Leonardo Noto
New Member
Howdy, I'm a physician turned author and I thought that you guys might get a kick out of the passage from my new book that is listed below.
Leonardo Noto
leonardonoto.com | Physician, Paratrooper, Boxer/Grappler Turned Grumpy Old Writer! or follow me on Twitter @DrLeonardoNoto
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to pause for a moment to present my views on steroid use to the reader. Steroid abuse has recently become a hot topic with the Barry Bonds/Roger Clemens/Major League Baseball steroid scandal making the front pages of newspapers from coast to coast. I have absolutely no sympathy for Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, or any other athlete who uses steroids to give himself an unfair advantage over his competitors. These cheaters should be punished and, as far as I am concerned, the media and the government have been far too soft on them. However, the criminalization of anabolic steroid use by laypersons for cosmetic reasons seems to me to be an extremely illogical policy for several reasons.
Anabolic steroid use was made illegal in 1990 by Congress in response to a public outcry against the widespread use of steroids by professional and Olympic athletes to gain an unfair advantage over their competitors. Other concerns regarding anabolic steroid use at the time were a plethora of postulated negative health effects including liver cancer, ‘roid-rage,’ and permanent sterility. Congress addressed the issue during a set of highly publicized hearings after which, against the recommendation of the American Medical Association, Congress took the politically popular step of classifying anabolic steroids as Schedule III Narcotics. The other Schedule III Narcotic drugs include ketamine (an hallucinogenic anesthetic), barbiturates, and Vicodin — drugs that are abused for the purpose of producing euphoria (i.e., to get high) and have nothing in common with anabolic steroids whatsoever. Nonetheless, this action by Congress made the recreational use of anabolic steroids punishable by imprisonment according to the same laws that govern the abuse of the other Schedule III Drugs.
As is the case of most substance prohibitions, the new law was both costly to enforce, a financial godsend to smugglers and organized crime, and devastating to the lives of American citizens who were unfortunate enough to by caught using anabolic steroids. The anabolic steroid prohibition has been an utter failure in its original aim of decreasing steroid use by competitive athletes — athletes who now abuse designer steroids and alternative performance enhancing drugs instead, such as growth hormone, drugs that evade detection during screening. In addition, since professional athletes are wealthy enough to obtain their anabolic steroids from pseudo-legitimate sources, such as from corrupt physicians or by traveling to countries where steroids are legal during the off-season (Thailand and Mexico are both popular vacation destinations for professional athletes), the overwhelming majority of those punished by our legal system for steroid use have been laypersons who were using anabolic steroids for cosmetic reasons, not the cheating athletes that the law was intended to punish.
As for the health concerns expressed by Congress in 1990, it is true that some steroids, the 17-alpha alkylated drugs, are liver toxic (but still most likely not cancer inducing); but they are a minority of the available anabolic steroids — even these 17-alpha alkylated drugs seldom cause adverse liver consequences, even in the very few persons who have abused outrageous quantities for exceedingly long periods of time, such as the professional bodybuilders from the 1970s and 1980s, the overwhelming majority of whom are quite healthy today in spite of their decades of anabolic steroid abuse. There is no scientific evidence that the postulated ‘roid-rage’ phenomenon exists and, indeed, the fact that there has never been a ‘roid-rage’ epidemic notwithstanding the fact that millions of Americans have used these drugs strongly suggests that ‘roid-rage’ does not exist. The concern that anabolic steroids might induce permanent sterility has similarly proven unfounded, although some users are temporarily infertile during use. This discovery that has led to scientific interest in the possibility of using anabolic steroids as a male birth control pill, similar to the way that estrogenic steroids are used in females for this purpose. Other proven side-effects of anabolic steroid use include a rise in LDL (‘bad cholesterol’) and decrease in HDL (‘good cholesterol’) during time of use, increased acne, and accelerated hair loss in persons who are genetically susceptible to male pattern baldness — but none of these side-effects would seem to justify our country’s policy of punishing and sometimes imprisoning cosmetic users of these substances.
It is difficult to reconcile the fact that we live in a society in which cosmetic anabolic steroid users risk prosecution when unnecessary major surgeries for cosmetic purposes, cigarette smoking, and recreational alcohol abuse are socially acceptable. All of the above, with the exception of perhaps moderate alcohol use (1-2 drinks per day with no binge drinking), are more dangerous than anabolic steroid use by virtually any imaginable standard; yet all of these practices are perfectly legal. For the record, I no longer use any form of anabolic hormones and I have not for many years. Nonetheless, I stand convinced that putting cosmetic users of anabolic steroids in jail is a great and senseless injustice and a waste of taxpayers’ money. Perhaps a more intelligent policy would be for physician-supervised cosmetic use of anabolic steroids. After all, if a woman is permitted to undergo a major unnecessary surgery to get bigger breasts, why shouldn’t a man be able to go to his physician and get a prescription for an anabolic steroid to get bigger biceps?
Leonardo Noto
leonardonoto.com | Physician, Paratrooper, Boxer/Grappler Turned Grumpy Old Writer! or follow me on Twitter @DrLeonardoNoto
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to pause for a moment to present my views on steroid use to the reader. Steroid abuse has recently become a hot topic with the Barry Bonds/Roger Clemens/Major League Baseball steroid scandal making the front pages of newspapers from coast to coast. I have absolutely no sympathy for Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, or any other athlete who uses steroids to give himself an unfair advantage over his competitors. These cheaters should be punished and, as far as I am concerned, the media and the government have been far too soft on them. However, the criminalization of anabolic steroid use by laypersons for cosmetic reasons seems to me to be an extremely illogical policy for several reasons.
Anabolic steroid use was made illegal in 1990 by Congress in response to a public outcry against the widespread use of steroids by professional and Olympic athletes to gain an unfair advantage over their competitors. Other concerns regarding anabolic steroid use at the time were a plethora of postulated negative health effects including liver cancer, ‘roid-rage,’ and permanent sterility. Congress addressed the issue during a set of highly publicized hearings after which, against the recommendation of the American Medical Association, Congress took the politically popular step of classifying anabolic steroids as Schedule III Narcotics. The other Schedule III Narcotic drugs include ketamine (an hallucinogenic anesthetic), barbiturates, and Vicodin — drugs that are abused for the purpose of producing euphoria (i.e., to get high) and have nothing in common with anabolic steroids whatsoever. Nonetheless, this action by Congress made the recreational use of anabolic steroids punishable by imprisonment according to the same laws that govern the abuse of the other Schedule III Drugs.
As is the case of most substance prohibitions, the new law was both costly to enforce, a financial godsend to smugglers and organized crime, and devastating to the lives of American citizens who were unfortunate enough to by caught using anabolic steroids. The anabolic steroid prohibition has been an utter failure in its original aim of decreasing steroid use by competitive athletes — athletes who now abuse designer steroids and alternative performance enhancing drugs instead, such as growth hormone, drugs that evade detection during screening. In addition, since professional athletes are wealthy enough to obtain their anabolic steroids from pseudo-legitimate sources, such as from corrupt physicians or by traveling to countries where steroids are legal during the off-season (Thailand and Mexico are both popular vacation destinations for professional athletes), the overwhelming majority of those punished by our legal system for steroid use have been laypersons who were using anabolic steroids for cosmetic reasons, not the cheating athletes that the law was intended to punish.
As for the health concerns expressed by Congress in 1990, it is true that some steroids, the 17-alpha alkylated drugs, are liver toxic (but still most likely not cancer inducing); but they are a minority of the available anabolic steroids — even these 17-alpha alkylated drugs seldom cause adverse liver consequences, even in the very few persons who have abused outrageous quantities for exceedingly long periods of time, such as the professional bodybuilders from the 1970s and 1980s, the overwhelming majority of whom are quite healthy today in spite of their decades of anabolic steroid abuse. There is no scientific evidence that the postulated ‘roid-rage’ phenomenon exists and, indeed, the fact that there has never been a ‘roid-rage’ epidemic notwithstanding the fact that millions of Americans have used these drugs strongly suggests that ‘roid-rage’ does not exist. The concern that anabolic steroids might induce permanent sterility has similarly proven unfounded, although some users are temporarily infertile during use. This discovery that has led to scientific interest in the possibility of using anabolic steroids as a male birth control pill, similar to the way that estrogenic steroids are used in females for this purpose. Other proven side-effects of anabolic steroid use include a rise in LDL (‘bad cholesterol’) and decrease in HDL (‘good cholesterol’) during time of use, increased acne, and accelerated hair loss in persons who are genetically susceptible to male pattern baldness — but none of these side-effects would seem to justify our country’s policy of punishing and sometimes imprisoning cosmetic users of these substances.
It is difficult to reconcile the fact that we live in a society in which cosmetic anabolic steroid users risk prosecution when unnecessary major surgeries for cosmetic purposes, cigarette smoking, and recreational alcohol abuse are socially acceptable. All of the above, with the exception of perhaps moderate alcohol use (1-2 drinks per day with no binge drinking), are more dangerous than anabolic steroid use by virtually any imaginable standard; yet all of these practices are perfectly legal. For the record, I no longer use any form of anabolic hormones and I have not for many years. Nonetheless, I stand convinced that putting cosmetic users of anabolic steroids in jail is a great and senseless injustice and a waste of taxpayers’ money. Perhaps a more intelligent policy would be for physician-supervised cosmetic use of anabolic steroids. After all, if a woman is permitted to undergo a major unnecessary surgery to get bigger breasts, why shouldn’t a man be able to go to his physician and get a prescription for an anabolic steroid to get bigger biceps?
. if using drugs just to look good is not a crime, why is it to perform better profesionally, or just to feel better. 
