Is HGH cheating?

by Dex on Mar 1, 2007 6:46 AM PST in News

So Gary Matthews Jr. is busted. In light of that, I'm really starting to wonder if we shouldn't just let these players do whatever they want to do in terms of training. I mean, really... The whole point of banning these things is because kids want to emulate athletes and emulating an athlete who's on cocaine or amphetamines or steroids is dangerous. But what if a kid wants to emulate an athlete taking HGH? Is HGH bad for you? And if it isn't bad for you, then why shouldn't players use it?

The side effects of steroids include the following:

...For men shrinking of the testicles, reduced sperm count, infertility, baldness, development of breasts; for women growth of facial hair, changes in or cessation of the menstrual cycle, deepened voice;

In other words, taking steroids will turn you into some sort of asexual monster. If you're a dude, you turn into a hairless thing with boobs and shrunken, useless balls. If you're a chick, it'll turn you into a dude. The side effects of amphetamines include weight loss, mood swings, hostility and euphoria followed by depression. Basically, it will turn you into a contestant on America's Next Top Model. And if you take cocaine, it turns you into an arrogant little prick with the sniffles.

What if you take HGH? Well... If you're short, it will likely makes you taller. If you're old it might keep you younger. If you're an athlete, it will make you stronger. And in our society, something that makes you taller, stronger and younger is frankly... pretty cool.

The negative side effects of elevated levels of HGH? Well, according to one set of studies:

HGH can lead to swelling of the soft tissues in the body; abnormal growth of the hands, feet and face; high blood pressure; an increased tendency to sweat and excessive hair growth.

...Which sounds a lot like what happens to athletes normally.

Other information suggests that there are slightly more troubling side effects like Carpal tunnel, arthritis, bloating and diabetes, but really... that's the same kind of stuff that can happen to you if you spend too much time in front of a computer, drinking too much soda. And on top of that, studies show that those types of side effects are less prevalent in young people than they are in old people. And since a lot of those side effects start to occur naturally as you get older, there's still a sentiment that the good may outweigh the bad.

Of course... Studies are still necessary.

With all that being said, if further studies come back and say that there really isn't any negative effect to using HGH at levels that significantly improve an athlete's performance, then shouldn't we allow it to be used? Would it then be the same as laser eye surgery or protein or vitamins?

I used to have a pretty good idea of why we don't want performance enhancers in baseball, but with a lot of the newer stuff that's out there... I'm starting to get fuzzy on it. I'm pretty sure that it has something to do with me not liking Barry Bonds.

Tweet Comment 21 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Steroids are good for people

as the medical technology continues to develop the stigma attached to steroids will diminish. I'm 31 now and by the time I'm 51 we will all be taking steroids to live longer, healthier, and stronger. it's true. steroids are already commonly used in medicine and their use (and prevalance) is only going to grow.

I know this guy is kind of a douche, but if you get 45 minutes, read Canseco's book. (I think it's called Juiced). great book. he really predicts the future in his rationale look at steroids. the current fuss over steroids is basically a witch hunt to keep Bonds from feeling good about breaking Aaron's record. I hope it's only because Bonds hasn't been the model interview subject for reporters and not because there is still racism in baseball.

Relax, all right? Don't try to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.

by TheRevRun on Mar 1, 2007 8:09 AM PST reply actions

The point

Don't we want our society to celebrate natural athleticism and ability as opposed to who can fill their body with as many different drugs as possible?

Taking performance enhancing substances changes the game because a player's real talent is no longer easily measurable.

Who's to say that I'm not stronger, faster, and bigger than most MLB players if I take enough steroids and other crazy drugs that the market, if legal, will invent. If anybody can be Albert Pujols with enough drugs, why even bother celebrating athletes at all?

Do you want to see a contest of people who excel at their art through years of practice combined with natural talent, or a contest of who can spend the most money to pump their body full of as many drugs as possible to compete?

by Brad @ Gaslamp Ball on Mar 1, 2007 8:23 AM PST reply actions

Clarification

My comments were regarding the generic category of performance enhancing drugs , not HGH specifically.

by Brad @ Gaslamp Ball on Mar 1, 2007 8:24 AM PST up reply actions

It's a tough question

I'm pretty sure that even if I took HGH and steroids, I wouldn't be able to do what these guys can do. You gotta figure that there are thousands of guys who play baseball who don't make it to the big leagues... And that includes probably a significant number of whom take steroids and performance enhancers. Also, it's really tough to test for HGH. At this point, I don't think they have any sort of reliable test that's given consistent positive results on people who have taken HGH.

So then the question becomes this... If it has significant benefits with little side effects and is impossible to test for, then should we even try to police the situation?

I understand what you're saying, Brad, but I wonder if practical considerations make this a situation where we're just going to have to accept it as distasteful as it might be.

by Dex on Mar 1, 2007 8:45 AM PST up reply actions

NASCAR Analogy

I am not sure the american public would care if it about who spends the most money. NASCAR is infamous for the team that spends the most money wins, and it is not always about skill.

----Plus I take HGH for lightning quick legs and to help my back after linebackers hit me everysudnay and to keep my herpies under control.................

by Ron Mexico on Mar 1, 2007 10:43 AM PST up reply actions

Is HGH legal?

but just not Legal in Baseball? I used to hear HGH commercials on the radio all the time.

by jbox on Mar 1, 2007 10:54 AM PST reply actions

HGH....

HGH is NOT legal to sell over the counter. HGH is a federally regulated substance that can only be prescribed and administered (through injection), by a doctor.

"People who write about spring training not being necessary have never tried to throw a baseball." ~ Sandy Koufax

by Drama on Mar 1, 2007 11:06 AM PST up reply actions

Why we care about drugs in Baseball

Even if there aren't side effects to any of these drugs, they shouldn't be allowed. What separates baseball from all the other sports is our ability to compare different eras based on statistics. That's the beauty of baseball, comparing Ruth to Aaron to Bonds. When/if Bonds passes Ruth, you want him to have the same advantages or disadvantages physically as the other player.

Nobody cares about career stats in football or basketball. It's too hard to compare eras. But in baseball there isn't much change in the technology. Maybe bats have gotten lighter and harder (that's what she said), parks have gotten somewhat smaller, or pitching is dilluted by expansion, but it's still a 90+ MPH fastball against a hitter.

Why do you think McGwire and Sosa brought baseball back to prominence? That's what baseball is all about. Connecting generations through comparison. Steroids and HGH will put an end to that all together.

by FUBYU on Mar 1, 2007 11:13 AM PST reply actions

FUBYU...

I couldn't agree more. This whole "it's their bodies let them do whatever the hell they want" attitude is bullshit. I don't care if every single player in baseball is doing it EXCEPT one...it's not fair to the one guy that doesn't want to risk his health...the one guy that actually got to the major league level based solely on his talent, hard work and dedication.

"People who write about spring training not being necessary have never tried to throw a baseball." ~ Sandy Koufax

by Drama on Mar 1, 2007 12:20 PM PST up reply actions

I totally agree in the case of steroids

The problem that I'm talking about is if there isn't a risk to the person's health. If HGH turns out to be reasonably safe, then what? Also, there's bound to be kids with growth deficiencies who play baseball who were treated with HGH to make sure that they grew to a "normal" height. Should they be banned from baseball because they were "supposed" to be 4'11" and instead grew to 5'10" thanks to HGH?

by Dex on Mar 1, 2007 12:51 PM PST up reply actions

I'm only 5'10" so...

If it proves out to be safe, I'll give it to my teenagers once I have kids so they'll be 6'+

Relax, all right? Don't try to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.

by TheRevRun on Mar 1, 2007 3:35 PM PST up reply actions

But where's that line drawn?

If you're banning performance enhancers that don't have negative side effects, then should we ban Lasik? What about vitamins in general? Should caffeine be banned?

What about guys who have Tommy John surgery? Is that a performance enhancer? After the surgery, their arms are able to do those motions with greater ease and not necessarily in a way that would have been completely natural.

by Dex on Mar 1, 2007 12:55 PM PST up reply actions

Good points, Dex.

I think that MLB should allow anything that is legal.

In A.J. We Trust
E-mail me

by Richard Wade on Mar 1, 2007 1:03 PM PST up reply actions

What's "legal"?

Legal? As in legal over the counter? Or legal if prescribed and administered by a doctor?

"People who write about spring training not being necessary have never tried to throw a baseball." ~ Sandy Koufax

by Drama on Mar 1, 2007 1:14 PM PST up reply actions

Bonds has already passed Ruth...

As far as comparing eras, I have to completely disagree. We're not talking about golf and two guys playing the same course 50 years apart. We're talking about baseball which is a head to head sport among teams. It's simple to compare eras because of a player's relative play to the players of his era. Ruth played in an era of drunks, gamblers, and racists. Bonds plays in an era of weightlifting, nutrition, and steroids. Maybe Bonds hit 300 of his 700 home runs the same day he took steroids. He probably hit 300 of his 700 home runs against pitchers who took steroids that day. You can compare eras even today because baseball is not an individual sport. Do you think if Cy Young was cloned and born today he would win 511 games in the 21st century? I doubt it. But he played in an era before relief pitchers and for teams that scored a lot of runs. You don't compare him to Greg Maddux, who also has a metric butt-ton of wins, because Maddux pitches in an era where 4 CGs in a year is only for the best pitchers. Modern players are strong and the 2007 Devil Rays would probably beat the 1927 Yankees if they played today with equipment of each's era.

Basically what I'm trying to say is that you can still measure eras across each other just maintain a relative perspective.

Relax, all right? Don't try to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.

by TheRevRun on Mar 3, 2007 4:51 AM PST up reply actions

Not too long...

before there is a urine test for HGH, and then the whole thing gets blown wide open. I have an inside source that tells me so. More to follow.

Padres fan since '76

by kev on Mar 1, 2007 1:33 PM PST reply actions

is your inside source Dr. Catlin?

http://mlb.mlb.com/content/printer_friendly/mlb/y2007/m03/d02/c1824134.jsp

Relax, all right? Don't try to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.

by TheRevRun on Mar 3, 2007 4:40 AM PST up reply actions

My hope for HGH

All I'm hoping is that that one day, if I take enough Human Growth Hormone I'll grow another arm, slightly below one of my current arms. This would allow me to switch to a fresh arm in the late innings when they have a runner in scoring position and the top of the order coming up. think of the possibilities.

Steroids...they're not just for hitters anymore.

by RBS on Mar 1, 2007 10:03 PM PST reply actions

Heh. But they never were just for hitters.

Pitchers on steroids
Recover fast, which leads to:
What?! Ryan Franklin?!

by haikuandrun on Mar 2, 2007 1:51 PM PST up reply actions

Man that's a good one

I like haiku.

by Dex on Mar 3, 2007 6:42 PM PST up reply actions

HGH is not a steroid

HGH is not a steroid and the body reacts totally differently to it than steroids. Performance
enhancing, especially at the pro level, can be just a sliver that makes the difference between success or failure. If an athlete can work 10% harder in the gym, last 10% longer, and recouperate 10% faster than someone who doesn't use HGH, than that might make the sliver of difference. If the breaking ball bites a bit more or the batter reacts a nanosecond sooner, that's the sliver we are talking about.

HGH is approved by the FDA for over the counter sales in homeopathic solutions. No doctor's prescription is necessary. So a baseball player can use it without breaking any US laws. It's not
allowed by Major League Baseball but there is no test that will show homeopathic HGH in the body. Since homeopathic HGH oral sprays achieve 60%-80% of the same results as injected HGH, is legal, cheaper, does not involve hypodermic needles, it's absolute idiocy that these baseball players are getting busted for HGH usage.

There are at least 30 websites, http://www.21stcenturyhgh.com is the most popular with athletes, that sell the homeopathic HGH oral sprays perfectly legally. All homeopathic remedies, whether they be for allergies, the flu, or enhanced athletic performance, are extremely gentle to the system. A good story about the misleading reports about HGH and baseball can be found here http://www.21stcenturyhgh.com/hgh-newsstories-baseball-confusion.htm

by mharvey on Mar 16, 2007 1:35 PM PDT reply actions