Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 53

Thread: Steroids and Blood Doping for LEO/Mil/Competitive Shooters

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    769
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    OK so:

    I can smoke tobacco products and give myself, and everyone around me, cancer, emphysema.

    I can use smokeless tobacco products and give myself oral, asophougus cancer or stomach cancer.

    I can drink alcohol and give myself liver disease. (DUI anyone?)

    But I cannot use a little HGH or Winny V to get a nice six-pack of abs???

    Makes perfect sense to me

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    278
    Feedback Score
    0
    Steroids?

    I think that some of my brothers should start with diet and exercise first.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    sc
    Posts
    83
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Hizzie View Post
    OK so:

    I can smoke tobacco products and give myself, and everyone around me, cancer, emphysema.

    I can use smokeless tobacco products and give myself oral, asophougus cancer or stomach cancer.

    I can drink alcohol and give myself liver disease. (DUI anyone?)

    But I cannot use a little HGH or Winny V to get a nice six-pack of abs???

    Makes perfect sense to me

    Or if you really wanted to screw with nature you could get a sex change and they would feed you all the hormones you want.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Pleasure Island
    Posts
    2,338
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by MK18Pilot View Post
    Try and justify it anyway you want. If you take steroids or HGH, supervised or not, your a ****ing loser, plain and simple.


  5. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    769
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by nhskull21 View Post
    Or if you really wanted to screw with nature you could get a sex change and they would feed you all the hormones you want.

    Umm, I'm confused. How do performance enhancing drugs and gender reassignment surgery have anything to do with each other? Or are you just trying to be antagonistic and insulting?

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Northern Alabama
    Posts
    992
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Can't we just discuss the pros and cons of drug enhanced performance? The roid raging needs to stop.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    487
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    While, like most drugs, steroids can be and are used responsibly, I would be worried giving them to soldiers for one primary reason: the roid raging psychopath stereotype. While this is an unfair representation, I'd be concerned that if a soldier who was using steroids got involved in a fire fight and in the heat of things accidentally shot a civilian who looked like they had a weapon, or anything else happened that could potentially call their judgment into question... would the steroid use be held against them?

    The military not using these drugs, at least apparently not, makes me wonder if super soldier programs are real or if science fiction movies have been lying to me for 40 years.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    769
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    I have been going to professional gyms for more than 15 years and encountered many "enhanced" athletes. Some of which were doctors and PHD candidates in molecular biology. The biggest problem with the average "enhanced" athlete is that they think since some is good, more must be better. Look at the Greg Lamont-tour de france doping scandal. Those guys were using mirco-pulsing and achieving tremendous results. The lab boys have been testing the mirco-pulse doping regime and have been unable to get any test subject to piss hot. All this while taking test subjects from being able to cycle at max threshold for less 5 minutes to almost an hour. The largest stumbling block is that most doctors will have nothing to do with an "enhanced" athlete. Those that find helpful (not drug dealing) and cooperative Docs get the needed testing and care for safe "enhancement".

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Northern Alabama
    Posts
    992
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Hizzie View Post
    I have been going to professional gyms for more than 15 years and encountered many "enhanced" athletes. Some of which were doctors and PHD candidates in molecular biology. The biggest problem with the average "enhanced" athlete is that they think since some is good, more must be better. Look at the Greg Lamont-tour de france doping scandal. Those guys were using mirco-pulsing and achieving tremendous results. The lab boys have been testing the mirco-pulse doping regime and have been unable to get any test subject to piss hot. All this while taking test subjects from being able to cycle at max threshold for less 5 minutes to almost an hour. The largest stumbling block is that most doctors will have nothing to do with an "enhanced" athlete. Those that find helpful (not drug dealing) and cooperative Docs get the needed testing and care for safe "enhancement".
    Agreed. For obvious reasons, many medial professionals will have nothing to do with sports doping. Those who do, sometimes aren't the best.

    As for how this relates to LE and military use... notice that all those sports situations where people exhibited superhuman performance were very carefully monitored by teams of professionals. The last thing I want is for dehydrated guys living in the woods on MRE's to have elevated hematocrit.

    On the other hand, HGH, steroids and even plain old amphetamines probably have their uses on the battlefield.... within reason. Whatever your regimen is has to be 100% battle-proof.
    - Can you miss dosages safely?
    - Can you continue your regimen while malnourished, dehydrated, etc?
    - What about drug interactions if you're wounded and receive treatment?

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    278
    Feedback Score
    0
    I don't know if "battlefield dosing" is really the issue. Garrison or non-deployment use to increase physical capacity could be considered. I just think that it would have to be so closely monitored that the administrative hasstle would outweigh any potential benefits.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •