The HGH and Steroid Controversy

[Drum&Bass]

it was just an example..I'm not suggesting anything man..relax..I need some kind of real world effect that I can relate to and compare that to the negative effects of steroids. The aspirin thing was an example..but something thats easily understood for NON juice heads like myself.

 

[Andromax]

I'm just trying to see what you were wanting to know.

You post seemed a little like you were baiting for something, anyways.

If you are truly curious about steroids do some research. steroid side effects

 

[wolf116]

I need some kinda comparison for the negative effects of steroids..if someone were to take the bare minimum of anabolics to see growth is the damage to a persons system equivalent to 5 aspirins all at once ??

The bare minimum use of steroids is normally a plain old testosterone cycle. It's the first cycle most people do and should gain about 20lbs of lean muscle but only keep 15lbs (on a 12 week cycle).

Don't quote me, this is just from memory.

As with comparing it to the aspirins, well since you are injecting you won't put strain on your liver and testosterone is natural so you just gain muscle like you did when you went through puberty, only more so.

 

[Being_the_Don]

Equipoise also dramatically increases appetite, so I could never perfrom cardio while cycling it. Great "cutting" agent, though.

Personally, I think Lance Armstrong was taking EPO...

And if so it means he didn't earn his wins in the Tour de France contests. It's all the same EPO, anabolic steroids, hGH, diuretics, beta blockers, etc. alter the field. Those who use the stuff might say it helps their game and doesn't hurt anybody. Okay, but why are the drugs illegal? Why does the IOC have drug testing policy in place? Why do athletes try to beat the drug tests if there is nothing wrong with performance enhancers?

If a person wants to do it, that't their choice. It's their body. But we don't live in a closed world, everyone affects everyone else. And for athletes who are training to be the best, doing it with their own blood, sweat and tears, that's the real victory.

I'll tell you a personal story. I wear gloves when I workout. It makes sense because the bars have ridged grips which rub the skin when lifting heavy. About a month ago I forgot my gloves when I went to the gym. I didn't realize it until I had already gotten to the gym. I was deadlifting that morning. I was going for the heavier lifts and I soon realized that I had rubbed the callous loose and my palm was bleeding. It was the first time that happened to me. It hurt a bit but I kept lifting (I cleaned my hand before continuing, though). It felt good because it brought home the message about putting blood and sweat into my work. I like working out. It makes me feel good. My gains may not be as fast as some of the other guys who post here at H&F (who have a different diet than me) but that's okay. There are two different camps in this debate: some of us on H& F lift naturally and some others believe stereoids, hGH, etc. are okay. Speaking personally, working out IS the boost, telling me that I can continually improve, go beyond where I am now. That's what athletics teaches us: to go beyond our self imposed limitations. This isn't a judgment on people who juice up, they have their own reasons. But what got people involved in athletics in the first place? What about the natural endorphin rush that comes from lifting heavy and having a naturally good workout? Making your body do more than it thought it could do, doing it because you make the conscious decision to make your body do what it was meant to do? And to value the only life and body that you were given? No judgement here, just saying what drives me to strength train.

 

[lookyoung]

I feel that the majority of athletes are doing steroids. If you look at the athlete from even 12 years ago till now you will notice a huge difference. When I was a kid if you were 30 you were considered over the hill. Now you have guys playing into there 40's... Clemens, Bonds, maddux.. etc....

I personally think that if you use steroids the right way they are very beneficial. Steroids allows you to train alot harder and recover better which is very important in sports. It gives you a feeling of well being also.

I personally would only do HGH with possibly a little bit of test. The other roids are just too much maintanence to keep up with. Your doing one roid and than you end up doing 3. I think to myself I am not an actor or an athlete. I am fairly young so i don't feel like I need it. But if I was an athlete or a model than i would not hesitate to use these drugs.

Even if the medical community finds HGH helpful in the age process they will never make it easily available to us. There will always be some moral issue that is attached with HGH.

 

[Mr.Positive]

As with comparing it to the aspirins, well since you are injecting you won't put strain on your liver and testosterone is natural so you just gain muscle like you did when you went through puberty, only more so.

If you are injecting it, aren't you putting more strain on your liver? Your liver filters your blood. By injecting it directly into your bloodstream, I would think, it would be more taxing on the your liver.

 

[wolf116]

If you are injecting it, aren't you putting more strain on your liver? Your liver filters your blood. By injecting it directly into your bloodstream, I would think, it would be more taxing on the your liver.

It doesn't work that way, if injected, they do not pass through the liver.

 

[Bible_Belt]

Growth hormone no benefit to athletes: U.S. study

Mar 17, 2008
By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Editor

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - People who take human growth hormone in the hope of boosting athletic performance are not only breaking the law and risking their health, but likely are not even achieving their objective, U.S. researchers reported on Monday.

While some reports show that some illegal steroids may help athletes bulk up and train harder, human growth hormone is not one of them, the report in the Annals of Internal Medicine suggests.

"What we saw is that while there was a change in body composition, we didn't find evidence that growth hormone improves athletic performance," Dr. Hau Liu of Stanford University in California, who led the study, said in a telephone interview.

Liu's team looked at 27 studies covering 303 people aged 13 to 45. They found that, overall, those who took growth hormone did develop more lean body mass, but this did not translate to either more strength or exercise capacity.

People who took growth hormone had swelling of their tissues and more fatigue compared to people not taking the drug, they added.

Use of growth hormone is banned by the International Olympic Committee, Major League Baseball and the National Football League. U.S. law prohibits its use for sports enhancement.

When the hormone is given to people with growth hormone deficits caused by pituitary tumors or other conditions, it can improve strength. But it does not enhance strength in normal, healthy people.

For example, people given hormone generated more lactate, a byproduct of exercise that can cause pain and muscle fatigue. In one study meant to see if human growth hormone might boost strength or endurance, two cyclists given the hormone stopped a workout because of fatigue.

"The key takeaway is that we don't have any good scientific evidence that growth hormone improves athletic performance," Dr. Andrew Hoffman, a professor of endocrinology, gerontology and metabolism who worked on the study, said.

Hoffman noted that other hormones have been shown to benefit athletes -- notably testosterone.

"Athletes probably take much more hormone than the investigators felt that they could ethically try to give to healthy people; in addition, some athletes combine growth hormone with other anabolic hormones like testosterone," Hoffman added in an e-mail.

Hoffman said people get side-effects from high doses of hormones. "You get fluid accumulating in the legs, you get pain in the joints," he said in a telephone interview.

"From what we hear the athletes are taking very, very large doses," he added.

Other hormones do, however bulk up athletes -- although not without risk, Hoffman said. "The findings with growth hormone absolutely do not extend to other hormones like testosterone which work through entirely different mechanisms," he said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSN1763598420080318

 

[Fuglydude]

Very interesting thread...

I've used AAS in the past, at fairly low doses (~400 mg/wk) just to give me a "boost" because with my work/school/training schedule I sometimes dont' have a great diet/get enough rest etc. I really wish I had waited til I was over 30 to use AAS.

I'm ashamed to say that my physique doesn't change that much when i'm "off" because I just tighten up my training and diet. I hate how AAS lets me "get away with more", and therefore I can eat crap and still look good. I strip part time so I get paid to look a certain way. In my opinion you really shouldnt' be performing unless you're in the top 5-10% of the male population in terms of physical aesthetics. Most of the guys in the industry in my neck of the woods have used or are currently on at any given point in time.

I LOVE being on. The feeling of dominance, the confidence, the knowledge that you can have pretty much any woman you want just because of your build is a very addictive and powerful feeling. That being said, I dont' like how I treat my gf when I'm on...I've much more of an a-hole, even though I try to be nice.

I don't like how society on the whole has demonized AAS, HGH, and related performance enhancing compounds rather than demonize things like McDonalds, cigarettes and alcohol which I think physically harm a lot more people than AAS. I think education is the key for individuals to make up their personal opinion on whether to use or not...