WEEK EIGHTEEN :: Should The IFBB Ban Steroids For Real?

[admin]

TOPIC: Should The IFBB Ban Steroids For Real?

For the week of: March 10th - March 17th.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

With the latest controversy surrounding Arnold's involvement in professional bodybuilding and its promotion, some have asked for the IFBB to ban steroids and other illegal drugs "for real". The IFBB says they are not allowed in its competitions, but everybody knows that the pros are using illegal drugs and most of the pros will admit it. Should the IFBB crackdown on illegal drugs and seriously test every athlete for all illegal drugs before and after every competition?

If so, what would be the effects on pro bodybuilding? Would it gain more mainstream acceptance? Or would small, less freaky athletes simply draw less of a crowd until IFBB pro shows are as small as amateur shows? What would be the effect on the entire bodybuilding and fitness industry?

If you do not believe they should ban illegal drugs, then why do you believe this? Do you believe that sooner or later law enforcement will start arresting more of the pros? Or will they ignore it like they do with rappers who admit to smoking weed?

Post your detailed opinions and show off your knowledge!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Don't discuss any other topic in this section. ONLY discuss the question above.

The best response will get $50 in credit to use in our online store! The other good responses will be used in an article on the main Bodybuilding.com site, with the poster's forum name listed by it.

Thanks,
Bodybuilding.com

[TheAustrianOak]

No I don't think so

Everyone always says "let's get rid of the drugs, and bring bodybuilding back to how it was in the old days."
But thats the thing, even back in the old days they all admit to having used drugs anyways.
Arnold was known for popping DBols like candy, Sergio Olivia stated in an interview that most of them used Deca and Dbol as their stack.

Also that wouldn't be fair to the current lineup of competitors, who have dedicated their lives to a sport where they knew they were not going to make very much money anyways, but used steroids to get to where they are today. You can't just go in and say "alright guys, we're going to start testing from now on. If you don't like it, quit."

And not all of the recent competitors look bad anyways, just a couple guts here and there.

So what I think they should do is have a waist restriction. Before the competition every athlete has their waist measured. Let's say the cut off point is 36 inches, which is still pretty wide for having 3% bodyfat. Any competitor whos waste is larger then 36 inches is not allowed to compete.

This essentially gets rid of the guts but not the freakish proportions. This way you will have more competitors like Levrone, Flex, and Dexter. Guys who have freakish mass everywhere, yet still have tight waists.

Just imagine Big Ron with his current size everywhere else and a 32 inch waist!

And I do not think the athletes should stop using over legal reasons, they should just keep denying that they use.
To quote Plato, "A just man is he who breaks unjust laws."
I stick by this statement because I believe they aren't harming anyone except themselves.
What difference does it make to my life if some IFBB pro is sticking himself in the delt with some test? Absolutely nothing.

[chad12121]

No. It would literally kill the IFBB, and the IFBB knows this that is why it will never happen. It has been said again and again simple fact, no one wants to see a bunch of swimmers on stage. This is why natural competitions are'nt nearly as popular as the Olympia, Ironman, Arnol Classic, etc.

If the IFBB really enforced their steroid ban, none of the current pros would compete. What you would have is all the Pros going to another organization. Which then the IFBB would have to compete with and would lose. Just like the current situation with natural competitions vs. unnatural competitions. Natural competitions just don't draw enough popularity and money.

[Crear1705]

I totally agree with all you guys, i think its dumb to even consider banning roids in IFBB. Everyone knows bodybuilders use them and they turn a blind eye to it. It maked perfect sence though, there not cheating, there not doing somthing that gives them an edge, i would be willing to be that 99% of guys at the O and Arnold juice. Its the only way to be a "bodybuidler" these days. i dont see anything wrong with that, there not hurting anyone, they all are very well informed and supplied. And i agree, Arnold could kiss our asses, he used roids, hes being a huge hypocrite, and hes trying to save his own ass.

[Tony B]

If IFBB bans steriods its not going to change the culture. In my opinion if there is a ban on steriods there is still the "hardcore" bodybuilding fans and types that will continue to use steriods, "underground" so to speak. These are the people who want to see the big freaky physiques.

The general public opinion of bodybuilders is as "junkies". Banning steriods isnt going to change people using them such as in athletics. There is still the perception though that even some of these so called natural bodybuilders actually do use steriods. Skip La Cour is a good example. Bodybuilding doesnt have the most rosy public opinion and people are often freaked out by these type of extreme physiques. The general community admires to the Men's health cover model physique not a Ronnie Coleman style physique. But having a Men's health cover model as Mr Olympia is not going to do anything but annoying the bodybuilding public and most likely lead to break away bodybuilding leagues.

If the sport wants to clean up its image, banning human growth hormone would be one way to go, as well as changing the judging mentality that bigger is always better. Fitness/health industry is massive and people need to be made aware of the positive benefits of a bodybuilding type diet/fitness approach, to change the public perceptions

[IGF]

Should The IFBB Ban Steroids For Real?

I don't believe steriod use should be ultimately cut off in the IFBB, but the regulation of certain drugs should be brought in. Many of the substances that are used are destroying the sport because their use (and overuse) is clearly obvious on the physiques some of the pro's bring out.

Look at one of the Golden Era physiques, do you see a distended gut? Do you see a person at 4% bodyfat that has muscles smoothened out and softened by synthol use? Do any of the premier participates get put into hospitals afterwards due to the overuse of diuretics. No you don't, not at all. What you do see is a very aesthetic and balanced physique such as Arnold Swarchzenegger (Of course),Robby Robinson and Franco "The Bat" Columbo. That is what I believe should come back today, true freaks that are impressive in size and definition but do not sacrifice their entire lives to the sport.

While I may never know how much steroids today's Professional Bodybuilders are using exactly I believe it would be fair to assume bodybuilders the likes of Ronnie Coleman and Markus Ruhl are taking a gigantic or even astronomical amount to gain and maintain their lean muscle mass. Just look at the 2002 and 2003 season, Ronnie Coleman (who had been training for at least 15 years and using Anabolic Steroids for a considerable amount of time) put on an unprecedented 30 pounds of muscle to consolidate his Olympia crown. How could anything BUT a pharmacy load of Deca,Test and GH cause this? I doubt even a miracle would produce such results. What image does this portray to younger and up and comming bodybuilders you ask, well surely not one of "hardwork and dedication will pay off". Many people do not have the will in themselves to take in such enourmous amounts of drugs just to be able to compete in the higher levels of bodybuilding, which doesn't even pay well. Drugs in these quantities are ruining our sport, the sport that is meant to portray health and fitness not empty syringes and drug dealers.

So what will this mean for bodybuilding? Well I believe it would be a small step forward in making the physiques more appealing (not just to us bodybuilders but to the general public as well) and help bodybuilding reclaim some of it's image as a sport of health. Bodybuilding going mainstream? This will never happen, not in anyones most deslusional fevour dreams. Bodybuilding is the only sport on the planet where the dedicated fans also do what their rolemodels do - lift weights. Not everyone that watches football plays football or anybody who watches basketball plays basketball, instead they like to eat a nice fat hot dog and sit on the couch. Implementing a more strict drug and substance use policy will take bodybuilding into the next era and help it gain more popularity among the general population.

Again I'll finish off by saying I do not believe steroids should ever be taken out of the IFBB scene, but more regulation should start occuring to try and reign in the amount and types of drugs being used in the sport.

[mroussell]

Yup!

[1dayIWillBeBig]

I'll say no, because if they did. Bodybuilders would find a way around it anyway and continue to use. I really dont care if they use Drugs or not, it has no effect on me.

Maybe what they should do is, Ban certain types of drugs.
For Instance:
GH
Insulin
and some types of Androgens, but allow the More Popular(Dbol, Deca, Test e, etc...) But either way, it would still be Illegal

and ban Synthol

[Mr. Shoulders]

Absolutley not

[LukeT]

If you do not believe they should ban illegal drugs, then why do you believe this? Do you believe that sooner or later law enforcement will start arresting more of the pros? Or will they ignore it like they do with rappers who admit to smoking weed?

I do not think that the IFBB should "really" ban steroids. I base my opinion on extremes. Example: If you were a big fan of skateboarding, would you rather watch people who were immensely and unnaturally good or people who were just really good? Myself, I would like to watch the abnormally good people. Say there was a somewhat harmful and illegal drug that enabled these pros to attain that unnaturally good status; I wouldn't mind them taking it as long as they were taking it on their own freewill. I myself would never take the drug (just as I don't ever plan on taking steroids) but it wouldn't change the fact that it'd undoubtedly boost skate boarding’s level of entertainment.

To me the exact same applies to bodybuilding, I'd rather see guys like Dorian Yates, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Jay Cutler, ect than .. (drawing a blank). See, I can't even think of a natural bodybuilder who is highly recognized (for bodybuilding anyway). I do believe that there should be some limiting to the types of anabolic steroids permitted, but for the most part leave things the way they are. If they were banned, then it would be very unfair to the current top competitors, as they would no longer be able to compete and many of them dedicated their entire lives to the sport, and you’d be stripping away everything they’ve worked so hard for. The only advantage I can see to having the ban enforced is that a lot of guys guts would be smaller due to less organ enlargement from GH, ect. However guys like Dexter Jackson prove that large-gut can be overcome, as well as a lot of the oldschool icons.

Regarding the overlooking, I do think that law enforcement will overlook this as marjiuana is overlooked, but I do think that in other sports where the majority don't use performance enhancing drugs (MLB) that law should continue (they have been in the past) pressuring drug testing, as well as the olympics drugs do not belong in triathelones for example where many or most competitors wish to compete legit.

If so, what would be the effects on pro bodybuilding? Would it gain more mainstream acceptance? Or would small, less freaky athletes simply draw less of a crowd until IFBB pro shows are as small as amateur shows? What would be the effect on the entire bodybuilding and fitness industry?

If steroids were "really" banned I believe that it would effect pro bodybuilding very negatively, and would make genes even more of a deciding factor than ever before. At least now with steroids you can exceed beyond what your genes had in plan for you. Without them (steroids), guys like Ronnie would arguably be at their natural limit. Now I realize that he’s already surpassed this, but assuming Ronnie was all natural and had the same diet/work ethic/genes as he has now. After a while it'd really be a question of who has the better genes, even more so than now. As far as mainstream acceptance goes I’m probably going to have to say no. The majority of the public these days aren't interested in bodybuilders, they may find the current IFBB pros disgusting, but they wouldn't be too interested in it even if they were all natural because to me it seems that men in general are just not interested in it and females only tend to be into guys like Brad Pitt; much larger becomes gross to them. I think male modeling is something that could definitely fly mainstream, but not bodybuilding, steroids or not. I think if this were to happen that smaller crowds would be attracted to the IFBB shows, but bodybuilding in general as a community wouldn't be hurt too badly, just the entertainment side, and the elite few who are currently in contention to win IFBB pro shows.

[Oxi]

Should the IFBB Ban Steroids For Real:

It appears that any arguement on this issues of steroids comes back to a different arguement. It seems to me that these days, the complaints in the bodybuilding world are based around two groups. One group admires Ronnie Coleman, Yates, and the rest of the mass monsters of today. The other group admires the more "natural" phsyiques of Arnold and Frank Zane.

So, let's look at it objectively, for once. In the 70's and early 80's, balance, and symmetry were what won you a Mr. O. As of recent times, the judging characteristics have shifted to having a more massive, less balanced athlete win Mr. O. Why is this? Some say that steroids and other muscle enhancers have gotten much better and more sophisticated, and even more safe. I would tend to agree.

So, in the seventies and eighties, steroids were used, abused, and reused in the same way they are today. Only today, the wealth of knowledge is much greater, and the products can produce much better results. If one were to look at it from that angle, one would have to assume that the steroids should remain legal, since it "levels" the playing field. All athletes are in a sort of free for all, and none has an unfair advantage over another, as long as they are in the same time period. Arnold, Zane, and the others of the 70's an 80's used whatever they could, and whatever they knew to get huge and win the Mr. O. Yates, and now Coleman are doing the same. It is impossible to compare athletes of different generations in any sport, even though journalists attempt it on a daily basis (who was better Shaq or Wilt)

On the other hand, if the IFBB were able to test for every performance enhancer available, the field would also be level. Many substances can't be tested for, but their direct affects can be. This is how the olympic commitee, and the international bicycling commitee do it. I do not know if there is a way to stay at the forefront of medical technology and be in front of the next underground steroid. But, in a perfect world, let's assume you can. If these rules were implemented, all athletes would be "all natural". Athletes of the previous generations would never be on level footing with today's athletes, and the great heritage of the sport would be separated into a "before" and "after" the rule was implemented. Today's athletes would be banned from all compitition, and all "known" names would be gone from the IFBB.

The sad truth is, no one will ever be able to 100% ensure us that an athlete has never taken a steroid their entire lives. There is no test that is fault proof. There is no possible way that the IFBB can make sure athletes aren't on test, HGH, Synthol or whatever else hasn't hit the headlines yet. There is even less of a chance that they will be able to go back to whther they were used 15-20 years ago by the athlete. For this reason, I believe the rules should stand the way they are as far as steroid testing goes.

Ahh, but there is a catch, there is a simple way to ensure that both sides are happy...to a point. Since bodybuilding is a subjectively judged compitition, there needs to be a way to regulate this. Again, I look to the Olympics (however faulted they were in Figure skating one year). A panel of judges that is large by today's standards, from a large background of nationalities, and with FREQUENT turnover, would give a better indication of what the whole world sees as the person with the "best body in the world". Also, a publicly available scorecard, as they use in boxing, along with realtime scores as they use in gymnastics and figure skating for each judge, will "self govern" this policy. The judges who judge something different that most others will show up and be scrutinized by the media. Many people seem to think that some people "high up on the food chain" in bodybuilding have the ability to manipulate judges to make their sponsered athlete the winner. With public scorecards, much of this talk will either be justified, or thrown out as ridiculous. The "highest" and "lowest" score of each round could be removed, ala olympic diving.

Keith

[ford4life]

A Steroid Ban?
.....................
With all the heat on pro sports in general with the MLB streroid scandal, it is very possible that bodybuilding is next on the government's agenda. When you think about it, who really cares about baseball anymore? After all these issues the past year, even with the excitement of the NY-Boston series last year, I do not think I am going to watch a single game unless I am there in person this year. The reason? frist of all, i loved seeing these juiced giants hit masive home runs. If the same thing happens in pro bodybuilding, I might... I might just as well look back to collegiate wrestlers for their phyiques.

A Reality?
..............
For all intensive purposes, yes, steroids are illegal in the United States as of right now. It seems like everyone blames the problems of our country on roid use right now, too. A recent estimate I saw put actual steroid (not counting prohormones or gH supplements) at over 300,000 high school students. This inflated propoganda is nowhere near the actual amount, and if steroids in IFBB competions are banned, it is obvious that none of the big guns in bodybuilding would continue competing, or if they did at least not in as excellent shape as they are now. Steroids are the only line that separate a bodybuilder and an athlete. If steroid use in the IFBB is discontinued, everyone remotely athletic would be considered a bodybuilder.

[musclefreak]

[Ithink they should be banned,the natural looking physiques are much better to look at rather then the freakyness of tht of a steroid user.Look at whts happened in baseball,and all the trouble this illegal drug has caused.Also i saw a story i think it ws on The Today show about how the use of steroids among teens has risen,which isnt good.Another thing tht has convinced me about how bad and how dangerous they are is the story tht a friend told me about his dad and how he thought the way he took them and the way he ws advised to tke them ws safe and he wound up with i think kidney problems and still to this day has them.In the story from tht report they talked about how its supposingly safe to stack these so called unharmful kinds of anabolic roids,when it isnt.Whose to say tht i wouldnt drop dead from a massive heart attack from injecting or cycling or tking this kind or tht kind or hve to go the hospital the exact same day?Steroidss are and always will be harmful dangerous and they hve dangerous potential side effects too,i certainly dont want my balls to shrink or hve liver and other problems,heck there are probably even some regular supps tht can be harmful.Also a friend told me his take awhile back and tht is tht steriods are a cheat way in getting to where u wanna go,putting on size etc.Natural has and always will be the best route to take.It may tke goingthe extra mile but its well worth it.It may tke time but it will be time well spent.These pros who juice will regret it eventually.So yes the IFBB shold ban them and go with the natural looks which arent those of swimmers.To me all natural bodybuilding rules,the best advice regrding roids is to not even start.The evidence is there,and proves the point tht anabolic steroids are no good,and thts wht i am sticking with along with others who believe in the all natural approach,and there are plenty out there.

Peace


Eric










QUOTE=ford4life]A Steroid Ban?
.....................
With all the heat on pro sports in general with the MLB streroid scandal, it is very possible that bodybuilding is next on the government's agenda. When you think about it, who really cares about baseball anymore? After all these issues the past year, even with the excitement of the NY-Boston series last year, I do not think I am going to watch a single game unless I am there in person this year. The reason? frist of all, i loved seeing these juiced giants hit masive home runs. If the same thing happens in pro bodybuilding, I might... I might just as well look back to collegiate wrestlers for their phyiques.

A Reality?
..............
For all intensive purposes, yes, steroids are illegal in the United States as of right now. It seems like everyone blames the problems of our country on roid use right now, too. A recent estimate I saw put actual steroid (not counting prohormones or gH supplements) at over 300,000 high school students. This inflated propoganda is nowhere near the actual amount, and if steroids in IFBB competions are banned, it is obvious that none of the big guns in bodybuilding would continue competing, or if they did at least not in as excellent shape as they are now. Steroids are the only line that separate a bodybuilder and an athlete. If steroid use in the IFBB is discontinued, everyone remotely athletic would be considered a bodybuilder.[/QUOTE]

[BigLarge]

NO

Who wants to see a bunch of swimmers on stage?

Ban Insulin, HGH, and especially SYNTHOL, but not steroids.

[Psychoholic]

I think alot of the problem with modern professional body building is a lack of aesthetics. While it is interesting to see mass monsters like Coleman and Ruhl, I think that pro's like Lee Priest have far better bodies because they have all of the qualities that the judges used to look for. I miss the days of the V shape instead of the X. I don't think that banning steroids would do any good for the sport, but I think alot of the problems with it would solve themselves if the judges based their decisions on overall appearance and symmetry instead of just mountains of GH induced muscle. Look at Ruhl, his belly button kept popping out! When Big Ron has a sweat shirt on, it looks like he has an enourmous beer belly. How about the scene from Ruhl - Made in Germany when he sticks out his gut?

I don't think they should ban steroids (and actually mean it), but I think that synethol and GH should go.

Just look at the stats on the image galleries. Everyone exalts Arnold for his physique back in the day. Huge wide shoulders, the best pecs ever, and a tight narrow waist; We don't have hardly anybody who does that anymore. History will remember this era of bodybuilding as the age of the gut, and we'll still be googling for pictures of Arnold and Zane when we want inspiration.

Chris

[bucsfan]

Many people feel that the IFBB should ban steroids, many believe they shouldnt. I feel that illegal substances should be banned.


The reason I feel this way is because of the health of the athletes. They are putting themselves at such a risk to look the way they do. The IFBB should do what is in the best interest of their performers health.
I also feel that bodybuilding will become a more respected sport if steroids are banned. Bodybuilding is a underground sport. It is not respected by the general public like it should be. I feel this is because of the use of illegal substances. If these are banned the general public will respect bodybuilding and the athletes who are building their bodies the safe and healthy way.
On the other hand if the IFBB does ban steroids I feel that many suporters of it will protest. The people who support the IFBB like to see the big huge genetic freaks. Even I think they look cool. But I feel that in the best interest of the athletes that illegal substances should be banned.

[youngdurin]

Of course they should be banned. Bodybuilding is a dead sport because of drugs. It is a joke. Get rid of the drugs and create a sport based on hard work instead of pharmacology.

[ScorpioBrat]

Ok, I work at a pharamacy; I used to personal train in a competitors gym--i.e., both sides of the track here..(or so I'd like to think)

People are going to do the drugs regardless--if there is a will there is a way--thus it would be fruitless for the IFBB to ban steroids for "real." As someone previously said there would be another organization accepting those athletes and giving them endorsements--there will always be a home for the people who are at extreme ends of either side of an argument. Not to mention there is always a new drug out of hide or that wouldn't be detected yet...

On the other hand, a wo/man makes choices in his or her life on their own--if they choose to kill or severely incapacatate themselves for a sport ((due to or not due to psychological or insecurity issues)) that is there choice. I knew a bodybuilder who would use steroids everytime he lost a set or rep--but I also knew a pro who only used it when it was time for a competition. Coleman I've heard has trouble functioning--but that was his choice--it is what has made him happy (hopefully). His health has paid for his wealth.

Of course, I think CERTAIN steroids should be legalized--if people are going to do them--doctors should accept that and monitor them. Otherwise you run the risk of people damaging things or possibly killing themselves. Forbidden fruit tastes the best after all doesn't it???

Cleo

[push it 05]

I do not think they should "for real" kick the steroid habbit. If you want to see people compete naturally, then go to an all natural competition. It is widely known that most of the IFBB pros use these illegal steroids, but why is this much of a problem? Pros have a bunch of different people that watch them and make sure everything is going as it should, if any of them where in danger they would find out and either stop or keep going. It would take the edge off of bodybuilding, the reason why people like to watch the Arnold classic, or the Olympia is to see people who are far away from the norm. If anyone could become as massively cut as Ronnie there would be no one who would want to watch that since everyone could do it. Its not like the pros are cheating, they are still putting in the blood, sweat, and the tears into their bodies and these substances just help them get closer to where they want to be. So should the steroid ban be pushed harder? Absolutely not, let the pros keep saying that they are not users and what the world doesnt know cant hurt them.

[IGF]

Originally Posted by youngdurin

Of course they should be banned. Bodybuilding is a dead sport because of drugs. It is a joke. Get rid of the drugs and create a sport based on hard work instead of pharmacology.

To get to elite pro level you still have to work very hard and be 100% dedicated. But natural BB'ing will never be successful because you can be huge naturally...you will never get any freakishly huge competitors

[~jAmeZ~]

...

Why bodybuilding needs steroids


I want you to think about how a steroid ban could affect bodybuilding as a whole. Take your mind off the obvious. Sure, the bodybuilders themselves would be smaller. Fans might turn their backs. But this is nothing compared to the bigger picture. A steroid ban could destroy bodybuilding as you know it.

A steroid ban could cost fans more cash to see their heros. A steroid ban could actually increase drug abuse. A steroid ban could splinter bodybuilding into warring federations. And the public would see bodybuilding as an even bigger freak show.

Here’s why.


Steroid ban would cost fans $$$
The IFBB’s first step in really banning steroids is serious testing. And serious testing would cost millions each year. Weider would lose a large chunk of his profit margin. But no businessman likes losing profit. Weider would probably pass the testing costs onto bodybuilding fans by increasing ticket and merchandise prices. And he might also cut his operating expenses—so the 2006 Olympia could be coming soon to a high school auditorium near you.

This is not an exaggeration. The Sydney Olympics spent $4 million on proper drug testing procedures and another $1.6 million on research, just so they could keep up. Four years later, the Athens Olympics spent almost twice as much on testing and research. And the Olympics only happen every four years, for two weeks at a time.

Now, think about how many IFBB shows are held each month all over the world. Hard-to-beat testing costs an average of $100 for each drug tested for. Multiply that figure by the list of possible performance enhancers taken by your average pro bodybuilder. And the list of diuretics. And masking agents. Then multiply that figure by the number of bodybuilders who place in each show.

Weider would not tolerate such huge financial losses. He would probably make the fans pay dearly for his extra bills.

90 million reasons to keep steroids
An IFBB steroid ban would give a business rival the perfect opportunity to start another bodybuilding federation. A federation that allowed steroids.

Why would a rival bother? Well, creating a pro-steroid federation would be highly profitable. Weider currently uses his top bodybuilders to promote millions of dollars worth of merchandise. Weider Nutrition alone turns over an average of $360 million every year. But a steroid ban would make Weider’s bodybuilders smaller. The rival pro-steroid federation would have much bigger guys. And advertisements with big guys can sell more protein powder, home gyms and magazines than ads with smaller guys. The IFBB has proved that to be true with its own marketing practices.

A pro-steroid federation could easily encourage star bodybuilders to leave the IFBB. On one hand, the stars could maintain their reputation (which they built on steroids) and keep their fans. And the rival federation could pay them better, because Weider’s shrinking market share would lead to less lucrative endorsement contracts.

And the situation we are in today repeats itself. The rival federation encourages freakish physiques, so their bodybuilders take more drugs. The problem does not disappear. It just moves sideways.

And what if more than one rival seized the opportunity to start a new federation? We end up with a situation similar to the IFBB vs World Bodybuilding Federation of the early nineties. It was an ugly 18 months for bodybuilding. Even when the WBF folded, the repercussions and bad blood among the athletes were felt for years afterwards.

Far from conspiracy theory
Sure, you have probably not heard this kind of argument against a steroid ban before. But it could happen. Think about the relationship of steroids to bodybuilding. Then think about the relationship of bodybuilding to the $21.5 billion US fitness industry. A steroid ban could drastically change the shape—literally and metaphorically—of bodybuilding as we know it.

A final note: Bringing back the Golden Age
The common argument for banning steroids is based on health and aesthetics. What people really mean when they say steroids should be banned is "I don't like the way steroids are turning some pros into cow-gutted freaks with dangerously high blood pressure". It's true...few modern bodybuilding stars seem to consider symmetry. They strive only for bigness, which means big doses of anabolics.

But bigness is more a symptom caused by IFBB judging than drug abuse. Look at the last two decades of the Olympia. Haney beat Labrada in 1989…because he was bigger, and arguably not better. Ditto for the massive Dorian downing Shawn Ray in 1994. The message from modern judges was clear: if you want to win, you have to be the biggest.

Compare this to the Golden Age of bodybuilding. John Grimek chiseled down his massive physique to win the 1948 Mr Universe over Steeve Reeves. Grimek knew he needed to be “complete” to win over the judges, not just “big”. Schwarzenegger realised he needed more definition when he lost to Zane in 1968. So he cut 15lbs from his huge frame and never looked back.

It would be impractical and virtually impossible for the IFBB to stamp out steroids from bodybuilding. But the IFBB can help prevent their abuse by changing the criteria their judges use to pick winners.

Would fans be turned off by the smaller, more symmetrical physiques? Put it this way: any magazine with Arnie on the cover is still a sell-out. And this guy was 40lbs “smaller” than Ronnie.


...

[tylertommons]

ban the drugs ban the pro hormones ban everything that is not natural.

[Flexer]

if they do, i will become the next Weider and start teh IOBB (international organization of body builders) and they will all come to me, since it won't be a tested organization, problem solved





Phil

[gracurtisce]

Banning steroids from professional bodybuilding could be both good and bad, depending on what side of the fence one sites on, but before any firm decision is made, one way or the other, the pros and cons of this steroid ban need to be determined and debated vigorously. Many would argue that, fundamentally, bodybuilding is a sport that showcases the extremes to which the human body can be taken, and should continue to promote the types of physiques currently on display. It is also common knowledge that steroids are used prolifically among competitors to help create these types of physiques - the massive bodies that actually help to sell magazines, nutritional products and tickets to bodybuilding contests. Irrespective of how well established is the fact that pros use steroids, bodybuilding fans will probably continue to want to see the massive physiques that can only be created chemically, and it is the fans who purchase, magazines, products and tickets, and keep the multibillion-dollar bodybuilding industry ticking along. One could argue that the issue of steroid use ultimately hinges on what the fans want to see, and if the fans are happy with the types of non-chemically assisted physiques witnessed at the natural bodybuilding shows (the types of physiques seen in any gym in any country) then there is probably room to move on the actual banning of steroids. So it probably boils down to a complete paradigm shift in what the paying public want to see before any firm changes can be made - the public, after all, keep the industry growing.

Banning steroids would involve implementing stringent testing procedures for all pro-shows. The cost for doing this would be astronomical, a further cost to an industry already under siege as the crowds become disillusioned with the emphasis on smaller muscles and mediocrity (rightly or wrongly the steroid enhanced physique is at the upper end of what can be achieved in bodybuilding). Drug testing is somewhat of a nebulous process at best, with many avoiding detection, as the methods for detection avoidance become more sophisticated - and they will if the IFBB enforce compulsory testing of all athletes. If the IFBB want to create a level playing field by testing all athletes, the athlete might look to other drug options - ones that haven’t made the banned substances list at the time of testing. It could go on and on until the sport is full of designer drugs and the implications of this are dire as far as cleaning up the sport is concerned.

If the IFBB were to ban steroids, their pro-athletes might choose to compete under the banner of a different federation. Federations might increase in number to accommodate a mass defection, and the athletes would carry on their merry, drug induced, way. However, given the IFBB is the biggest, the message sent might persuade others to follow their lead.

Banning steroids might also rob bodybuilding of some of its allure. The massive (steroid produced) physique can only be seen, at its best, in a pro show. The competitors in these shows are almost exclusively on steroids, to greater or lesser degrees. Take this away, and there may no longer be 250lb ripped physiques sporting 24inch arms and 35inch quads - the types of freaky physique that attract many fans to the sport in the first place. Removing steroids might remove the allure and the shock value of such a physique. The smaller muscular physique can be seen almost anywhere. If pro-shows were comprised of these physiques, attendance rates (and overall fan base) would probably taper significantly, effecting the industry as a whole. Removing steroids could, indeed, cripple the sport.

On the other hand, banning steroids from bodybuilding would possibly help to clean up the sport, in that competitors will be healthier and the public will have more realistic physiques to emulate. However, this would depend on whether the athlete is prepared to make this choice to quit. A young aspiring bodybuilder would never obtain a ‘pro-bodybuilder’ physique without the help of steroids. Pro-bodybuilders undoubtedly inspire beginning bodybuilders and a switch to steroids is often the logical step for these beginners after the inevitable plateau ensues.

The sport of bodybuilding has, for many years, been tainted with the widespread use of steroids and other performance enhancing substances. The general public, often through the media, are presented with an image of bodybuilding, and bodybuilders, which contradicts the healthy principals set out by many of the larger sporting bodies such as the IOC - themselves not exempt from drug-users. Sport and exercise are generally seen as both physically and psychologically healthy pursuits and vigorously promoted as such. Bodybuilding, however, is often seen as a sport of freaks, hell-bent on destroying themselves in the pursuit of physical glory - despite the relative paucity of data to support this belief. The fundamental problem for bodybuilders using steroids is that using them for performance enhancing purposes is currently illegal. By virtue of this use, bodybuilders are committing a criminal act, and, it could be argued, bringing the sport of bodybuilding (a sport that started off as a natural pursuit) into disrepute. For a large number of athletes to be branded as criminals simply presents a very negative image of the sport.


To summarise, steroids should be banned from bodybuilding because, it could be argued:

1: They are detrimental to health. A whole host of health problems are attributable to steroid use (cardiovascular problems and cancer to name but two) and while these problems are occurring, the sport will be viewed in a negative light.
2: Using them for bodybuilding purposes is a criminal act, under current legislation. Steroid use makes criminals out of bodybuilders and this also increases public castigation the sport.
3: Distorted physiques result. The increasing use of steroids, and growth hormone, have been blamed for the higher number of distorted physiques on show. The large gut, Gynecomastia (bitch tits), unrealistic proportions and disproportion could all be attributed to steroid use. These features are unpleasing and serve to turn fans away while further fuelling mainstream condemnation of the sport.
4: It is ethically wrong to use them. Using steroids provides an unfair advantage for the user. The physiques of their non-using counterparts could simply not compete with their chemically assisted physiques. This could be viewed as unfair and the drug-using athletes could be labelled as cheats.
5: Drug-free physiques will enhance the growth of the sport over the long term as beginning athletes will transform their physiques to the required standard, on an even footing with their peers, over a shorter period, given the benchmark for mass and cuts will need to be lowered - drugs enhance these qualities.

However, a case could be made for maintaining the status quo:

1: The bodybuilding industry could be adversely effected if steroids were banned. The spin-offs such as supplement sales, gym memberships, magazine subscriptions, and ticket sales, which result from the massive physiques that are produced by steroids would dwindle if a ban was effectively placed on the very physiques that sell these products and services in the first place. A steroid ban could cripple the bodybuilding industry.
2: Banning steroids might rob bodybuilding of its allure, and shock value, both of which attract a fan base. Lets face it: the massive physiques seen at bodybuilding shows have a certain appeal. It has been said that people go to the circus to see lions and tigers, not hamsters and fieldmice. Bodybuilding competition is similar.
3: Banning them would not solve any of the above problems as they will continued to be used and athletes will simply shift to another federation rather than discontinue their use. Federations might increase in number to accommodate the large number of bodybuilders who refuse to bow down to the IFBB’S new policy. This would simply spread, and possibly increase, the problem.
4: The testing procedures designed to detect steroid levels are not 100% accurate. This makes the whole process of testing fatuous at best. If only some competitors are caught, what is the point of testing? Not only is this unfair on those who are caught, but it encourages the athletes who do manage to cheat the system to continue to beat the tests, and the athletes who are caught to devise ways of beating the tests.


So to ban steroids or not to ban steroids? I would personally like to see them banned to promote the health aspect of the sport and encourage a life-long pursuit for fitness and strength. As mentioned, steroids are problematic in many ways, and a ban might encourage newcomers to the sport to emulate a more realistic example. There are many fors and againsts but by banning steroids, a healthier physique will be the result, and the sport will probably have greater appeal to the mainstream public, and this in itself, could go a long way toward improving the image bodybuilding currently has.

However, the problem is an exceedingly complex one, with many of the arguments presented in this essay contradicting one another. Before a decision is reached, many concerns will need to be ironed out.

[black007]

Look guys....this bodybuilding site owes its existence to the IFBB and to steroids. We all like looking at the magazines and going to the contests and arguing over who won that particular show. Would we be all excited to see a bunch of non-juiced up guys on stage? I don't think so. Now, I am the ultimate hypocrite because I do not juice, but I love to see the results when others use the products(go figure..). I guess that I would not begin to tear my body apart unless I felt that there was some sort of a fantastic payday up ahead in my future. The problem is that there is really no real money in bodybuilding except for the top 0.05% of pros today. Now ask me if I would use sterioids if I were a AA baseball player who had a chance of making the majors....of course I would. Hell, give me a good endorsement contract with GNC and I would start juicing today.

The point is that we would all lose interest if the contests consisted of "natural" bodybuilders. Why pay to see a bunch of guys that we can see at our local gyms.

Ed

[antihero]

For many years now steroids have been "banned" from use. Although some arests are made on this, there arent enough steps taken for this "ban" to be taken seriously. So, for a significant amount of time, regular people use them quietly, while pros use them publicly because they know they can get away with it. Recently Arnold Schwarzenegger is pushing to actually enforce this ban at his event (Arnold Classic), and pushing to enforce this in two well-known magazines (Flex, and Muscle and Fitness). But, Arnold has admitted to using steroids, and also has said that he does not regret using them because at the time they were legal. These events are having the bodybuilding community question how they would be affected by this, and how the sport in general will be affected by this.

An event like this would certainly have a tremendous effect on the entire bodybuilding industry, but the effect would be a very positive one. If the bodybuilding industry were no longer based on steroids, these would be the effects:

a) Contestants would appear more aesthetically pleasing. Steroid use can often lead to a 'gut', and many people dont like the appearance of having that instead of the "picture perfect 6-pack" that the guy on the front of a magazine has.

b) Seeing professionals turn away from steroids and promote proper diet and training may lower the amount of children who use steroids to acheive their goals.
8th graders who have used steroids: 1.7% (year 2000) ------------------------> 2.5% (year 2003) *
10th graders who have used steroids: 2.2% (year 2002) ------------------------> 3.0% (year 2003) *
12th graders who have used steroids: 2.5% (year 2002) ------------------------> 3.5% (year 2003) *
Children this young should not even be thinking about steroids, let alone using them. Taking these things can completely screw up their endocrine system.

c) It would promote more people to get into the sport of bodybuilding. If everyone was on a "level playing feild" (so to speak) more people would be allowed a chance to compete. That means that if everyone was doing it naturally (without using substances that would possibly jeopardize their health) then more people would be interested in doing it. When a professional stepped on stage, and he worked naturally, HE WOULD BE SMALLER. But that also means that more people in the audience would say to themselves: "I CAN DO THAT". I feel that too many people are driven away from this sport because they see contestants such as Ronnie Coleman and they say to themselves: "I COULD NEVER LOOK LIKE THAT" So, I think that instead of shrinking the crowds because there are 'less freaky' athletes, it would actually expand the crowd.

But for this to actually happen, we need to take a look at another picture, the bigger picture. What would it take to put this ban into action?

a) What would the current competitors do if they disqualified anyone who uses, or has used steroids? It just wouldnt be fair to them to make a decision that throws away everything that they have worked their whole lives to accomplish

b) Think about every steroid out there, and every form and derivetive. Then consider research and development. Now figure out the cost. YOU CANT. The point is, its not even practical to consider testing for all the steroids on the market, the contest just wouldnt be able to afford it. The amount of money that would go into a venture like that is astronomical.

As much as I'd like to see steroids removed from bodybuilding, it just cant be done. So unfortunatly, I have to say no.


* http://www.nida.nih.gov/Infofax/steroids.html

[dzL p Hr Ea K]

The following content was stolen from:

http://www.wellnessmd.com/anabolics.html

dzL p Hr Ea K - Thanks for wasting our time!

---------------------------------------------------------------------

I believe that the IFBB should definately not begin the testing for steroids. Many bodybuilders today take steroids, and it has helped them get to where they are now with a lot of hard work as well. If steroids are used without the muscles being worked (weightlifting) there will not be an effect on the muscles, and it can just add fatty tissue to the body. It has been said to take steroid using bodybuilders out of competitions to make it like the old days but former bodybuilders such as Arnold Schwarzenegger has admitted to using steroids so this is not a valid statement.

What Steroids Really Are:

Anabolic steroids are testosterone, or testosterone-like drugs which produce anabolic activity by increasing protein synthesis and androgenic activity (enhanced secondary sexual characteristics) in the male. These compounds can produce a significant increase in muscular size, in both males and females. Natural testosterone is produced in larger quantities in the male, but is also present in the female. Anabolic steroids are the most widely detected drugs taken for ergogenic (performance-enhancing) purposes. This group of substances has probably exceeded any other in controversy among those in the super-charged atmosphere of competitive sports. Drug testing and education on the pros and cons of anabolic steroid use are essential to maintain the health of both amateur and professional athletes.

History of Steroids:

Until 1935, no one knew that anabolic steroids were associated with the accumulation of muscle tissue. In that timeframe, two researchers experimenting on dogs discovered that testosterone given under certain conditions would increase muscle mass. The current history of anabolic steroids as abusable drugs began in 1954 among Olympic weightlifters. In 1956, Dianabol (Methandrostenolone) was first marketed in the United States, clearing the way for the use of anabolics by U.S. athletes. At first, only world-class athletes in high-strength sports such as weight lifting abused anabolics. Among Olympic athletes, anabolic steroids were a problem as long ago as 1964.

Different Forms of Steroids:

Anabolic steroids are either taken by mouth or injected into a muscle. The "orals," as they are called, are ingested tablets or capsules. These forms are reportedly more toxic to the liver. Often the orals are taken in conjunction with injectable forms.

The injectable forms are known as "oils" or "waters". The oils refer to the long-acting types. They are injected into a muscle, usually the rearend, and the steroid is released slowly over time. Typically, these drugs are injected only a couple of times a week. The "waters" are short-acting forms. Again, these are injected, usually in the rear end, but they work much faster and are eliminated much more quickly. There are two ways for anabolic steroids administration. Oral steroids are highly potent and are excreted fairly rapidly from the body due to short metabolic half-lives, (usually within weeks). So, oral steroids are the first choice for athletes who want to rapidly improve their performance and try to escape showing positive results on drug tests. These drugs, however, are the most toxic and have more side effects. Injectable steroids are less potent and generally exhibit delayed uptake into the body, especially if they are oil-based diluents. They have less liver toxicity than oral steroids, but they are being less used by athletes because of having a detectability in drug tests for long periods

Side Effects:

Since anabolic steroids are synthetic versions of the naturally-occurring male hormone testosterone, they have very similar pharmacological actions and side effects. In mature males, the body secretes 2.5-10 mg of testosterone each day to promote various body processes. Steroid use often introduces up to an additional 100 mg of testosterone into the system daily. When levels become too high, the brain shuts down the body's own production of the testosterone as well as other substances necessary for the proper functioning of the body. Some of the body systems at risk include:

Male reproductive system
Too much testosterone or related substances prompts the pituitary gland to stop producing the hormone gonadotropin. This in turn also prevents the production of other intermediate substances which leads to testicular atrophy (decreased size and function), lowered sperm count, sterility (reversible), painful, prolonged erection, prostate enlargement and frequent or continuing erections. When steroid use ceases, the entire testosterone producing function may remain shut down, possibly leading to a permanent imbalance of the hormone.

Female reproductive system
These side effects are the result of masculinization due to increased testosterone and include enlargement of the clitoris*, uterine atrophy, irregularity or cessation of menstrual cycle, increased body hair*, deepening of the voice*, shrinkage of breast size and masculinization of female fetuses in pregnant women. (*permanent effects)

The heart and blood vessels
Anabolic steroids cause fluid retention, which can lead to high blood pressure. Steroids also lower high-density lipoproteins (HDLs) in the blood. These HDLs help rid the body of cholesterol. In some cases, production of low-density lipoproteins (LDLs), which promote the production of cholesterol, increases. Too much cholesterol leads to buildup of plaque on the walls of arteries. Clogged arteries can result in strokes or heart attacks. Deaths have been reported in both young and older athletes.

Adolescents
Bone growth is among the body processes that can shut down with steroid use. Adolescents on anabolic steroids may find their muscles bulking up, but bone growth stops with premature fusion of the epiphysis (growth center) of long bones. The result is permanently stunted growth. There is risk until bones stop growing.

Psychological Effects
Steroids change users in many ways, but psychological changes can be the most drastic of all. These include:

Aggression. Feelings or irritability and aggression may appear so subtly that the athlete may barely notice, but his friends or family will. Taking anabolic steroids keeps an athlete constantly "on edge". Situations that normally would not disturb him can, with steroid use, generate strong feelings of anger and hostility (the "roid rage"). Athletes who take anabolic steroids often have difficulty dealing with people because of these uncontrollable feelings. Anxiety can disturb sleep patterns, and users may experience paranoia.

Depression. Anabolic steroids produce psychological addiction. The aggression and other psychological changes accompanying steroid use make the athlete want to take more steroids for even larger muscles. When the athlete goes off steroids and the body decreases in size, depression and other withdrawal symptoms often induce users to take steroids again.

Addiction and Dependence. Users may find they have become dependent and experience withdrawal symptoms of severe depression (including suicidal thoughts), insomnia, loss of energy or appetite, sweating, nausea, headaches and craving for anabolic steroids. Withdrawal symptoms will last one to three weeks. Weight loss will also occur.

If the professional bodybuilders in the IFBB are willing to take all of these risks, then it should not be up to the other people whether they should be aloud to take them or not, it is up the the bodybuilders. They know what the side effects are, and they know what they are doing to themselves, nothing is hidden, and they can find out whatever they want from so many different sources.

I feel that this will be ignored by the law enforcement because as stated, it is ignored by them that all the rappers smoke marijuana. They even tell everyone and show off in their music videos!!! Everyone knows that they smoke marijuana so no one would think of it as a big deal if they were arrested for illegal drug use. This can also be the same with bodybuilders and steroids. Most bodybuilders cant gain as much size as they have by not using any supplements. Steroids are obviously the most effective ones, but also the most dangerous.

If this is not ignored by the law enforcement and they begin to arrest a lot of bodybuilders and get rid of them completely from the bodybuilding industry this will effect millions of people and the bodybuilding mainstream would crash. Although the bodybuilders would be all natural and 100% clean, they wouldnt have made as much gains and wouldnt be even close to as large as they are now because of a lack of steroids. This wouldnt attract as many people to watch different competitions or anything like that because it wouldnt be as impressive to see the bodybuilders and the gains they have made. There may be other alternatives to steroids but the other supplements would not even be close to the effects of steroids on the body.

This is a very sensitive subject with many people, and many steroid users will admit their usage. If the IFBB was to begin to test the bodybuilders for steroid usage, this will greatly effect millions of people, all over the world. I believe that it would have a negative effect and would disappoint many people.

[Tarkana]

It's really easy for lots of you to say no because these unrealistically insane physiques are what bodybuilding needs. Of course without steroids all the pros would be much smaller. But the facts are that steroids are still dangerous and the public doesn't like the idea of using anything with such harmful effects as a necessity to be competitive. So what if genetics wil them become the determinant? Thats how it is for most other sports, along with great training, and thats what all the young athletes aspire to. I know as a high school wrestler that there is so much to work for in this sport, and a muscular and very lean build is one of them. So to the audience being more closely involved in bodybuilding than in mainstream sports, there is one thing that is seperate from them, which is also why steroid use is treated much differently there. In major league sports and things like skateboarding, someone could look at these athletes and think "I wish I could do that". The reason that some magic pill would go over better there is because it would still make the effects more desireable to the general public. I could look at a shot of Frank Zane, and I would love to be built like that, but then I look at Coleman's pictures, with his huge gut and his way-too-veiny arms looking like plastic, and thats not something I would want to look like, so that is a huge problem with public perception. So I definatley think steroids 'should' be strictly banned, the the fact must be accepted that there's no way to afford such testings and keep up with new medical technology, so, even if its still on the bulkier side (as well it should be), bodybuilding should be judged on more aesthectically pleasing builds. It aught to be something that everyone could admire, and think of the path to success as noble, even if there is still some steroid use done in secret, it wouldn't be as huge of doses and be so blatantly obvious.
I just read that interview with Ronnie Coleman, and noticed his comments on Shawn Ray being too small. That's the kind of thing that weirds people out in bodybuilding. I look at Shawn Ray's pictures, and that looks like what they should be judging for, and I definately wouldnt consider him 'too small'.

[lilpoppapump123]

OK ok I can honestly see both sides of this issue. On one hand the sport is called bodybuilding, and by definition we should want to see the people who can "build" the biggest and most defined body on the planet. There is no doubt that is what the sport is called and what is expected out of the competitors. However just as in baseball and all other sports that are currently dealing with this problem, steroids are ILLEGAL! PERIOD! If somthing is illegal to posess, purchase without a doctors consent saying you NEED it, distribute to your budies or anything else, than why should it be allowed to be used by "athletes"? IF they are athletes, than why do they need a leg up or a way to assertain that gargantuon body? They shouldnt be allowed to. All bodybuilding competitions should follow the natural sports guidelines on legal and illegal supplements and rules. If you need to use an illegal supplement to compete with the people who are geneticaly talented and work hard enough to not need them then you SHOULD NOT BE IN THE SPORT! YOU ARE NOTHING BUT A CHEATER!

[tylertommons]

Originally Posted by black007

Look guys....this bodybuilding site owes its existence to the IFBB and to steroids. We all like looking at the magazines and going to the contests and arguing over who won that particular show. Would we be all excited to see a bunch of non-juiced up guys on stage? I don't think so. Now, I am the ultimate hypocrite because I do not juice, but I love to see the results when others use the products(go figure..). I guess that I would not begin to tear my body apart unless I felt that there was some sort of a fantastic payday up ahead in my future. The problem is that there is really no real money in bodybuilding except for the top 0.05% of pros today. Now ask me if I would use sterioids if I were a AA baseball player who had a chance of making the majors....of course I would. Hell, give me a good endorsement contract with GNC and I would start juicing today.

The point is that we would all lose interest if the contests consisted of "natural" bodybuilders. Why pay to see a bunch of guys that we can see at our local gyms.

Ed

if it was natural the competition would increase because evevryone has a chance. and we still would see massive monsters that are genetically gifted.