If steroids are cheating...why isn't Lasik? - good read

[sooner2002]

here is some more good info - from a mod on my board (www.universal-muscle.com). here is a link to the National Public Radio interview

http://www.npr.org/dmg/dmg.php?prgC...tUnderwriting=1

A month ago, Mark McGwire was hauled before a congressional hearing and lambasted as a cheater for using a legal, performance-enhancing steroid precursor when he broke baseball's single-season home run record.

A week ago, Tiger Woods was celebrated for winning golf's biggest tournament, the Masters, with the help of superior vision he acquired through laser surgery.

What's the difference?

At the steroid hearing on March 17, numerous members of the House Committee on Government Reform, led by Chairman Tom Davis, R-Va., denounced performance-enhancing drugs. They offered three arguments: The drugs are illegal, they're harmful, and they're cheating. But illegality doesn't explain why a drug should be illegal, and the steroid precuror McGwire took, Andro, was legal at the time. The director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse conceded at the hearing that steroid precursors weren't banned until last year, that steroids "do, in fact, enhance certain types of physical performance," that some are "prescribed to treat body wasting in patients with AIDS and other diseases that result in loss of lean muscle mass," and that "not all anabolic steroid abusers experience the same deleterious outcomes."

Don't get me wrong. If you buy a steroid off the street or the Internet today just to bulk up, you're taking a stupid risk. But much of that risk comes from your ignorance and the dubious grade of steroid you're getting. A star player with access to the best stuff and the best medical supervision isn't taking the same degree of risk. Furthermore, steroids are a crude, early phase of enhancement technology. Chemists are trying every day to refine compounds and doses that might help pro athletes without bad side effects.

Already the medical objection to doping has holes. At the hearing, lawmakers displayed a supposedly damning list of "Performance Enhancing Substances Not Covered by Baseball's New Testing Program." The first item on the list was human growth hormone. But the Food and Drug Administration has approved human growth hormone for use in short, healthy children based on studies showing its safety and efficacy. The National Institutes of Health says it's "generally considered to be safe, with rare side effects" in children, and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists has found the same pattern in adults.

That leaves one comprehensive complaint: cheating. At the hearing, I heard six lawmakers apply this term to performance-enhancing drugs. They compared the drugs to corking bats, deadening baseballs, and sharpening spikes. "When I played with Hank Aaron and Willie Mays and Ted Williams, they didn't put on 40 pounds of bulk in their careers, and they didn't hit more homers in their late thirties than they did in their late twenties," said Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky. "What's happening now in baseball isn't natural, and it isn't right." Rep. Mark Souder, R-Ind., chairman of the House subcommittee on drug policy, recalled that baseball had harshly punished players who threw games. He asked why such punishment didn't apply to "players today who systematically cheat through steroids and performance-enhancing drugs to alter the games." Davis, who presided at the hearing, announced that he would co-chair "Zero Tolerance: The Advisory Committee on Ending the Use of Performance-Enhancing Drugs in Sports."

Zero tolerance? Wait a minute. If the Andro that helped McGwire hit 70 home runs in 1998 was an unnatural, game-altering enhancement, what about his high-powered contact lenses? "Natural" vision is 20/20. McGwire's custom-designed lenses improved his vision to 20/10, which means he could see at a distance of 20 feet what a person with normal, healthy vision could see at 10 feet. Think what a difference that makes in hitting a fastball. Imagine how many games those lenses altered.

You could confiscate McGwire's lenses, but good luck confiscating Woods' lenses. They've been burned into his head. In the late 1990s, both guys wanted stronger muscles and better eyesight. Woods chose weight training and laser surgery on his eyes. McGwire decided eye surgery was too risky and went for Andro instead. McGwire ended up with 70 homers and a rebuke from Congress for promoting risky behavior. Woods, who had lost 16 straight tournaments before his surgery, ended up with 20/15 vision and won seven of his next 10 events.

Since then, scores of pro athletes have had laser eye surgery, known as Lasik (Laser-Assisted In Situ Keratomileusis). Many, like Woods, have upgraded their vision to 20/15 or better. Golfers Scott Hoch, Hale Irwin, Tom Kite, and Mike Weir have hit the 20/15 mark. So have baseball players Jeff Bagwell, Jeff Cirillo, Jeff Conine, Jose Cruz Jr., Wally Joyner, Greg Maddux, Mark Redman, and Larry Walker. Amare Stoudemire and Rip Hamilton of the NBA have done it, along with NFL players Troy Aikman, Ray Buchanan, Tiki Barber, Wayne Chrebet, and Danny Kanell. These are just some of the athletes who have disclosed their results in the last five years. Nobody knows how many others have gotten the same result.

Does the upgrade help? Looks that way. Maddux, a pitcher for the Atlanta Braves, was 0-3 in six starts before his surgery. He won nine of his next 10 games. Kite had Lasik in 1998 and won six events on the Champions Tour over the next five years. Three months after his surgery, Irwin captured the Senior PGA Tour Nationwide Championship.

According to Golf Digest, Woods aimed for 20/15 when he signed up for Lasik. This probably didn't strike Woods as enhancement, since he was already using contacts that put him at 20/15. Now ads and quotes offering 20/15 are everywhere. One Lasik practice takes credit for giving Irwin 20/15 vision. Another boasts of raising Barber to 20/15 and calls the result "better than perfect." Other sellers promise the same thing and offer evidence to back it up. Last year, they report, 69 percent of traditional Lasik patients in a study had 20/16 vision six months after their surgery, and new "wavefront" technology raised the percentage to 85. Odds are, if you're getting Lasik, you're getting enhanced.

The medical spin for Lasik, as opposed to the entrepreneurial spin, is that it's corrective. Your eyesight sucks, you go in for surgery, you hope for 20/20. Maybe you get it, maybe you don't, and that's that. But it isn't that simple. If you don't like the results, your doctor might fire up the laser for a second pass. In the business, this is literally called an "enhancement." Hoch, the golfer, got four enhancements in 2002 and 2003. He ended up 20/15 in one eye, 20/10 in the other.

Nor do you need poor vision to find a willing doctor. Most states think you're fine to drive a car without corrective lenses as long as your eyesight is better than 20/40. Cirillo, then a third baseman for the Seattle Mariners, was 20/35 in one eye and 20/30 in the other when he went in for Lasik two years ago. He came out 20/20 and 20/12. Cruz, an outfielder for the Toronto Blue Jays, was 20/30 when he went for an eye exam. Five days later, he was under the beam. "The doctor kind of talked me into it," Cruz told the Toronto Star. He came out 20/15. According to the Orange County Register, Gary Sheffield, an outfielder for the Los Angeles Dodgers, had eyesight better than 20/20 when he asked for laser surgery to raise his batting average. His doctor talked him out of it.

Why risk surgery for such small increments? "Every little half-centimeter counts," Cruz told the Star. Last year, the Seattle Times reported that Troy Glaus, a power hitter for the Anaheim Angels, had gotten Lasik because he "felt his contacts were sufficient, just not always ideal. A windy day or a wave of dust could tip the advantage back to the pitcher." Often, coaches play a role. The Minnesota Twins training staff successfully encouraged several players to get Lasik. Maddux told the Atlanta Journal and Constitution that the Braves gave him "a little push" to get Lasik in 2000. Meanwhile, the Braves' manager, having talked to the same doctor about getting Lasik, in his own words "chickened out."

This is the difference between therapy and enhancement. You don't need bad vision to get the surgery. Wavefront, if you've got the bucks for it, reliably gives you 20/16 or better. If your vision ends up corrected but not enhanced, you can go back for a second pass. Players calculate every increment. Pro golfers seek "to optimize any competitive advantage," a Lasik surgeon told the Los Angeles Times. "They're already tuned in to the best clubs, the best putter, the best ball. … Clearly having great vision is one of the best competitive advantages you can have." Eyes are just another piece of equipment. If you don't like 'em, change 'em.

The sports establishment is obtuse to this revolution. Leagues worry about how you might doctor bats, balls, or clubs. They don't focus on how you might doctor yourself. Look at the official rules of Major League Baseball: A pitcher can't put rosin on his glove, but he can put it on his hand. A batter can't alter the bat "to improve the distance factor," but the rules don't bar him from altering his body to get the same result. Baseball now has a dope testing policy, but it isn't in the rules; the players negotiate it. That's why it's weak.

At last month's hearing, baseball...

OK sorry the whole thing wouldnt fit....the finish is classic. about 3 paragraphs are cut off because im limited to numbers of characters I can post. if you register at my board you can view the whole thing...here is the link: http://www.universal-muscle.com/show...=4514#post4514

[TheGreekGod]

Very good read!!!!!!!!!!!

[sikboy]

Great post.

[guym]

Nice...good points/

[linebacker45]

Interesting...ttt

[sooner2002]

bump

[sooner2002]

yes, bumping my own post again.....but i think this is great and want people to hear. PeacE

[meanmo]

its all about having a fair playing field, all players are allowed lasik, if all players were allowed steroids it would be ok, but you should not be able to get an advantage over someone who plays by the rules, by breaking the rules. I use steroids, but im just competing with myself nowadays, when I competed in collegiate baseball I did not.

Some guys on our team did and frankly it just did not make that big of difference in their performance.

[sooner2002]

bump

[UNF12345]

bump for a homo

[TheGreekGod]

Originally Posted by UNF12345

bump for a homo

U just want to bump a homo.

[TheGreekGod]

clear ur pm's bro.

[Swizzle Dizzle]

That was a good read. It had some good points to it. People think that just because someone takes a steroid means they can automatically bomb a baseball out of the park.


Sure it will make you stronger but baseball players work hard everyday, the
steriods are just a boost.

I personnaly don't care if they take them or not, its not my problem.

but good post never the less

[sooner2002]

Originally Posted by Big Drake

clear ur pm's bro.

all clean now man

[AllstarForward]

end of the day


no sport is fair or never will be. its in our human nature to get one up. one up might be a extra weights session or fitness session or its some dianabol and enanthate hell it could be surgery who knows? sports will never be fair thats that.

[sikboy]

Thats it, augmentation is the way to stay ahead, its the future of sports.

[UNF12345]

Originally Posted by Big Drake

U just want to bump a homo.

haha u got me

[bobcat]

bump

[velikimajmun]

Guess I'm a double cheater. Now if I only played a sport.

[jrkarp]

There is a simple difference. The surgery is not against the rules of golf, while steroids are against the rules of baseball.

I don't have a problem with steroids, and I think that professional athletes should be able to use them.

However, the bottom line is that the rules of baseball, as they are now, prohibit their use.

If someone uses a corked bat, which is against the rules, they are cheating. If they use steroids, which are against the rules, they are cheating.

Once again, I DO NOT AGREE WITH THE RULES. However, breaking the rules in any sport or game is cheating, regardless of the rule or how wrong the rule is.

/karp

[sikboy]

It gets me how ppl think things get easier on aas, sure you gain more but the process you have to go through (high intensity anaerobic training), becomes much more intense when on aas, therefore the training becomes much harder, on some exercises i improve by 9 full reps at a time, compared to the last time i did the same exercise, i only improve by 4 reps while nat, the extra 5 i get makes the workout much more intense, therefore productive, but even on aas, it is possible to overtrain, and that is always a bad thing, sure you may be able to do more, but even on aas the body does not have an infinite capacity for high intensity anaerobic exercise, which is stress, the body does not have an infinite capacity to deal with anything.

[modified7]

come on guys you cant really think thats a good point can you?


you think lasik helped tiger woods game? the only thing lasik does is eliminate contacts or glasses doesnt give you some super human vision even if it did that helps his golf game how?

just like the other guy in this thread said anyone can improve their vision its legal. it doesnt compare to bonds and his HGH (no no it was flax oil lol) and transforming from a guy who was my size 160lbs when he came into the league to someone who weighs 240lbs today

oh and i just want to add i have no problem with roids in general. im just saying using them vs corrective eye **** isnt even comparable.

[armz_ha]

Originally Posted by Swizzle Dizzle

That was a good read. It had some good points to it. People think that just because someone takes a steroid means they can automatically bomb a baseball out of the park.


Sure it will make you stronger but baseball players work hard everyday, the
steriods are just a boost.

I personnaly don't care if they take them or not, its not my problem.

but good post never the less

same exact thing goes for obese people. When they opt to go for stomach by-pass surgery- people don't see it as cheating. So, why are steroids?

[sikboy]

Originally Posted by modified7

come on guys you cant really think thats a good point can you?


you think lasik helped tiger woods game? the only thing lasik does is eliminate contacts or glasses doesnt give you some super human vision even if it did that helps his golf game how?

just like the other guy in this thread said anyone can improve their vision its legal. it doesnt compare to bonds and his HGH (no no it was flax oil lol) and transforming from a guy who was my size 160lbs when he came into the league to someone who weighs 240lbs today

oh and i just want to add i have no problem with roids in general. im just saying using them vs corrective eye **** isnt even comparable.

It is still augmentation, but to a different degree, same principle applies.

[modified7]

Originally Posted by sikboy

It is still augmentation, but to a different degree, same principle applies.

you missed my point i think..


how is tigers vision going to make his game better or worse?this story is basically saying lasik made tiger great or made his game better same with the other pro althetes listed.i mean unless the guy is blind all he really needs to do is see where the hole is he doesnt need great vision to have a great swing or a monster drive.

fixing your vision is legal so i dont see the complaint here. it just sounds like steroid advocates trying to make a play to help their case in some way.

[sikboy]

Originally Posted by modified7

you missed my point i think..


how is tigers vision going to make his game better or worse?this story is basically saying lasik made tiger great or made his game better same with the other pro althetes listed.i mean unless the guy is blind all he really needs to do is see where the hole is he doesnt need great vision to have a great swing or a monster drive.

fixing your vision is legal so i dont see the complaint here. it just sounds like steroid advocates trying to make a play to help their case in some way.

If tiger can see better, he can play better, how much better, hard to say.
Like i said before, it is augmentation to a different degree.
Steroids are illegal yes, but they used to be quite legal.
The fact is they are a huge part of sports, and if you want to be the best in your field, you have to use them, legal or not, any athlete that doesn't gets left behind.

[modified7]

Originally Posted by sikboy

If tiger can see better, he can play better, how much better, hard to say.
Like i said before, it is augmentation to a different degree.
Steroids are illegal yes, but they used to be quite legal.
The fact is they are a huge part of sports, and if you want to be the best in your field, you have to use them, legal or not, any athlete that doesn't gets left behind.

i think you are way off on this one. you dont have to use roids to be the best in your field come on now do you really believe that? there is plenty of proof out there that states otherwise but yes they are/were all over baseball

as for him seeing better there is still no way i believe that is helping a golfer . i golf of course im not a pro but i golfed before and after i had lasik and it didnt do a damn thing for my game lol . his swing and ability to drive the ball 300-340yrds everytime is what makes him a great player also his ability to chip in shots like he did to win the masters and make hella long putts. but anyway enough about that lets just say we disagree that lasik helped tigers game.

[sikboy]

Originally Posted by modified7

i think you are way off on this one. you dont have to use roids to be the best in your field come on now do you really believe that? there is plenty of proof out there that states otherwise but yes they are/were all over baseball.

So you really think that the best athletes today are clean? Lol, trust me the best athletes, in the sports where greater strength is needed are using some form of performance enhancing drug.
NFL, Boxing, Baseball, powerlifting, track and feild ect ect.

[modified7]

Originally Posted by sikboy

So you really think that the best athletes today are clean? Lol, trust me the best athletes, in the sports where greater strength is needed are using some form of performance enhancing drug.
NFL, Boxing, Baseball, powerlifting, track and feild ect ect.

well this is where the discussion gets too vague.

who do you consider the best althletes?

im just going to throw some names out there of great althletes

nolan ryan
roger clemens
carl lewis
wayne gretzky
joe montana
dan marino

those are some of the greatest ever in their respective sports and they dominated them .so do you think they were on roids? im not trying to get into a long drawn out discussion just trying to show you that you dont need roids to be the best in your field but if you think these guys were on the juice i guess that will never happen lol

[sikboy]

Originally Posted by modified7

im just going to throw some names out there of great althletes

nolan ryan
roger clemens
carl lewis
wayne gretzky
joe montana
dan marino

those are some of the greatest ever in their respective sports and they dominated them .so do you think they were on roids? im not trying to get into a long drawn out discussion just trying to show you that you dont need roids to be the best in your field but if you think these guys were on the juice i guess that will never happen lol

You didnt need roids IN THE PAST, before aas and other performance enchancing substances, but today is the future.
Theres the difference.