Anabolic-androgenic steroids gained notoriety because of their illegal use in different sport disciplines. We constantly hear about this certain athlete using this particular steroid and testing positive for it and then getting banned because of it.
The role of AAS in modern sport has become an ethical issue because this group of drugs is reportedly providing unfair advantage for their users. But the question is can they really do that?
If the American College of Sports Medicine’s findings were to be believed, then anabolic-androgenic steroids do not award advantage to athletes.
The ACSM, in its position stand at The Use of Anabolic-Androgenic Steroids in Sports, has stated that these compounds do not increase aerobic power or capacity for muscular exercise. They arrived at this conclusion when they carried out a literature survey and ‘a careful analysis’ of the ergogenic effects of steroids.
And the recent article appearing on ESPN Page 2 seems to support this fact, which stated ‘that somehow steroids are overrated or ineffective or even counterproductive’, even in sport that requires power such as shot put.
Many would shake their heads in disbelief, but the truth has come straight from horse’s mouth – the legends of the shot put sport.
“There’s nothing that you can do with steroids that you couldn’t do without them,” said Geoff Capes in an interview. “They can’t give you strength that you couldn’t come by naturally. Among the elite [shot-putters], it doesn’t come down to who’s doing steroids or not. The big natural athlete is going to come through.” Capes is the world’s top-ranked shot putter in late 1970s and was the fifth placer in 1980 Olympic Games in Moscow.
Brian Oldfield likewise downplayed the role of AAS in his sport. Oldfield is a preeminent shot putter, who is credited for making the rotational technique popular now referred to as the “Oldfield spin.”
“If it just came down to something you got from a bottle, whether there was testing or not, somebody would be throwing 80 feet,” Oldfield stated.
If anabolic steroids were the elixirs of victory and if shot put was purely a competition of strength then it should follow that athletes should consistently break the records of their predecessors. However, this is not happening.
The ESPN Page 2 article says:
Times in many events on the track have dipped almost every year, likewise for times in the swimming pool. But in the one event that would seem to benefit a steroid user more than any other, the records have been basically unthreatened for a generation. Or even two. Oldfield’s old throw of 75 feet came in 1975 and it’s still the fourth-longest in history. Randy Barnes set the current record of 75 feet, 10 inches in 1990. The list of top-10 performers is dominated by shot-putters from the ’80s and early ’90s. The only shot-putters to have cracked the all-time top 10 since 2000 are Americans: Kevin Toth, Christian Cantwell, Adam Nelson and Reese Hoffa. But their best shot puts are still more than a foot behind Oldfield’s.
Steroids do not make winners
This just shows that anabolic steroids do not necessarily make winners and, therefore, the ‘accolades’ that they receive from ethicists are undeserved. Well, undeserved in some part.
Oldfield, who has admitted using steroids during his amateur years, said steroids do provide advantage for the user, but only up to a point.
“Some university did research that found that there was no positive effect from using steroids,” he said. “Well, I don’t agree with that. It might make the difference between improving 1 percent over a training period or 2 percent. That can be the difference between medal and fourth place. But there is a point where [the steroids] can’t help you and that’s at the very top. That’s why we haven’t seen records set.”
He clarified that he was not into these compounds when he threw that 75-foot distance, the first man to accomplish that feat.
“I’m throwing over 70 [feet] right now without steroids,” he stated in the Track & Field News when he was named U.S. Athlete of the Year in 1975. “The ‘roids seem to give you that psychological crutch, and I experience cramps and stuff with them. I don’t think they’re that great. People who are using ‘roids — it’s to come up to a high level, but once you’re up there you don’t need them anymore.”
And there are even those that say that steroids could in fact negatively affect athletic performances. Randy Matson, whom many consider as the greatest shot putter of all time, held this view.
He said he was 19 when he participated in the 1964 Olympics and was aware that there were athletes using performance enhancers during that time. The Eastern Europeans obviously were on them because ‘they just looked different’, according to Matson. He said he never did steroids. Both Parry O’Brien and Dallas Long, whom he considered as his mentors, also abstained from steroids Matson said. In his interview, he said that fans have this incorrect notion that the sport is a strength event.
“When I set my world record, I wasn’t the strongest one out there. Not even close. But it’s a technical event, even a speed event. It doesn’t come down to who has the best bench [press],” Matson said. In 1965, in just a span of two months, Matson broke the world record three times, adding over two feet to the previous mark.
Matson further explained they had used caffeine pills then, but in his case the pills did more harm than good. He said the pills messed up his timing and technique, losing his usual athletic equilibrium. If the caffeine pills could do that to you, he said, then steroids could too. Matson further added that although steroids could make you stronger they could also slow you down in some aspect of your performance. This is because aside from strength shot putting also requires other athletic abilities.
Should steroid use be legalized?
This is precisely the point of view of many pro-steroid advocates who want steroids to be legalized. If this is the case with steroids – that is, taking these substances do not necessarily result to bringing home the bacon – then why not allow athletes to use these drugs legally to level the playing field.
Ever since the Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 1990 classified anabolic-androgenic steroids as Schedule III drugs in the United States, there have been movements that protest against the legal rules and policy applied to these substances.
The U.S. government’s position is that steroids cause many health risks to their users to allow them to be legalized and remain unregulated. However, the stance of many pro-steroid advocates is that the scheduling of these drugs could be more detrimental to the health of those who take them. They say nonmedical users have no choice but to turn to illegal sources to acquire these products.
Rick Collins, a well-known author and steroid legal expert, points out that criminalization of steroids actually increases the risks associated with anabolic steroids due to impurities in black market products.
As for the purported health risks, there are still no conclusive evidence if this group of drugs do indeed deserve to be called as ‘highly fatal’ compounds.
Tags: American College of Sports Medicine, Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 1990, anabolic-androgenic steroids, Brian Oldfield, Dallas Long, Geoff Capes, legalization of steroids, Parry O’Brien, Randy Matson, shot put
Posted in Steroids and Anabolic Steroids, Steroids in Sports, steroid nation | No Comments/Questions
Taking steroids is never a wise choice
According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, doctors never prescribe anabolic-androgenic steroids to young, healthy individuals to help them in building their muscles.
Just like the new rule proposed by New Jersey Racing Commission executive director Frank Zanzuccki for standardbreds, a similar rule was proposed regarding the testing program and penalties for 
Incidence of anabolic androgenic steroids for non-therapeutic use is highly prevalent among young people. Previously, AAS was only used widely among athletes who require greater muscular strength. Nowadays, even teens in their high school years were found to be long-term steroid users. Improvement of appearance is the top motive for AAS use among 
A group of periodontists from Adana, Turkey conducted a study on the 
The 
Seven-time 
Lots have been said about the negative sides of synthetic steroids, and only a few positive feedbacks are making it to the mainstream media. Roid rage, aggression, infertility, liver damage, hirsutism – are just a few terms associated with steroid use.