I have included the full-text since it is behind a paywall.
Dispute Over Muscle-Building Drugs Goes to Court
‘Dr. Huge,’ a brawny former bankruptcy lawyer, reps the SARMs fan base, which says it’s safe; another lawyer says that’s a stretch
Dispute Over Muscle-Building Drugs Goes to Court
In the world of bodybuilding, a former bankruptcy lawyer has gained a following as a YouTube personality nicknamed Dr. Huge, whose videos extol an experimental line of drugs he promotes as a safer alternative to steroids.
“I use them all the time in megadoses, and I’m huge,” says Anthony Hughes, aka Dr. Huge, in one of dozens of clips about his experience consuming the drugs known as Selective Androgen Receptor Modulators, or SARMs.
But the SARMs industry, including one of the large online vendors that licenses its name from Mr. Hughes, has come up against a formidable foe: a trial lawyer who is trying to banish the substance from the online marketplace.
The lawyer, Robert Tauler, represents a rival supplement maker in the muscle-building market. Mr. Tauler says his lawsuits are vital in the absence of much federal oversight of SARMs. His complaints claim that SARMs are more dangerous to the liver than advertised and accuse the vendors of falsely marketing the substance as a safe, natural supplement. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which declined to comment on the litigation, considers SARMs a drug subject to strict approval and labeling rules, but the agency so far has taken few enforcement actions against the vendors.
SARMs represent a new frontier in the Wild West of the multibillion-dollar supplements industry.
Mr. Hughes and other users of SARMs say they accelerate muscle growth, but pose fewer side effects and risks to the liver than anabolic steroids, which are synthetic forms of testosterone. The drug is so new that there is little clinical data on its effects or the industry overall.
Since 2015, Mr. Tauler has filed lawsuits alleging false advertising against dozens of SARMs retailers, which proliferated online in the last five years.
Mr. Tauler—who represents a company called Athletic Xtreme that markets what it says are natural testosterone-boosting and weight-loss supplements—says he is simply filling a void left by the FDA. “A competitor is in a much better position than a federal regulatory agency to police a niche marketplace,” he said.
Many of the SARMs retailers sued agreed to stop selling the pills, according to Mr. Tauler. But a handful of them are flexing for a longer fight, arguing that the lawyer is improperly treading on the FDA’s turf.
In coming weeks, a federal appeals court is weighing a legal challenge that could decide the fate of the SARMs litigation.
SARMs, a chemical compound taken orally, help to stimulate muscle and bone growth like steroids, according to its developers. They don’t generate the hormonal byproducts of steroids associated with acne, baldness and breast enlargement, they say.
Pharmaceutical companies have spent years exploring the potential for SARMs to help patients with muscle-wasting diseases and breast cancer.
But there is little research on the impact of SARMs on healthy, younger people, making their side effects and longer-term health risks unclear.
Like steroids, SARMs are banned by the World Anti-Doping Agency, an international regulator of drugs in sports. But SARMs aren’t covered by the Designer Anabolic Steroid Control Act, a federal law restricting steroids use in athletics.
While clinical trials are pending, the FDA has warned at least one online vendor that SARMs are drugs subject to strict regulation and “present significant potential safety risks.” Selling them without the agency’s approval is unlawful, the FDA says.
But the FDA hasn’t made a priority of cracking down on SARMs sales. Federal officials say such a move requires significant resources. The process of issuing a single company a warning letter—threatening legal action and product seizure—can take months and vendors can elude enforcement by switching names or temporarily suspending sales.
“I wish [the FDA] would do more” to police the market, said Duane D. Miller, a University of Tennessee chemist who was part of the team that developed SARMs in the late 1990s. The university later patented and licensed research that Prof. Miller says is being exploited by online vendors.
Enter Mr. Tauler, who has cast himself as a kind of sheriff of the performance-enhancing supplement industry.
More recently, Mr. Tauler has filed suit against one of the industry’s bigger players, a SARMs vendor that operates under the name Enhanced Athlete Inc.
The face of Enhanced Athlete is Mr. Hughes, a 35-year-old who founded a law firm in Sacramento specializing in consumer bankruptcy.
Mr. Hughes isn’t a defendant in the litigation but owns and licenses out the Enhanced Athlete name.
A couple of years ago, Mr. Hughes wound down his legal practice as he embarked on a new career as “Dr. Huge,” hopscotching the globe promoting SARMs and networking at bodybuilding events. Enhanced Athlete’s YouTube channel, which Mr. Hughes runs, has amassed close to 100,000 subscribers and features the brawny lawyer offering advice about bodybuilding drugs, driving flashy sports cars, and cavorting with bodybuilders and models, some of whom are seen injecting substances into his buttocks.
Part gym rat and part lab rat, Mr. Hughes says he has taken daily doses of SARMs for five years and doesn’t deny their risk for side effects. He has personally dealt with fluctuations in his cholesterol levels, occasional blurry vision and kidney strain, Mr. Hughes says. Overall, he says, SARMs are no more hazardous to one’s health than a diet of fast-food burgers.
In recent days, the dispute between Mr. Tauler and Enhanced Athlete has taken a nasty turn. Mr. Tauler has alleged in court papers that Enhanced Athlete has waged a harassment campaign against him and his firm. Last month, he got a personal restraining order against Enhanced Athlete Director Scott E. Cavell.
In an email, Mr. Cavell called Mr. Tauler “a greedy lawyer trying to intimidate small business owners.” Enhanced Athlete’s lawyers also filed court papers attacking Mr. Tauler’s lawsuits as a “shakedown.” Regarding the restraining order, Mr. Cavell said that what Mr. Tauler called harassment was simply an attempt to encourage its customers to engage in lawful protest speech.
Enhanced Athlete has denied the lawsuit’s allegations and says its product labels have disclaimers saying SARMs are for “research purposes only.”
The question of whether Mr. Tauler’s lawsuits against Enhanced Athlete and other SARMs vendors can proceed in court will soon get a hearing before the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.
The appeals court is looking at whether judges can decide if SARMs marketers are deceiving consumers without more formal input from the FDA. The Ninth Circuit is scheduled to hear arguments on the issue later this year.
In an interview, Mr. Hughes said weightlifters should be able to decide what to put in their bodies, calling the lawsuits against SARMs a “direct attack on freedom in America.”
