"Doping" in rugby?

[Peg Leg]

Here is another one, Roid rage doesnt exist http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 6X01917064

However, TP does increase the likelihood that the animal will respond with aggression/dominance in a provoking situation.

So what's that if not roid rage?

Ah yes, but those rats weren't eating 35g of creatine and 150g of concentrated protein on top of their well balanced diet per day! Probably couldn't bench 185kg either BW, so whats your point?

[Broken Wing]

its still not "roid rage", merely increased aggression in the face of provocaction.

Ignoring the dosage for a minute, what is the definition of roid rage? I was under the impression it was increased aggression and an inability to respond to provocation, however slight, without aggression.

I am not defending abuse or misuse here

Oh right, just normal use.

So, what is the recommended dosage of anabolic steroids for rugby players?

[fourthirtythree]

A study I was looking at earlier on has an insight into the self declared expertise of the steroid abuser http://hpq.sagepub.com/content/11/6/845.abstract the cohort in this study uniformly declared their expertise in deciding what was healthy and derided healthcare professionals as they didn't have "hands on" experience of injecting steroids and "had probably never trained a day in their life".

You certainly can find studies backing an opinion that they don't cause kidney,liver damage or aggression if you go looking. Meta analyses suggest that this is not the case however. But carry on, and get a dictionary out before using the word "empirical" again.

[Peg Leg]

I am not defending abuse or misuse here

Oh right, just normal use.

So, what is the recommended dosage of anabolic steroids for rugby players?

It's been established earlier in the conversataion L4L's guidelines for dosage are set by the screening procedures.
If you get caught, you've taken too much.

[leinster4life13]

its still not "roid rage", merely increased aggression in the face of provocaction.

Ignoring the dosage for a minute, what is the definition of roid rage? I was under the impression it was increased aggression and an inability to respond to provocation, however slight, without aggression.

I am not defending abuse or misuse here

Oh right, just normal use.

So, what is the recommended dosage of anabolic steroids for rugby players?

Normal use is all I would ever talk about, what is the point of discussing anything if you are using an abnormal baseline?

does not eliminate the ability to discriminate between social or environmental cues, as might be expected if it induces a “ ‘roid rage.”

thats the definition for "roid rage", eg not flying into an uncontrolled blind rage, in plain English, you may be slightly more aggressive, but you will always be in control, therefore no "Roid Rage", as for the increased aggression, that can happen with diet, sleep patterns and many other things besides, no big deal.

Recommended dose? depends on your goals, height, bw, bf, and many other variables, less is always more. I would not advise any pro athlete to take them as they will show up on a test, take peptides or some short acting ester, you would be stupid to take certain steroids if you know you could be tested in a month time frame

[leinster4life13]

A study I was looking at earlier on has an insight into the self declared expertise of the steroid abuser http://hpq.sagepub.com/content/11/6/845.abstract the cohort in this study uniformly declared their expertise in deciding what was healthy and derided healthcare professionals as they didn't have "hands on" experience of injecting steroids and "had probably never trained a day in their life".

You certainly can find studies backing an opinion that they don't cause kidney,liver damage or aggression if you go looking. Meta analyses suggest that this is not the case however. But carry on, and get a dictionary out before using the word "empirical" again.

Only orals can damage your kidneys/liver. Aggression has been "proven" in massive does only, in rats at that. Empirical means fact in my mind, just because you conduct an experiment with some criteria does not make your finding fact, there are "empirical" published studies that prove Global warming isnt happening, I will use a different word.

As for Medical professionals, how many GP's are anything other then pill dispensers? How many Doctors have first hand knowledge of compounds and their use, the likes of Lance's Dr's Ferrari etc would be to the people to talk to, not regular Dr's. I cant claim to be a medical expert, I studied/work in the legal field, but I have more knowledge then the majority of Dr's/GP's in Ireland on the issue, without a doubt. Now biologists and chemists? What I know pales in comparison to their depth of knowledge, why people hold up regular Dr's a yardstick of knowledge is beyond me.

[simonokeeffe]

A study I was looking at earlier on has an insight into the self declared expertise of the steroid abuser http://hpq.sagepub.com/content/11/6/845.abstract the cohort in this study uniformly declared their expertise in deciding what was healthy and derided healthcare professionals as they didn't have "hands on" experience of injecting steroids and "had probably never trained a day in their life".

You certainly can find studies backing an opinion that they don't cause kidney,liver damage or aggression if you go looking. Meta analyses suggest that this is not the case however. But carry on, and get a dictionary out before using the word "empirical" again.

Only orals can damage your kidneys/liver. Aggression has been "proven" in massive does only, in rats at that. Empirical means fact in my mind, just because you conduct an experiment with some criteria does not make your finding fact, there are "empirical" published studies that prove Global warming isnt happening, I will use a different word.

As for Medical professionals, how many GP's are anything other then pill dispensers? How many Doctors have first hand knowledge of compounds and their use, the likes of Lance's Dr's Ferrari etc would be to the people to talk to, not regular Dr's. I cant claim to be a medical expert, I studied/work in the legal field, but I have more knowledge then the majority of Dr's/GP's in Ireland on the issue, without a doubt. Now biologists and chemists? What I know pales in comparison to their depth of knowledge, why people hold up regular Dr's a yardstick of knowledge is beyond me.

the medical degree?

[Peg Leg]

As for Medical professionals, how many GP's are anything other then pill dispensers? How many Doctors have first hand knowledge of compounds and their use, the likes of Lance's Dr's Ferrari etc would be to the people to talk to, not regular Dr's. I cant claim to be a medical expert, I studied/work in the legal field, but I have more knowledge then the majority of Dr's/GP's in Ireland on the issue, without a doubt. Now biologists and chemists? What I know pales in comparison to their depth of knowledge, why people hold up regular Dr's a yardstick of knowledge is beyond me.

Who equated doctor to GP? You can be a doctor of many many subjects in many specific fields of expertise!

[leinster4life13]

A study I was looking at earlier on has an insight into the self declared expertise of the steroid abuser http://hpq.sagepub.com/content/11/6/845.abstract the cohort in this study uniformly declared their expertise in deciding what was healthy and derided healthcare professionals as they didn't have "hands on" experience of injecting steroids and "had probably never trained a day in their life".

You certainly can find studies backing an opinion that they don't cause kidney,liver damage or aggression if you go looking. Meta analyses suggest that this is not the case however. But carry on, and get a dictionary out before using the word "empirical" again.

Only orals can damage your kidneys/liver. Aggression has been "proven" in massive does only, in rats at that. Empirical means fact in my mind, just because you conduct an experiment with some criteria does not make your finding fact, there are "empirical" published studies that prove Global warming isn't happening, I will use a different word.

As for Medical professionals, how many GP's are anything other then pill dispensers? How many Doctors have first hand knowledge of compounds and their use, the likes of Lance's Dr's Ferrari etc would be to the people to talk to, not regular Dr's. I cant claim to be a medical expert, I studied/work in the legal field, but I have more knowledge then the majority of Dr's/GP's in Ireland on the issue, without a doubt. Now biologists and chemists? What I know pales in comparison to their depth of knowledge, why people hold up regular Dr's a yardstick of knowledge is beyond me.

the medical degree?

A medical degree does not confer one with omnipotence, or expertise in what is a very narrow field of medicine, how often would they deal with it in their daily rota of fat sick people, hypochondriac parents and old people, it could be twenty years since they picked up a textbook on it. Its the same in every professional field from Law to engineering, you cant know everything, or rather, most people don't know everything.

[Tricky Dicky]

@ Leinster4life13, just out of interest, could we get a run-down of everything you're on while training?

[fourthirtythree]

Researchers conducting meta analyses of research on AAS use and related health and mental health issues ≠ your local GP.

Fact is a very difficult and often unverifiable term. Ontologically it may not be particularly useful in many cases. Empiricism relating to human behaviour is often over rated. If you measure one thing in a group of humans as a proxy for another the group will tend to game the result as an example. "What get's measured, gets massaged" should be a maxim.

[leinster4life13]

Researchers conducting meta analyses of research on AAS use and related health and mental health issues ≠ your local GP.

Fact is a very difficult and often unverifiable term. Ontologically it may not be particularly useful in many cases. Empiricism relating to human behaviour is often over rated. If you measure one thing in a group of humans as a proxy for another the group will tend to game the result as an example. "What get's measured, gets massaged" should be a maxim.

Depends on the researchers, as seen by the research overleaf upon which a Dr would rely, its not very good imo, compared to say, all the notes Ferrari has on Lance and every other cyclist he trained, that is probably the best and most definitive collection of data on EPO, GH, and test in human subjects anywhere. Its literally a goldmine and would settle any debate on long term use, dosages and side effects etc.

I agree, look at the variation and contradictions in all the "experiments" on the other page, hence why it should be legalised so we can get data and make a decision on if its good or bad, same with every substance.

[leinster4life13]

@ Leinster4life13, just out of interest, could we get a run-down of everything you're on while training?

In light of the legal status of AAS in Ireland and their ban by most sports authorities I wouldn't use AAS whilst training or without a prescription from my Dr, but a friend of a friend would. He would start in April with 6 weeks at 750mg of test e which would ensure his system is 100% clean by August. Two weeks after he stopped test, he would pin 500iu of HGC every three days for 8 shots. PCT would be lots of Vit D(from natural sources as well as supplements) and Vit E, combined with clomid at 50mg every twelve hours for 30 days and nolvadex at 20 mg a day for 40 days. All of that is useless without the right diet and training programming however, a person could be a walking chemistry lab yet if their diet and training is not correct, they would basically be wasting their time.

None of the above should be construed as advice or an admission on my part in any case, it is an entirely hypothetical scenario of what a friend of a friend might do.

[Alternative Ulster]

Cheers. I'll order some now.

[fourthirtythree]

Depends on the researchers, as seen by the research overleaf upon which a Dr would rely, its not very good imo, compared to say, all the notes Ferrari has on Lance and every other cyclist he trained, that is probably the best and most definitive collection of data on EPO, GH, and test in human subjects anywhere. Its literally a goldmine and would settle any debate on long term use, dosages and side effects etc.

I agree, look at the variation and contradictions in all the "experiments" on the other page, hence why it should be legalised so we can get data and make a decision on if its good or bad, same with every substance.

I've often thought it would be great to have Ferrarris case notes alright. But they would in no way be definitive, they would in fact be much closer to the work of a GP with a very select client base and not generalisable. They would be practice rather than research.

Meta analyses of research, a couple of which I was looking at this morning, are done to weed out the variation and try to obtain an evidence based consensus. I haven't seen one suggesting that mental health issues are not a concern.

[leinster4life13]

Depends on the researchers, as seen by the research overleaf upon which a Dr would rely, its not very good imo, compared to say, all the notes Ferrari has on Lance and every other cyclist he trained, that is probably the best and most definitive collection of data on EPO, GH, and test in human subjects anywhere. Its literally a goldmine and would settle any debate on long term use, dosages and side effects etc.

I agree, look at the variation and contradictions in all the "experiments" on the other page, hence why it should be legalised so we can get data and make a decision on if its good or bad, same with every substance.

I've often thought it would be great to have Ferrarris case notes alright. But they would in no way be definitive, they would in fact be much closer to the work of a GP with a very select client base and not generalisable. They would be practice rather than research.

Meta analyses of research, a couple of which I was looking at this morning, are done to weed out the variation and try to obtain an evidence based consensus. I haven't seen one suggesting that mental health issues are not a concern.

The thing with Ferrari would be the length and duration as well as information he would have stored, he literally has very specific data of over a hundred riders combined with their sleep patterns, training patterns, bloods, urine, diet, exercise frequency, everything, all noted down for near on a decade, you literally could not replicate a more comprehensive study on the effects of PED's on a controlled group of people, forget rats, if anyone has an answer its Ferrari. You are right though, its not definitive, but I dont see how you could structure anything to match the data he has compiled.

[fourthirtythree]

I'm not disagreeing that Ferrari is a meticulous doctor, if entirely unethical, but there is no control group in his practice. Not unless he was shafting some of his clients and making them race clean at least!

Continuing on the theme from where I started this - I'm sure PEDs are safe when administered under a programme like Ferraris. Most people cant afford that. Lance was bringing him sacks of cash in car parks. And you are then encouraging people who can't afford that kind of care to use them in order to compete. Like those forgotten Belgian cyclists long dead.

[JB1973]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/5139870.stm

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales ... id-2104644

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales ... es-7035953

Don't tell me none of these lads are not playing rugby as well, I'm not saying the pro players are taking them but certainly in the amateur game this sort of thing is rife.

You can physically see a huge difference in some guys in a 6 month period, I don't care how much protein or weights they are on these guys are using gear.

The testing at junior level is next to non existent, I played for 20 years and never ever got a single test. ((granted with my beer belly and pipe cleaner arms you could tell I was not a roider )

There is an example (granted 10 years ago) of an entire team who refused to take a drug test!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/3035593.stm

The player coach of this side (who was a first class player and whose brother is an ex welsh international and now is a senior coach at the Cardiff blues) Is now a highly ranked officer in the south wales police!

[Peg Leg]

A must watch for a different take on the vast improvements made by sports persons. http://www.ted.com/talks/david_epstein_ ... r_stronger

[paddyor]

A must watch for a different take on the vast improvements made by sports persons. http://www.ted.com/talks/david_epstein_ ... r_stronger

Interesting, particularly "the big bang of bodies". Doesn't dismiss the possibility of cheating as you can simply aim to make your body more like(in appearance and function) a "perfect" body through supplements. The NBA stat is mad(1 in 6 USAian men over 7ft tall 20-40 yrs old play in the NBA). The trend for 6'4 centres looks set to continue.........