Bruce Kneller arrested - could Anthony Roberts be next?

[thick]

What does your gut say lol

Does anyone see a problem by ordering from ag-guys? Any danger with them right now?

 

[Bigkarch]

re

I think the issue is not writing about AAS (if it were Lewellyn, Brink etc would have problems), but developing/selling 'legal' counterparts.

thank you

 

[Bigkarch]

Bruce was not and no investigation was anticipated because he wrote about ass..that is not the case..he was busted for sourcing...nothing less nothing more..now his articels and posts can be used against him..but the alarming shit about, if we give advice, we will be arrested NO...but dont take my advice as concrete..I dont know everthing...so stop with the shit that just because he wrote about aas and gave advice he was busted....

 

[Bob Smith]

Karch, dont get me wrong, I wasnt trying to imply that he was arrested for writing. But I think if you are a prolific writer, then that could certainly at least put you on the radar of the authorities. As is the case here with BK, sourcing is the real matter.

 

[SWALE]

The real problem is that few doctors have the knowledge and experience to treat AAS athletes. And by "treat" I mean protecting their bodies from the ravages of steorid use while they are on, by monitoring their health, and helping to recover their HPTA afterward.

As I always have said, I do not condone smoking, but I sure will provide them with the meds to help them breath--all the while trying to get them to quit. Perfect analogy.

All this is VERY different form providing AAS for the attainment of muscle mass, in absence of wasting disease. THAT violates the law, and professional ethics.

 

[Bob Smith]

THAT violates the law, and professional ethics.

Which leads to another issue that really pisses me off. AAS arent even illegal because of medical reasons, its solely because of sports organizations (USOC, NCAA, etc) that have never been able to police themselves. The govt would never admit that because "steroids kill." Its the same garbage they used in the 1930s to make pot illegal. Again, nothing medical related and everything to do with Mexicans. Both of these are 100% political and nothing medical.

 

[Bob Smith]

The real problem is that few doctors have the knowledge and experience to treat AAS athletes.

Agreed. They buy into the emotional hype and ignore rational thought.

As I always have said, I do not condone smoking, but I sure will provide them with the meds to help them breath--all the while trying to get them to quit. Perfect analogy.

Which is what you do with TRT patients. You monitor them and provide them with the necessary meds to make it all work. Thats all Im asking for in regards to AAS.

All this is VERY different form providing AAS for the attainment of muscle mass, in absence of wasting disease. THAT violates the law, and professional ethics.

It would violate ethics standards if the doc prescribed AAS at high doses. But Im not even arguing that point. Im arguing that many docs will refuse treatment for people who obtain AAS elsewhere.

IMO, AAS usage should be much like cosmetic surgery. Each area has very limited medical use (muscle wasting and reconstructive surgery, respectively), but only one is legal and readily accessible. I think docs should be able to prescribe say, test at 600mg/wk for 10 weeks, and monitor all the appropriate health variables. All of this would be outside of the insurance companies, just like cosmetic surgery is, and patients health would be better protected. No black market products, no worries over contamination or foreign matter, no worries about the police beating in your door. And in the end there would be fewer negative health consequences, the justice system could focus on real criminals, and everyone wins.

But that would be the rational thing to do, and why I ever expect the govt to act rationally is beyond me. I should have thrown out that idea when I learned that Santa Claus wasnt real.

 

[Millard]

The real problem is that few doctors have the knowledge and experience to treat AAS athletes. And by "treat" I mean protecting their bodies from the ravages of steorid use while they are on, by monitoring their health, and helping to recover their HPTA afterward.

As I always have said, I do not condone smoking, but I sure will provide them with the meds to help them breath--all the while trying to get them to quit. Perfect analogy.

Agreed on this. Perfectly logical medical care.

All this is VERY different form providing AAS for the attainment of muscle mass, in absence of wasting disease. THAT violates the law, and professional ethics.

Just to clarify, I wasn't suggesting doctors should prescribe AAS while making my points regarding the hypocrisy frequently displayed in medical practice.

 

[Millard]

IMO, AAS usage should be much like cosmetic surgery. Each area has very limited medical use (muscle wasting and reconstructive surgery, respectively), but only one is legal and readily accessible. I think docs should be able to prescribe say, test at 600mg/wk for 10 weeks, and monitor all the appropriate health variables.

I feel that IF medicine is to be practiced with the physiological health of the patient as the overriding concern, then physicians should not "prescribe" medical treatments, pharmaceutical protocols, or surgical procedures that increase the likelihood of harmful outcomes. This would mean that most forms of cosmetic surgery (i.e. liposuction, breast implants, gluteal implants, etc) would be outside the scope of medicine. This would only be consistent with the supposed goal of optimizing physiological health. This is, from what I understand, SWALE's position on the matter. I'm sure he will correct me if I'm wrong.

Now, there is some debate as to whether medicine should encompass the treatment of psychological health in the absence of any physiological medical condition with procedures, protocols, drugs that are not medically indicated. E.g. supraphysiological dosages of AAS and/or cosmetic surgery to improve body image.

Now, IF medicine is to fully encompass treatment of psychological health (e.g. body image dissatisfaction), your argument is sound. After all, it is hypocritical for medicine to embrace cosmetic surgery but deny the medical prescribing of AAS for bodybuilding purposes.

Not saying that AAS are the best treatment option, but certainly no less dangerous or risky than cosmetic surgical procedures, etc.

---

At any rate two things that medicine should provide to licit or illicit AAS-using patients are:

(1) medical monitoring of their health;
(2) medical treatment for conditions arising from AAS use

This is an essential, basic duty of a medical practictioner. And such a standard of care is deserved by anyone paying for medical services.

 

[Millard]

All this is VERY different form providing AAS for the attainment of muscle mass, in absence of wasting disease. THAT violates the law, and professional ethics.

Isn't the law irrelevant when it comes to medical ethics?

 

[SWALE]

Not in this case.

 

[SWALE]

I think you meant to ask if Anthony Roberts may be arrested AGAIN. From what I hear, he is already an ex-con.

So he gets out of prison and decides to take up a career promoting illegal activities, practices medicine wihtout a license, takes illegal drugs, etc. SMART!

 

[thick]

Sucks the media has frozen the terrible image of AAS into the general public. They really should be treated at least as equal as f'n implants
Which is what you do with TRT patients. You monitor them and provide them with the necessary meds to make it all work. Thats all Im asking for in regards to AAS.

It would violate ethics standards if the doc prescribed AAS at high doses. But Im not even arguing that point. Im arguing that many docs will refuse treatment for people who obtain AAS elsewhere.

IMO, AAS usage should be much like cosmetic surgery. Each area has very limited medical use (muscle wasting and reconstructive surgery, respectively), but only one is legal and readily accessible. I think docs should be able to prescribe say, test at 600mg/wk for 10 weeks, and monitor all the appropriate health variables. All of this would be outside of the insurance companies, just like cosmetic surgery is, and patients health would be better protected. No black market products, no worries over contamination or foreign matter, no worries about the police beating in your door. And in the end there would be fewer negative health consequences, the justice system could focus on real criminals, and everyone wins.

But that would be the rational thing to do, and why I ever expect the govt to act rationally is beyond me. I should have thrown out that idea when I learned that Santa Claus wasnt real.[/QUOTE]

 

[thick]

unfortunately, i dont think so

Isn't the law irrelevant when it comes to medical ethics?

 

[Bigkarch]

he likes x

 

[Bigkarch]

yes he's an ex convict ...im sure that is not in his book

 

[Deacon]

you mena he didnt put the ex convict down in his biography?

I cant believe he would forget that

 

[Millard]

Not in this case.

unfortunately, i dont think so

I think it is unfortunate, although completely understandable, that physicians must allow laws to influence medical care.

 

[SWALE]

Where on earth has Anthony Roberts' Parole Officer been?

 

[The Dark]

Yeah, no doubt. I know BS and I are giving doctors a hard time, but really it is not all their fault. Even if they wanted to provide their patients with effective medical treatment for conditions resulting from illicit AAS use, they risk being reprimanded by the Medical Examiners Board or even risk losing their license. AAS use is highly stigmatized and politicized, and Boards are known to be influenced by politics over scientific evidence or optimal patient care.

I think we also need to drag the physicians back to earth - they are not all-knowing. Some may know their own speciality well but, in an era of specialization, few know a lot about other areas. In many areas of medicine they are as ill-informed as are the public and no only what they read or hear. What makes it bad is that their words carry weight and they usually do not hesitate to make pronouncements with little knowledge. [In all honesty, I must admit that members of my own profession are not immune to this.] That is not to say that the so-called "experts" are not full of it; you do not have to look far to see many peer-reviewed publications by MDs who should know better that are full of glaring mistatements about AAS.

For instance, one of my favorite recent quotes that highlights this is from an article by two MDs: "The abuse of AAS is still rampant today, as evidenced by its mention in the 2004 State of the Union address by President Bush, the recent disqualification of 20 international weightlifters before the Olympic games in Athens, and the suspension of several Olympic athletes in Athens for "doping."

Just stop and smell the idiocy for a moment. The evidence of rampant AAS abuse is the president's SOTU address and 20 some athletes getting caught using. This was in a regional medical journal that other MDs read for "education" from two MDs who are fairly well-published in the AAS literature.