Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Here's an interesting question. If it's proven that there are long term benefits to moderate steroid use, is it ethical to ban them for non competitive athletes?



Unless I'm misunderstanding, I don't think steroids are banned for non-competitive athletes. Who would test them and why? They're not competing anywhere.


As a manner of speaking, the word “banned” indicates a rule forbidding use in formal competition, under penalty of disqualification.

But, in the medical sense, there are a number of layers that restrict access to substances, even over the counter drugs are subject to regulation and laws, as well as prescription drugs, research chemicals, known toxins, and hazardous chemicals. All for many different reasons.

The class of anabolic steroids that body builders and weight lifters use are definitely going to land you in jail if you have them or provide them to a peer.

It doesn’t mean they are completely unavailable, but really, they are almost entirely outlawed to the same degree as crack, meth and so many other drugs around the world. Often veterinarians are the black or grey market source.

They cause harm, to the point of leaving behind a wake of debilitating destruction among the lives of users, causing awful damage that emerges later, in ruinously subtle ways, or suddenly killing without warning, by way of cardiac problems or strokes.

People use them, the results can be frightening and permanent, and a few years later, deadly.


> They cause harm, to the point of leaving behind a wake of debilitating destruction among the lives of users, causing awful damage that emerges later, in ruinously subtle ways, or suddenly killing without warning, by way of cardiac problems or strokes.

> People use them, the results can be frightening and permanent, and a few years later, deadly.

This is exaggerated. There is an increased risk of cardiovascular disease, and maybe irritability at high doses. Closer to the risks of taking a medication than a street drug.


>Closer to the risks of taking a medication than a street drug.

Which street drugs? The comparison reminds of making the distinction between "natural" and "chemical" drugs. Sounds nice if you want to convey an image but not a sensible generalization. You will find quite a lot of street drugs that are less dangerous then some types of medication and vice versa.


Everything besides cannabis? The most prevalent street drugs besides cannabis are cocaine, heroin, ecstacy, and methamphetamine.

All of those are quite a bit more dangerous than the average medicine you get prescribed by our doctor just because of addiction potential and inconsistent quality of the end product.


What is an average medication? Its an extremely broad generalization that doesnt make much sense. It includes everything from chemotherapeutic agents over Fentanyl over Aspirin to coal tablets. There are quite a few medications that are a lot more dangerous than the drugs on your list. And they are more dangerous for a reason, as they still have fewer side effects then the illness they are trying to combat.

Unless you are talking about the purity of the product, i dont see a sensible case for the comparison of street drugs with pharmaceuticals.


lol they are illegal... they are banned for citizens by the government.


This is incorrect. What's banned (in many western countries) is distribution unless there is a medical prescription.

But nothing prevents people from using them, same with other drugs like cocaine and heroine.


It's misleading to say "nothing prevents people from using them" if it's a crime to buy them, and if it's a crime for someone to sell them to you.

Furthermore, for other drugs like cocaine and heroine, in many countries not only distribution is banned, but also possession and use itself.


Possession is also illegal. At least in the US and many other countries.


Which is exactly the definition of being "banned".


In my country at least I need a prescription from a doctor if I want to take antibiotics, does that mean they're banned here?


I've never heard of someone being charged with possession of antibiotics without a prescription. That happens with steroids.


Is that right? How come you can find them in pharmacies?


Steroids are not legal lol


They are legal medicine. If you suffer from serious disease, doctor will prescribe them to you.

Now interesting question is: if someone wants to have big muscles - is it serious disease? In some sense it's similar to silicon breast implants - in both cases it's mental 'disease'/disfunction/discomfort - so some doctor's help is needed. Or surgery due to bad looking nose eg.


Steroids generally prescribed for disease (corticosteroids) are not the same as Anabolic steroids. Same class/grouping but different molecular structure and it's worth making the distinction when talking about the legality of them


Testosterone is used to treat hypogonadism and probably other conditions, so I'm not sure what your point is.


I just thought in the legality discussion its worth making sure people are talking about the same class of steroids as they are already treated and classified differently under the law.

Anabolic steroids are a Class C drug in the UK so in general are illegal to possess and distribute unless prescribed.

  Steroids are not legal lol 
  They are legal medicine
So both these statements are true and false depending on which class of steroid you are talking about or if you are talking about the group as a whole. So to have a productive discussion on the legality you need to be specific about which class and not group them together.

Anabolic steroids are illegal in the US and UK (unless otherwise prescribed) whilst most of the other classes in the UK at least are not illegal to possess or even distribute


> Anabolic steroids are a Class C drug in the UK so in general are illegal to possess and distribute unless prescribed.

So they are legal - only access is controlled (prescription from doctor).

Alcohol and cigarettes are legal - only access is controlled (age).

Violence is legal - only access is controlled (police).

Tortures are not legal - no one has access to do that.

Capital punishment is not legal (in some countries) - no one has access to do that.


Exactly. Testosterone is just a medicine and it's even prescribed to old ladies if their condition need that (I know one such case). Testosterone gives a lot of power when your body is weak after some other treatment. As a side effect (or maybe desired when due to disease you're losing your muscles) is getting more muscles and energy.


Unfortunately it's not proven; nor is it completely risk-free.

But let's assume it was, I don't think ethics ever came into question when making substances illegal.


Depends on the drug. Testosterone is very well studied and has been for decades.


There is still a huge lack of information regarding long term (or even short term) exogenous Testosterone usage - and again, it's definitely not without risks or unforeseen circumstances - this is for both low and high dosages.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: