Eleven of the fourteen members of the Greek National Weightlifting Team have tested positve for the anabolic steroid methyltrienolone. Both samples A and B were positive for the steroid. This will likely result in the expulsion of the entire Greek Weightlifting Team from the 2008 Beijing Olympics.

Methyltrienolone is a very toxic oral anabolic steroid. However, reports by the Athens News that methytrienolone killed 200 bodybuilders in the 1960s are ludicrous. Researchers at the University of Bonn (Germany) blocked its commercial release in 1966 due to its high hepatotoxicity (liver toxicity). Professor Demetrios Kouretas (Department of Biochemistry and Biotechnology at the University of Thessaly) told Steroid Report he worked with the toxic steroid methyltrienolone as part of his postdoctoral thesis at the University of Harvard.

I remember when I was working with R1881( methyltrienolone) at Harvard in 1990, we were very particular with handling R1881 due to its lipophilicity and easy diffusion throught the skin. And you may think that when you work with steroids you must be very careful.

Steroid experts William Llewellyn (Molecular Nutrition) and Patrick Arnold (Ergopharm) have each called methyltrienolone one of the “most powerful” anabolic steroids ever created. 

Arnold has told the Steroid Report that several athletes used methyltrienolone in the 1990s and were able to successfully pass doping controls looking for methyltrienolone due to the very small quantities of the steroid required for performance enhancing effects. He was somewhat surprised that methyltrienolone was detected by drug testers in the Greek Weightlifting steroid scandal suggesting anti-doping tests have improved for the substance.

Patrick Arnold is organic chemist who developed the once undetectable anabolic steroid tetrahydrogestrinone (THG) for BALCO. THG is a modified form of methyltrienolone.

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.

Senators Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) have modified a bill that would have added human growth hormone (HGH) to the Controlled Substances List. The bill was introduced as a kneejerk reaction to revelations of widespread HGH use in professional baseball. But in the end, legislators avoided making the same mistake with HGH as they did with anabolic-androgenic steroids (AAS) with the Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 1990. (“HGH bill altered to help children,” April 16)

Senators Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., and Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, have dropped language in the bill that would have put HGH on the same legal plane as anabolic steroids, a move that would have severely limited access to the synthetic hormone.

For example, under the bill’s original language, HGH would not have been widely available through the mail and would not have been available in longer than six-month supplies. Because doctors specializing in childhood growth disorders often are far from patients, such controls could have caused hardship for families with children using the drug.

The atmosphere of steroid hysteria resulted in overwhelming bipartisan support for the original HGH bill practically guaranteeing passage of the legislation. When it comes to steroids and performance enhancing drugs, it appears that emotional arguments generally trump intellectual arguments. But fortunately, and surprisingly, the Sen. Schumer and Sen. Grassley rationally examined the evidence of the adverse consequences, particularly for children, of making HGH a Scheduled-III controlled substance. 

“We’ve ran into some things that we didn’t anticipate. We were enlightened by the parents whose children legitimately need HGH,” Grassley told USA TODAY on Tuesday. “Making it (a more tightly controlled substance) would have created a lot of red tape for them.”

Sadly, Sen. Schumer and Sen. Grassley are not students of history when it comes to the Controlled Substances Act; otherwise, they would already known how political misuse of the Controlled Substances Act (especially involving doping in sports) can adversely affect availability of pharmaceuticals for patients who needs these therapies for health, wellness, and survival. The addition of anabolic steroids to the Controlled Substances List with the Anabolic Steroids Control Act of 1990 had adverse unintended consequences for untold numbers of patients who had legitimate medical indications requiring anabolic steroid treatment.

We can thank Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY) and Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC), who were widely criticized for doing so at the time, for placing a temporary hold on the original HGH legislation thereby allowing reason to prevail over emotion in the Senate. But most credit should go to the MAGIC Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated to “providing support services to the families of children afflicted with chronic and critical disorders, syndromes, and diseases that affect their growth,” for their activism in the matter.

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.

Confirm Biosciences has released a new home anabolic steroid testing kit this month. CNBC’s Sports Biz with Darren Rovell thinks it would be useful for parents to test their children for steroid use. Athletes may found it useful and convenient to monitor the elimination of banned substances from their bodies.

STEROIDCONFIRM™ enables sports trainers, employers and parents to test individuals who they suspect may be abusing steroids. Simply take a urine specimen at home, in the workplace or at school, and mail to our laboratory using the pre-paid shipping pak. You have the option to perform a confidential test (no personal information is required) or a test with a Chain of Custody…

Using Liquid Chromatograph Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC/MS/MS), the most sophisticated and sensitive technology available for the steroid testing community, STEROIDCONFIRM™ can accurately quantify substances well below the cut-off levels. Each specimen is tested directly with this instrument – there is no screening process.

Confirm Biosciences claims the SteroidConfirm steroid testing kit is comparable to the steroid panels used by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). This may be misleading.

STEROIDCONFIRM™ is comparable to World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) panels, detecting a full list of prescription androgenic anabolic steroids, prohormones, designer anabolic steroids, essential masking agents, anti-estrogen agents and diuretics.

But the SteroidConfirm description only claims to identify 11 anabolic steroids, 5 metabolites, and 1 beta-2 agonist. This doesn’t come close to approaching the number of anabolic steroids included in the WADA doping tests. SteroidConfirm advertises the detection of the following 17 substances (mostly steroids and their metabolites).

» Tetrahydrogestrinone (THG)
 » Boldenone (Equipoise)
 » Hydroxyboldenone (Metabolite)
 » Clostebol (Steranobol)
 » Clenbuterol
 » Dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA)
 » Testosterone
 » Epitestosterone
 » Oxymesterone (Oranabol)
 » Oxandrolone (Anavar)
 » Methyloxandrolone (Metabolite)
 » Stanozolol (Winstrol)
 » Hydroxystanozolol (Metabolite)
 » Flouxymesterone (Halotestin)
 » 6B-Hydroxyflouxymesterone (Metabolite)
 » Androsterone
 » 19-Norandrosterone (Metabolite)

Several popular anabolic steroids are apparently not included in the testing. These include Anadrol (oxymetholone), Dianabol (methandrostenolone), Trenbolone, Masteron (drostanolone propionate), Primobolan (methenolone), and Proviron (mesterolone).

Deca Durabolin (nandrolone decanoate) is not included either; however, I think a positive result for the metabolite 19-norandrosterone will effectively detect the use of any nandrolone based steroids (Deca, Laurabolin, Dynabolan, Anadur, etc).

It is possible that some of the steroids I mentioned will be detected by discovery of some of the 5 metabolites that SteroidConfirm does test for. But it would seem that the Confirm Biosciences marketing department would be certain to mention this if it were true.

Otherwise, I think suggesting that the steroid testing kit is comparable to WADA panels is a bit of a stretch. The steroid testing kit is not nearly as comprehensive at the company would like you and your $145 believe.

(Hat tip to Steroid Nation for link to CNBC story.)

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.

The steroid hysteria related to steroids in sports continues to have an adverse impact of the availability of anabolic-androgenic steroids and human growth hormone for legal use in legitimate medical conditions. Congressional attacks upon anabolic steroids and other anabolic drugs (solely because athletes use them) are hurting those patients who stand to benefit from these highly beneficial and effective drugs.

Nelson Vergel, HIV activist and co-author of Built to Survive, published a letter on his blog that outlines how patients with legitimate medical needs for these pharmaceuticals suffer as a result of the steroid hysteria and legislation that limits the availability of anabolic steroids and human growth hormone (“Hearings on Steroids in Sports and the Impact on Treatments for HIV and other Medical Conditions,” March 12).

The difficulty now is that anabolic steroids are becoming much less available legally because of Federal pressure upon producers. The anabolic steroid most successfully used over the years to combat wasting has been nandrolone decanoate. Up until recently, this product was produced by Watson Pharmaceuticals. In 2007, however, Watson stopped producing nandrolone. Instead, it is promoting Oxandrine, an oral steroid that is less effective and has more adverse side effects, but is also proprietary and therefore commands a higher price. Since then, anyone who needs to use nandrolone must go to compounding pharmacies, which will then produce the medicine on a custom order. At this time, the only anabolic steroids that may be used legally in the United States are Oxandrine and nandrolone. So the choice is Watson’s expensive, less effective, propriety product or use of the compounding pharmacies.

This situation presents two major problems for patients who need anabolic therapies. The first is that a prescription filled by a compounding pharmacy is not covered by insurance or AIDS Drug Assistance Programs (ADAPs), so use of nandrolone is an out-of-pocket expense. Many patients suffering from HIV are in difficult economic circumstance. The added expense frequently puts the medicine out of reach.

The other problem is that compounding pharmacies are now under heavy scrutiny by the Drug Enforcement Agency to ensure that prescriptions are for legitimate medical needs. In theory, this would sound reasonable, but, in practice, the added delays, pressure and bureaucratic requirements have caused many compounding pharmacies to shy away from production of nandrolone. The most popular, Applied Pharmacy of Alabama, was providing the product reliably and at a reasonable price. However, the DEA insisted that the pharmacies verify the medical necessity of each prescription. That is not the role of a pharmacy. That is the role of the doctor writing the prescription. So the DEA regularly comes into the Applied Pharmaceuticals, gathers up all their records and keeps them for an unreasonable amount of time for review purposes. This amounts to blatant harassment solely to suppress production of a legitimate medication. For this reason, Applied Pharmacy has announced that it will no longer provide nandrolone or other hormone-based products. Other compounding pharmacies have similarly so halted production, and this has caused an increase in prices among the remaining producers and confusion among HIV prescribers who wrongly assume that nandrolone is no longer available in the U.S.

I have generously excerpted from this detailed letter written by Mark A. Meier, a constituent in Representative Nancy Pelosi’s district. I encourage readers to carefully read the entire letter at Nelson’s HIV blog to see see what is at stake.

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.

Filip Bondy wrote a story today about the likelihood that growth hormone would be more expensive and more difficult to obtain for parents of children with growth-related disorders as a result of a Congressional bill that would reclassify human growth hormone as a controlled substance (“Littlest victims of an HGH bill,” March 17).

Here’s the problem: The proposed legislation would re-classify HGH as a Schedule III drug, increasing penalties for its illegal use and limiting access in several ways. The penalties are fine, the parents agree. Limiting access for growth-challenged kids is the deal breaker.

The Champs, for example, would need to go to Mount Sinai Hospital in Manhattan once every month for a new prescription, which would last 30 days. Currently with each visit, they are able to obtain a three-month supply of HGH, with two refills. They only need to go once every nine months. Meanwhile, their insurance co-pays would triple for the extra doses.

Bondy blames the athletes for this problem. However, the immediate culprit is obviously Congress’ ill-informed attempts to eliminate steroids in sport by expanding the Controlled Substances Act to include non-addictive human growth hormone.

I do not understand why Congress thinks scheduling performance enhancing drugs is an effective tool for eliminating steroids in sports. I am not aware of many any professional athletes who have been prosecuted under the Anabolic Steroids Control Act. I can not name a single athlete who has failed a doping test in the United States and was criminally sanctioned as a result. History tells us that the Controlled Substances Act is ineffective at punishing professional athletes who use steroids. Including human growth hormone on the Controlled Substances list will only be another failure in more ways than one.

Now, perjury is another story. This seems to be a highly effective tool for punishing athletes who use steroids based on perjury investigations involving Barry Bonds, Marion Jones, Tammy Thomas, and Roger Clemens.

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.

The non-medical use of anabolic steroids by mature, consenting adults, whether for appearance- or performance-enhancing purposes, is one thing that doesn’t particularly trouble me. The voluntary consumption of steroids by consenting teenagers is more problematic. But it still does not represent a public health crisis.

According to a recent AP probe, there are steroid hormones in our drinking water. The presence of pharmaceuticals including steroids in our public water supply is significantly more important than steroids in baseball. Not only does is point to the hypocrisy of our doped culture attacking doped athletes, but more importantly, it represents a serious threat to children, infants, and developing fetuses whose endocrine systems are particularly vulnerable to pharmaceuticals that act as endocrine disruptors.

This is yet another example where our obsession with steroids in baseball overshadows more serious issues. The involuntary exposure of individuals to steroid hormones, pharmaceuticals and potential endocrine disruptors via our water supply during critical developmental periods represents a real public health crisis. Certainly, steroids in our drinking water is more importantant than steroids in baseball?

And while researchers do not yet understand the exact risks from decades of persistent exposure to random combinations of low levels of pharmaceuticals, recent studies — which have gone virtually unnoticed by the general public — have found alarming effects on human cells and wildlife.

Furthermore, the government doesn’t require testing for pharmaceuticals. As a result, the majority of the nation’s water suppliers do not testing public drinking water for pharmaceutical contaminants in spite of the fact that the majority of the sources for the drink water supply are contaminated with pharmaceuticals. The ones that do test the water often withhold this information from the public for various reasons, including “post-9/11″ concerns! The withholding of information is another reason for concern.

 For example, the head of a group representing major California suppliers said the public “doesn’t know how to interpret the information” and might be unduly alarmed.

The ones that do reveal the testing results provide alarming information (“AP Probe Finds Drugs in Drinking Water” March 9):

 Officials in Philadelphia said testing there discovered 56 pharmaceuticals or byproducts in treated drinking water, including medicines for pain, infection, high cholesterol, asthma, epilepsy, mental illness and heart problems. Sixty-three pharmaceuticals or byproducts were found in the city’s watersheds.

Anti-epileptic and anti-anxiety medications were detected in a portion of the treated drinking water for 18.5 million people in Southern California.

Researchers at the U.S. Geological Survey analyzed a Passaic Valley Water Commission drinking water treatment plant, which serves 850,000 people in Northern New Jersey, and found a metabolized angina medicine and the mood-stabilizing carbamazepine in drinking water.

A sex hormone was detected in San Francisco’s drinking water.

The drinking water for Washington, D.C., and surrounding areas tested positive for six pharmaceuticals.

Three medications, including an antibiotic, were found in drinking water supplied to Tucson, Ariz.

Sadly, I am certain this story will be buried within a couple of days. Yet, the steroids in baseball saga will continue to compete for national headlines, Congressional grandstanding opportunities, and federal funding.

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.

I know it is not popular to express skepticism at claims that anabolic steroids lead to suicide or suicidal behavior. But the media has once again embraced a story of a teenager who blames steroids as the cause of his/her psychological state without question.

A former cheerleader and gymnast admits to injecting Winstrol ever other day for a five week period when she was in high school. She claims the steroid caused her to experience “roid rage” and experience suicidal thoughts and behavior.

“I was definitely suicidal,” she said. “I just was so upset the smallest thing would set me off. And I’m just like, ‘I want to die.’ Like, maybe if something happens to me, I’ll get the attention I need. I was, like, looking for something and I certainly didn’t find it.”

Certainly, the use of the anabolic steroid stanozolol was one of many potential causes associated with this behavior including emotional contagion (Taylor Hooton committed suicide 11 miles away during the course of her five week steroid cycle) not to mention her admitted pre-existing binge eating (and possibly bulimic) behaviors.

To isolate steroids as the specific cause for her psychological reflects bias more than science. This is exemplified in the Taylor Hooton case, as described by Dr. Jack Darkes, Associate Professor at the University of South Florida and Director of Interventions at the Alcohol and Substance Use Research Institute in his article on steroids and suicide:

Taylor Hooton reportedly “colored his hair and looked twice when he passed a mirror (Longman, 2003)” and “…was always concerned about his looks (Kix, 2004). In combination with a reported desire to be bigger suggests potential body dissatisfaction (e.g., Pope, Phillips, & Olivardia, 2000) which is associated with both AAS use (Cafri, Thompson, Ricciardelli, McCabe, Smolak, & Yesalis, 2005) and suicide (as a form of “socially-prescribed perfectionism”; Boergers et al., 1998). He had “low self-esteem” (Longman, 2003), a family history of depression (mother) and suicide attempt (sister) (Longman, 2004) and was taking anti-depressant mediation (Lexapro) (Ardis, 2005). [Interestingly, a Mail Tribune (8-10-2004) headline (Landers, 2004) seemed to echo the parents’ sentiments in these cases, reading "Drug leads to son’s suicide, family says" – but it was actually referring to Lexapro. See both Garland, 2004 and Valuck, Libby, Sills, Giese, & Allen, 2004 for a discussion of antidepressants and adolescent suicide]. His AAS use was allegedly motivated by wanting to excel at baseball (Numerous sources including father’s testimony), although some sources have suggested it had more to do with personal appearance and status.

If such a case history could truly prove causation, then the brief review above has identified several potential “causes”. But such a “psychological autopsy”, which is commonly used to investigate suicides, cannot show causation. It can suggest that many warning signs can be identified, any one (or combination) of which might be associated with suicide, but none of which can be definitively shown as a cause. In this case, to single out one might reflect other than scientific issues.

In spite of my skepticism that steroids cause suicide, I believe that teenage use of anabolic steroids is infinitely riskier than adult use of these drugs. Unlike adults, teenagers are undergoing radical and important developmental changes. The use of anabolic steroids could have persistent or permanent effects on the developing body and particularly the developing brain.

The side effects of steroids in adults, for the most part, tend to be transient and reversible. There is limited evidence published by the Melloni research group to suggest this isn’t the case with regard to brain development in teens. Even in the absence of more scientific information about the effects of steroids in teenagers, we should make our best efforts to reduce teenager steroid use in a rational, scientific approach to steroid education.

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.

Several blogs have been discussing Neil Levin’s criticism of inaccuracies reported by CNN.  Levin strongly criticized CNN for “preposterous,” “erroneous,” and otherwise “false claims” that dietary supplements are “unregulated” and/or free of “government supervision.” His blog entry goes on to cite the many ways that dietary supplements are regulated by the government. The lengthy entry, with several quotes from regulatory agencies gives the impression that the dietary supplement industry is tightly regulated.

While CNN is technically inaccurate, it is closer to the truth than Levin’s advocacy would suggest. From a consumer standpoint, I feel it is safer to assume that dietary supplements are unregulated. Most regulations are actually “post-marketing” measures i.e. very little prevents a new supplement from being sold in the marketplace.

I like the Dietary Health and Supplement Education Act (DSHEA) in principle too. But the supplement industry has abused and exploited DSHEA and utterly failed to self-regulate in the face of legislative challenges to DSHEA. It remains to be seen whether DSHEA is salvaged or systematically dismantled.

There is a reason that dozens of steroids have been and continue to be sold as dietary supplements for over a decade in the U.S.; DSHEA makes it legal. As long as supplement companies avoid certain claims and meet certain criteria well-known within the industry, the steroidal supplements can be introduced to the marketplace without “burdensome” requirements that the supplement company notify the government. This is the legacy of DSHEA.

At least one of the two most infamous designer steroids in the history of sport steroid scandals could have probably been legally sold as dietary supplements if they did not become scrutinized due to the spotlight of the BALCO steroids in baseball scandal i.e. tetrahydragestrinone aka THG aka “The Clear” and desoxymethyltestosterone aka DMT aka Madol synthesized by the convicted “father of prohormones” Patrick Arnold.

Pat Arnold’s indictment didn’t identify these so-called designer steroids as “anabolic steroids” because, legally, they were not. In response to the BALCO scandal, the FDA issued a press release on THG stating it was an “unapproved new drug” and not a “dietary supplement” to stop manufacturers who felt it met DSHEA criteria from selling it. (Actually, the latter steroid DMT was introduced into the marketplace but quickly (and voluntarily) pulled by its manufacturer shortly after the press associated it with the BALCO scandal and Patrick Arnold.)

THG and DMT did not legally become “anabolic steroids” until the passage of the Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2004.

Several new steroid products are currently sold as dietary supplements legally and others illegally. But little is done about either due to the laissez faire regulation of the industry.

Furthermore, dietary supplements contaminated with steroids and stimulants continues to be a problem; for this reason alone I would be cautious about teenagers or children using any dietary supplement. Sadly, the supplement industry (or more accurately, several companies within the industry) are giving legislators every excuse to gut DSHEA.

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.

The State of Texas University Interscholastic League (UIL) produced a steroid education video entitled “The Making of a Champion.” The steroid education video was released in conjunction with the introduction of steroid testing in public high school sports in Texas.

The video features lengthy segments featuring high school teenage athletes who used steroids and suffered. The video implies that anabolic steroids caused stroke and paralysis in one case; it implies that steroids caused suicide in the other case (Taylor Hooton). This type of “scare tactic” approach is common in state produced steroid education and anti-drug productions.

Legislators and state educators need to realize that what is negative to adults is not necessarily negative to teenagers. High school athletes contemplating the use of steroids are much more motivated by the positive reinforcement resulting from steroids; their behavior isn’t as heavily influenced by fear of uncertain punishment, especially the low probability, overstated, exaggerated, or downright inaccurate side effects promoted in typical steroid education videos.

There was an insightful comment by a high school student who watched the UIL steroid education video. He watched the emotional scare tactics involving steroids and stroke/paralysis, and steroids and suicide, but this apparently had little influence on him; his biggest concern was the risk of tendon tears.

Me and a couple of friends got a little worried about it after we watched it… One thing that really scared me is your muscles get too strong for your tendons and then your muscles rip out your tendons.

The scare tactics didn’t work; he was more influenced by the (more realistic) possible effect on performance. What is negative to adults and what is negative to high school athletes are not necessarily the same thing.

In society’s obsession with steroids, I think the real concerns are often ignored. The student goes on to say:

That [steroids] can take you out of football for life, and football is my life.

A discussion of the overemphasis of athletics in high schools (especially in Texas) and winning by everyone involved is critical in the steroid debate.

Steroid Education Video by UIL Texas: The Making of a Champion

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.

John Lombardo, M.D. is the drug advisor to the NFL on anabolic steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs. He has granted waivers to football players who have tested positive for anabolic steroids based on medical need. The medical rationale was “testicular disease” in each case.

John Lombardo, has granted waivers to players who have failed drug tests but then explained their medical need for testosterone. NFL spokesman Greg Aiello won’t disclose names or reveal how many players have been allowed to pump synthetic hormones into their bodies except to say it’s “a very small number.”

This is the National League Football (NFL) version of the therapeutic use exemption that can be submitted after failing a drug test. An interesting article by Tom Farrey of ESPN the Magazine suggests this is a precedent opening the door to widespread use of hormones in sports like football.

It’s a little-used exemption to the league’s drug policy, but it’s a precedent-setting one: Any player who can show that replacing hormones is critical to his continued health should be allowed to take them.

The demonization of anabolic steroids and performance-enhancing drugs in sports fails when there is a legitimate medical need for treatment. No longer are anabolic steroids and growth hormone categorically bad or dangerous.

Tom Farrey cites recent studies showing that mild concussions can cause brain damage (pituitary dysfunction) resulting in growth hormone and/or testosterone deficiencies.

Players with testicular disease are not the only ones in need. At the base of the brain, encased in a small, bony shell, is a pea-size gland called the pituitary, which secretes hormones that help regulate everything from mood to energy level. For years, the gland had been overlooked in discussions of head trauma. But in the late 1990s, UCLA neurosurgeon Daniel Kelly noticed that many of his head-injury patients suffered from symptoms associated with pituitary failure: depression, fatigue, anxiety, poor concentration. His findings, which he published in 2000, have led to at least eight studies on three continents, which together involved more than 600 subjects. Each study confirmed the link between traumatic brain injury (TBI) and a loss of hormonal function. The most common deficiencies in men were those of growth hormone, which occurred in 15% to 20% of cases, and of testosterone, in 10% to 15%.

Most of the subjects in these studies had suffered a moderate or severe TBI with some bleeding in the head during a car accident, a fall or some other nonsports-related activity. But, Kelly says, “if you look at the literature, there’s a small but definite component of patients with milder head injuries who also lose hormonal function.” One study, in Italy, found pituitary dysfunction in as many as 37.5% of patients with mild TBI, the same level of injury NFL players typically incur when they get dinged.

Another interesting bit of information from this article includes information from World Anti-Doping Association (WADA) about the number of therapeutic use exemptions granted for testosterone and growth hormone.

International sports federations overseen by WADA have granted 15 therapeutic-use exemptions for HGH and 26 for testosterone.

As a society, we’ve already accepted brain damage as an acceptable consequence of playing certain sports. This likely risk in football from concussions doesn’t make the sport unacceptable. Yet, the dangers from anabolic steroids and growth hormone will likely continue to be unacceptable. At the very least, let’s hope that exemptions for the therapeutic use of steroids and other performance enhancing drugs is permitted in sports to preserve the health of affected athlete’s. (Therapeutic use by definition means the benefit outweighs the risk of harm.)

Thanks to Radley Balko for pointing us to this article. He also makes the following comment on the hypocritical concern given to the health of (football) athletes subjected to drug testing:

The league has banned HGH (on very little evidence), allegedly to protect its players from the harm it allegedly does to their health. But the game of football itself is causing debilitating, potentially life-threatening injuries to players, and we think little of it. These injuries are the entirely predictable result of the slobber-knocking hits that make the game so much fun to watch, both live, and from the six different angles in various highlight packages on SportsCenter.

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.