06/12/2022 11:02 pm Welcome to isteroids.com - BLOG

Archive for  January 2007

Wednesday 31, Jan 2007

200% increase in use of anabolic steroids – stupid laws are pointless

Posted By

This is interesting news, so are the steroid laws working , are the idiotic busts WORKING ??? are the arrests working ?

200% increase in use of anabolic steroids
Wednesday 31 January 2007

The number of people using anabolic steroids and other illegal substances to boost their physique or sporting performance has gone up by 200% to 150,000 over the past four years, says the Dutch doping authority. The authority warns that the users, mainly young men, are risking their health by taking enormous quantities of illegal, and often contaminated, performance boosters

This is in “ductchland” LOL but imagine the USA, even worse really if you ask me.  I think steroid use has increased 1000% in the USA BECAUSE of all the news about it! Not even kidding.

Tuesday 30, Jan 2007

steroid bust stories

Posted By

The steroid bust stories from below , this guy was busted for selling steroids

 credited to the WSAW

they didn’t seem to do a bias coverage, just stated what they knew, showed some pics, not much steroid bashing – pretty impressive journalism (somewhat unbias) for once

Marshfield Man Charged with Four Felonies Stemming From Steroid Bust
Posted: 6:29 PM Jan 23, 2007
Last Updated: 7:21 PM Jan 23, 2007
Reporter: WSAW Staff
The Marshfield man accused of being behind a $225,000 steroid ring is now being charged.

Kyle Bredl, 20, made his initial appearance in Portage County court today.

Bredl is charged with four felonies, including possession and delivering a controlled substance.

Each charge carries a $10,000 fine and a six-year jail sentence.

Bredl’s preliminary hearing is scheduled for Tuesday.


UPDATE: Street Value of Steroid Bust at $250,000; Suspect Charged
Street Value of Steroid Bust At $250,000; Suspect Charged
Posted: 3:43 PM Jan 16, 2007
Last Updated: 7:15 PM Jan 16, 2007

The Marshfield man arrested in what Police Chief Joe Stroik says is the largest drug bust in Wood County is now charged.

Police found the drugs at the home of 20-year-old Kyle Bredl on Thursday.

He appeared in court today and is charged with delivery of controlled substances and possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance.

The judge authorized he be held on a $5000 signature bond.

Bredly is scheduled to make his inital court appearance on January 23.

Between October 2006 and January 11, 2007, authorites say he sold steroids to an undercover officer in Stevens Point three times and once in Marshfield. They say about $10,000 worth of steroids were bought, $6000 of which occurred on January 11.

After his arrest, a box of steroids ready to be shipped outside Wisconsin was found in his vehicle.

His residence at 909 Western Street in Marshfield was then searched. Police there say they found a variety of steroids in liquid, powder and capsule form. They originally estimated the street value of those steroids to be at least $120,000. However, after identifying further bulk substances, they now believe the value may be $250,000.

Packaging and processing materials were also found.

The investigation has been linked to countries including Canada and China, as well as other states.

“He was getting it from quite a distance,” says Stoik. “He certainly could have been selling it to anywhere in the United States or further.”

Authorities say three search warrants were executed in Missoula, Montana over the weekend. One man was arrested on steroid-related charges.

Some of the anabolic steroids discovered include Methandrostenolone, Stanozolol and Oxymetholone. All three are considered Schedule III drugs and fall under control of the Wisconsin Uniform Controlled Substances Act.

Monday 29, Jan 2007

Recent Bust….and who to avoid because of those busts…

Posted By

This is given to Anthony Roberts as a credit, over on his blog but I figured it needs a repost badly

Recent Bust….and who to avoid because of those busts…
Well…this is the kind of thing I really never like to report about in my blog. In my perfect world, anabolic steroids would be legal, and people would use them under a doctor’s supervision. But that’s my own fantasy, and as much as I work towards steroid law reform, it’s not reality yet. What is reality is that there are many people (the majority) who are unable to obtain steroids legally, and that means that every so often somebody gets arrested. When that happens, often it sends ripples of busts throughout the community. We’ve seen several such busts lately, and I don’t think that we’ve seen the last of them. At the bottom of my blog will be 2 links to the most recent bust which has been the catalyst for all of the other recent ones.

Interestingly, in this most recent case (just play the video at the bottom of this blog to see it)… the authorities chose to show (on the news) the stuff they confiscated. And since they’ve done that, we can take a little peek at what products were confiscated. If I were concerned for my own freedom (and I’m not, because I operate totally legally)…I’d avoid every UG which had a product confiscated by this particular bust. Watch the video and read the names off the bottles…and you may want to avoid those labs for awhile.

And in this case, there was even a significant amount of research chems confiscated, and I would avoid that company as well (watch the video and you’ll be able to spot the research chems which were confiscated…I believe the one they do a closeup on was a thyroid med). Clearly the fact that those products were confiscated tells us that the authorities are looking at those items as having been purchased by this particular person with the intent to be sold or used by humans, in conjunction with anabolic steroids (in this case). And it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that the authorities have confiscated this person’s computer and such as well…and will most likely find e-mails and ordering details from this particular company to this dude who was busted…and that may be all they need to start seriously looking at this research chem company very closely. I wouldn’t want to be one of their customers right about now (or ever, really).

So do yourself a favor…watch the video(s), make note of the UGs and companies involved, and do what you think is appropriate to keep yourself safe. I think avoiding them…and especially avoiding the research chem company from the bust…would be prudent.

I don’t want to see anyone else going to jail, but especially not over research chems!




Sunday 28, Jan 2007

Baseball’s Steroids Taint Gets Hall of Fame Test With McGwire – will they ever leave baseball alone?

Posted By


I wonder, you know, like these government guys have anything better to do? I mean give me a break

can’t you leave baseball and steroids ALONE! god, how long will this shit go on

so they juice up, hit the stack, poped the cherry, hell 1/2 of the government snorted coke, and??? who’s questioning that


Baseball’s Steroids Taint Gets Hall of Fame Test With McGwire

By Danielle Sessa

Mark McGwire’s performance on Capitol Hill in 2005 may have more to do with his chances of being voted into baseball’s Hall of Fame than his 583 home runs.

McGwire refused under oath to answer questions from a congressional committee on whether he used steroids. By repeatedly saying “I’m not here to talk about the past,” McGwire raised doubts about his 16-year career, according to a Hall of Fame pitcher who is now a U.S. senator.

“He didn’t handle himself very well,” said Jim Bunning, a Kentucky Republican. “I will be anxious to find out how much influence his performance before the Congress will have.”

Bunning will find out tomorrow when the Baseball Writers Association of America announces the results of balloting for the 2007 Hall of Fame class. Cal Ripken Jr. and Tony Gwynn probably will lead the tally.

McGwire, 43, is the first player under the steroids cloud to be listed on the ballot. How much support he receives may indicate how Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa and others linked to performance-enhancing substances will be judged. McGwire, Bonds and Sosa all have repeatedly denied drug use.

McGwire’s business manager, Jim Milner, didn’t return messages seeking comment.

Players named on 75 percent of the roughly 575 ballots gain entry to the Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, New York. A total of 32 players are on this year’s ballot. Ripken, who holds the record for consecutive games played at 2,632, and Gwynn, who won eight batting titles, are likely inductees.

First-Ballot Statistics

Based on career statistics, McGwire might be a first-ballot inductee. The St. Louis Cardinals first baseman became the first player to hit 70 home runs, and his career total ranks seventh. He won the 1987 American League Rookie of the Year with the Oakland Athletics and was picked for 12 All-Star teams.

McGwire’s race with Sosa in 1998 to break Roger Maris’s single-season home run record of 61 helped draw fans after the 1994 players strike. McGwire beat Sosa to Maris’s mark and held the record with 70 for three seasons until Bonds topped him with 73.

In congressional testimony, McGwire’s voice cracked and he frequently reviewed his prepared statement. Sosa, a Dominican Republic native, used an interpreter. That cast doubt about the legitimacy of their chase, said Bob Klapisch, national baseball writer for New Jersey’s Bergen Record newspaper.

“We don’t know what we saw, I don’t know what I covered,” said Klapisch, who said he left McGwire off his Hall of Fame ballot. “There’s too much of a mystery on where the home runs came from. Until we know more about what he did, I don’t see him getting in.”

Steroid Tests

McGwire was never tested for steroids. Major League Baseball didn’t screen for the drugs until 2003, two years after he retired. Lawmakers pressured the sport to test after Jose Canseco and Ken Caminiti admitted taking performance-enhancing substances and charged that usage was rampant throughout baseball. That pressure accelerated after the March 2005 hearing.

Canseco, who alleged in a book he wrote that he injected teammate McGwire with steroids, is also on the Hall of Fame ballot for the first time, along with Caminiti. McGwire denied Canseco’s allegation, telling the news media he never used “steroids or any other illegal substance.”

Bunning, 75, was among those who pushed baseball to strengthen its drug policy and sponsored legislation to mandate testing and penalties in major professional sports. He dropped the bill after baseball agreed to strengthen its policy in November 2005. Baseball and its union first banned steroids in its 2002 labor contract.

`Wiped Out’

Bunning, who pitched a perfect game in 1964 for Philadelphia, said cheaters shouldn’t receive baseball’s highest honor.

“All your records should be wiped out from the day you were found to be using illegal steroids,” he said.

There’s no proof McGwire or Sosa, who last played in 2005, took steroids.

Another congressional witness, Rafael Palmeiro, was suspended for 10 days for failing a steroids test five months after he pointed at lawmakers and stated he never used drugs. Palmeiro wasn’t re-signed by the Baltimore Orioles and hasn’t played since 2005.

The support McGwire receives may show how voters will judge players like Palmeiro and Sosa, said Lyle Spatz, a baseball historian in Boynton Beach, Florida.

“The message they will be sending is that `We kind of recognize that some of the numbers you put up were not comparable with what players before you put up under a more level playing field,”’ said Spatz.


Steroids suspicions have dogged Bonds, who’s agreed to return to the San Francisco Giants. In leaked grand jury testimony, he said he might have unknowingly used steroids.

Baseball appointed former Senator George Mitchell last March to investigate steroids. Bunning said he’ll reserve judgment on players until Mitchell’s report comes out or an ongoing federal investigation uncovers evidence.

Until then, some players aiming for the Hall, on the first ballot at least, may have more to worry about than whether their statistics are compelling, Bunning said. “Now they have the added problem of being suspicious.’

Saturday 27, Jan 2007

Will Texas test high school athletes for steroids? – waste of taxpayer money anyone?

Posted By

ok i dont get why it’s such a big deal to waste taxpayer money on steroid tests on some highschoolers , I mean what’s the damn point? when has the government become the ultimate steroid authority that can spend tax money on BS like this!!!!!!!! You decide!

AUSTIN — Texas is a hotbed of high school football, where the Friday night lights burn brighter and many of the athletes are among the biggest, fastest and strongest in the country.

A key state leader is pushing to make Texas kids the cleanest athletes as well.

Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, a Republican, is proposing a sweeping mandatory random testing program in public schools for steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs.

And it would go far beyond football. Athletes in baseball, basketball, track and other sports likely would be tested, too.

If approved, it would be the nation’s largest program of its kind at the high school level, with tens of thousands of students tested every year.

“It will save lives. That’s the whole purpose,” Dewhurst said. “I’m convinced steroid use in high schools is greater than people want to admit.”

The question is whether local school districts, a powerful lobby at the state Capitol, will want to go along. They have resisted in the past.

“Many schools would say they have a bigger problem with alcohol and other drugs,” said Charles Breithaupt, athletic director for the University Interscholastic League, the governing body for Texas public school sports. “A lot of them think this is a local issue and way below the radar.”

Dewhurst’s proposal wouldn’t be the first of its kind — New Jersey started a testing program last fall — but it would be the biggest.

Texas had 733,026 students participate in public school sports during the 2005-06 school year, more than any other state.

The New Jersey program only tests athletes who qualify for state championships. Dewhurst envisions a much broader, season-long program in Texas, although he has yet to reveal details.

That’s when the questions over local control, student privacy, punishments for failed tests and other issues must be answered.

Some Texas schools already are testing for steroids, and their numbers are growing. Of about 1,300 member schools, a UIL survey in 2005 found that 53 schools tested athletes for steroids. By 2006, that number rose to 127.

The 2005 survey also asked the schools that didn’t test: “Why not?”

More than half said it was either too expensive or because they did not think steroids are a problem on their campus. Only 39 schools said they considered steroids a problem on their teams.

Of the schools with testing programs in place, only one of 4,100 tests performed in 2005 came back positive for steroids.

And when asked who should decide whether to test, more than 800 schools said it should be handled locally.

School districts worried about cost — the tests can run up to $200 each — scuttled a playoffs-only testing proposal in 2005. With the low rate of positive results at the schools that do test, they wonder if it is worth the money, Breithaupt said. [yea who’s paying for the steroid tests ?|

A state study of substance abuse among 141,000 Texas students in grades 7-12 conducted by Texas A&M University found that steroid use fell from 2 percent in 2004 to 1.5 percent in 2006. Among 12th graders, it went down from 2.4 percent to 1.8 percent.

Tremain Smith, a lanky 17-year-old senior long jumper at Dallas Wylie High School, said he’s never taken performance-enhancing drugs or competed against anybody he suspected of taking them. But he thinks testing is a good idea and would be a deterrent.

“It wouldn’t be fair. You have to catch the ones trying to get an unfair advantage,” Smith said.

His father, Julian, a junior ROTC instructor at the school, agreed.

“I think they should test,” Julian Smith said. “These kids these days are trying to buff up their bodies and get bigger and faster.”

Dewhurst said schools should be willing to go along if the state pays the bill.

Texas lawmakers began the current legislative session with a $14.3 billion budget surplus for the next two years. A random sampling of 30,000 students, about 4 percent of athletes statewide, at $200 each would cost about $6 million.

“You can’t put a price tag on a young person’s life,” Dewhurst said.

But there’s more than money at stake. Schools also worry about privacy — how to collect a urine sample from a 14-year-old female freshman runner, for example — penalties and the litigation that might ensue. Routine disqualifications over eligibility often end up in court.

A look at the New Jersey program might satisfy some of those concerns.

New Jersey contracts with the National Center for Drug Free Sport in Kansas City, Mo., to collect samples and send them to a lab at UCLA. Students and a parent must sign a consent form before the season. The form includes a list of banned substances.

New Jersey randomly selects athletes who qualify for team or individual state championships. The state will test about 500 students this school year.

“It forced parents to take a look at the substances that were banned and maybe take a look at what their children were ingesting,” said Bob Baly, assistant director of the New Jersey State Interscholastic Athletic Association.

To protect student privacy, samples are collected by a monitor of the same sex as the athlete. The athlete must take off most of his or her exterior clothing but is allowed to step into a closed stall to urinate. At the college and professional levels, the monitor watches the athlete produce the urine sample.

“We have not violated their rights,” Baly said.

Athletes caught with banned substances must sit out competition for a year and attend counseling. Although students and their families are notified, overall results aren’t made public until the end of the school year.

Rather than catch a lot of cheaters, Baly said, New Jersey officials hope the program’s real impact will be keeping kids from taking steroids or other drugs in the first place.

“They are worried about being caught and being labeled as the cheater,” Baly said. “Adolescents, if you tell them speeding is dangerous, they’re still going to speed. If you tell them about the cop around the corner with the radar gun, hopefully they slow down. It’s the fear of being caught.”

Dewhurst’s plan has drawn support from Don Hooton, who became an activist for steroid testing after his son Taylor committed suicide at the age of 17. Doctors said they believe Taylor Hooton became depressed after he stopped using steroids.

“I hope his plan to curb steroid use in Texas will become a model for this nation,” Hooton said at a Dewhurst campaign stop.

D.W. Rutledge, president of the 18,500-member Texas High School Coaches Association, said he believes coaches do a good job steering athletes away from steroids.

Rutledge hasn’t surveyed his organization’s members, but said coaches would likely have the same worries as school administrators about how such a program would work.

He also said testing would probably be a good thing for the students.

“It gives them a chance to escape the peer pressure, to say ‘I can’t get involved with that,’” Rutledge said. “It gives them an out.”


Friday 26, Jan 2007

A new look at Anavar… + Anavar Profile

Posted By

I realized yesturday I didn’t give you a link to an anavar profile after showing you the anthony roberts anavar info

not good right? LOL


Chemical Name: Oxandrolone
Drug Class: Oral Anabolic Steroid

Read it, pretty much explains all you need about anavar and how it plays out in life etc..

really the info anthony put out is revolutionary IMO

==================I bit this from Anthony-Robert’s Blog so this is not an IS exclusive but really good info for everyone to read!



As many of you know, I am on HRT from Oasis Rejuvination. My HRT doses are very conservative (more or less) and consist of 100mgs of testosterone propionate injected every other day, and 25 mgs of Anavar (oxandrolone) every day.

As per my usual routine, I just got my quarterly bloodwork done. There were two surprises in store for me this time around.

My first surprise was that my testosterone levels would have (*actually) been low enough to pass a blood doping test. I came in at around 950, while a positive doping result would have been 1,000. This is pretty interesting on several levels, because anyone who has been on 100mgs of test prop every other day knows that it certainly gives a decent anabolic effect…and now I know that it won’t cause a positive blood doping test as well (in me, at least). That’s a nice, hefty dose for an athlete.

But the real shocker was that my free testosterone levels were through the roof, and my SHBG was way down. WTF?

It was the Anavar.

When I wrote my first book on Anabolic Steroids, I reported that there was some lowering of SHBG with Anavar, but I neglected to really investigate it any further. It wasn’t too relevant to me, because it wasn’t a huge concern at the time. I don’t even remember if I had tried Anavar before that book came out…

So I went back to PubMed, because I needed an answer here. I wrote an entire article on the difference between injectable and oral winstrol, and came up with one of the main differences being that the Oral version lowers SHBG considerably more.

At this point, we all know that Proviron lowers SHBG considerably, and that Winstrol does the same. But what I didn’t know is that Anavar is potentially the best drug (*that I know of) to lower SHBG.

Now, think about this logically, ok? Why is it that people don’t really report great gains with Anavar alone, but can get away with (*silly) low doses of it when they use it in a cycle? Most of the time, we say that it’s just the other steroids causing the gains. But I think that Anavar is actually very synergistic with virtally all other steroids because of it’s effects on SHBG. Now, remember, I told you that I think it’s potentially the most powerful reducer of SHBG that I know about, right? Ok…I’m going to show you a piece of a study…in this study, ten boys with delayed growth were given 2.5mgs ( yes…two-point-five milligrams) of Anavar daily for 3 months…and here’s what it did to their SHBG levels:

SHBG concentrations were also reduced from 130.9 +/- 14.6 to 30.7 +/- 7.3 nmol/l.


(*Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 1993 Apr;38(4):393-8. Links
The effects of oxandrolone on the growth hormone and gonadal axes in boys with constitutional delay of growth and puberty.)

OK…so that means SHBG levels were lowered to about l/4th (or so) of their original levels! All from 2.5mgs of Anavar!

Although my SHBG levels were low, and my free test levels were high, they weren’t on par with what’s found in that study…but I think that the results I’ve experienced with 25mgs of Anavar make it a worthwhile addition to any cycle, even at a dose that low (I’d speculate that even as low as 10- 20mgs is the low-end threshold dose to use with Anavar to free up some testosterone and lower SHBG, to make your cycles more effective). Now, that doesn’t make it a better buy (necessarily) than using Winstrol for that purpose, but it certainly gives us a new look at an old favorite; and maybe a new “lowest effective dose” we can suggest for upcoming cycles.

Thursday 25, Jan 2007

The final word on British Dragon

Posted By

this is care of anthony roberts blog


Ok. I choose to post this information here, in my own blog, instead of on any one particular message board. The reason for this is simple; by posting it here, I can avoid claims of bias, and such…I can also avoid being censored, and bring everyone the truth, as it was told to me. I’m not making any money off of this, and I don’t profit in any way from any endorsement of any particular brands or pharmacies…in other words, my income is solely from writing , book sales, and (now) from my supplement line. I have a pretty wide readership in my blog, equivalent to most discussion boards with around 4-5k registered members (if search engines and such statistics are to be believed).

I also choose to put this information here because if I were to post it on any board on the internet, claims of bias on the part of the board owner(s), mods, etc…would run rampant. And honestly, so would claims from people who heard something from their bro, who heard something from a respected bro, who heard….ad nauseam.


As many people know, British Dragon is the oldest and most respected name in anabolic producers to date. They initially opened up many years ago, founded by two guys who I’ll call “J” and “R”…because their names aren’t important for my purposes here.

As J told me, he didn’t get into the buisness of anabolics to earn a nobel prize, but rather to earn money. I doubt my efforts in writing will eventually earn me the former, and this current effort will not earn me the latter…but I digress…

What eventually happened, after the formation of British Dragon was unprecidented success in the field. A money making endevor turned into the most widely recognized, respected (and counterfeited) name in the field of anabolics. I can’t comment on the legality (*at the time) of their activities, as I don’t know the laws of the countries they operated in.

Fast forward several years to 2006.

At some point in the beginning of this year, a push to legitimize the company was started from within. Things get hazy from here, but I was kept in the loop by several parties, all within BD itself. At this point, one of the founders related to me his desire to quit the buisness and sell off his interest in the company. Understandable, I told him.

During the push to legitimize the company, a third partner was brought on. We’ll call him “A”…which should make it obvious to most people who he is. He operates a legitimate buisness (a pharmacy) in his country, and was/is a BD remailer.

The three partners all put up money and plans to buy a factory for the production of high-quality anabolics was purchased. This point, and all of the previous points are agreed upon by all parties involved. No issues yet.

Now, apparently, A (alone) had to keep investing in the company, driving up his initial investment, and appreciating the value of the company’s assets (more machines, raw materials, etc…). A also was given power of attourney and registered the BD logo and such, and gained trademark/copyright for everything involved. There is a dispute on how long power of attourney was to last, ranging from one side saying 3 months, to the other saying 3 years. The factory was built (I have ownership papers in my posession and have provided them on request to several people already) and a licence granting status as a leitimate pharmaceutical company was granted. All of this was under A’s supervision and control, where he was located. The BD website remained under control of the two founders.

Now, on or about October 19th, I received an internal memo from within BD stating that a remailer, G****L (I’m censoring their name because I don’t need them getting any free publicity from me…I consider them a bunch of douchebags)…started a rumour that A was selling BD counterfeits. Now, logically, how can the person who is running the factory where BD is produced be accused of making counterfeits? It doesn’t make much sense to me. It would appear that recently, G****L attempted to start that same rumour again. Again, it is false.

BD products were, until recently, being produced by A, while all packing/packaging was supplied by the original owners (this way, they had an idea of inventory…if they shipped out X amount of bottles and labels per month, then they knew that much product was being produced per month).

Then, as often happens, things went south…internal disputes regarding money and contract terms arose, etc…I can’t comment on internal issues like this, other than it is my understanding that nobody is 100% happy with how things turned out (the sign of a true buisness deal: nobody leaves the negotiating table happy). I’m told that the initial investment by the two founders leaves them with a percentage o the company now, although less %-wise than they started out with. They also own the website as well. The factory and rights to the name and BD logo remain with A, who was (during at least one point) the majority shareholder of the (now) legitimatized company. A also continues to own and operate the facilities for production of pharmaceuticals, of human-grade quality and licencing. This is what I know up until now. Anyone who is still selling BD is getting rid of their final stock.

At least one of the founders is retired and totally done with things. I haven’t spoken to the other. From what I know of the one I spoke/speak to, he still will probably not earn that nobel prize, but I trust is alright financially. Again, he’s retired from the field. The other founder, I am uncertain about. The third, and most recent partner still holds paperwork and properties, as previously stated.

British Dragon, however, will most likely not be produced….for at least awhile. I’m of the opinion that all parties are (or have) already washed their hands of the incident, and have moved on to better things. Several sources on the internet are waging some sort of sad turf war in the aftermath, but in reality, all of their claims are very silly. I’ve read the allegations of threats, scams, counterfeits and all the rest, and think them to be utter bullshit. None of the people arguing in the wake of this incident, who were not involved in the ownership of BD, really have a leg to stand on with regards to their claims. The three people involved with this buisness deal (gone sour) are the only ones who this should really concern.

As I understand it, none of the three people with share(s) in the company will continue to produce the BD brand of products any longer. Remaining stock of products will be sold by remailers…but it’s uncertain whether anymore will ever be produced. Of course, the three people involved can sort all of it out amongst themselves or sell the company or whatever…but that is speculative at best.

Again, claims by various sources on the internet, who are simply remailers and such, should be dismissed out of hand as bullshit. I’m suspecting that counterfeits will flood the market after awhile, and people who will claim to have suspiciously large amounts “remaining” from before the company will spring up.

I’m hoping that this puts to rest the conjecture and speculation currently rampant on the internet, and sheds some light on this regretable situation. I wish the best for the people involved, and moreso that this only could have gone better for all involved. Knowing the caliber of people involved, I’m sure all of them will bounce back from it all.

It’s also highly regretable that so many people sought to capitolize on the situation and attack others…I can only hope that those people, their venomous e-mails, posts, and outright lies are ignored, and that both the people who founded the most well loved of all pharmaceutical brands, as well as their most recent partner, continue to prosper in whatever areas they pursue. I know they will.

Wednesday 24, Jan 2007

This is REAL: Double-standard? Steroids in the NFL vs. steroids in baseball

Posted By

There is a double standard, I mean look EVERYONE IN THE NFL USES STEROIDS , so why is baseball the ONLY topic being discussed with steroids?

I mean give me a break, I would venture to guess that 99.9% of NFL players are on all sorts of juice, so why isn’t there any congress investigation of that, can anyone say double standard!!! I KNOW I CAN!


It’s the game he loves and the sport that’s given Mike Sweeney wealth and friends beyond his imagination.

It’s the game he loves and the sport that’s given Mike Sweeney wealth and friends beyond his imagination. And that’s why he won’t keep quiet about the double standard that’s made baseball the national bad guy.

He’s watched steroid use — especially steroid use in baseball — become the story that won’t go away, and, consequently, Mark McGwire become the ex-hero who’s had to go away.

McGwire was declined induction into the Baseball Hall of Fame on Tuesday, and he’s nowhere to be found, shamed by allegations and assumptions about something he’s never been proven guilty of.

Meanwhile, please congratulate San Diego Chargers linebacker Shawne Merriman on his Pro Bowl selection.

Merriman led the league with 17 sacks and finished third in the NFL Defensive Player of the Year voting — and served a four-game suspension after testing positive for the steroid nandrolone.

“It breaks my heart,” Sweeney says, “that a guy like McGwire has been persecuted for something he never tested positive for or never admitted to, yet there are guys playing on Sundays in the NFL that tested positive and people just seem to cover that up.”

So how’d we get to this point?

There are a million reasons this exists, and none of them fully explains it. Football people proudly talk about the NFL running a drug policy since 1990, whereas baseball started testing only in recent years after embarrassing media reports.

“We started doing this a long time ago,” says NFL vice president of public relations Greg Aiello, “and have continued to review and modify the policy and strengthen it on a yearly basis. That’s why we do receive credit.”

Baseball people, on the other hand, talk about the sport’s history and place in America’s past and culture as reason they are often criticized.

“We are held to a higher standard,” Major League Baseball commissioner Bud Selig has said. “Pro football had a meteoric rise in the `60s, `70s and `80s, and during that period they had their problems with steroids as well.”

Independent observers say that’s part of the problem, that instead of developing a legitimate drug policy, baseball’s reaction has too often been to point its finger and say, well, football started it.

Maybe this begins to explain the venom for McGwire and Barry Bonds and the acceptance for Merriman and former NFL linebacker Bill Romanowski. One side has literally made a federal case out of the same issue the other side has been able to breeze past.

“There’s a large P.R. component to this,” says Mark Fainaru-Wada, one of the San Francisco Chronicle reporters whose work helped expose steroids in baseball. “Football has stayed largely under the radar while baseball has come un-der attack in a much larger way.

“I’m not saying it’s wrong for baseball to come under attack. I think the question is whether football’s gotten the attention it’s deserved.”

Two Marches ago, even while the NCAA Tournament was in its opening day, the sporting world’s eyes were glued to television sets, watching baseball’s brass and brightest stars take a verbal beatdown during a congressional hearing.

Charles Yesalis is a former Penn State professor who has studied and written extensively about fighting drugs in sports. He was a few rows behind Selig, close enough to feel the damage.

“What I was hearing in my perverse brain, in every way I could interpret,” Yesalis says, “was, `Mr. Selig, look, (then-NFL commissioner Paul) Tagliabue has an excellent facade to cover up their drug use. We want you to adopt a bet-ter facade to cover up your drug use so our constituents aren’t screaming and yelling.”’

Shortly after that, Yesalis and a friend laughed at the notion of the NFL as the gold standard for drug testing, and there is plenty of evidence that performance enhancers are at least as prevalent in the NFL as MLB.

A handful of Carolina Panthers players were proved in court documents to have been issued refillable steroids prescriptions but managed to skirt NFL punishment. Former lineman Dana Stubblefield once guessed that 30 percent of players used HGH, and Washington lineman Jon Jansen said in an HBO piece that 15 percent to 20 percent used some sort of performance enhancer.

NFL quarterback Jim Miller was suspended for steroids and joked around about it to reporters, while baseball sluggers are often assumed guilty until proven innocent.

Just this year, Merriman — who said he took an over-the-counter supplement that was approved by the FDA but not the NFL — and Detroit Lions star defensive tackle Shaun Rogers each tested positive for banned substances. Imagine if two of the top sluggers in baseball were suspended in the same season.

“If somebody does something that’s against the rules, they should have equal judgment and consequence across pro sports,” says Richard Lapchick, director of The Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport at the University of Central Florida. “We’ve never done that in the history of American sports.”

Truth is, the NFL’s policy has the same inherent and inevitable loopholes as MLB. Most obvious is that there is no reliable test for HGH or insulin-like growth factor.

The biggest problem, in Yesalis’ estimation, is the lack of transparency. In both the NFL and Major League Baseball policies, the league controls the testing and information.

“It’s the fox guarding the henhouse,” Yesalis says. “There is no independent agency of journalists or people like me who aren’t on the payroll with no vested interest in this. The only way you’re going to find out who tested positive is when they tell you who tested positive.”

For a better understanding of why people seem to view the NFL’s fox as Jack Bauer and MLB’s as Barney Fife, think back to those congressional hearings two years ago.

The NFL had a similar appointment, but Tagliabue and the league’s administrators were very cooperative. They provided information. They answered questions. They played the game.

Selig, on the other hand, initially said he wouldn’t attend. Rafael Palmeiro laughed the first time someone asked if he’d go. Said it was his wife’s birthday.

“I’ve worked on hearings for 20 years,” said Phillip Schiliro, chief of staff for U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman of California, the panel’s top-ranking Democrat, “and we’ve never had a witness say, `It’s my wife’s birthday.”’

We bring this up because the Baseball Hall of Fame announced its newest members on Tuesday. It’s almost always a glorious time in baseball.

Not this year. Not even with two icons — Cal Ripken and Tony Gwynn — set for induction. McGwire’s eligibility has generated a new wave of steroids stories overshadowing Ripken’s 2,632 consecutive games played and Gwynn’s .338 lifetime average.

All this comes eight years after cocaine addict and suspended drug user Lawrence Taylor was inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame. The museum in Canton, Ohio, has what some refer to as “The Lawrence Taylor Rule,” which states that only on-field performance should be considered.

Baseball’s ballot says, “Voting shall be based on player’s record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character and contributions to the teams on which the player played.”

Big difference.

“You have to treat them differently,” says St. Louis Post-Dispatch colum-nist Bernie Miklasz, who votes for both halls. “You’re given completely different instructions.”

It’s a fuzzy line, to be sure. Ferguson Jenkins and Orlando Cepeda are both Hall of Famers with cocaine convictions on their records. Gaylord Perry doctored baseballs.

So cocaine’s OK. Greasing balls is fine. Amphetamines, used by generations of ballplayers, is acceptable.

Miklasz voted for McGwire in large part because there is no definitive proof of steroid use — though Miklasz assumes McGwire is guilty. On the other hand, he says he wouldn’t have voted Merriman for Defensive Player of the Year because of the suspension.

“I do think steroids would create some gray area even in the Pro Football Hall of Fame selection,” Miklasz says. “If we know for a fact that steroids enhance a player’s performance, I don’t see how you can’t take that into consideration.

“Merriman, if he has his day where he’s a finalist for the Hall of Fame, we’ll have the kind of discussion baseball voters are having right now.”

Somewhere in here, somewhere in the way we digest our sports, is the reason baseball’s record book is now a James Frey novel, but the NFL is the most power-ful and popular league in the country.

It’s not just the NFL’s proactive approach. It’s not just baseball’s reluc-tance to do anything on its own. And it’s not just that of the two biggest targets — McGwire and Bonds — one broke the most famous record in baseball and the other is on the verge of breaking perhaps the second-most famous record in baseball.

It’s all those things with others, but if we’re really serious about cracking down on the dangers of steroids, putting heat on the NFL is barely a start.

“Take a closer look at college football and high schools, too,” Lapchick says. “The biggest consumers of performance-enhancing drugs in America today are teenage boys under the age of 16 who are not athletes. It’s a pervasive social issue that goes even beyond sports, certainly beyond what’s going on in the NFL and Major League Baseball.”


Tuesday 23, Jan 2007

Steroids In Baseball and Sports – Mark McGwire

Posted By

What McGwire Really Did Wrong? NOTHING because when he played there was no steroid policy or steroid testing, so get off the guys back people!

What McGwire Really Did Wrong

Mark McGwire may never get elected to the Hall of Fame, but one thing is fairly certain: someday, a steroid user will be voted into the Hall.

I don’t know who that player will be, and most likely, neither will the voters. But it is naive to believe that the only stars who used are those for whom the effects of steroids were obvious.

McGwire is not just being punished because-we must assume-he used steroids. He is being punished because he used steroids and broke Roger Maris’ home run record. If instead of hitting 70 home runs in 1998 and 65 in 1999, McGwire had stayed “under the radar” and hit maybe 50 and 45, he would be a much stronger candidate for the Hall. With those lower home run totals, he would still be a member of the 500 home run club. Sure, there might have been rumors, but they could be easily defended. Big Mac was always a big guy. “He hit 49 as a 23 year old rookie!” you would hear.

Big Mac would be a modern day Harmen Killebrew, a big bopper with a mediocre batting average but enough to make it to Cooperstown eventually, if not on the first ballot. Most importantly, without breaking baseball’s single-season home run record, McGwire would not have become the poster boy for the era, would not have been called to testify before Congress, and would have a much stronger case for innocent until proven guilty.

That, in a nutshell, is the problem.

It isn’t that there was a big increase in home runs. People like home runs. It was that two of the game’s most cherished marks – the single season and career home run records-will likely be held by Barry Bonds; that’s what people don’t like. Indeed, it was Bonds’ 73 and his pursuit of Aaron’s 755 that really raised the outcry among baseball purists. Like McGwire, it wasn’t that he hit home runs, it was that he hit too many.

But juiced up home run totals are about more than steroids. Virtually every major change in baseball over the past generation has been designed to increase offense.
 No doubt then there are others who used, but with less dramatic results. For them there will be enough benefit of the doubt to allow entrance into the Hall.

They hit 50 home runs instead of 60-plus. Or maybe they weren’t home run guys so much as longevity guys, players who used steroids or other drugs to extend their careers. Maybe they were pitchers who continued to throw 95 MPH fastballs into their 40s or nice guys, unlike Barry Bonds, and nice guys don’t do bad things.
In any case, when it is their time for the Hall, they’ll make it and no one will know how much of their career statistics were owed to chemicals. The irony of this is that the 30-home run guy who hit 40 juiced-up homers may get a pass while the 45 home run guy who hit 60 will always be suspected.

But juiced up home run totals are about more than steroids. Virtually every major change in baseball over the past generation has been designed to increase offense.

The mound was lowered, the strike zone shrunk, the DH added, the leagues expanded, four-man rotations gave way to five-man staffs, ballparks got smaller, the ball may be different, umpires further reduced the strike zone, batters were allowed to wear protective armor so they could crowd the plate, the style of play changed to embrace the highlight reel of home runs and strikeouts, both of which are at record highs. And most of these changes were embraced-or at least accepted-by fans, owners, sportswriters and players. The unsurprising result is that home runs are up 50 percent from 20 years ago.

Even in 2006, the first year of tougher drug testing, home runs increased seven percent from the year before. This might mean that the testing is incomplete or ineffective, or it might just show that the many other factors that contributed to this power surge are still in effect. This isn’t the “steroid era,” it’s simply the “home run era,” in which steroids and the like were the logical last slide down the slippery slope.

Therefore, I believe that the challenge facing Hall of Fame voters, and fans in general, is not to determine who used and who didn’t. It is a larger task-how to evaluate the modern home run hitter against players from the past.

Some telling statistics: Ron Santo retired in 28th place on baseball’s all-time home run list. Since then, 50 players have passed him. From 1962 through 1994, only three players hit 50 or more home runs in a season. It happened 20 more times from 1995 through last year. As recently as 1989, Fred McGriff led the league with 36 home runs. In 2006, 17 players hit more than that many.

But there is one other statistic about the modern era’s embrace of individual home run accomplishments that adds some perspective. Total number of World Series rings won by those modern players during their 50 home run seasons – 1. Total number of World Series rings won by 5’6″, 150 pound David Eckstein – 2.

Monday 22, Jan 2007

Steroid use in baseball continues

Posted By

Basically right now, instead of fixing Iraq, cutting taxes, fixing illegal immigration and finding a way out of the deficit – the government is concentrating on steroid use in baseball !!! of all things like they got nothing better to do!!! you can read below yourself – investigation upon investigations, upon pointless meetings! waste of taxpayer dollars for US folks if you ask me.

Commissioner Bud Selig wrapped up two days of meetings with baseball’s owners in Phoenix on Thursday with a fiery call for reluctant clubs to begin cooperating with former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell’s nearly yearlong investigation into steroids use in the game.

“The commissioner was very forceful,” Houston Astros owner Drayton McLane said with a grin after the final session of the meetings at the Ritz-Carlton in the Camelback Esplanade. “He knew what he needs and he can pretty forceful.”

Selig’s remarks came behind closed doors shortly after Mitchell briefed owners on the status of his slow-moving investigation. advertisement  
Mitchell told the owners he and his staff already had reviewed “tens of thousands of documents and conducted hundreds of interviews.” But he said the investigation was dragging because “cooperation with our requests for information has been good from some, less good from others.”

“I recognize that many clubs are not accustomed to large-scale document discovery, so for them this is a new and time-consuming process,” Mitchell told the owners in remarks released to the media. “And there are serious and credible legal issues which can be and must be resolved.

“I ask you to work with me in an effort to achieve what I hope is our common goal: a thorough, fair, objective and credible report that is published as soon as possible.”

Several owners have balked at Mitchell’s request for detailed records from their trainers and team medical personnel, citing privacy rights.

“If there was a reliable way to redact the documents and satisfy the requests, then I’d be happy to do that,” one club’s representative to the meetings said. “But, so far, we haven’t been able to do that.”

One other objection, he said, was that Mitchell is intent on naming names in his report, “so what we’ll end up with is a few guys getting caught and who knows how many others going unnamed.”

The players union has refused to cooperate with Mitchell’s efforts, also citing privacy reasons, and urged any member contacted by investigators to consult, not one, but two lawyers – a private attorney and one from the union.

In his published remarks, Mitchell said his investigators planned “to begin soon” seeking to “interview active players.”

Mitchell did not speak to reporters after his private briefing but warned in his remarks that unless owners were more cooperative they ran the risk of Congress intervening to subpoena witnesses. As a private investigator, Mitchell does not have subpoena power.

“Unlike the Congress, or other federal and state authorities, I cannot compel cooperation,” he said. “(But) they can and if they get involved they will.

“I believe a report that is not credible and thorough will significantly increase the possibility of action by others, especially if it’s the result of a lack of cooperation by the clubs, or by anyone else who is or has been involved with baseball.”

A lawyer for the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which held hearings on steroids and professional sports in 2005 and 2006 – told the Associated Press he was almost certain Mitchell had not contacted the panel about possible subpoenas. But the attorney, Keith Ausbrook, said lawmakers were closely following the investigation.

“If he’s not getting anywhere, we’ll certainly consider where to re-engage in it,” Ausbrook told the wire service in Washington.

The players union refused comment on Mitchell’s remarks.

Selig met with a small group of reporters after the meetings broke up and said he was comfortable with the pace of the investigation.

“Look, some clubs have been more cooperating than others,” Selig said, not naming names. “But at this stage, I’m not concerned about that. We will have cooperation.”

Asked if he urged teams to cooperate when he spoke after Mitchell’s briefing, the commissioner turned uncharacteristically steely-eyed and said: “Urged is not strong enough.”

“He was pretty firm,” one team representative acknowledge. “I wouldn’t call it a dressing down by any means, but he was certainly firm.”

Mitchell told the owners that when he agreed to head the investigation he “would follow the evidence wherever it leads, and that in writing my report I will stick to the evidence and let the chips fall where they may. That’s what I am going to do.”

Neither Mitchell nor the commissioner gave any indication how far off that report might be. But neither gave any indication it would be any time soon.

“I’ve always believed it’s better to get things done right than to get them done fast,” Selig said. “In this case, there’s no timeline because there’s no history for this. The senator has a very able group of people working with him and for him. And he’ll get it done as fast as he can.”

Next Page »