"Doping" in rugby?

Forum for the discussion of other Teams and Clubs as well as General Rugby chat.

Moderator: moderators

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby Peg Leg » July 31st, 2014, 1:06 pm

Broken Wing wrote:
leinster4life13 wrote: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?
"It was Mrs O'Leary's cow"
Daniel Sullivan
User avatar
Peg Leg
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 8030
Joined: February 1st, 2010, 6:08 pm
Location: Procrastinasia

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby Broken Wing » July 31st, 2014, 1:07 pm

leinster4life13 wrote: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.

leinster4life13 wrote: 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?
Last edited by Broken Wing on July 31st, 2014, 1:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Champions of Europe 09, 11 & 12!
Pro 12 and Challenge Cup Champions 13!
Pro 12 Champions 14!
Magners League Champions 08!
Best supported in the Magners League 08 & 11!
Broken Wing
Brian O'Driscoll
 
Posts: 5144
Joined: April 3rd, 2006, 11:06 am
Location: South Stand, Baby!

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby fourthirtythree » July 31st, 2014, 1:09 pm

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.
Datta: what have we given?
My friend, blood shaking my heart
The awful daring of a moment's surrender
Which an age of prudence can never retract
What the thunder said to Brian Lenihan
User avatar
fourthirtythree
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 8559
Joined: April 12th, 2008, 11:33 pm
Location: Eight miles high

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby Peg Leg » July 31st, 2014, 1:10 pm

Broken Wing wrote:
leinster4life13 wrote: 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.
"It was Mrs O'Leary's cow"
Daniel Sullivan
User avatar
Peg Leg
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 8030
Joined: February 1st, 2010, 6:08 pm
Location: Procrastinasia

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby leinster4life13 » July 31st, 2014, 1:19 pm

Broken Wing wrote:
leinster4life13 wrote: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.

leinster4life13 wrote: 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
The Harry Vermass fanclub

Heroes: David Knox, Carlos Spencer, Marc Lieveremont, Ian Madigan.

Villains: Kidney, O'Gara, Phillpe St Andre, Laporte, Cork Con Mafia,Matt O'Connor.
User avatar
leinster4life13
Mullet
 
Posts: 1274
Joined: May 5th, 2009, 7:29 pm
Location: Salivating over a Carlos Spencer highlight reel

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby leinster4life13 » July 31st, 2014, 2:17 pm

fourthirtythree wrote: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 Harry Vermass fanclub

Heroes: David Knox, Carlos Spencer, Marc Lieveremont, Ian Madigan.

Villains: Kidney, O'Gara, Phillpe St Andre, Laporte, Cork Con Mafia,Matt O'Connor.
User avatar
leinster4life13
Mullet
 
Posts: 1274
Joined: May 5th, 2009, 7:29 pm
Location: Salivating over a Carlos Spencer highlight reel

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby simonokeeffe » July 31st, 2014, 2:38 pm

leinster4life13 wrote:
fourthirtythree wrote: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?
When he spreads his legs like that youd need dynamite or the Highland Light Infantry to shift him.
User avatar
simonokeeffe
Leo Cullen
 
Posts: 16080
Joined: July 21st, 2011, 3:04 am
Location: Dublin

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby Peg Leg » July 31st, 2014, 2:52 pm

leinster4life13 wrote: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!
"It was Mrs O'Leary's cow"
Daniel Sullivan
User avatar
Peg Leg
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 8030
Joined: February 1st, 2010, 6:08 pm
Location: Procrastinasia

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby leinster4life13 » July 31st, 2014, 3:01 pm

simonokeeffe wrote:
leinster4life13 wrote:
fourthirtythree wrote: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.
The Harry Vermass fanclub

Heroes: David Knox, Carlos Spencer, Marc Lieveremont, Ian Madigan.

Villains: Kidney, O'Gara, Phillpe St Andre, Laporte, Cork Con Mafia,Matt O'Connor.
User avatar
leinster4life13
Mullet
 
Posts: 1274
Joined: May 5th, 2009, 7:29 pm
Location: Salivating over a Carlos Spencer highlight reel

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby Tricky Dicky » July 31st, 2014, 3:09 pm

@ Leinster4life13, just out of interest, could we get a run-down of everything you're on while training?
He who fights, and runs away... ...can run away another day
User avatar
Tricky Dicky
Knowledgeable
 
Posts: 302
Joined: July 4th, 2014, 9:02 pm

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby fourthirtythree » July 31st, 2014, 4:14 pm

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.
Datta: what have we given?
My friend, blood shaking my heart
The awful daring of a moment's surrender
Which an age of prudence can never retract
What the thunder said to Brian Lenihan
User avatar
fourthirtythree
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 8559
Joined: April 12th, 2008, 11:33 pm
Location: Eight miles high

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby leinster4life13 » July 31st, 2014, 5:35 pm

fourthirtythree wrote: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.
The Harry Vermass fanclub

Heroes: David Knox, Carlos Spencer, Marc Lieveremont, Ian Madigan.

Villains: Kidney, O'Gara, Phillpe St Andre, Laporte, Cork Con Mafia,Matt O'Connor.
User avatar
leinster4life13
Mullet
 
Posts: 1274
Joined: May 5th, 2009, 7:29 pm
Location: Salivating over a Carlos Spencer highlight reel

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby leinster4life13 » July 31st, 2014, 5:57 pm

Tricky Dicky wrote:@ 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.
The Harry Vermass fanclub

Heroes: David Knox, Carlos Spencer, Marc Lieveremont, Ian Madigan.

Villains: Kidney, O'Gara, Phillpe St Andre, Laporte, Cork Con Mafia,Matt O'Connor.
User avatar
leinster4life13
Mullet
 
Posts: 1274
Joined: May 5th, 2009, 7:29 pm
Location: Salivating over a Carlos Spencer highlight reel

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby Alternative Ulster » July 31st, 2014, 6:04 pm

Cheers. I'll order some now.
Alternative Ulster
Graduate
 
Posts: 691
Joined: July 2nd, 2010, 3:05 pm

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby fourthirtythree » July 31st, 2014, 7:14 pm

leinster4life13 wrote: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.
Datta: what have we given?
My friend, blood shaking my heart
The awful daring of a moment's surrender
Which an age of prudence can never retract
What the thunder said to Brian Lenihan
User avatar
fourthirtythree
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 8559
Joined: April 12th, 2008, 11:33 pm
Location: Eight miles high

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby leinster4life13 » July 31st, 2014, 9:04 pm

fourthirtythree wrote:
leinster4life13 wrote: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.
The Harry Vermass fanclub

Heroes: David Knox, Carlos Spencer, Marc Lieveremont, Ian Madigan.

Villains: Kidney, O'Gara, Phillpe St Andre, Laporte, Cork Con Mafia,Matt O'Connor.
User avatar
leinster4life13
Mullet
 
Posts: 1274
Joined: May 5th, 2009, 7:29 pm
Location: Salivating over a Carlos Spencer highlight reel

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby fourthirtythree » July 31st, 2014, 9:25 pm

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.
Datta: what have we given?
My friend, blood shaking my heart
The awful daring of a moment's surrender
Which an age of prudence can never retract
What the thunder said to Brian Lenihan
User avatar
fourthirtythree
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 8559
Joined: April 12th, 2008, 11:33 pm
Location: Eight miles high

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby JB1973 » August 1st, 2014, 10:05 am

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 :D )

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!
JB1973
Mullet
 
Posts: 1623
Joined: June 7th, 2013, 10:30 am

Re: "Doping" in rugby?

Postby Peg Leg » August 1st, 2014, 10:36 pm

A must watch for a different take on the vast improvements made by sports persons. http://www.ted.com/talks/david_epstein_are_athletes_really_getting_faster_better_stronger
"It was Mrs O'Leary's cow"
Daniel Sullivan
User avatar
Peg Leg
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 8030
Joined: February 1st, 2010, 6:08 pm
Location: Procrastinasia

Re:

Postby paddyor » August 2nd, 2014, 12:49 am

Peg Leg wrote:A must watch for a different take on the vast improvements made by sports persons. http://www.ted.com/talks/david_epstein_are_athletes_really_getting_faster_better_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.........
Ruddock's tackle stats consistently too low for me to be taken seriously as a Six Nations blindside..... Ruddock's defensive stats don't stack up. - All Blacks Nil, Jan 15th, 2014
England A 8 - 14 Ireland A, 25th Jan 2014
Ruddock(c) 19/2 Tackles
paddyor
Girvan Dempsey
 
Posts: 2891
Joined: November 17th, 2012, 12:48 am

PreviousNext

Return to General Rugby

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest