First, I read all three articles. Once you overcome that heart attack, allow me to rebuff this nonsense. the NYT article and the summary say: Before you dismiss this notion, consider what we're stuck with today. The system is ostensibly designed to create a level playing field, protect athletes' health and set an example for children, but it fails on all counts. Exactly how does it fail on all accounts? Where is the proof of this allegation in this article? I don't myself see this as a broken system, so this statement is not self evident. If someone has some proof please provide it. To dissect this statement, I don't see athletes dropping dead in sports where steroids are banned, and I know plenty of kids who think Steroids are wrong. I also see that, at least in high schools, steroids are the exception, not the rule. I have however, seen stories of kids and athletes dropping dead from a steroid overdose, or running into emotional, or worse, legal, problems resulting from behavioral changes that current steroids are known to cause. So show me what's broken.
You've seen stories on athletes dropping dead from steroids? Are any of them true? You obviously buy into the FUD and hype. Same as with the behavioral changes. Roid rage perhaps? Or rather just some ass that doesn't like to take responsibility for their own actions. Someone who is not an ass before they juice will not turn into one after. Rather someone who is, will just be a bigger, stronger more confident ass and abuses it.
So show how it's not broken.
The rest of the article falls on it's face because it's making an assumption I don't see as being there.
Because you don't see it, doesn't make it false. It's dead on.
And it's not the kids and the athletes I really have a problem with when it comes to doping. The number one problem I have with doping are all the people surrounding kids and athletes who will pressure the kids to dope! Coaches with pride on the line (and maybe an increased paycheck), principals and superintendents trying to increase notoriety of their school district. Deans trying to increase enrollments. Endorsers promising big contracts for more touchdowns this season. The money chain will explode! All at the expense of he health of one kid who just wants to be badass and land a big contract. Other people get fat and rich at his expense. I absolutely abhor that possibility.
I completely agree here. But I will also add that they is no place for children or anyone for that matter under 20, if not 25 in using steroids. Kids are going through puberty and adding synthetic hormones into the mix at that time can have all sorts of unintended consequences. Not to mention that teenage boys generally have an extremely high level of testosterone in their systems already.
But to ban perfectly reasonable and rational adults from making their own informed decisions is not right.
There are things in health science that are working to improve performance of athletes without doping. It's my understanding that doping not only gives you an unfair competitive edge, but also leads to health problems down the road. If that's not true, someone please dispute what I'm saying. But that's the basis for the ban country wide of Steroids. The last thing we need are mega corporations shoving athletic performance enhancing drugs down our gullets, because if you think prescription drugs are bad now..............
Unfair competitive advantage? What about food? Athletes from prosperous areas can eat a healthier selection than those that are poorer. Their nutrition is obviously an advantage. Where do you draw the line at what you define as an "unfair competitive advantage"? Legal supplements such as protein of creatine? How about caffeine which happens to be one of the most studied and proven performance enhancers? Ban coffee perhaps? Those that have access to new technical training methods? What about superior coaches? Genetics? Because obviously genetics give them an unfair advantage, otherwise you or I could compete. It's a BS argument as either everyone has access to the exact same "performance enhancers" or someone is going to have that Edge. And guess what? Some do!
More people have died from aspirin than steroids. Can you site even one person who legitimately died from juicing?
You've obviously bought into the FUD of the media and the politicians.
By legalizing it, these athletes would have healthier lives. Right now they have to depend on blackmarket drugs of uncertain quality without any physician over site. Making it legal for adults would not only give access to pharmaceutical grade product but also doctor supervision. There are some side effects from juicing but most can be avoided or alleviated with proper usage.
Kids right now have access. Unfortunately the access they have is to cheap counterfeits or dangerous bathtub mixed drugs. The difference is, if it's legalized, the access may not change but at least the quality would.
Does any ban on drugs work? Did prohibition work? Does it appear to stop anyone? All it does in the end is endanger the lives of more people who are relegated to the black market.
But if you just want to close your eyes and bleat "but it's for the children!" and take zero responsibility for the outcome, go ahead.
Slashdot Mirror
First, I read all three articles. Once you overcome that heart attack, allow me to rebuff this nonsense.
the NYT article and the summary say:
Before you dismiss this notion, consider what we're stuck with today. The system is ostensibly designed to create a level playing field, protect athletes' health and set an example for children, but it fails on all counts.
Exactly how does it fail on all accounts? Where is the proof of this allegation in this article? I don't myself see this as a broken system, so this statement is not self evident. If someone has some proof please provide it. To dissect this statement, I don't see athletes dropping dead in sports where steroids are banned, and I know plenty of kids who think Steroids are wrong. I also see that, at least in high schools, steroids are the exception, not the rule. I have however, seen stories of kids and athletes dropping dead from a steroid overdose, or running into emotional, or worse, legal, problems resulting from behavioral changes that current steroids are known to cause. So show me what's broken.
You've seen stories on athletes dropping dead from steroids? Are any of them true? You obviously buy into the FUD and hype. Same as with the behavioral changes. Roid rage perhaps? Or rather just some ass that doesn't like to take responsibility for their own actions. Someone who is not an ass before they juice will not turn into one after. Rather someone who is, will just be a bigger, stronger more confident ass and abuses it.
So show how it's not broken.
The rest of the article falls on it's face because it's making an assumption I don't see as being there.
Because you don't see it, doesn't make it false. It's dead on.
And it's not the kids and the athletes I really have a problem with when it comes to doping. The number one problem I have with doping are all the people surrounding kids and athletes who will pressure the kids to dope! Coaches with pride on the line (and maybe an increased paycheck), principals and superintendents trying to increase notoriety of their school district. Deans trying to increase enrollments. Endorsers promising big contracts for more touchdowns this season. The money chain will explode! All at the expense of he health of one kid who just wants to be badass and land a big contract. Other people get fat and rich at his expense. I absolutely abhor that possibility.
I completely agree here. But I will also add that they is no place for children or anyone for that matter under 20, if not 25 in using steroids. Kids are going through puberty and adding synthetic hormones into the mix at that time can have all sorts of unintended consequences. Not to mention that teenage boys generally have an extremely high level of testosterone in their systems already.
But to ban perfectly reasonable and rational adults from making their own informed decisions is not right.
There are things in health science that are working to improve performance of athletes without doping. It's my understanding that doping not only gives you an unfair competitive edge, but also leads to health problems down the road. If that's not true, someone please dispute what I'm saying. But that's the basis for the ban country wide of Steroids. The last thing we need are mega corporations shoving athletic performance enhancing drugs down our gullets, because if you think prescription drugs are bad now..............
Unfair competitive advantage? What about food? Athletes from prosperous areas can eat a healthier selection than those that are poorer. Their nutrition is obviously an advantage. Where do you draw the line at what you define as an "unfair competitive advantage"? Legal supplements such as protein of creatine? How about caffeine which happens to be one of the most studied and proven performance enhancers? Ban coffee perhaps? Those that have access to new technical training methods? What about superior coaches? Genetics? Because obviously genetics give them an unfair advantage, otherwise you or I could compete. It's a BS argument as either everyone has access to the exact same "performance enhancers" or someone is going to have that Edge. And guess what? Some do!
More people have died from aspirin than steroids. Can you site even one person who legitimately died from juicing?
You've obviously bought into the FUD of the media and the politicians.
By legalizing it, these athletes would have healthier lives. Right now they have to depend on blackmarket drugs of uncertain quality without any physician over site. Making it legal for adults would not only give access to pharmaceutical grade product but also doctor supervision. There are some side effects from juicing but most can be avoided or alleviated with proper usage.
Kids right now have access. Unfortunately the access they have is to cheap counterfeits or dangerous bathtub mixed drugs. The difference is, if it's legalized, the access may not change but at least the quality would.
Does any ban on drugs work? Did prohibition work? Does it appear to stop anyone? All it does in the end is endanger the lives of more people who are relegated to the black market.
But if you just want to close your eyes and bleat "but it's for the children!" and take zero responsibility for the outcome, go ahead.