Why are Steroids not allowed in UFC? Are they really bad for health?

[giusti825]

It's not about the athletes though. It's bigger than them.

It's so when those few guy takes 10000 the recommended dose and gets liver or heart problems and dies, or that one guy that genetically reacts poorly and dies, the promoter and the sport can say "I didn't have anything to do with that."

That's completely understandable. You can't have a sport tolerating things that lead to athletes' deaths.

It's the same reason we have heroin laws. Do heroin laws actually lower heroin usage? Probably not. But society has to have some level of decency that it won't stoop below. Legal and regulated heroin is one of those levels. Intentionally massacring enemy civilians en masse until they just give up or are completely wiped off the face of the Earth is pretty logical and would work. But is that a level that we want to stoop to? Or are we better than that?

I could quadruple my paycheck and cut my work hours in half by doing gay for pay. It's the most "logical" career choice. But that's just not a level that I want to stoop to.

Legalized steroids in sports is another one of those levels that we can't stoop to.

do you believe that the athletes who pass the tests are natty?

if not, then your argument boils down to 'theyre going to use steroids, but we have to pretend to try to stop it to avoid legal liability rather than actually preserving the health and safety of the athletes....

you are making value judgements in each of your examples that reeks of bias from unwarranted social stigma.....much like steroids have been this whole thread.....

legalizing steroids isnt the 'stoop to' decision if it makes the athletes safer.....

gay for pay is an individual choice....if someone wants to make money that way, and they conduct business honestly.....who is anyone to judge them?

you are making moral arguments based on what 'feels right' to you because you dont like the alternative that is actually safer and more preactical and moral in the real world.....

 

[superpunch]

do you believe that the athletes who pass the tests are natty?

if not, then your argument boils down to 'theyre going to use steroids, but we have to pretend to try to stop it to avoid legal liability rather than actually preserving the health and safety of the athletes....

you are making value judgements in each of your examples that reeks of bias from unwarranted social stigma.....much like steroids have been this whole thread.....

legalizing steroids isnt the 'stoop to' decision if it makes the athletes safer.....

gay for pay is an individual choice....if someone wants to make money that way, and they conduct business honestly.....who is anyone to judge them?

you are making moral arguments based on what 'feels right' to you because you dont like the alternative that is actually safer and more preactical and moral in the real world.....

Why don't you kill people for a living? It's a logical career choice. But it "feels wrong", right?

Same way for everything you just asked. Feelings. That's what it comes down to. And 99% of the population feels the same way I do. Since 99% of the population feels that way, that's what the sport's steroid policy should bel

 

[superpunch]

do you believe that the athletes who pass the tests are natty?

Of course not. I think 90% of the athletes are on something. Don't be ridiculous.

 

[giusti825]

By definition, morals aren't logical. That's why they're subjective instead of objective.. There's absolutely nothing wrong with having fallacies in your morals because of that.

Morality is objective, values are subjective.....

it is immoral to cause undue harm or to fail to prevent undue harm when it is within your ability to do so.....

in this instance, peoples values and biases against peds (alot from brain washing and social programming) is clouding their moral judgements.....

we cant stop peds.....this much is obvious.....

we can make peds safer for athletes by letting them openly use safe drugs under the supervision of professionals....this would mitigate risk and harm to athletes....

the only moral action is clear ....make it safer....

to not do so is just being malicious and causing athletes undue harm because you have a problem accepting reality.....

 

[giusti825]

Why don't you kill people for a living? It's a logical career choice. But it "feels wrong", right?

Same way for everything you just asked. Feelings. That's what it comes down to. And 99% of the population feels the same way I do. Since 99% of the population feels that way, that's what the sport's steroid policy should bel

it would cause undue harm......thus immoral....

Basing important moral decisions on illogical premises (feelings, biases) is exactly how we wind up in the situation we are in now.

The percentage of pro athletes who are natty is statistically insignificant, yet almost none of them ever fail a drug test.

The drug tests come back saying 'natty, natty natty' yet there is a man standing there weighing 265 lbs at 15% body fat.....

Honesty and morality help solve problems instead of just sweeping them under the rug.....

forcing these athletes to get their drugs from chinese basements and rogue veterinarians is ridiculous in an era where we have the technology to make their use safer and mitigate permanent risk and side effects.....

 

[Robbie Corleone]

Can't be a serious thread surely.

 

[superpunch]

Morality is objective, values are subjective.....

Seeing as values are subjective.. Subjective and objective aren't interchangeable terms .. and if one is derived from the other....

it is immoral to cause undue harm or to fail to prevent undue harm when it is within your ability to do so.....

Your morality is different from 99% of the population. That's just how it is.

If you want a successful operation, you don't tailor to that 1% unless they're really, really rich.

 

[superpunch]

it would cause undue harm......thus immoral....

Undue harm is a moral value that you're willing sacrifice expediency and effectiveness for, then. Legal steroids in sports is exactly the same for other people, 99% of people.

 

[Mike Haggar]

No.

And most people here know fuck and all about them.

Do your own research there's plenty of forums where people know what they're talking about.

 

[Rea_ctor]

I see steroids being allowed in bodybuilding, physique, crossfit, powerlifting/strongman sports.

Are steroids really bad for health? Sorry I failed to understand this. What's the worst that can do to a human other than the mentioned side effects? I see many new crossfit athletes using medication such as testosterone boosters that are related.

Arnold Schwarzeneggar took steroids in his bodybuilding prime. Now he is living a healthy life.

Someone please explain about steroids.

Steroids aren't allowed in crossfit at all, shit testing does mean they're allowed...

 

[giusti825]

Seeing as values are subjective.. Subjective and objective aren't interchangeable terms .. and if one is derived from the other....



Your morality is different from 99% of the population. That's just how it is.

If you want a successful operation, you don't tailor to that 1% unless they're really, really rich.

morality is objective.....whatever causes the least harm causes the least harm....

people who believe prohibition is the moral solution either dont understand the reality of the situation, or would rather see athletes who use peds suffer because they dont agree with them....despite the fact that they're all on drugs....

Its spiteful and repugnant....

 

[superpunch]

it would cause undue harm......thus immoral....

You know what it really comes down to? Appearances. Keeping things out of sight.

Society is full of stuff that we wish didn't exist and will always exist, no matter what. But by keeping a lot of it out of sight, out of mind, we get to enjoy living an illusion of a decent society. We take the blue pill in the Matrix and live a happier life than the guy that took the red pill. And there's something to be said for the value in that.

Versus

 

[giusti825]

Steroids aren't allowed in crossfit at all, shit testing does mean they're allowed...

its all shit testing....and in a way, that does mean its allowed.....

If its illegal to do something, but there is no way to enforce the law, that something is legal in practice....

PEDs are being used just as frequently in pro sports as they would if they were legal. The problem is, there is no way to tell who is using them with any reasonable accuracy.....

If you cant tell who is using, you cant stop the ones who are using, in that instance, which is the case now, everyone uses.....

We cant stop them.....but we can make them safer and we should try to do so by being honest about it.....

 

[giusti825]

You know what it really comes down to? Appearances. Keeping things out of sight.

Society is full of stuff that we wish didn't exist and will always exist, no matter what. But by keeping a lot of it out of sight, out of mind, we get to enjoy living an illusion of a decent society. We take the blue pill in the Matrix and live a happier life than the guy that took the red pill. And there's something to be said for the value in that.

Versus

just because we dont examine it doesnt mean it doesnt exist....what we are really not examining is ourselves if we think its better to maintain an unproductive lie over honest and moral solutions....

 

[Levi_]

I'm just using hyperbole, obviously. I have no idea what the real numbers are.

But why would you base your opinion on hyperbole and assumed numbers?

You are overlooking fundamental flaws in the structure of scientific research in a capitalist society.....

Who the fuck is going to pay for studies into PEDs in sports?

What athlete is going to be honest about it?

Documentaries are best suited to subject material that cant get funding for in-depth lattitudinal and longitudinal studies.....

"The drug tests are very easy to beat.....very easy...." - Don Caitlan, Founder, UCLA Drug Lab

Check out the documentaries Icarus and Bigger, Stronger, Faster.....they actually give honest answers to the nature of PEDs and athletic competition.....governments help their athletes dope for the olympics.....

I wasn't talking about difficulties in getting the research done; that wasn't relevant to what I was saying. Research regarding the harm of roids would have to be controlled to be valid, so the honesty of athletes is also irrelevant; it wouldn't be based on self-report. Again, the level of harm cannot be determined based on what groups and individuals have seen or claimed; anecdotal evidence is not remotely reliable. Making the claim that it is safe at this point is pissing into the wind.

What I was saying as far as the prevalence of use was that you can't make reliable assumptions about the percentages of people using because no one really knows for sure, and again, "come on man, it's obvious," or claims made by individuals in documentaries don't tell us anything other than a lot of people in sports probably use them. That isn't terribly meaningful given the wide range that could cover- is it 30%, 40, 60, 90? We don't know, and the differences really would characterize the situation differently if we really knew.

 

[superpunch]

its all shit testing....and in a way, that does mean its allowed.....

If its illegal to do something, but there is no way to enforce the law, that something is legal in practice....

PEDs are being used just as frequently in pro sports as they would if they were legal. The problem is, there is no way to tell who is using them with any reasonable accuracy.....

If you cant tell who is using, you cant stop the ones who are using, in that instance, which is the case now, everyone uses.....

We cant stop them.....but we can make them safer and we should try to do so by being honest about it.....

USADA isn't stopping steroids in their tracks. But this is just wrong:

PEDs are being used just as frequently in pro sports as they would if they were legal.

Look at all the guys who's careers have tanked since USADA started. Some really big names. Look at the physique change in Overeem. USADA is having a HUGE effect in how frequently guys use roids.

A lot of it isn't even the testing but the severity of the punishments. Is it worth losing 2 years, 4 years, or more of your career at a time? Guys have to wonder. And they are wondering.

 

[superpunch]

just because we dont examine it doesnt mean it doesnt exist....what we are really not examining is ourselves if we think its better to maintain an unproductive lie over honest and moral solutions....

That's preferable for me and 99% of the population.

 

[giusti825]

That's preferable for me and 99% of the population.

i have a bit more faith in humanity than you do....

 

[superpunch]

i have a bit more faith in humanity than you do....

Your side will win but you won't see any of the benefits in your lifetime. You're going to live a lifetime of misery. Meanwhile, I get to enjoy a slowly collapsing system. But I get to enjoy it. Who's really winning here?

 

[VVarhead]

This thread is so fucking stupid, just stop bumping it...