Performance Enhancers (7 Viewers)

OP
Nenz

Nenz

Senior Member
Apr 17, 2008
10,472
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #27
    England aren't all on drugs, their government decided to spend a shitload on their olympic team.
    What a dumb thing to do.

    Dru, any bad side effects? I've heard stories of bad acne, hair in wrong places etc.
     

    .zero

    ★ ★ ★
    Aug 8, 2006
    82,806
    #28
    i was just kidding about the whole steroids bit. but i know ppl that have used enhancers and i haven't seen any visible side effects on them.

    performance enhancers are the next stage in training whether ppl like it or not. science will perfect the formulas to lessen the side effects but this can only happen if competition committees and governments unban the use, sale and creation
     

    Bozi

    The Bozman
    Administrator
    Oct 18, 2005
    22,747
    #29
    England aren't all on drugs, their government decided to spend a shitload on their olympic team.
    What a dumb thing to do.

    Dru, any bad side effects? I've heard stories of bad acne, hair in wrong places etc.
    don't make me whup your ass boy. Chris Hoy -3 gold medals is from Edinburgh,Scotland
     
    OP
    Nenz

    Nenz

    Senior Member
    Apr 17, 2008
    10,472
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #32
    don't make me whup your ass boy. Chris Hoy -3 gold medals is from Edinburgh,Scotland
    i shall edit, UK? now you mention it boz, that also poses an advantage, increasing your number by incorporating all of the UK.
     
    OP
    Nenz

    Nenz

    Senior Member
    Apr 17, 2008
    10,472
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #33
    i was just kidding about the whole steroids bit. but i know ppl that have used enhancers and i haven't seen any visible side effects on them.

    performance enhancers are the next stage in training whether ppl like it or not. science will perfect the formulas to lessen the side effects but this can only happen if competition committees and governments unban the use, sale and creation
    correction, only the creation. Until they have a full proof product with no side effects, governments wouldn't dare allow it but why shouldn't they keep trying. USA allow the use though don't they? My friend went to LA for only a few months and came back ripped, i don't know what he took though.
     

    Bozi

    The Bozman
    Administrator
    Oct 18, 2005
    22,747
    #34
    i shall edit, UK? now you mention it boz, that also poses an advantage, increasing your number by incorporating all of the UK.
    not really, there is under 5m people in scotland, that is less than rome. and adding wales does little to help either,there is literally 76 people and a lot of sheep:p
     
    OP
    Nenz

    Nenz

    Senior Member
    Apr 17, 2008
    10,472
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #35
    not really, there is under 5m people in scotland, that is less than rome. and adding wales does little to help either,there is literally 76 people and a lot of sheep:p
    :lol: Sounds like New Zealand
     

    .zero

    ★ ★ ★
    Aug 8, 2006
    82,806
    #36
    correction, only the creation. Until they have a full proof product with no side effects, governments wouldn't dare allow it but why shouldn't they keep trying. USA allow the use though don't they? My friend went to LA for only a few months and came back ripped, i don't know what he took though.
    No its not allowed in the U.S. They are substances which are unregulated by the FDA thus putting them in the same category as illegal narcotics. But unless you are peddling large volumes to people I doubt the severity of the trafficking is the same as narcotics.

    But I still stand by my statement of enhancements becoming regulated and legalized. If you think about the stuff people use currently such as creatine, animal protein injections, B12 injections, etc.. These were all once considered taboo. But as science/medicine and conventional thinking progress and evolve these performance enhancers became regulated, legalized and are now merely a stepping stool for those who really train.

    At the end of the day its all about money, so once the FDA has a changing of the guard per se, they will see that there is A LOT of cash to be made if they regulate this stuff so they will modify their rules/regulations and requirements for performance enhancers, which will send a beacon out to the pharmaceutical companies around the world to develop (they most likely are already developed) a designer enhancer. Once the submissions come in from the thousands of Pharm companies, the FDA will make their tweaks as well as suggest tweaks to the Pharm companies on their product. And finally the FDA will slap their label on the bottle, jar, etc as they do with everything on shelves and voila! Now you have steroids and perfomance enhancers which were previously banned on all accounts.

    All it takes is a little bit of time. Keep in mind that most of the members of these athletic competition boards (Olympic committee, FIFA, NFL, etc..) are old people from a different time where science and technology had no part in sports or any reflection on the field. Once these people are replaced the old mentality and short-sightedness will gone as well. It takes progressive minds to do progressive things.
     
    OP
    Nenz

    Nenz

    Senior Member
    Apr 17, 2008
    10,472
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #37
    Its the stories of the terrible side affects that induce fear into who ever is calling the shots and the consumers themselves.
    You know that guy who did the McDonalds for a month thing? When he had his own show, one man took these things for 4 consecutive weeks. He looked in tip top shape but his fertility was down the drain, and he suffered heart irregularities. It showed back stories also, one kid picked up depression after he was using growth hormones and he eventually killed himself.
    I'm not saying thats always the case (in fact it may be extremely unlikely) but as long as people keep pumping out these stories its going to look like a bad idea to take them, therefore it doesn't pose a good investment to the FDA's etc. Imagine the protests, and the shit they will get. It may be against their code of ethics.
    Its like MDMA, in the right hands its an almost harmless drug but it still manages to have a terrible reputation.
     

    Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 7)