The gains aren't massive, that's true, but it wasn't designe to be massive. Basically it was designed to be a dry, lean mass gainer that was easier on the liver than most oral steroids. The risk/reward ratio with SuperDrol is a lot better than a good number of steroids out there, especially M1T, which gave impressive gains but was a step away from being pure poison.[b said:
Who cares about steroids?
- Thread starter BIZ
- Start date
I don't know why this old thread popped back up, but thought I'd add my opinions.
First, I agree with every post of xahrx.
Yes, HRT is available but our doctors are still mostly uneducated. I qualified for it myself but haven't gotten on it yet because:
1.) the amount you get is barely anabolic at all. But will make you feel good and tend to lean out. (lose fat) I was prescribed around 100IU test cyp. A beginner's anabolic program would be 250IU I believe. (weekly) I've talked to local guys on the legal dose and they love it, but all wish it were higher.
2.) everything legal is expensive, from the tests to the prescription fees and the "drug". You could save by getting your own tests though. Mine were "$500.00" but gee, they gave me a "discount" at "cost" of $350.00 after I bitched. It was no more complete of a test than I could have gotten at AnyTest for $100.00. So at this time, the 'control' of the market is with either the antiaging ripoffs or black market. No one has had the sense to make it truly legally available at a decent dose and price.
My past experience with Superdrol was mediocre compared to my trial with M1t, which I understand, both are weak compared to test. The new Superdrol (legal after the ban) is supposedly no better than tribulus, which we know is a ripoff. I'm not wasting money anymore on PH's. And you WILL lose your gains without proper protocol. Perhaps even regardless. I eventually did.
A very short cycle of test, done by our very own Sci, was ineffective. There seems to be a need to stay on for more than a few weeks, but he was doing Enanthate, a slow acting hormone. That's all I've observed about that, so it's a guess.
HRT would even the playing field for us older lifters who've lost their hormones like Bo Peep's sheep, and put us in a more youthful state. As a matter of fact, after reading MANY aging articles, and literature from the antiaging clinics, the BEST method of revitalization seems to be GH and Test. Once begun, the test isn't so expensive to maintain, and at the low doses they give, you DO NOT HAVE TO CYCLE it. You can just stay on it and enjoy the benefits. I believe, as was mentioned, that since no one is showing any long-term ill effects from heavier 'roid cycling (I mean using; not abusing) then HRT doses couldn't possibly hurt. Even if a little higher, into the anabolic range.
GH is very expensive, no matter what.
Regardless, I'd rather have a legal amount of test and pay for it (painfully) than to keep fighting this inability to bulk without getting instantly fat and the inability to lose the fat without losing most of the gains. That's what's happening to me now and I'm pissed. Not that BB'ing is the end-all of life, but I haven't made my goals yet, and it's still my hobby/sport/lifestyle/choice.
Just my 2 or 3c worth.
First, I agree with every post of xahrx.
Yes, HRT is available but our doctors are still mostly uneducated. I qualified for it myself but haven't gotten on it yet because:
1.) the amount you get is barely anabolic at all. But will make you feel good and tend to lean out. (lose fat) I was prescribed around 100IU test cyp. A beginner's anabolic program would be 250IU I believe. (weekly) I've talked to local guys on the legal dose and they love it, but all wish it were higher.
2.) everything legal is expensive, from the tests to the prescription fees and the "drug". You could save by getting your own tests though. Mine were "$500.00" but gee, they gave me a "discount" at "cost" of $350.00 after I bitched. It was no more complete of a test than I could have gotten at AnyTest for $100.00. So at this time, the 'control' of the market is with either the antiaging ripoffs or black market. No one has had the sense to make it truly legally available at a decent dose and price.
My past experience with Superdrol was mediocre compared to my trial with M1t, which I understand, both are weak compared to test. The new Superdrol (legal after the ban) is supposedly no better than tribulus, which we know is a ripoff. I'm not wasting money anymore on PH's. And you WILL lose your gains without proper protocol. Perhaps even regardless. I eventually did.
A very short cycle of test, done by our very own Sci, was ineffective. There seems to be a need to stay on for more than a few weeks, but he was doing Enanthate, a slow acting hormone. That's all I've observed about that, so it's a guess.
HRT would even the playing field for us older lifters who've lost their hormones like Bo Peep's sheep, and put us in a more youthful state. As a matter of fact, after reading MANY aging articles, and literature from the antiaging clinics, the BEST method of revitalization seems to be GH and Test. Once begun, the test isn't so expensive to maintain, and at the low doses they give, you DO NOT HAVE TO CYCLE it. You can just stay on it and enjoy the benefits. I believe, as was mentioned, that since no one is showing any long-term ill effects from heavier 'roid cycling (I mean using; not abusing) then HRT doses couldn't possibly hurt. Even if a little higher, into the anabolic range.
GH is very expensive, no matter what.
Regardless, I'd rather have a legal amount of test and pay for it (painfully) than to keep fighting this inability to bulk without getting instantly fat and the inability to lose the fat without losing most of the gains. That's what's happening to me now and I'm pissed. Not that BB'ing is the end-all of life, but I haven't made my goals yet, and it's still my hobby/sport/lifestyle/choice.
Just my 2 or 3c worth.
Morgoth the Dark Enemy
New Member
<div>
(xahrx @ Aug. 12 2005,16:49)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(--Totentanz @ Aug. 10 2005,8:29)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I wouldn't use Superdrol anyway. In my opinion, the gains are mediocre compared to other types of steroids, and it's pretty new so we don't know as much about it as we know about testosterone or even dianabol. The only good thing is that it is legal. But personally, I don't think it is worth it.</div>
The gains aren't massive, that's true, but it wasn't designe to be massive. Basically it was designed to be a dry, lean mass gainer that was easier on the liver than most oral steroids. The risk/reward ratio with SuperDrol is a lot better than a good number of steroids out there, especially M1T, which gave impressive gains but was a step away from being pure poison.</div>
My uneducated opinion, based on interacting with experienced users and reading stuff written by individuals who actually know a thing or two about steroids, is that the best gear to take is the tried and true one:Test, Dbol, Primo and so on. All of the post-ban so called designer stuff has been rather mediocre, and it also lacks the background of usage and research that is characteristic for tried and true medicinal use steroids. Then again, I know jacksquat about drugs so, take everything I say with a wagon of salt.
(xahrx @ Aug. 12 2005,16:49)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(--Totentanz @ Aug. 10 2005,8:29)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I wouldn't use Superdrol anyway. In my opinion, the gains are mediocre compared to other types of steroids, and it's pretty new so we don't know as much about it as we know about testosterone or even dianabol. The only good thing is that it is legal. But personally, I don't think it is worth it.</div>
The gains aren't massive, that's true, but it wasn't designe to be massive. Basically it was designed to be a dry, lean mass gainer that was easier on the liver than most oral steroids. The risk/reward ratio with SuperDrol is a lot better than a good number of steroids out there, especially M1T, which gave impressive gains but was a step away from being pure poison.</div>
My uneducated opinion, based on interacting with experienced users and reading stuff written by individuals who actually know a thing or two about steroids, is that the best gear to take is the tried and true one:Test, Dbol, Primo and so on. All of the post-ban so called designer stuff has been rather mediocre, and it also lacks the background of usage and research that is characteristic for tried and true medicinal use steroids. Then again, I know jacksquat about drugs so, take everything I say with a wagon of salt.
Fausto
HST Expert
Steroids have their use in HRT. And whne weel presecribed and aministred can have highly benefitial consequences (Jon Benson is an example)
To me guys who use them to grow huge are feating the purpose of body building and nature.
Secondly as xharx pointed out the older body builders had it right, today's guys look stupidly big, like a bunch of body parts put together, just doesn't gel to me.
To me guys who use them to grow huge are feating the purpose of body building and nature.
Secondly as xharx pointed out the older body builders had it right, today's guys look stupidly big, like a bunch of body parts put together, just doesn't gel to me.
Well, Fausto, this is an old argument, but I'll bite. What do you think you're doing with supplementation, food management and exersize? Is that not "cheating" nature? Is not getting bigger than you are naturally not bodybuilding? And what are you going to do when you hit your genetic LIMITS???
There is steroid USE, as done successfully by THOUSANDS of guys all over the world, and steroid ABUSE, which is the part you hear about, done by hundreds of guys who aren't worried about their futures.
There are only two problems with AA's in a nutshell: illegality creating a black market with bad drugs and lack of education, IMO.
America was founded on freedom, which the government is eroding away, thanks to the sheep-like nature of the masses who allow it. I want the right to decide what I do with MY body. It's not like we're killing babies. (yes, I'm pro-life)
There is steroid USE, as done successfully by THOUSANDS of guys all over the world, and steroid ABUSE, which is the part you hear about, done by hundreds of guys who aren't worried about their futures.
There are only two problems with AA's in a nutshell: illegality creating a black market with bad drugs and lack of education, IMO.
America was founded on freedom, which the government is eroding away, thanks to the sheep-like nature of the masses who allow it. I want the right to decide what I do with MY body. It's not like we're killing babies. (yes, I'm pro-life)
In a strange way, steroids level the playing field. I mean, if you have naturally low test levels you aren't going to stand a chance in a strength/power sport against someone with naturally high levels of test coursing through their body.
What could be useful for competition would be the setting of maximum levels of 'supplementation' allowed (although I can't see anyone agreeing on what that would be). I don't suppose it would be policeable and would still be open to abuse but at least every competitor would feel that they had a fair shot. A really gifted athlete might not have to take much to still stay at the top of the field (look at what Steve J has managed without AAS - and, yeah, I know he doesn't think he's gifted
) . Those that did abuse the drugs might well wind up with a medal one year and a heart attack the next. That would be up to them I guess?
I'm not sure the public really care whether athletes take performance enhancing drugs or not? I suspect parents of young athletes do and fellow competitors do, but the vast majority have become accustomed to seeing steroided individuals in the media. Most just want to see a good race/competition and the occasional new record.
What could be useful for competition would be the setting of maximum levels of 'supplementation' allowed (although I can't see anyone agreeing on what that would be). I don't suppose it would be policeable and would still be open to abuse but at least every competitor would feel that they had a fair shot. A really gifted athlete might not have to take much to still stay at the top of the field (look at what Steve J has managed without AAS - and, yeah, I know he doesn't think he's gifted
I'm not sure the public really care whether athletes take performance enhancing drugs or not? I suspect parents of young athletes do and fellow competitors do, but the vast majority have become accustomed to seeing steroided individuals in the media. Most just want to see a good race/competition and the occasional new record.
True, but you've hit on the heart of the real problem. I'm 53+ and just want to be young again, a bit on the anabolic side preferred, willing to cycle, and do PCT.
But if uncontrolled (like the BM?) and completely legal, you have these 15 year old airheads thinking they can / should / could / need AA's and all kinds of bad stuff happens. If you want to regulate it, where do you draw the lines? If you want to go superanabolic compared to my mediocre desires, do you not have the same right to do your own thing as I?
And let's say it's like drinking, before that comes up. Even 21 years old is too young to really need AA's, so age lines are hard to draw as well.
And the weaker-minded masses who can get addicted to everything from tea to breathing other people's smoke...it just goes on and on.
It's a nut with no shell.
But if uncontrolled (like the BM?) and completely legal, you have these 15 year old airheads thinking they can / should / could / need AA's and all kinds of bad stuff happens. If you want to regulate it, where do you draw the lines? If you want to go superanabolic compared to my mediocre desires, do you not have the same right to do your own thing as I?
And let's say it's like drinking, before that comes up. Even 21 years old is too young to really need AA's, so age lines are hard to draw as well.
And the weaker-minded masses who can get addicted to everything from tea to breathing other people's smoke...it just goes on and on.
It's a nut with no shell.
stevejones
Member
All drugs are cool. Go out and do whatever you want to do with your body. If snorting an ounce of cocaine makes you feel stronger before you go to the gym, then do it. Want to inject 5 lbs of synthol in each arm and have 28 inch arms ? Fine by me. I don't care, it's your business. I seriously have no problem with someone who is stronger than me or looks better in the gym because they are on steroids. As long as you aren't jeopardizing the health of anyone but yourself, I'm ok with it. Actually, you might be putting others at risk, but that's another issue. I don't delve into how steroids might effect society as a whole.
My opinion changes once you enter into a competition. With your drug abuse, you are forcing other athletes to take drugs if they want to compete. Many rationalize their drug abuse by telling themselves that everyone is doing it and they're just trying to catch up to the rest of the guys who are abusing. That only makes the drug abuse worse. This is why we have HGH abuse, insulin, diuretics, and all the other crap bbers & plifters take. Everything just escalates. Pro bber Kris Dim just had a heart attack a few days ago and bbers are talking about how he must have been genetically predisposed to die of a heart attack at age...34 ? Of course I don't believe steroids was the reason, but I do think that the HGH and/or insulin/other drugs played a huge part. Get off the drugs, and just face the fact that not all humans are created equal. Let nature decide who wins, just like it does in most situations unrelated to bbing and plifting competitions.
My opinion changes once you enter into a competition. With your drug abuse, you are forcing other athletes to take drugs if they want to compete. Many rationalize their drug abuse by telling themselves that everyone is doing it and they're just trying to catch up to the rest of the guys who are abusing. That only makes the drug abuse worse. This is why we have HGH abuse, insulin, diuretics, and all the other crap bbers & plifters take. Everything just escalates. Pro bber Kris Dim just had a heart attack a few days ago and bbers are talking about how he must have been genetically predisposed to die of a heart attack at age...34 ? Of course I don't believe steroids was the reason, but I do think that the HGH and/or insulin/other drugs played a huge part. Get off the drugs, and just face the fact that not all humans are created equal. Let nature decide who wins, just like it does in most situations unrelated to bbing and plifting competitions.
<div>
(Morgoth the Dark Enemy @ Jun. 10 2007,08:59)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">My uneducated opinion, based on interacting with experienced users and reading stuff written by individuals who actually know a thing or two about steroids, is that the best gear to take is the tried and true one:Test, Dbol, Primo and so on. All of the post-ban so called designer stuff has been rather mediocre, and it also lacks the background of usage and research that is characteristic for tried and true medicinal use steroids. Then again, I know jacksquat about drugs so, take everything I say with a wagon of salt.</div>
You would be correct. Most of the newer orals have no known safety profiles and are basically being pulled from old research which was likely abandoned for a reason. And the existing tried and true steroids, all delivery methods, were usually the best attempts at keeping the positives and lowering the negatives of testosterone.
(Morgoth the Dark Enemy @ Jun. 10 2007,08:59)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">My uneducated opinion, based on interacting with experienced users and reading stuff written by individuals who actually know a thing or two about steroids, is that the best gear to take is the tried and true one:Test, Dbol, Primo and so on. All of the post-ban so called designer stuff has been rather mediocre, and it also lacks the background of usage and research that is characteristic for tried and true medicinal use steroids. Then again, I know jacksquat about drugs so, take everything I say with a wagon of salt.</div>
You would be correct. Most of the newer orals have no known safety profiles and are basically being pulled from old research which was likely abandoned for a reason. And the existing tried and true steroids, all delivery methods, were usually the best attempts at keeping the positives and lowering the negatives of testosterone.
<div>
(stevejones @ Jun. 12 2007,05:34)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">My opinion changes once you enter into a competition. With your drug abuse, you are forcing other athletes to take drugs if they want to compete. Many rationalize their drug abuse by telling themselves that everyone is doing it and they're just trying to catch up to the rest of the guys who are abusing. That only makes the drug abuse worse. This is why we have HGH abuse, insulin, diuretics, and all the other crap bbers & plifters take. Everything just escalates. Pro bber Kris Dim just had a heart attack a few days ago and bbers are talking about how he must have been genetically predisposed to die of a heart attack at age...34 ? Of course I don't believe steroids was the reason, but I do think that the HGH and/or insulin/other drugs played a huge part. Get off the drugs, and just face the fact that not all humans are created equal. Let nature decide who wins, just like it does in most situations unrelated to bbing and plifting competitions.</div>
To the point steroids aren't allowed in most comps, I agree. You should play by the rules and get kicked out if caught breaking them. But to the extent that one person taking steroids forces another to, I think that's hogwash. Look at the prevelance of use vs how many actual superstars there are. The ratio of users to superstars is very unbalanced. What this means is that steroids are another tool to be used, and they give just as much as any other tool, exactly what you put into them. Just as a person can ineffectively use the best appointed gym on the planet, using steroids is a long throw from actually using them effectively to improve your performance appreciably. Just ask all the users who didn't end up being the next Barry Bonds.
There isn't anything inherrently beneficial about using steroids, it still comes down to the individual, the training and the diet.
(stevejones @ Jun. 12 2007,05:34)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">My opinion changes once you enter into a competition. With your drug abuse, you are forcing other athletes to take drugs if they want to compete. Many rationalize their drug abuse by telling themselves that everyone is doing it and they're just trying to catch up to the rest of the guys who are abusing. That only makes the drug abuse worse. This is why we have HGH abuse, insulin, diuretics, and all the other crap bbers & plifters take. Everything just escalates. Pro bber Kris Dim just had a heart attack a few days ago and bbers are talking about how he must have been genetically predisposed to die of a heart attack at age...34 ? Of course I don't believe steroids was the reason, but I do think that the HGH and/or insulin/other drugs played a huge part. Get off the drugs, and just face the fact that not all humans are created equal. Let nature decide who wins, just like it does in most situations unrelated to bbing and plifting competitions.</div>
To the point steroids aren't allowed in most comps, I agree. You should play by the rules and get kicked out if caught breaking them. But to the extent that one person taking steroids forces another to, I think that's hogwash. Look at the prevelance of use vs how many actual superstars there are. The ratio of users to superstars is very unbalanced. What this means is that steroids are another tool to be used, and they give just as much as any other tool, exactly what you put into them. Just as a person can ineffectively use the best appointed gym on the planet, using steroids is a long throw from actually using them effectively to improve your performance appreciably. Just ask all the users who didn't end up being the next Barry Bonds.
There isn't anything inherrently beneficial about using steroids, it still comes down to the individual, the training and the diet.
Xahrx I love ya man, but would you please explain this last statement?
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">There isn't anything inherrently beneficial about using steroids, it still comes down to the individual, the training and the diet. </div>
It would appear that the individual, the training and the diet = 1
It would appear that the individual, the training and the diet + 'roids = 1+
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">There isn't anything inherrently beneficial about using steroids, it still comes down to the individual, the training and the diet. </div>
It would appear that the individual, the training and the diet = 1
It would appear that the individual, the training and the diet + 'roids = 1+
stevejones
Member
If you want to be a pro bb in the ifbb, you must use drugs. You don't have a chance in competition without them. No way could Lance Armstrong win 7 tours without the use of drugs. Scot Mendelson could maybe bench press 550 lbs raw without the use of drugs? 600 ? I'll never know.
If Cutler, Mendelson, Armstrong....and one thosuand other names refused to use drugs, you would have never heard of any of them. Things may not have escalated to that extent in the game of baseball, but I do think that Barry Bonds would never have been able to compete with Mark McGwire or Sammy Sosa without the use of drugs, and vice versa. That's a shame, because Bonds probably has more talent.
If Cutler, Mendelson, Armstrong....and one thosuand other names refused to use drugs, you would have never heard of any of them. Things may not have escalated to that extent in the game of baseball, but I do think that Barry Bonds would never have been able to compete with Mark McGwire or Sammy Sosa without the use of drugs, and vice versa. That's a shame, because Bonds probably has more talent.
stevejones
Member
<div>
(style @ Jun. 13 2007,05:56)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">''No way could Lance Armstrong win 7 tours without the use of drugs. ''
Lance Armstrong is and always has been, clean.</div>
Think so ? I've never believed him. Of course, I have no way of knowing, and neither do you. If I did "know" he was clean, then I would probably consider him to be one of the greatest athlete in sports history. However, I can't believe that it's possible for someone to achieve that kind of success against other athletes in a highly competitive grueling sport like cycling unless he's on drugs. Many others can't believe it either. That's why he constantly has to defend himself. The fact that most of the other cyclists are on drugs doesn't make me feel any better about his accomplishments. Just goes to show how much drugs have screwed up athletic competitions. Pretty sad
(style @ Jun. 13 2007,05:56)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">''No way could Lance Armstrong win 7 tours without the use of drugs. ''
Lance Armstrong is and always has been, clean.</div>
Think so ? I've never believed him. Of course, I have no way of knowing, and neither do you. If I did "know" he was clean, then I would probably consider him to be one of the greatest athlete in sports history. However, I can't believe that it's possible for someone to achieve that kind of success against other athletes in a highly competitive grueling sport like cycling unless he's on drugs. Many others can't believe it either. That's why he constantly has to defend himself. The fact that most of the other cyclists are on drugs doesn't make me feel any better about his accomplishments. Just goes to show how much drugs have screwed up athletic competitions. Pretty sad
<div>
(style @ Jun. 13 2007,05:56)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">''No way could Lance Armstrong win 7 tours without the use of drugs. ''
Lance Armstrong is and always has been, clean.</div>
No offense, but Ronnie Coleman claims this very same thing.
(style @ Jun. 13 2007,05:56)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">''No way could Lance Armstrong win 7 tours without the use of drugs. ''
Lance Armstrong is and always has been, clean.</div>
No offense, but Ronnie Coleman claims this very same thing.
<div>
(quadancer @ Jun. 12 2007,20:19)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Xahrx I love ya man, but would you please explain this last statement?
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">There isn't anything inherrently beneficial about using steroids, it still comes down to the individual, the training and the diet. </div>
It would appear that the individual, the training and the diet = 1
It would appear that the individual, the training and the diet + 'roids = 1+</div>
Yes, but the steroids minus the diet and training equal shrunken nuts and little else except perhaps a more favorable body composition than otherwise would have existed. My point was simply that if all it took for an average athlete to become Barry Bonds were some test injections, there would be a lot more athletes like him around.
(quadancer @ Jun. 12 2007,20:19)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Xahrx I love ya man, but would you please explain this last statement?
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">There isn't anything inherrently beneficial about using steroids, it still comes down to the individual, the training and the diet. </div>
It would appear that the individual, the training and the diet = 1
It would appear that the individual, the training and the diet + 'roids = 1+</div>
Yes, but the steroids minus the diet and training equal shrunken nuts and little else except perhaps a more favorable body composition than otherwise would have existed. My point was simply that if all it took for an average athlete to become Barry Bonds were some test injections, there would be a lot more athletes like him around.
RUSS
Member
I for one have serious doubts about L. Armstrongs " Clean status ".BUT- thats niether here nor there though in terms of the state of sports on the whole. I have tremendous respect for honest users like PLer Andy Bolton who was absolutely jawdropping as a natural and completely upfront about when and why his status changed .
Such a shame though that such a gifted individual would be forced to use just to be able to claim what by "natures design" was clearly meant to be his ( world record's).
Such a shame though that such a gifted individual would be forced to use just to be able to claim what by "natures design" was clearly meant to be his ( world record's).
stevejones
Member
<div>
(RUSS @ Jun. 13 2007,12:34)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Such a shame though that such a gifted individual would be forced to use just to be able to claim what by "natures design" was clearly meant to be his ( world record's).
</div>
Yes ! Very well said.
(RUSS @ Jun. 13 2007,12:34)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Such a shame though that such a gifted individual would be forced to use just to be able to claim what by "natures design" was clearly meant to be his ( world record's).
Yes ! Very well said.
<div>
(RUSS @ Jun. 13 2007,12:34)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I for one have serious doubts about L. Armstrongs " Clean status ".BUT- thats niether here nor there though in terms of the state of sports on the whole. I have tremendous respect for honest users like PLer Andy Bolton who was absolutely jawdropping as a natural and completely upfront about when and why his status changed .
Such a shame though that such a gifted individual would be forced to use just to be able to claim what by "natures design" was clearly meant to be his ( world record's).
</div>
Thing is no one forced him to use. It was his decision, and like the way he went or not, he made it on his own and without a gun to his head.
I get a bit annoyed when people imply use is necessary. The only thing you have to do in life is die eventually. Everything else, to various degrees and within the laws of physics, is under your control. Especially what your goals are, and what you do and do not put into your body to achieve those goals. Steroids may be necessary to compete in the Mr. Olympia for example, but the choice to compete and to use is the individual's, no one else's. He doesn't like the option, he can work at a bank. It's time people stopped blaming substances and other such incidental things in life for their actions and took responsibility for choices that are clearly theirs and not forced upon them.
(RUSS @ Jun. 13 2007,12:34)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I for one have serious doubts about L. Armstrongs " Clean status ".BUT- thats niether here nor there though in terms of the state of sports on the whole. I have tremendous respect for honest users like PLer Andy Bolton who was absolutely jawdropping as a natural and completely upfront about when and why his status changed .
Such a shame though that such a gifted individual would be forced to use just to be able to claim what by "natures design" was clearly meant to be his ( world record's).
Thing is no one forced him to use. It was his decision, and like the way he went or not, he made it on his own and without a gun to his head.
I get a bit annoyed when people imply use is necessary. The only thing you have to do in life is die eventually. Everything else, to various degrees and within the laws of physics, is under your control. Especially what your goals are, and what you do and do not put into your body to achieve those goals. Steroids may be necessary to compete in the Mr. Olympia for example, but the choice to compete and to use is the individual's, no one else's. He doesn't like the option, he can work at a bank. It's time people stopped blaming substances and other such incidental things in life for their actions and took responsibility for choices that are clearly theirs and not forced upon them.