Why can’t a doctor prescribe chemicals that enhance muscle growth for someone that wants it?
Doctors prescribe steroids all the time. Prednisone, nasal steroid sprays, birth control pills.
You’re probably thinking of anabolic steroids, the testosterone-type steroids that build muscle. Docs can prescribe them too. They’re controlled substances, like narcotic pain-killers, barbituates, valium, etc. That means they’re regulated by the drug enforcement administration.
So docs can prescribe them when indicated. But most docs won’t prescribe them just to make someone bigger, as there’s this thing called ethics. Not that doctors are necessarily ethical, but inappropriate prescribing can get one’s license to practice pulled.
In addition, most states have made it illegal to prescribe anabolic steroids just to increase muscle mass.
I could be mistaken, but most anabolic steroids are only supposed to be prescribed for situations like: a cancer patient who has lost a lot of weight from treatment and needs to put on some weight in order to have a better chance of fighting the disease.
There is a guy I know who was part of an experimental study to make kids taller by giving them injections of human growth hormone. I don’t know if it was effective or not, but a few of the people in the study came down with CJD.
Oh, and as for why docs shouldn’t do it (besides it being illegal): Side-effects. Common ones inclue HDL cholesterol (the good kind) goes down, blood thickens, and then won’t clot properly, the liver gets inflamed, the heart muscle gets too big and doesn’t pump efficiently anymore, the prostate enlarges, the testicles shrink, and the thyroid gets deranged. Not all the time, and not in every one, but often enough, and sometimes the changes are irreversible.
That must have been from the bad old days when the only way to get HGH was from harvesting it from cadaver brains. These days it’s all produced via recominant DNA, so there’s no risk of prion infection.
But HGH is abusable too, and has dire side effects if not used properly.
I think the question is really “I understand the risks, and with your guidance and help, I want to use this product in order to increase my muscle mass.” While IANAD, I know that when steroids are used by bodybuilders, they regulate dosages and take ancillary medications to counteract negative side affects.
Given that many legal drugs have side effects of their own (some quite severe), why would steroids be classed differently?
I understand why you may not want to have atheletes taking them, but what about John Q. Public, who wants a better physique? Wouldn’t it be akin to getting plastic surgery?
I think QtM answered my question in post #5. Should have previewed. Thank you, sir.
The thought of professional bodybuilders regulating anything is just the least bit comical. Some of those guys take $25,000+ worth of drugs every year–and we’re not talking real expensive stuff, either.
The risk of steroids is not quite as bad as most folks have been lead to believe. The risk of random, unplanned steroid use is that bad–all the side effects QtM mentioned are real, and really can be irreversible–but that’s not what athletes and other intelligent users are doing.
It may interest you to know that the steroid ban was originally opposed by the DEA, the AMA, and the department of Health and Human Services (cite, scroll down to the review of Legal Muscle). Additionally, the biggest users of steroids after athletes and physique pros are the life extensionists, whose main interest is not dying. Kinda makes you wonder a little, doesn’t it?
Accordingly, QtM made clear the medical aspects of steroids’ illegality.
If there were no side effects, would there be any reason for them to be illegal?
Yes this study took place in the 1960s.
There was an interesting article in the LA Weekly about it about 10 years ago by one of the participants.
Actually the reason for anabolic steriods be a controlled substance in the USA has less to do with potental side effects, as it could still be a prescription drug, but without the controlled substance restrictions.
It has to do more with opinions of ethics and morality in the use of steriods for muscle enhancement, than it does with an problem arising from their actual use.
While abused steriods CAN have serious side effects. The proper steriods used in the proper fashion, under doctor supervision can be relatively safe and effective, as shown from common usage in UK and Canada, as well as most of the rest of the world. To my knowledge the US is the only country in the world that hold these kinds of restrictions on and fear of anabolic steriods.
Most of the world laughs at the US’s attitude on steriods.
This however should not be taken as an endorsement of steriods in any way however, as they can be dangerous when abused and taken incorrectly which is what frequently happens when purchased illicitly and used without doctor supervision. This is just to explain that concepts of ethics or morality are controlling our perception of this in the USA.
You’re probably on the right track here, but the only “ethical” explanation I can think of is as an offshoot of “fair” competition rules.
I don’t know which countries you’re thinking of here - anabolics are controlled in Europe in a similar fashion to US.
I can’t really argue with the above.
The trouble is, a certain significant percentage of body-builders won’t stick with the program, and start seeing other doctors, and getting additional steroids from them. An old podiatrist friend of mine who was also a body builder did exactly this, seeing at least 5 other doctors to get all the steroids he wanted. He also suffered some significant physical consequences, and ended up in drug rehab for anabolic steroid abuse.
In a lot of ways, anabolic steroid abusers can act like drug addicts. I’m not sure that fact merits such draconian regulation of anabolic steroids as a class, but that’s the way it is.
I thought anabolic steroids were not a controlled substance until president bush signed a bill making them controlled in 1990. Congress is always making drugs controlled, some dangerous and some not. Anabolic steroids do have alot of dangers though as QtM mentioned. They include things like blood pressure going up, cholesterol levels going out of whack, gynomastia, premature baldness, premature bone closing, mood disorders, testicular shrinkage, muscle and tendon injuries due to getting too strong too fast, etc.
I don’t see the logic in it though because like Ultrafilter said, my experience has been that alot of people who use anabolic steroids and HGH are reasonably responsible people just trying to improve their physique and people practicing life extension in their 70s. You can legally get plastic surgery and risk major infections but you can’t legally get testosterone injections to build muscle mass.
Kind of “apples and oranges” here. You can’t do plastic surgery to yourself, but once you have drugs in hand you can self-medicate. Even major infections are generally curable, whereas some steroid side effects are irreversible. And there’s pretty much no other way to say, make a nose smaller, but there is another (non-surgical/non-drug using) way to build muscle.
Why can’t a doctor prescribe morphine to me if I like taking morphine recreationally? I can’t imagine any coherent legal argument to make steroids legal without making morphine legal. Of course, I do favor legalizing drugs. However, I DON’T think doctors should be prescribing drugs for non-therapeutic usage. If I want to get drunk, bars and liquor stores are where I should go, and not a physician. Doctors are supposed to heal people, and not help them abuse drugs. I would consider what you are suggesting above being medically unethical.
I’m trying really hard to add something to the discussion, but it’s kinda tough to not venture into GD territory. According to the review of the book I linked to earlier…well, let me quote the article:
That seems to explain a lot. Thanks.
Define therapeutic. To me perscribing anabolic steroids isn’t much different than prescribing diet pills or anti-depressants.
“Lack of muscle” isn’t exactly a disease or illness and it doesn’t lead to other diseases and illnesses though (unlike obesity and depression), so I can see your point. At the same time using drugs to try to improve yourself is the same no matter if you are using drugs to cut fat or drugs to build muscle.