Steroids and Heavy Weight Boxing...
Daniel Richardson
I was just wondering if Heavy Weight Boxers like Mike Tyson, Lennox
Lewis, Riddick Bowe, etc. are tested before each fight in order to see if
they have been taking steroids. I know that steroid use is a serious
problem among professional body builders, and boxers like the ones that I
have mentioned above are really starting to look a bit like professional
body builders!
If any one has any information on this subject please post it or E-Mail
it to me.
Is it possible that these guys are taking 'roids?
-Dan
fzabot
Riddick Bowe when did he start looking like a body builder?
-Rob
Big D at SC
In article
<Pine.PMDF.3.91.9606202...@cluster.cwu.edu>, Daniel
Richardson <rich...@cluster.cwu.edu> wrote:
I suppose it is possible, but testing them just prior to a fight would be
pointless, since steroids are a training drug, and not a day-of-the-event
drug. That's how a lot of athletes who DO get tested get away with it.
There are also growth hormones (usually taken from cadavers - yes, dead
bodies) that show up on no test because they are naturally occuring.
There have been boxers who took steroids, and since they were illegal and
they took them without the benefit of a doctor, they caused themselves
permanent damage.
Big D at SC
Big D at SC
> > Is it possible that these guys are taking 'roids?
> > -Dan
>
> Riddick Bowe when did he start looking like a body builder?
>
> -Rob
Not like a body builder, but if you compare him today to the really smooth
and flabby amateur he was in Seoul, you might wonder. And what about
Tyson... the guy is PLATED with muscles, yet never lifts weights. HOW DO
YOU GET a physique like that?
Big D at SC
faro...@comteck.com
> Daniel Richardson <rich...@cluster.cwu.edu> wrote:
> > I was just wondering if Heavy Weight Boxers like Mike Tyson, Lennox
> >Lewis, Riddick Bowe, etc. are tested before each fight in order to see if
> >they have been taking steroids. I know that steroid use is a serious
> >problem among professional body builders, and boxers like the ones that I
> >have mentioned above are really starting to look a bit like professional
> >body builders!
> > If any one has any information on this subject please post it or E-Mail
> >it to me.
> >
> > -Dan
> >
>
> Riddick Bowe when did he start looking like a body builder?
>
> -Rob
>
>
Withersppon began looking like Mr. Universe. and George Foreman
was mistaken for Sylvester Stallone.
Fred(Faroukey)
fzabot
ddma...@cats.ucsc.edu (Big D at SC) wrote:
>In article <4qda5p$r...@aphex.direct.ca>, fzabot <fza...@direct.ca> wrote:
>
>> > -Dan
>>
>> Riddick Bowe when did he start looking like a body builder?
>>
>> -Rob
>
>and flabby amateur he was in Seoul, you might wonder. And what about
>Tyson... the guy is PLATED with muscles, yet never lifts weights. HOW DO
>YOU GET a physique like that?
>
>Big D at SC
If you give anyone 8 year's there body will change.
-Rob
Rosaria Locasso
In article 21069608...@std-01.ucsc.edu, ddma...@cats.ucsc.edu (Big D at SC) writes:
> In article <4qda5p$r...@aphex.direct.ca>, fzabot <fza...@direct.ca> wrote:
>
> > > Is it possible that these guys are taking 'roids?
> > > -Dan
> >
> > Riddick Bowe when did he start looking like a body builder?
> >
> > -Rob
>
> Not like a body builder, but if you compare him today to the really smooth
> and flabby amateur he was in Seoul, you might wonder. And what about
> Tyson... the guy is PLATED with muscles, yet never lifts weights. HOW DO
> YOU GET a physique like that?
>
> Big D at SC
Tyson is naturally endowed. Also, I'll bet he does a whole lot of
pushups, chinups, situps, heavy bag, etc. to enhance his natural physique,
and running to stay lean. I have always thought that most boxers eschew
weight lifting as it is said to make you tight and slow while what you want
is to be loose and quick. Has that changed? Do most boxers lift nowadays?
About steroids, my understanding is that one doesn't just take steroids and
get big, any more than one eats protein and gets big. I don't know the
mechanism involved but I think steroids allow a greater muscle gain for a
given amount of lifting. Someone can correct me on this if I'm wrong.
Rosaria Locasso
Eric Taylor
Big D at SC (ddma...@cats.ucsc.edu) wrote:
: I suppose it is possible, but testing them just prior to a fight would be
: pointless, since steroids are a training drug, and not a day-of-the-event
: drug. That's how a lot of athletes who DO get tested get away with it.
: There are also growth hormones (usually taken from cadavers - yes, dead
: bodies) that show up on no test because they are naturally occuring.
: There have been boxers who took steroids, and since they were illegal and
: they took them without the benefit of a doctor, they caused themselves
: permanent damage.
It's somewhat pointless to only use steroids in training. You want the
steroids to be in your body the day of your contest.
Steroids can give you muscle gains a number of ways. Via
anti-catabolic effects, via water retention, by helping low body fat.
However, one things is for sure. After about 2 weeks when you stop
cycling (more or less depending on the drug) you will lose nearly all
the gains you have made while on the drugs. Steroids are not really a
training drug. They are competition drugs. You go on and off cycles
but one thing is for sure. The day of your contest you want to be on
the drugs for maximum effect (especially for the class of drugs like
Dianobol where muscle water retention provides much of the strength
gains).
Second, it has been several years since a cadaver has been used to
produce growth hormone. It is all produced synthentically now,
especially because cadaver growth hormone can give you something like
CJ disease, mad human brain diseases you know.
In boxing there are weight classes so if you simply take a bunch of
'roids with no thought to the consequences you find yourself bumped up
to the next weight class and get yourself beat up.
A boxer taking steroids would use them most likely not for the mass
bulking up like a body builder would, but to lower his body fat and
become stronger for his weight class.
I doubt that any of the world class boxers take steroids. There's
simply too much other stuff you must be good at first. Endurance.
Heart. Your punch. Sparring practise. Developing your defense. So
many things. Getting on a steroid cycle seems just one more thing that
you have to worry about, because it doesn't give you as much advantage
in a fight as simply practising defense or your jab. I do not doubt
that some boxers use steroids, but it doesn't appear to be the same
problem that it is in other sports.
In many other sports like track, field, swimming, there is only one
thing: the clock. Steroids (or for endurance atheletes, that blood
thickener stuff) gives you a measurable improvement in your times and
unfortunately many atheletes find when they reach the top in the world
that they simply have to take the drugs in order to compete.
If boxers continue to become more "scientific" they will probably begin
using steroids or possibly endurance drugs, forced blood enfusions,
stimulants (wasn't Bramble stripped of a title for using Mua Huang) at
least to some extent to stay competitive. At that point, steroid
testing would be required.
The reason atheletes get away with steroids is that they find out which
steroids which will be tested for the day of the race and then they go
back to the laboratories to find new and exotic drugs which are not yet
testable and use these new drugs the two weeks before the race. Then a
new test is developed to find the new drugs. Etc., etc. It's all very
cat and mouse. Growth hormone is detectable. I'm not sure if they
test for it yet, but I do know in the olympics if your testosterone (a
naturally occuring steroid) is too much above normal they know you've
been injecting it and will dq you.
--- edt
Big D at SC
In article <4qf1i2$m...@lastactionhero.rs.itd.umich.edu>,
e...@ren.us.itd.umich.edu (Eric Taylor) wrote:
> Big D at SC (ddma...@cats.ucsc.edu) wrote:
> : I suppose it is possible, but testing them just prior to a fight would be
> : pointless, since steroids are a training drug, and not a day-of-the-event
> : drug. That's how a lot of athletes who DO get tested get away with it.
> : There are also growth hormones (usually taken from cadavers - yes, dead
> : bodies) that show up on no test because they are naturally occuring.
>
> : There have been boxers who took steroids, and since they were illegal and
> : they took them without the benefit of a doctor, they caused themselves
> : permanent damage.
>
> It's somewhat pointless to only use steroids in training. You want the
> steroids to be in your body the day of your contest.
>
> Steroids can give you muscle gains a number of ways. Via
> anti-catabolic effects, via water retention, by helping low body fat.
> However, one things is for sure. After about 2 weeks when you stop
> cycling (more or less depending on the drug) you will lose nearly all
> the gains you have made while on the drugs. Steroids are not really a
> training drug. They are competition drugs. You go on and off cycles
> but one thing is for sure. The day of your contest you want to be on
> the drugs for maximum effect (especially for the class of drugs like
> Dianobol where muscle water retention provides much of the strength
> gains).
You seem to speak intelligently on this topic, and I have to admit that I
am relatively ineducated in the specifics, so I won't argue with you,
except to say that it isn't the drug you want to have in your body on the
day of the competition, rather it is the effect of that drug. The line I
printed about these being training drugs is one that I picked up while
listening in on the Olympics last time, and this is what they said. If
the announcer at the event was wrong about this, I'm sure it wouldn't be
the first time. On the other hand, if you are right, then I would have to
admit that I probably know just about zip about this stuff.
> Second, it has been several years since a cadaver has been used to
> produce growth hormone. It is all produced synthentically now,
> especially because cadaver growth hormone can give you something like
> CJ disease, mad human brain diseases you know.
I suppose this is true today. The comment I made about cadavers and
growth hormone was a concept I picked up from an article about Olympic
wrestling. The Russian super-heavy gold medalist was a guy that our guys
called "the experiment" because he had all the classic signs of heavy
steroid abuse. He had the heavy brow and the elongated face, and the
tapery fingers, plus he was something like 350 pounds of solid muscle and
stronger than a moose. The American wrestlers commented that this guy
passed every steroid check the Olympics could throw at him. They thought
(this was back in 1988) that the Russians were giving him this human
growth hormone that their medical people were gleaning from dead bodies.
It was probably true back then.
By the way, isn't this stuff still illegal, or at least by prescription only?
What about a guy like Mike Tyson. At 14 he's about 5' 10" and wants to be
a heavy weight boxer, but weighs only about 175 pounds.
Or say an Evander Holyfield, who is a 180 pound boxer who wants to gain
weight and become a heavy.
Or a Roy Jones Jr., who has all the tools, and at 6' tall could
conceivably carry the weight, but he needs to pack it on in order to get
over 200 pounds so he can make the big money.
Wouldn't these guys figure it was worth the risk to take something like this?
Of course I know there are other, legal, safer supplements to use these
days. Any comments on them?
Big D at SC
Robert C. May
Big D at SC wrote:
>
> In article <4qda5p$r...@aphex.direct.ca>, fzabot <fza...@direct.ca> wrote:
>
> > > Is it possible that these guys are taking 'roids?
> > > -Dan
> >
> > Riddick Bowe when did he start looking like a body builder?
> >
> > -Rob
>
> Not like a body builder, but if you compare him today to the really smooth
> and flabby amateur he was in Seoul, you might wonder. And what about
> Tyson... the guy is PLATED with muscles, yet never lifts weights. HOW DO
> YOU GET a physique like that?
>
while. And Lee didn't get that big using Joe Weider's protein powder.
Roy Zornow
Great boxing books:
- The Great Book of Boxing
by Harry Mullan, published by Crescent
Mullan is an Englishman who conveys a great
enthusiasm for the sport, as well as good historical coverage
and terrific fight photos. This is a coffee table sized book
but I was able to get it at a used book store (I love used
book stores, hardware stores, and sporting good stores) for
20 beans.
- Beyond the Ring
by (Oh shit, I left it at home)
A study of the cultural impact of boxing that
includes great boxing anecdotes. Academic but not boring. Nice
to see a serious boxing book that isn't penned by some stereotypical
self-conscious Pete Hamill type. Paperback $14
-- Roy
Geoff Foster
In article <4qda5p$r...@aphex.direct.ca>, fzabot <fza...@direct.ca> writes:
>Daniel Richardson <rich...@cluster.cwu.edu> wrote:
>> I was just wondering if Heavy Weight Boxers like Mike Tyson, Lennox
>>Lewis, Riddick Bowe, etc. are tested before each fight in order to see if
>>they have been taking steroids. I know that steroid use is a serious
>>problem among professional body builders, and boxers like the ones that I
>>have mentioned above are really starting to look a bit like professional
>>body builders!
>> If any one has any information on this subject please post it or E-Mail
>>it to me.
>>
>> -Dan
>>
>
>Riddick Bowe when did he start looking like a body builder?
>
>-Rob
geoff
Dan Taylor
In article <31CB2D...@ix.netcom.com>, "Robert C. May"
<bob...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Big D at SC wrote:
> >
> > In article <4qda5p$r...@aphex.direct.ca>, fzabot <fza...@direct.ca> wrote:
> >
> > > > Is it possible that these guys are taking 'roids?
> > > > -Dan
> > >
> > > Riddick Bowe when did he start looking like a body builder?
> > >
> > > -Rob
> >
> > Not like a body builder, but if you compare him today to the really smooth
> > and flabby amateur he was in Seoul, you might wonder. And what about
> > Tyson... the guy is PLATED with muscles, yet never lifts weights. HOW DO
> > YOU GET a physique like that?
> >
> > Big D at SCRemember, Holyfield trained with 8 time Mr. Olympia Lee
Haney for a
> while. And Lee didn't get that big using Joe Weider's protein powder.
Peoples' (especially athletes) bodies are different from each other, and
change over time. Conditioning peaks also vary from event to event.
Finally, the body (even in top condition) changes as it matures.
Weight training put about 25+ pounds on Michael Spinks, Vinnie Pazienza and
Tommy Hearns put on nearly 30 pounds over about three years without even
touching weights - he simply ate to grow into his frame naturally (don't
think he would have accused Leonard of using steroids before their rematch
if he had dabbled himself). And look at Oscar DLH at the Chavez fight -
same weight as his last fight but MUCH more muscular. Training and
nutrition can do amazing things to the body.
I thinks it's irresponsible and disrespectful to accuse someone of drug
use without ANY evidence.
Just my opinion.
- DT
Big D at SC
In article <dan_taylor-2406961653300001@dan_taylor.truevision.com>,
dan_t...@truevision.com (Dan Taylor) wrote:
>> Remember, Holyfield trained with 8 time Mr. Olympia Lee Haney for a
>> while. And Lee didn't get that big using Joe Weider's protein powder.
Probably true, but Haney was a football player who turned to bodybuilding
after an injury made him quit the sport, so he was probably already a
pretty big guy.
> Peoples' (especially athletes) bodies are different from each other, and
> change over time. Conditioning peaks also vary from event to event.
> Finally, the body (even in top condition) changes as it matures.
>
> Weight training put about 25+ pounds on Michael Spinks, Vinnie Pazienza...
Actually, Vinnie has been using steroids since they were prescribed by a
doctor after his broken neck in the car accident. Don't forget, these
drugs exist for a legitimate medical reason, and this was one such
application.
> ... and Tommy Hearns put on nearly 30 pounds over about three years without
> even touching weights - he simply ate to grow into his frame naturally (don't
> think he would have accused Leonard of using steroids before their rematch
> if he had dabbled himself). And look at Oscar DLH at the Chavez fight -
> same weight as his last fight but MUCH more muscular. Training and
> nutrition can do amazing things to the body.
It's true, but both of the guys you mentioned, Oscar and Tommy are still
quite thin for their weight, suggesting that their frames could easily
handle the extra tissue. They could hardly be accused of using steroids.
> I thinks it's irresponsible and disrespectful to accuse someone of drug
> use without ANY evidence.
Right. Actually, I have always considered Tyson and Holyfield to be very
likely candidates for steroid use. But I would never make that
accusation.
Big D at SC
Thomas Jordan
References:
<Pine.PMDF.3.91.9606202...@cluster.cwu.edu>
<4qda5p$r...@aphex.direct.ca> <ddmacang-210...@std-01.ucsc.edu>
<31CB2D...@ix.netcom.com>
<dan_taylor-2406961653300001@dan_taylor.truevision.com>
<ddmacang-250...@std-01.ucsc.edu>
Organization: De Montfort University, Leicester, UK
Distribution:
Big D at SC (ddma...@cats.ucsc.edu) wrote:
: Right. Actually, I have always considered Tyson and Holyfield to be very
: likely candidates for steroid use. But I would never make that
: accusation.
I honestly believe that is what you meant to write, Big D.
--
Tom.
Big D at SC
> Big D at SC (ddma...@cats.ucsc.edu) wrote:
>
> : Right. Actually, I have always considered Tyson and Holyfield to be very
> : likely candidates for steroid use. But I would never make that
> : accusation.
>
> I honestly believe that is what you meant to write, Big D.
>
> Tom.
...which is why I wrote it.
Big D at SC
Thomas Jordan
Precisely.
What was the point of saying, to thousands, possibly millions, on usenet
that you believe someone to be a likely candidate for steroid abuse, and
then saying you would never make that accusation, when clearly you just
had?
--
Tom.
Big D at SC
>>>> ...I have always considered Tyson and Holyfield to be very likely
>>>> candidates for steroid use. But I would never make that accusation.
>>>
>>> I honestly believe that is what you meant to write, Big D.
>>
>>which is why I wrote it.
>
> Precisely.
>
> What was the point of saying, to thousands, possibly millions, on usenet
> that you believe someone to be a likely candidate for steroid abuse, and
> then saying you would never make that accusation, when clearly you just
> had?
>
> Tom.
What? So now my opinion is an accusation? I think it, so go cut the
warrants, boys? What do you want me to say, "I hereby accuse them of
steroid use?" No. I don't accuse them of it. I merely point out that I
have always thought that they could have been steroid users. Just like
Ben Johnson was a likely candidate for steroid use. Carl Lewis always
said he suspected it. When interviewed, he said things like, "...I don't
know, man... the guy has made some pretty incredible gains..." but he
didn't accuse him. The world had to wait until he flunked a test.
So I am willing to wait until they flunk a test too.
Any other questions?
Big D at SC
Thomas Jordan
: > What was the point of saying, to thousands, possibly millions, on usenet
: > that you believe someone to be a likely candidate for steroid abuse, and
: > then saying you would never make that accusation, when clearly you just
: > had?
: >
: > Tom.
: What? So now my opinion is an accusation? I think it, so go cut the
: warrants, boys? What do you want me to say, "I hereby accuse them of
: steroid use?" No. I don't accuse them of it. I merely point out that I
: have always thought that they could have been steroid users. Just like
: Ben Johnson was a likely candidate for steroid use. Carl Lewis always
: said he suspected it. When interviewed, he said things like, "...I don't
: know, man... the guy has made some pretty incredible gains..."
When did Tyson make incredible gains, either in size or accomplishments?
The guy weighed more when he was thirteen years old than Holyfield did as
world cruiser champion. And he's been knocking people off their feet for
about as long, if it's even relevant.
: but he
: didn't accuse him.
He came pretty close. In Johnson's case, he had far more to go on- the
great gains in muscle, the brown colouration on the eyes in particular
made Lewis suspicious, the vast improvement in performance. In Tyson's
case, there is zilch- it's just hot air. You just say these things and
hope some of the mud sticks.
: The
: world had to wait until he flunked a test.
: So I am willing to wait until they flunk a test too.
Or not, as the case may be. Speculation's all very well, but so far you've
presented absolutely nothing in way of substantive evidence, just cheap
insinuations. I'm sorry, but I really feel that's all it is.
: Any other questions?
It just seems a strange thing to say, is all.
--
Tom.
Big D at SC
> Big D at SC (ddma...@cats.ucsc.edu) wrote:
> : In article <4r04vb$u...@orac.dmu.ac.uk>, t...@dmu.ac.uk (Thomas Jordan) wrote:
>
> : > What was the point of saying, to thousands, possibly millions, on usenet
> : > that you believe someone to be a likely candidate for steroid abuse, and
> : > then saying you would never make that accusation, when clearly you just
> : > had?
> : >
> : > Tom.
>
> : What? So now my opinion is an accusation? I think it, so go cut the
> : warrants, boys? What do you want me to say, "I hereby accuse them of
> : steroid use?" No. I don't accuse them of it. I merely point out that I
> : have always thought that they could have been steroid users. Just like
> : Ben Johnson was a likely candidate for steroid use. Carl Lewis always
> : said he suspected it. When interviewed, he said things like, "...I don't
> : know, man... the guy has made some pretty incredible gains..."
>
> When did Tyson make incredible gains, either in size or accomplishments?
> The guy weighed more when he was thirteen years old than Holyfield did as
> world cruiser champion. And he's been knocking people off their feet for
> about as long, if it's even relevant.
Didn't say Tyson made incredible gains. He has an incredible physique.
Remember, his career has been guided since he was in his early teens.
Ample time to get him on a "weight gain" program, just to be sure he gets
to be a heavyweight.
> : but he didn't accuse him.
>
> He came pretty close. In Johnson's case, he had far more to go on- the
> great gains in muscle, the brown colouration on the eyes in particular
> made Lewis suspicious, the vast improvement in performance. In Tyson's
> case, there is zilch- it's just hot air. You just say these things and
> hope some of the mud sticks.
I'm not sure there is zilch. He certainly has vast amounts of muscle, and
(IMO) he has some of the classic signs of steroid use in the shape of his
shull; i.e., the pointy chin and heavy brow. I noticed it most in the
first Bruno fight.
> : The world had to wait until he flunked a test.
>
> : So I am willing to wait until they flunk a test too.
>
> Or not, as the case may be.
No, I am willing to wait until they flunk a test before I would accuse
them of being steroid abusers. Not flunking a test does not let you off
the hook.
> Speculation's all very well, but so far you've presented absolutely nothing
> in way of substantive evidence, just cheap insinuations. I'm sorry, but I
> really feel that's all it is.
This is a public forum, set up for the specific purpose of allowing the
common man, such as you and I (not forgetting the ladies out there as
well) to express our opinions about the subject of boxing, and boxers. I
don't know what PROOF you expect someone like me to be able to show over
the internet, unless you expect me to refer you to some kind of web page
from the Mayo clinic or something. My opinion is all you are going to
get. And since when is expressing someone's opinion "cheap"? It's what I
think. It is what I have seen. It's what I have noticed.
If you think it's wrong, or if you disagree, that's fine. Tell me about
it. I will listen.
> : Any other questions?
>
> It just seems a strange thing to say, is all.
It's not strange at all. It's something that I am sure a lot of people
have thought about.
> Tom.
Big D at SC
Eric Taylor
: (IMO) he has some of the classic signs of steroid use in the shape of his
: shull; i.e., the pointy chin and heavy brow. I noticed it most in the
: first Bruno fight.
I really doubt Tyson used steroids. I mean, I know the signs too. The
acne on the back. Thin onion-like skin. You know the type. You're
hanging out doing some squats at the gym, and you see this guy with a
round puffy face and think, man that guy is fat, but you look at the
body and it's all muscle and skin. Then you see the acne, the thinning
hair, and think, aha, steroids.
Tyson is just genetically gifted. With Holyfield, on the other hand,
it's difficult to believe that he has never used steroids.
The changes is skull shape due to steroids are more difficult to
detect. If you want to change your skull, you can get a seriously
noticable cro-magnon look when you start using the human growth
hormone. This is also the drug which causes giagantism (acromeglia).
A side effect of too much HGH is the growth of internal organs. You
often see body builders today with superb muscles, low bodyfat, perhaps
2%, and then when you look at their abdomen, you can see the 6-pack of
muscles, but it's puffed out. That's the liver pushing out, enlarged
from all the use of growth hormone (and sometimes fluid retention
caused by steroids, but this doesn't happen quite as often).
"Ow! My liver, my liver!" he said, clutching his nads. --- Beavis
--- edt
Big D at SC
In article <4re6p8$7...@lastactionhero.rs.itd.umich.edu>,
e...@ren.us.itd.umich.edu (Eric Taylor) wrote:
> I really doubt Tyson used steroids.
> Tyson is just genetically gifted. With Holyfield, on the other hand,
> it's difficult to believe that he has never used steroids.
>
> The changes is skull shape due to steroids are more difficult to
> detect. If you want to change your skull, you can get a seriously
> noticable cro-magnon look when you start using the human growth
> hormone. This is also the drug which causes giagantism (acromeglia).
> A side effect of too much HGH is the growth of internal organs. You
> often see body builders today with superb muscles, low bodyfat, perhaps
> 2%, and then when you look at their abdomen, you can see the 6-pack of
> muscles, but it's puffed out. That's the liver pushing out, enlarged
> from all the use of growth hormone (and sometimes fluid retention
> caused by steroids, but this doesn't happen quite as often).
Good post. I was wondering, aren't there some commercially available and
legal products that bodybuilders use that are supposed to closely
approximate the effects of steroids? I've heard them discussed and seen
articles and ads for these things in some of the magazines. Any info on
Matador
In article <4re6p8$7...@lastactionhero.rs.itd.umich.edu>,
e...@ren.us.itd.umich.edu (Eric Taylor) wrote:
>: first Bruno fight.
>
>I really doubt Tyson used steroids. I mean, I know the signs too.
Thanks. Thanks for making me nauseaous. I thought I knew all the signs, but the
ones you know of make me sick just to think about.
Gag. Why would anybody do that to themself?
P.S. The liver bulging was probably the worst.
matador
Prodding the bull
..mund
ddma...@cats.ucsc.edu (Big D at SC) wrote:
>
(Earlier post snipped)
>
> Good post. I was wondering, aren't there some commercially available and
> legal products that bodybuilders use that are supposed to closely
> approximate the effects of steroids? I've heard them discussed and seen
> articles and ads for these things in some of the magazines. Any info on
> them?
>
> Big D at SC
These ads pop up from time to time, but I don't think there are any
legal products that even remotely matches the effect of steroids. One
much talked about product is creatine, a substance that I have tried
myself. The medical effect of creatine is not fully understood, but it
seems to increase the fluid level in the muscles, resulting in weight
and performance increase. Other products are chromium piccolinate,
ginseng and russian root. But there is a lot of humbug in the sports
nutrition buisness. Many expensive products have no effect whatsoever,
and some may even have harmful effects.
.mund
John O'Donoghue
Tyson,
Above all boxers doesnt look like a steroid taker.Firstly he is looser
than most muscled bound dudes.He doesnt train at weights except for
prison.Weights slow u down,look at Bruno.
I am sure steroids are somewhere in boixing,they are in all sport.But
I doubt seriously if Tyson does take them.Wait till u see Seldon when he
fights Tyson.He is huge as well.
THE IRISHMAN
Daniel Clinton
ddma...@cats.ucsc.edu (Big D at SC) wrote:
>>>>> ...I have always considered Tyson and Holyfield to be very likely
>>>>> candidates for steroid use. But I would never make that accusation.
>So I am willing to wait until they flunk a test too.
>Any other questions?
Yes, what makes you think this? I don't believe Tyson or Holyfield use
steroids. Some people are able to maintain a good physique, that's
just the way they are.
Evander is a very serious christian with a good work ethic from what
I've seen. He's a good guy and I can't believe he'd use steroids.
Tyson, while muscular, has the furthest thing from a bodybuilder's
bulbous physique. Plus the quality of Tyson's boxing and his
ferociousness in my view could not come from a pill or shot. I don't
believe Tyson uses steroids.
Why do you believe they are "likely candidates" for steroid use?
Daniel
Sanity Cruzer
e...@ren.us.itd.umich.edu (Eric Taylor) wrote:
>
>Tyson is just genetically gifted. With Holyfield, on the other hand,
>it's difficult to believe that he has never used steroids.
You should see the muscles on Holyfield's ass. Maybe he's using
asteroids.
>........................................ using the human growth
>hormone. This is also the drug which causes giagantism (acromeglia).
Can you inject this human growth hormone into a particular 'organ' to
create this 'gigantism' affect? Not that I need to. <sheepish g>
>--- edt
(Soon to be) The Gigantic Cruiser
Sanity Cruzer
>legal products that bodybuilders use that are supposed to closely
>approximate the effects of steroids? I've heard them discussed and seen
>articles and ads for these things in some of the magazines. Any info on
>them?
>
>Big D at SC
NOTHING legal/over-the-counter approximates steroids. It would be like
comparing a bb gun to a .357 magnum.
The Sanity Cruzer
R.D....@ncl.ac.uk
Sanity Cruiser
Just a quick note to say the "asteroids" gag was the funniest thing
I've read on the internet for ages.
Cheers
Bobby E - a boxing fan from the UK.
pliesenberg
Sanity Cruzer (snty...@cruzio.com) wrote:
: The Sanity Cruzer
No matter what bodybuilders tell you: the effects of steroids as
muscle building agents all on their own have *never* been
scientifically proven. Right now there's some renewed controversy
about it.
...paul
..mund
plies...@bix.com (pliesenberg) wrote:
>
> No matter what bodybuilders tell you: the effects of steroids as
> muscle building agents all on their own have *never* been
> scientifically proven. Right now there's some renewed controversy
> about it.
>
This depends what you mean by the phrase 'all of their own'. Of course
you have to train and eat properly in addition to the stereoids, but if
you do, the stereoids have a very dramatic effect that no food supplement
comes close to.
I have never done stereoids myself, but I have trained together with people
who have taken them. One guy increased his powerlifting total by nearly
300 kg in a mere two years of training, but then got caught in a drugs
test and was suspended from powerlifting for two years. In a few weeks,
his stereoid-based shape and muscle structure fell apart in a very dramatic
fashion.
One reason why scientific experiments haven't proven the effects, is perhaps
that the dosages have been kept very low for ethical reasons. But when drug
testers pick their subjects, they often look for sudden, huge performance
increases.
.mund
Big D at SC
In article <4s1h12$o...@news2.delphi.com>, plies...@bix.com
(pliesenberg) wrote:
> No matter what bodybuilders tell you: the effects of steroids as
> muscle building agents all on their own have *never* been
> scientifically proven. Right now there's some renewed controversy
> about it.
>
> ...paul
I saw a show on Geraldo just the other day (of course, when you consider
the source...) that had a huge panel of female bodybuilders, and Lou
Ferrigno, and a few others, one of which was a sports doctor who said that
after all of the extensive research they had done on steroids, they had
finally concluded that these drugs do in fact add to the muscle mass, but
only to the tune of between 10 and 15% of what you already have. That's
all. This doctor then pointed out that these people (indicating the body
builders) look the way they do because they get in the gym and they work
their asses off.
Big D at SC
Lee Chisnall
On 4 Jul 1996 14:30:04 GMT, "..mund" <asmund.u...@ffi.no> wrote:
>ddma...@cats.ucsc.edu (Big D at SC) wrote:
>>
> (Earlier post snipped)
>>
>> Good post. I was wondering, aren't there some commercially available and
>> legal products that bodybuilders use that are supposed to closely
>> approximate the effects of steroids? I've heard them discussed and seen
>> articles and ads for these things in some of the magazines. Any info on
>> them?
>>
>> Big D at SC
>
>These ads pop up from time to time, but I don't think there are any
>legal products that even remotely matches the effect of steroids. One
>much talked about product is creatine, a substance that I have tried
>myself. The medical effect of creatine is not fully understood, but it
>seems to increase the fluid level in the muscles, resulting in weight
>and performance increase. Other products are chromium piccolinate,
>ginseng and russian root. But there is a lot of humbug in the sports
>nutrition buisness. Many expensive products have no effect whatsoever,
>and some may even have harmful effects.
Actually, Creatine increases ATP (the chemical used for immediate
muscle contraction) when working out.
How? Creatine Monohydrate is processed by the body and stored as
Creatine Phosphate. When the ATP (Adenosine-triphosphate) breaks down
into ADP (Adenosine-diphosphate), the Creatine stored in the muscle
donates a Phosphor group to the ADP to convert it back to ATP.
This basically means that you can get a more intense workout. It's
really only suitable for anaerobic workouts as opposed to aerobic.
Also, Creatine is not a drug -- it is a natural food supplement. It
can be naturally found in red meats such as beef.
______________________________________________________________________
...the eastern sky was aglow with the first light of the rising sun...
spilling over the horizon now the first rays were touching the hills.
Sanity Cruzer
plies...@bix.com (pliesenberg) wrote:
>Sanity Cruzer (snty...@cruzio.com) wrote:
>: >Big D at SC
>
>: NOTHING legal/over-the-counter approximates steroids. It would be like
>: comparing a bb gun to a .357 magnum.
>
>: The Sanity Cruzer
>
>
>muscle building agents all on their own have *never* been
>scientifically proven. Right now there's some renewed controversy
>about it.
>
>...paul
Wow! To me that's analogous to what the tobacco companies are telling us
about cigarettes. I've known the people, I've seen the results, I believe
what I saw. If it looks like a duck, and it walks like a duck and it
quacks ... it's a duck. (please, no geese comments) I do not need to have
a scientist tell me what a duck is. Steroids can give body builders
unprecedentd gains. I am not talking about their side effects, but about
the 'benefits' of using them. Y'know, 50,000,000 Elvis fans can't all be
wrong.
The Sanity Cruzer