I may be preaching to the choir in posting this here, but it may prove to be a good sticky, and perhaps it will serve to enlighten a few people. Hope you enjoy.
About a year ago, I watched the documentary Bigger Stronger Faster. Many of the claims made in this documentary seemed incredible at the time. I listened to venerable old doctors say that no study has ever confirmed that steroids, properly used, cause long term harm. I listened to world famous athletes, as well as regular gym rats, describe how steroids were not only useful to athletes, but also useful in the medical treatment of diseases.
All of this contradicted much of what I had been brought up to believe about steroids. When I find that I’m in error about an entire field of knowledge, I quickly get to work, replacing my false beliefs with true ones. That’s exactly what I did in this case. I studied steroids for what must have been about three months, off and on, whenever I had some spare time and Internet access. The following is a collection of thoughts I developed about steroids and their use. Each of them is a reaction to some popular misconception or another that I think was not addressed in Bigger Stronger Faster, or was not addressed well enough. So this can be seen as continuing the work of the documentary that inspired me to write it.
Error #1: Speaking of “steroids” as a whole
Speaking of steroids as a whole is like speaking of recreational drugs as a whole: in many contexts, it only serves to confuse the discussion. Consider the context of the safety and biological effects of drugs. To properly determine the safety and biological effects of drugs, it needs to be specified which drug is being discussed—there’s weed and then there’s heroin. The same point applies to steroids. Some types of anabolic steroids are much more harmful than others. Too often, they are treated as a homogenous class; even Bigger Faster Stronger makes this error. But they are not a homogenous class. On the contrary, there are many types of steroids, many of which are as different from each other as peyote and cocaine—there’s the steroid Anadrol 50, and then there’s Equipoise. Unless one gets specific about the sort of steroid being discussed, blanket claims like “Steroids are dangerous” will have no more merit than the claim that “Drugs are dangerous”. Some drugs are. Some aren’t. Some steroids are dangerous. Some aren’t.
Error #2: Ignoring the importance of dosage in steroid discussions
Ignoring the relevance of dosage is just as harmful to intelligent discussion as ignoring the type of steroid. There’s the case of taking 200mg a week of testosterone, and then there’s the case of taking a gram a week of testosterone. The harm that this steroid can cause is almost entirely dependent on how much is taken (as well as the time frame in which that dosage is taken). Again, the danger of steroids cannot be discussed in the abstract—we must get down to cases and learn all the relevant information. What counts as steroid abuse, versus mere use, will often depend just as much on the dosage of the steroid as it does the type of steroid. Unfortunately, most discussions of steroids ignore this critically important variable.
Error #3: Those who take steroids are taking the easy way out
This is unfortunately a claim that I hear even from those who should know better. To understand why this claim is false, consider the following thought experiment:
Bob and Joe have the same natural recovery abilities. Each can only squat heavy and deadlift heavy once a week.
Bob is mentally stronger than Joe. He can tolerate more pain than Joe. He has more mental fortitude. He does not quit as easily. In particular, if Bob were physically able to squat and deadlift heavy twice a week, he would have the mental strength to take advantage of the additional opportunities to get stronger. Joe, on the other hand, would not and could not endure the additional pain each week even if he were able to handle the additional workload. His physical capacity for work would outstrip his mental capacity to undergo it.
Suppose that Bob does a modest steroid cycle, taking 200mg of testosterone every week along with 400mg of Equipoise every week. This enables him to squat and deadllift heavy twice a week without becoming overtrained. Having the mental strength to take advantage of the benefits the steroids offer, he gets to work, enduring twice as much pain as Joe. Joe, as we have already said, would not have the guts to squat and deadlift heavy twice a week even if he did take the drugs. They would only provide him with a potential that he would waste.
This example shows how steroids are not necessarily an easy way out, but on the contrary, often enable those with exceptional mental strength to apply it and work harder than they would otherwise be able. In many cases, steroids are an enabler of great mental fortitude, not a substitute for it.
There are surely other misconceptions about steroids that I have not addressed. Here, I just wanted to address those that I see most often on Internet message boards. My goal here is modest: to reduce the confusion, if only by a little, about a topic that is important to strength athletes and the general public as well.
-Watchful
About a year ago, I watched the documentary Bigger Stronger Faster. Many of the claims made in this documentary seemed incredible at the time. I listened to venerable old doctors say that no study has ever confirmed that steroids, properly used, cause long term harm. I listened to world famous athletes, as well as regular gym rats, describe how steroids were not only useful to athletes, but also useful in the medical treatment of diseases.
All of this contradicted much of what I had been brought up to believe about steroids. When I find that I’m in error about an entire field of knowledge, I quickly get to work, replacing my false beliefs with true ones. That’s exactly what I did in this case. I studied steroids for what must have been about three months, off and on, whenever I had some spare time and Internet access. The following is a collection of thoughts I developed about steroids and their use. Each of them is a reaction to some popular misconception or another that I think was not addressed in Bigger Stronger Faster, or was not addressed well enough. So this can be seen as continuing the work of the documentary that inspired me to write it.
Error #1: Speaking of “steroids” as a whole
Speaking of steroids as a whole is like speaking of recreational drugs as a whole: in many contexts, it only serves to confuse the discussion. Consider the context of the safety and biological effects of drugs. To properly determine the safety and biological effects of drugs, it needs to be specified which drug is being discussed—there’s weed and then there’s heroin. The same point applies to steroids. Some types of anabolic steroids are much more harmful than others. Too often, they are treated as a homogenous class; even Bigger Faster Stronger makes this error. But they are not a homogenous class. On the contrary, there are many types of steroids, many of which are as different from each other as peyote and cocaine—there’s the steroid Anadrol 50, and then there’s Equipoise. Unless one gets specific about the sort of steroid being discussed, blanket claims like “Steroids are dangerous” will have no more merit than the claim that “Drugs are dangerous”. Some drugs are. Some aren’t. Some steroids are dangerous. Some aren’t.
Error #2: Ignoring the importance of dosage in steroid discussions
Ignoring the relevance of dosage is just as harmful to intelligent discussion as ignoring the type of steroid. There’s the case of taking 200mg a week of testosterone, and then there’s the case of taking a gram a week of testosterone. The harm that this steroid can cause is almost entirely dependent on how much is taken (as well as the time frame in which that dosage is taken). Again, the danger of steroids cannot be discussed in the abstract—we must get down to cases and learn all the relevant information. What counts as steroid abuse, versus mere use, will often depend just as much on the dosage of the steroid as it does the type of steroid. Unfortunately, most discussions of steroids ignore this critically important variable.
Error #3: Those who take steroids are taking the easy way out
This is unfortunately a claim that I hear even from those who should know better. To understand why this claim is false, consider the following thought experiment:
Bob and Joe have the same natural recovery abilities. Each can only squat heavy and deadlift heavy once a week.
Bob is mentally stronger than Joe. He can tolerate more pain than Joe. He has more mental fortitude. He does not quit as easily. In particular, if Bob were physically able to squat and deadlift heavy twice a week, he would have the mental strength to take advantage of the additional opportunities to get stronger. Joe, on the other hand, would not and could not endure the additional pain each week even if he were able to handle the additional workload. His physical capacity for work would outstrip his mental capacity to undergo it.
Suppose that Bob does a modest steroid cycle, taking 200mg of testosterone every week along with 400mg of Equipoise every week. This enables him to squat and deadllift heavy twice a week without becoming overtrained. Having the mental strength to take advantage of the benefits the steroids offer, he gets to work, enduring twice as much pain as Joe. Joe, as we have already said, would not have the guts to squat and deadlift heavy twice a week even if he did take the drugs. They would only provide him with a potential that he would waste.
This example shows how steroids are not necessarily an easy way out, but on the contrary, often enable those with exceptional mental strength to apply it and work harder than they would otherwise be able. In many cases, steroids are an enabler of great mental fortitude, not a substitute for it.
There are surely other misconceptions about steroids that I have not addressed. Here, I just wanted to address those that I see most often on Internet message boards. My goal here is modest: to reduce the confusion, if only by a little, about a topic that is important to strength athletes and the general public as well.
-Watchful
