 04:10:29 +0000

steroid use for medium to long periods of time are dangerous for your long term health. Athletes should not have to worry about risking anymore than they already do for their profession, look up to them for it or not. maybe you should spend more time on the research and instead of just look up words to make yourself more secure in your argument however stupid it may be. you should have titled it “cocaine isn’t bad” because thats about how relevant it is.

By: dianabol samples

dianabol samples — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 02:44:03 +0000

The dangers of steroids have been exaggerated in the media but they are not without side effects. They also work well and you feel so good on them that they are addictive.

By: Top Sports Star

Top Sports Star — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 05:34:59 +0000

The most obvious way of avoiding these health problems is to limit your steroid use. It is better not to patronage steroids for long period of time. It is much more convenient and safe if you try to improve your physical appearance naturally by exercise and total body workout.

By: Sports Star Pro

Sports Star Pro — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 03:57:12 +0000

Steroids are said to have a bad side effects to the body which can last longer even lifetime. Cardiovascular diseases are said to be the number one effect of taking steroids. High blood pressure, hardening of arteries, palpitations and high cholesterol levels are some of the bad effects of steroids.

By: Sports Star Pro

Sports Star Pro — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 03:51:09 +0000

Steroids are hormone drugs that make athletes stronger and more muscular. This is an obvious advantage on the football field.

By: Sports Star Pro Mary

Sports Star Pro Mary — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 03:41:43 +0000

Steroids are developed as therapeutic drugs to treat several medical conditions. This is why the compounds are classified as prohibited in many countries like the United States. This means that you must have a valid prescription to legally obtain one. However, with the new trend is no doubt that the non-medical use of these substances has legitimate medical offset effects of steroids.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 22:48:32 +0000

It is true that I did not read your entire post and my fingers ran away with this one. I had to argue the other side, which proves to be a tough sell with how much the media has demonized steroid usage, and how safe the drug can actually be. I do have a hard time believing that professional sports organizations provide a “steroid progress doctor” that administers ‘roids and prevents all classic signs of steroid usage. Most of these guys getting busted have ties to third party trainers, not internal locker room doctors and organizational staff. Plus how can you say for certain all these users have avoided the fabled ‘roid rage or other side effects? Remember when Barry Bonds’ voice seemed a pitch higher?
My biggest issue is this: there are going to be athletes who want to be natural. The commissioners of their respective leagues will want their players to be natural. If you were to legalize, how would the foundation of that respective league be broken? It comes down to fairness. There needs to be a level playing field in sport, and as long as there are athletes who refuse to use the substance it will not be fair for them. Why do you think there was such a guff over the Mayweather v. Pacquiao fight? Mayweather wanted the competitive balance to be equal and he wanted proof it would be with blood testing results. Pacquiao refused his testing parameters, and as a result will ALL miss out on what could have been a fight for the ages. While you have addressed the “pureness” of sport and how technology is quickly turning hands into super glue and feet into grass shredding traction finders, there still are old timers who find pureness in the smell of the rosin bag and overweight pitchers. What would ESPN be without John Kruk?!
Plus, who would take over in the fight for wondering why our balls have shrunken so much? Senate, congress, CNN?

By: Kyle Munkittrick

Kyle Munkittrick — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 15:22:26 +0000

@Herve

High School sports, like the arts, are important. They are great for school unity and encouraging fitness, both of which help elevate mood and increase mental acuity. It’s when sports become the central focus instead of academics that they become a problem.

The tragedy of “Friday Night Lights” is not that it’s about football, but that it is the normative lens for understanding school. Hopefully shows like Glee will work to change that.

By: Kyle Munkittrick

Kyle Munkittrick — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 15:14:23 +0000

@ Ryan

1. The muscle is not “artificial.” Athletes who use steroids are able to work out longer and harder, recovering faster, but the work still has to be done and the muscle tone is real.

2. To be an “all-star caliber” player, one must already make lots of other sacrifices and decisions. Steroids is just one more, along with training constantly, practicing technique, and committing to one sport as opposed to another. There are always costs.

3. When substances are legalized, information on safe usage is prolific. Even the most moronic coach knows his students shouldn’t take more than the suggested dosage of ibuprofen. Making a user a pariah discourages that person from using safely. Your logic is self-defeating: protect children by making sure they don’t have information they need and are fearful to ask for it.

In short: None of the points you made are new, they’re all addressed in my original post.

By: Hervé Musseau

Hervé Musseau — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 12:23:11 +0000

The American school system, as per point 5, stumps everyone else. There is no football players and cheerleaders in high school elsewhere, where academics is the only measure, not sports. There are special schools with an adapted program for sports, though.
Friday Light Nights is fiction to us.