• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Male drive for beefy bodies unhealthy


  • Please log in to reply
91 replies to this topic

#1 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 13 August 2006 - 07:13 AM


http://www.upi.com/C...10-043847-9157r

Male drive for beefy bodies unhealthy

By CHRISTINE DELL'AMORE
UPI Consumer Health Correspondent
WASHINGTON, Aug. 10 (UPI) -- The bulging Olympic weight lifter's body is out of reach for most college-aged men, but that doesn't stop them from trying -- sometimes to their detriment, a new study says.

The pressure from society, friends and family to have muscular bodies may make men see themselves as objects, and that any body type besides big and burly is unworthy, said study author Tracy Tylka, an assistant professor of psychology at Ohio State University in Marion.

"Men can be affected by pressures to be muscular, and that can increase their own dissatisfaction with their muscularity and body fat," said Tylka, who presented her research Aug. 10 at the American Psychological Association annual meeting.

Since most body image research and attention has focused on women trying to be thin, people tend to downplay male pressures to be muscular.

"Anyone who cares about these men (should) not minimize it," she said.


Tylka and colleagues gave questionnaires to 285 predominantly white men with an average age of 19 at Ohio State University. The men were asked questions targeted at how much pressure they felt from family, friends, romantic partners and the media to become more muscular.

The researchers then used a technique called structural equation modeling to see if objectification theory could predict men's muscularity behavior, which included weight lifting, using supplements to increase muscle mass and restricting their diet. Objectification theory means a person is focused on their external appearance as an object, instead of their internal qualities such as personality. The theory has been thoroughly studied in women, but never in men.

The model provided an adequate to excellent fit to the data, which suggested that pressures to be muscular are associated with men dissatisfied with their muscle tone and body fat. However, it is still not possible to say media and societal pressure caused the behaviors.

The body-fat finding advanced the literature on male body image, Tylka said, because the research on muscularity often overshadows the fact men are also insecure about their body composition.

Men concerned about their body fat were more likely to report symptoms of eating disorders, such as restricting diet and a fear of obesity.

Those worried about lacking muscle were more likely to become obsessed with weightlifting or taking steroids -- which, if taken in excess, could be lethal.

A fascination with weightlifting and getting bigger may in some cases be signs of a mental illness called muscle dysmorphia. The opposite of anorexia, muscle dysmorphia, or "bigorexia," is a variant of obsessive-compulsive disorder; people who are affected become fixated with remedying their perceived smallness.

Previous research has shown college-aged men exposed to advertisements depicting highly muscular men experienced greater dissatisfaction with their bodies than men exposed to neutral ads. Tylka also found this connection: The more pressure the Ohio State University men felt, the greater their dissatisfaction.


Society has pumped up the male image in recent decades into a Herculean, sinewy ideal. "Playgirl" centerfolds have become increasingly muscular since the 1980s; likewise, the waist, chest and biceps of male action figure toys have grown bulkier over time. Like Barbie, many of the current toys exceed the muscularity of even the biggest bodybuilders, Tylka pointed out.


Tylka expects her study to be published in 2007. The results should be viewed with caution, since the findings have not undergone final peer review and may change. Tylka also warns not to generalize the findings to other populations beyond white college-aged students -- more studies are needed to confirm the results.

But any study that examines men's construction of self image is a step forward, said Dr. Doug Bunnell, clinical director of the Renfrew Center of Connecticut.

"It's been an understudied phenomenon, and we've all been (too) content with the explanation that men don't struggle with these sorts of issues," said Bunnell, who is also a past president of the National Eating Disorders Association.

Applying the objectification theory to men is a novel idea, Bunnell said, and he's not surprised that men also internalize messages from the media.

"These messages become part of the foundation for self-image, and men are not immune to it," he said.



E-MAIL | PRINT | SAVE | LICENSE
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved

#2 doug123

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 13 August 2006 - 07:16 AM

Pressure to be more muscular may lead men to unhealthy behaviors
http://www.foodconsu...behaviors.shtml

http://www.forbes.co...cout534327.html
Battle of the Sexes: Body Health Is What They See

Women with “accepting” attitude towards their bodies more healthy, study reveals
http://www.earthtime.../show/8100.html

Women comfortable with bodies eat better
http://www.upi.com/C...11-051233-7860r

#3 ikaros

  • Guest
  • 334 posts
  • 5
  • Location:EU

Posted 13 August 2006 - 10:00 AM

Besides prolonged heavy training keeps up the cortisol levels in the body which eventually has detrimental results on the mind. Maybe that's why athelethes tend to get the "stupid" label more often.

Edited by ikaros, 13 August 2006 - 01:17 PM.


sponsored ad

  • Advert

#4 caston

  • Guest
  • 2,141 posts
  • 23
  • Location:Perth Australia

Posted 13 August 2006 - 10:12 AM

I was thinking about going back to the gym myself as there's one at my uni.
Bulking up a little more can't hurt me but I should really take up dancing or something like that.

#5 icyT

  • Guest
  • 326 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Canada
  • NO

Posted 13 August 2006 - 11:25 AM

Psh, in actually reading this article you see it says absolutely nothing at all. First off, obsessive-compulsive disorders aren't necessarily bad, right? They're only bad if they push you in the wrong direction that unbalances you. I'm positively fixated on wanting to be immortal, after all, and honestly, if you're fixated on being big for the right reasons, it's good. The main thing's that you prioritize. Like this one time I read about bodybuilders being warned of kidney problems if they didn't make certain modifications and they shouted 'die big! die big!' That's an example of the wrong path.

Main thing's that you keep good health, don't forget internal qualities, associate good internal qualities with what it takes to build external (and really, why are they separating them? it's all one person...). Keep a good strength/weight ratio too because there's a recent backlash against any BBs who have muscles but can't use them all. Building skills like martial arts, sports skills, hobbies like juggliny or hacky sack, probably also tend to balance out any possible fixations, as you focus on what the body can do, and not it's size.

#6 ikaros

  • Guest
  • 334 posts
  • 5
  • Location:EU

Posted 13 August 2006 - 01:27 PM

The point was that bobybuilders tend to go to extremes with their pursuits, like taking in too much protein instead of balanced diet and overtraining.

if you're fixated on being big for the right reasons, it's good


What would be the right reasons? Enlighten me. Because for life extension I see very few if none.

#7 AdamDavis

  • Guest
  • 539 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Nottinghamshire, England

Posted 13 August 2006 - 02:04 PM

What would be the right reasons? Enlighten me. Because for life extension I see very few if none.


Apparently, strenuous walking for fitness releases more endorphins than bodybuilding actually does.

#8 Centurion

  • Guest
  • 1,000 posts
  • 19
  • Location:Belfast, Northern Ireland

Posted 13 August 2006 - 02:21 PM

I think a lot of people get a certain confidence from having a little more bulk to them.

#9 Athanasios

  • Guest
  • 2,616 posts
  • 163
  • Location:Texas

Posted 13 August 2006 - 02:26 PM

What would be the right reasons? Enlighten me. Because for life extension I see very few if none.


Enhanced glucose control and bone health/density are two reasons that i can think of off the top of my head. Heart health, leaness, and increased anti-oxidant production is created with lifting too, but I believe this can be gained with other exercise that is not related to getting big.

#10 DukeNukem

  • Guest
  • 2,008 posts
  • 141
  • Location:Dallas, Texas

Posted 13 August 2006 - 02:41 PM

Building (or at least maintaining) good muscle mass is strongly anti-aging. For example, it is you muscles that best pump lymphatic fluid throughout our bodies (double the fluid of our blood). Working out is great for improving our immunity. I haven't been sick in four years, so something is working. Other longevity factors gained from strength training:

o Better balance
o Ability to handle stress better
o Able to better react to a life threatening situation
o Improved body fat
o Better blood-sugar tolerance (huge benefit)
o Better aerobic capacity
o Better HDL/LDL ratio
o Improved blood pressure
o Better bone density and stronger tendons
o Your body can better regulate its temperature

And overall, you are less feeble, and more able to take advantage of life's enjoyable opportunities.

#11 ikaros

  • Guest
  • 334 posts
  • 5
  • Location:EU

Posted 13 August 2006 - 03:15 PM

but I believe this can be gained with other exercise that is not related to getting big.


IMO the exercises which use the body's own weight for working out are the most optimal. And bodybuilding is just plain dumb as also pointed out by dukenukem. It's well known that hardcore bodybuilders have many health problems later in life. Overall I have nothing against weightlifting, I was negatively implying to bodybuilding which is its exaggerated form. By evolution the human body wasn't meant to be optimal by being a mountain of meat.

#12 Athanasios

  • Guest
  • 2,616 posts
  • 163
  • Location:Texas

Posted 13 August 2006 - 03:29 PM

IMO the exercises which use the body's own weight for working out are the most optimal. And bodybuilding is just plain dumb as also pointed out by dukenukem. It's well known that hardcore bodybuilders have many health problems later in life. Overall I have nothing against weightlifting, I was negatively implying to bodybuilding which is its exaggerated form. By evolution the human body wasn't meant to be optimal by being a mountain of meat.


Tyciol's point was that if your drive to get big is for the health benefit, then you would not do things that would undermine that goal. If your goal is for looks, or how much weight you can lift, then you may possibly decide that you would rather be bigger or stronger than be healthy, which would be unhealthy.



"And bodybuilding is just plain dumb as also pointed out by dukenukem"

I think I am missing something here.

#13 ikaros

  • Guest
  • 334 posts
  • 5
  • Location:EU

Posted 13 August 2006 - 04:26 PM

"And bodybuilding is just plain dumb as also pointed out by dukenukem"

Sorry my bad, should have read through more thoroughly, I read dukenukem's first sentence as a counterargument.

And again my overall point was that being big excludes some of the health benefits one could get from exercising. I guess it is debatable which form of exercising is the best. I have my own preferences. The bottom line is that too much has adverse effects, that includes every form of exercising and IMO bodybuilding tends to be often the opposite of being healthconscious. Though sitting in your armchair is worse.

#14 doug123

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 14 August 2006 - 10:36 PM

Building (or at least maintaining) good muscle mass is strongly anti-aging.  For example, it is you muscles that best pump lymphatic fluid throughout our bodies (double the fluid of our blood).  Working out is great for improving our immunity.  I haven't been sick in four years, so something is working.  Other longevity factors gained from strength training:

o Better balance
o Ability to handle stress better
o Able to better react to a life threatening situation
o Improved body fat
o Better blood-sugar tolerance (huge benefit)
o Better aerobic capacity
o Better HDL/LDL ratio
o Improved blood pressure
o Better bone density and stronger tendons
o Your body can better regulate its temperature

And overall, you are less feeble, and more able to take advantage of life's enjoyable opportunities.


I don't think Duke is advocating use of drugs to enhance his appearance -- he's advocating physical fitness.

Maintaining physical fitness is of utmost importance if one plans to live a long and healthy life. If you do CR, you might live a bit longer, but you will look really frail.

The articles posted above are, in particular, aimed at individuals who feel small and go to extreme lengths to make themselves feel bigger...such as taking steroids and other artificial ways of making oneself feel more manly...such as HGH supplementation etc.

There is a BIG difference between being in excellent physical shape through exercise and feeling small about yourself and taking drugs instead of doing the work to be in good shape.

All of the recent scientific data suggests excercise is anti aging and enhances cognition....however, if you take compounds to make yourself feel more manly, that strongly suggests you suffer from dysmorphia.


The body-fat finding advanced the literature on male body image, Tylka said, because the research on muscularity often overshadows the fact men are also insecure about their body composition.

Men concerned about their body fat were more likely to report symptoms of eating disorders, such as restricting diet and a fear of obesity.

Those worried about lacking muscle were more likely to become obsessed with weightlifting or taking steroids -- which, if taken in excess, could be lethal.

A fascination with weightlifting and getting bigger may in some cases be signs of a mental illness called muscle dysmorphia. The opposite of anorexia, muscle dysmorphia, or "bigorexia," is a variant of obsessive-compulsive disorder; people who are affected become fixated with remedying their perceived smallness.


Previous research has shown college-aged men exposed to advertisements depicting highly muscular men experienced greater dissatisfaction with their bodies than men exposed to neutral ads. Tylka also found this connection: The more pressure the Ohio State University men felt, the greater their dissatisfaction.


http://today.reuters...C3-healthNews-2

Physically active life good for the body and brain
Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:44 PM ET

By Megan Rauscher

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Exercise keeps the body, and mind, in tiptop shape, according to a review of published studies on the topic. Taken together, the data suggest that exercise and physical activity may slow age-related declines in cognitive function, the reviewers conclude.

Moreover, fitness training may improve some mental processes even more than moderate activity.

"Although we clearly still have much to learn about the relationship between physical activity and cognition, what we currently know suggests that physical activity can help keep us both healthy and mentally fit," Dr. Arthur F. Kramer told Reuters Health.

Kramer, from the Beckman Institute at the University of Illinois in Urbana, presented his team's work this week at the annual gathering of the American Psychological Association. The research is scheduled for publication in an upcoming issue of the Journal of Applied Physiology.

In an effort to resolve the "varied opinions" on the impact of exercise on cognitive functioning, Kramer and colleagues conducted an "up-to-date" review of the scientific literature on the subject.

They found that many of the studies suggest "significant, and sometimes substantial" links between physical activity and later cognitive function and dementia. There is evidence that this relationship can span several decades.

In one study, for example, participating twice weekly in leisure time physical activity in middle age was associated with a reduced risk of dementia later in life.

However, "given the observational nature" of most of the studies on exercise and the brain, a "cause and effect" relationship cannot be established, Kramer and colleagues point out.

"Fortunately, there have been an increasing number of randomized intervention studies which have examined the relationship between fitness training and cognition and dementia," they note.

Some of these studies have shown significant improvements in mental performance and delayed dementia with fitness training, whereas others have not.

Pooled data from 18 intervention studies suggests a "moderate" positive influence of fitness training, particularly on "executive control" functions such as planning, scheduling, working memory and multi-tasking -- many of the processes that often show substantial decline with age.

Exercise is not only beneficial for healthy people but also for those already showing signs of dementia and related cognitive impairments, the team reports.

The medical research literature also contains evidence that "even relatively short exercise interventions can begin to restore some of the losses in brain volume associated with aging," they add.


http://www.imminst.o...=171&t=11957&s=

See this too:
http://www.imminst.o...=171&t=11957&s=

#15 doug123

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 14 August 2006 - 10:42 PM

Whoops, this is the link I meant:
http://www.imminst.o...=169&t=11800&s=

#16 doug123

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 12 September 2006 - 08:51 PM

Link to source

Weightlifting May Increase Glaucoma Risk

12 Sep 2006

If you are a regular weightlifter perhaps you should bear in mind that you could be increasing your chances of developing glaucoma, a condition that can make you blind, say Brazilian researchers.

The scientists found that weightlifting is associated with a temporary increase in intraocular pressure (pressure inside the eye). Introcular pressure is raised further if the person holds his/her breath during reps. This increase in pressure inside the eye raises the risk of developing glaucoma.
Reps = repetitions of an exercise. The total repetitions done in one go is called a Set. A person may do '3 sets of 7 reps of a bench press exercise')

You can read about this study in the journal Archives of Ophthalmology.

When air is forced against a closed windpipe (Valsalva manoeuvre) pressure inside the eyeball tends to go up. Valsalva manoeuvre commonly occurs when a person coughs, vomits, plays a brass wind instrument (trumpet) and does heavy weightlifting.

Aerobic exercise, such as jogging, cycling and swimming is usually followed by a fall in intraocular pressure. In fact, even non-aerobic exercise, such as weightlifting is also followed by a drop in intraocular pressure. The difference is that during the act of heavy weightlifting intraocular pressure can go up.

The scientists did research on 30 weight-training men. None of the men at the start of the study had any signs of glaucoma. All of them had normal intraocular pressure (<21 mm of mercury).

The 30 volunteers had to do a bench press exercise, four reps in two different ways:


1. holding their breath during the four reps
2. breathing normally during the four reps

While they were holding their breath, pressure in the right eye was measured. While they breathed normally, pressure in the left eye was measured. In both cases eye pressure was measured during the last rep.

When they held their breath

Eye pressure rose 4.3 mm of mercury (average) in 90% of the weightlifters.

When they breathed normally

Eye pressure rose 2.2 mm or mercury in 62% of weightlifters.

The researchers concluded that prolonged weightlifting might be a potential risk factor for the development as well as the progression of glaucoma.

Team leader, Dr Geraldo Magela Vieira, said "Intermittent intraocular pressure increases during weightlifting should be suspected in patients with normal-tension glaucoma who perform such exercises. Patients with normal-tension glaucoma should be questioned as to a history of regular weightlifting."

What is Glaucoma?

Glaucoma is an eye disease that gradually takes away a person's eyesight without warning. During the initial stages of Glaucoma there are often no symptoms at all. Health professionals say half of glaucoma sufferers probably don't know they have it.

The optic nerve, which carries visual messages from the eye to the brain, becomes damaged.

There is currently no cure for Glaucoma. Medication can slow down and even prevent further vision loss. Early detection is crucial to preserve a person's eyesight.

High pressure within the eye is a major cause of Glaucoma. It is not the only cause, as people with normal intraocular pressure have been known to experience vision loss from glaucoma.

"Intraocular Pressure Variation During Weight Lifting"
Geraldo Magela Vieira, MD; Hildeamo Bonifácio Oliveira, MSD; Daniel Tavares de Andrade, MSD; Martim Bottaro, PhD; Robert Ritch, MD
Arch Ophthalmol. 2006;124:1251-1254.
Click here to see Abstract online

Written by: Christian Nordqvist
Editor: Medical News Today
Article URL: http://www.medicalne...hp?newsid=51707


Save time! Get the latest medical news headlines for your specialist area, in a weekly newsletter e-mail. See http://www.medicalne...newsletters.php for details.

Send your press releases to pressrelease@medicalnewstoday.com

#17 doug123

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 12 September 2006 - 08:53 PM

Exercise helps breast cancer

#18 doug123

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 14 September 2006 - 08:28 PM

Link to source

Many young men 'abusing steroids'

The use of anabolic steroids is becoming mainstream as young men turn to the drugs to boost self-confidence and improve body image, experts warn.

The charity DrugScope found steroid abuse was a significant problem in 11 out of 20 towns and cities it surveyed.

The drugs have traditionally been used by elite athletes and bodybuilders.

But DrugScope found evidence of widespread use by young professionals, building-site workers and students for purely aesthetic reasons.

RISE IN STEROID USE
Birmingham
Blackpool
Cardiff
London
Luton
Manchester
Middlesborough
Newcastle
Nottingham
Portsmouth
Torquay


Young people see the drugs as an easy way to achieve a muscled, toned physique, the charity warned.

Supply of the Class C drug, a human growth hormone, is illegal, but possession is not.

Side effects of steroid misuse in men include reduced sperm count, kidney and liver problems, high blood pressure and increased aggression.

Injectors also risk contracting viruses such as HIV, hepatitis B and C.

Martin Barnes, chief executive of DrugScope, said: "The rise in the number of young men misusing steroids is extremely worrying and seems to be in response to a growing obsession with the ideal body image.

"There are serious risks associated with steroid misuse, but people may ignore the dangers or not seek help because they do not consider themselves drug users.

"A and E departments are seeing increasing numbers of young people, some as young as 15 and 16, with needle injection injuries.

"Gyms, drug and health services should provide more information and practical support for young people exposed to steroid misuse."


The DrugScope survey also found evidence of an increase in the simultaneous use of heroin and crack cocaine - a practice known as "speedballing".

In south London, the phenomenon is so common the combined substances are being treated as a drug in its own right.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.u...lth/5338482.stm

Published: 2006/09/13 06:11:50 GMT

© BBC MMVI

#19 robosapiens

  • Guest
  • 163 posts
  • 17
  • Location:Seattle

Posted 30 July 2007 - 04:30 PM

IMHO CHRISTINE DELL'AMORE is mistaken

Its OK to be "dissatisfied with muscle tone and body fat", who says we have to be happy about ourselves all the time?



The bulging Olympic weight lifter's body is out of reach for most college-aged men
Olympic weight lifters aren't very muscular compared to "professional" bodybuilders, they don't lift hypertrophy specific.


Besides prolonged heavy training keeps up the cortisol levels in the body which eventually has detrimental results on the mind. Maybe that's why athelethes tend to get the "stupid" label more often.

prolonged heavy training is unnecessary, and in fact detremental to hypertrophy, One should only spend about 30 to 45 min in the gym.


Side effects of steroid misuse in men *may* include reduced sperm count, kidney and liver problems, high blood pressure and increased aggression.

What are the negative side effects of proper use?

none

The DrugScope survey also found evidence of an increase in the simultaneous use of heroin and crack cocaine - a practice known as "speedballing". total missdirection of the issue

a survey also found evidence of an increase of pedophilia in govenment officials

Edited by robosapiens, 30 July 2007 - 05:17 PM.


#20 Liquidus

  • Guest
  • 446 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Earth

Posted 30 July 2007 - 04:38 PM

Being active in a weekly sport should be more than enough. I've played football for 3 years, and although I didn't really 'need' to be bulky, I still worked out a little, but nothing to consider myself a weight lifter or body builder.

I'm glad I've never had those pressures placed on me, I'm a lanky person by nature and I have no problem with it, if people have a problem with it, well, that's their problem, not mine.

I feel bad for people who live their lives in the eyes of other people, it must be a really depressing lifestyle. I live for one person, and one person only, that's myself. Of course I'm supportive of my family and close friends, but for the most part, I really could care less what anyone's opinion of me might be, unless that opinion is important in me getting somewhere I need to be, then every other 'opinion' is 100% irrelevant to my existence.

I wasn't always like that, and it's not easy to adapt to, but it makes life more enjoyable since you don't live for anyone but yourself (which makes me want to start a rant about people who think true happiness is solely found in dating/relationships, but I'll save that discussion for another time).

#21 Live Forever

  • Guest Recorder
  • 7,475 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Atlanta, GA USA

Posted 30 July 2007 - 05:13 PM

Beefcake!

#22 Liquidus

  • Guest
  • 446 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Earth

Posted 30 July 2007 - 05:56 PM

Beefcake!


First thing I thought of too, I just wasn't sure how many South Park fans are on this board.

Posted Image

Posted Image

#23 mike250

  • Guest
  • 981 posts
  • 9

Posted 31 July 2007 - 02:56 AM

i always get a laugh out of these studies.

#24 Mixter

  • Guest
  • 788 posts
  • 98
  • Location:Europe

Posted 31 July 2007 - 11:42 AM

[tung] I think that many men do the Cartman thing, gaining weight by eating more no matter whether fat or muscle... they'll exercise a bit, too, but eat too much and too unhealthy.

But, well, some kind of resistance training with weights, especially for upper body muscle maintenance is incredibly important. But how big muscles get is very much up to genetic predisposition. It's important that muscle mass and strength is maintained, but good strength can exist without gaining a lot of visible muscle mass. Building and maintaining 'invisible' parts of skeletal muscle is most important, for example.

The good lymph circulation that Duke mentioned is very important for detoxification and thus homeostasis and anti-aging. Maintaining muscles is important for that, but jumping and trampolining is THE most efficient way to increase lymph circulation.

Regular joggers of course get a good amount of these benefits, but buying a small trampoline if you have the space anywhere, is one of the best things to do for your metabolism, aerobic exercise-wise, plus it can release and prevent muscle tensions.

#25 robosapiens

  • Guest
  • 163 posts
  • 17
  • Location:Seattle

Posted 31 July 2007 - 05:00 PM

Interesting counter perspective here:

A Philosophical Defense of Anabolic-Androgenic Steroid Use

by Sidney Gendin, Ph.D.

Sidney is is a professor of philosophy of law at Eastern Michigan University. He has taught philosophy for 36 years, specializing in philosophy of law. He has co-edited several books and authored about 20 articles appearing in leading philosophy journals.
More Steroids, Please!

1. The Paternalistic Outlook
2. The Propaganda War
3. The Case from Unfairness / Unnaturalness

First Installment: The Paternalistic Outlook. This essay is frankly and entirely one-sided. I have no interest in remarks like "On the one hand this may be true but on the other hand that may be true and then again, who knows, maybe everybody is right." I don't like this wishy-washy approach. Better to be flat out wrong and even irritating than to be indecisive and maddeningly bland.

I will state right at the outset that I believe all condemnation of steroid drugs is a terrible mistake. I am so far to the left of even my most liberal friends that I will even defend so-called cheating, not merely the idea that the use of steroids should be made legal. However, this is a side issue for me, and not terribly important. What is important is that I will DEFEND three views: (1) Whether the use of steroids is unhealthful or not, people do not have the right to deprive those who wish to run the risks access to these drugs. Steroid use should be legal and, at the very least, decriminalized. (2) The medical evidence is not clear but the best indicators are that the dangers of steroid use are exaggerated. (3) The argument that steroid users have an unfair competitive advantage over nonusers turns out to be superficial and false.

Second Installment: The Propaganda War. Here is a clear-cut case of paternalism in action - you are deprived of a substance not necessarily because it is thought to give an undeserved advantage but because the banning gang is worrying about your health. Our "leaders" could simply send athletes notices that read: "WARNING! Although steroids may improve your performance, the dangers of taking them are well-established. Among these dangers are gynecomastia, liver diseases, cancer, baldness, severe acne, decreased sperm count, shrinking of the testicles, unbearable headaches, and undesirable voice changes." It might also mention the usual litany of side-effects that are found with every medicine including the contradictory ones meant to cover all bases such as insomnia and drowsiness, constipation and diarrhea. What else is new? Do we really need daily washings and scrubbings of our brain? There are, literally, dozens of steroids that athletes know about. They know which are injectable and which are taken orally. They know the possible and likely side effects of each. They know these things much better than 99% of all physicians for reasons to be explained shortly. We need a moratorium on brain washing just as we need one on control and power.

Third Installment: The Case from Unfairness / Unnaturalness Most people unthinkingly suppose something like this: "If a certain kind of behavior is illegal then it is wrong. Using steroids is illegal so it is wrong. Good people abide by the law and those who don't are taking unfair advantage." That is all there is to this slender argument. We must always consider whether the laws are right or wrong, stupid, cruel, or discriminatory, or in many other ways, moral failures. Suppose taking steroids was legal but using vitamins was not, and suppose vitamins are, as they seem to be, essential to good health and hence to superior performance. Now some people abide by the law and some don't. Those who don't abide by the law take unfair advantage of those who do but they do no wrong.


http://www.mesomorph...steroid-use.htm

#26 robosapiens

  • Guest
  • 163 posts
  • 17
  • Location:Seattle

Posted 31 July 2007 - 06:15 PM

The famous "muscle dysmorphia" study in Psychosomatics (1997) produced media hysteria over men obsessively scrutinizing their bodies, and subsequent mockery by many serious lifters who argued that there was no such thing as too big and people who said so were just jealous pencilnecks...

But remember, anabolic agents and performance enhancing substances are used for SELF IMPROVEMENT as defined by the individual.

Why is it that one can have major surgery to enhance ones appearance, but we cannot use tested and approved pharmaceuticals?

Why can a male get his private parts cut off, have a fake vagina installed, breasts implanted and take estrogen to become a “female”, or a woman can take testosterone and have an addadictomy [sp] to become a “male”, yet a man can’t use relatively safe, tested and approved pharmaceuticals to enhance his athletic performance or appearance?

It’s baffling (to me) how such presumably well educated members on this forum could fall for such illogical urban legend folklore, Where is the actual science on this, How big is “too big” for health, who says, and where is the proof?

Take this statement for example:

"There are serious risks associated with steroid misuse, but people may ignore the dangers or not seek help because they do not consider themselves drug users”

(Let’s not forget that steroids are, or have been, tested and approved pharmaceutical substances, this isn’t methamphetamine here guys.)

What is the difference between misuse vs. proper use?

They (users) don’t "ignore the dangers", they navigate around them because they can’t get expert assistance for lawful use, they don’t seek help because steroids are uh... ILLEGAL!

Edited by robosapiens, 31 July 2007 - 06:35 PM.

  • like x 1

#27 woly

  • Guest, F@H
  • 279 posts
  • 11

Posted 01 August 2007 - 12:18 AM

so are steriods actually fairly safe?

#28 health_nutty

  • Guest
  • 2,410 posts
  • 93
  • Location:California

Posted 01 August 2007 - 01:45 AM

Well for one CR and getting bigger contradict each other. This is something I'm struggling with personally. As a naturally thin guy, I can gain fairly significant muscle, but only if I eat a lot of calories. I'm not doing CR and the biggest reason is vanity :( There I admitted it.

#29 FunkOdyssey

  • Guest
  • 3,443 posts
  • 166
  • Location:Manchester, CT USA

Posted 01 August 2007 - 02:37 PM

Well for one CR and getting bigger contradict each other. This is something I'm struggling with personally. As a naturally thin guy, I can gain fairly significant muscle, but only if I eat a lot of calories. I'm not doing CR and the biggest reason is vanity :( There I admitted it.

Same exact situation here. I'm a little jealous that women can engage in moderate CR and still maintain some degree of attractiveness. There is nothing sexually appealing about a man that looks like he's starving (that is not to say he won't have successful sexual relations, but I am certain they will not be based on visual lust for his physique).

#30 robosapiens

  • Guest
  • 163 posts
  • 17
  • Location:Seattle

Posted 01 August 2007 - 06:26 PM

so are steriods actually fairly safe?


They aren't safe of you consider the legal aspects, getting arrested and convicted is a big "danger"

Dose makes the poison, depends on the exact substance, depends on the person, depends on your liver and blood pressure, depends on...

They aren't exactly methampetamine or crack cocaine, most (I'd say ALL ) pro bodybuilders take them regulary and they aren't dropping like flyes, Millions of doses have been administered, and very few (if any) fatalities have occured.

www.mesomorphosis.com is a good study guide




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users