Seahawks Insider

Morning links: Seahawks and PEDs

Post by Eric Williams on June 5, 2013 at 7:10 am with 60 Comments »
June 5, 2013 7:10 am
Seattle Seahawks' Bruce Irvin (51) leaves the field Monday, May 20, 2013, after during an NFL football organized team activity workout in Renton, Wash. The team announced last Friday that Irvin had been suspended for the first four games of the upcoming 2013 season after testing positive for performance enhancing substances. (AP Photo/Ted S. Warren)
Seattle Seahawks’ Bruce Irvin (51) leaves the field Monday, May 20, 2013, after during an NFL football organized team activity workout in Renton, Wash. The team announced last Friday that Irvin had been suspended for the first four games of the upcoming 2013 season after testing positive for performance enhancing substances. (AP Photo/Ted S. Warren)

With a league-high six players suspended for performance-enhancing drugs during Pete Carroll’s tenure, the Seattle Seahawks say they are going above and beyond what the NFL requires them to do so that players are better informed about the league’s drug policy.

My story today delves into the program the Seahawks have established to better educate players on PEDs.

Further, I talked with an expert on Adderall, which reportedly was the drug of choice for most of the suspended Seahawks. Dr. David Ferguson, a medicinal chemist at the University of Minnesota, said there’s been a rise in the use of Adderall and other amphetamine-type substances on college campuses, and believes it is no doubt a performance enhancer that can be dangerous and addictive if abused.

“These players are getting a stimulant effect out of it that gives them energy, plus this confidence,” Ferguson said. “It’s this reward where, ‘I’m doing great. I’m focused. And I’m very, very confident and secure in what I’m doing.’ … If folks don’t think they load up, and you get enhancement from increased concentrations of these kinds of drugs, caffeine included, they’re wrong. They’re crazy. They’re fools.

“We all have a few cups of coffee. And when we’re tired, we have an extra one. These amphetamines are no different”

Clare Farnsworth of Seahawks.com takes us down memory lane, offering thoughts on former Seattle Times beat reporter for the Seahawks Gil Lyons, who passed away on Tuesday. Lions, who covered the Seahawks from the team’s inaugural season to 1991, was 83 years old.

The Seahawks signed Mississippi State receiver Arceto Clark and released defensive tackle Myles Wade. Clark participated in Seattle’s rookie minicamp in May.

Jerry McDonald writing for the Contra Costa Times says that former Seattle quarterback Matt Flynn is working to become more a leader for the Raiders.

ESPN’s Mike Sando takes a closer look at quarterback rankings against NFC West defense in base and nickel packages. It’s not a surprise that the Seahawks were better against quarterbacks in base defense.

Bob Condotta of The Seattle Times provides his list of the Top five greatest moments in franchise history, with the Seahawks celebrating the franchise’s 39th birthday this week.

Jason LaCanfora of CBS Sports places Russell Wilson, Richard Sherman, Brandon Browner and Earl Thomas on his list of the players providing the best bang for the buck with inexpensive contracts in 2013.

Pete Prisco of CBS Sports gives us his Top 10 pass rushers of all time. Lawrence Taylor tops the list.

Matthew Gentle offers an interesting interview with the somewhat reclusive Brandon Browner. Check out the video below.

Categories:
Morning links
Leave a comment Comments → 60
  1. Dukeshire says:

    Thank you Eric for providing that. There is a lot of misunderstanding as to just what effect Adderall can have.

    I remember Gil from my youth, back, as farnsworth says, pretty much all the info you could get was in the papers. That’s too bad.

    Taylor number 1, eh? It’s all subjective, but I have a hard time putting anyone ahead of Reggie White. (I would love to have seen Jones play in person. He redefined the position.)

  2. chuck_easton says:

    Thank you Eric for taking the time to talk to a medical expert. I am only a lawyer, but as a person who has had to overcome severe ADHD and who now has a child struggling with school work even though he’s very bright, I have been forced to become a bit of a ‘Holiday Inn Express’ type expert in how these ADHD medications work.

    And Adderall is the last ditch treatment when all the other options don’t work. My son and I are lucky. We both reacted well to Vyvanse which isn’t as addictive as Adderall and doesn’t have the extreme side effects of some of the others such as Ritilin.

    These college students and now younger NFL players don’t realize they are playing the chemical version of Russian Roulette. At the wrong dosage these meds can cause severe side effects right up to heart failure.

  3. Dukeshire says:

    I wonder just what Sando is including in his “small” defense? Exclusively nickel or is he including (as I suspect) all passing down sub-packages? Either way one would suspect a higher passer rating for the opposing QB, but it’s clear Seattle must button that up in any case. Last in your division will not get it done.

  4. Dukeshire says:

    Expect a higher…

  5. juliusvrooder says:

    My 15 YO son was diagnosed with ADHD at age four. As he grows and changes, his meds have to constantly be altered. We have used about everything, including yoga and vitamins. Our first go-round with Aderral was in 3rd grade and was a disaster. He got really whacked out and mean. We dropped it in something like a week. Ritalin was much smoother.

    He was recently put back on Aderall, and it is working much better, but he still doesnt like it. He is not out of control, but he doesnt feel like himself. He says he feels dry and dead inside. Of course he takes it anyway, as his impulsivity would ruin him if it wasn’t blunted. He might wind up peeing all over the school.

    One other thing: All these meds, including Aderral are tightly controlled. You cant get a script by fax or email, and there are no refills. Every month, we need a paper script, and we can’t get it until 30 days have passed. They don’t even make exceptions for travel. We were once camping and had to drive 50 miles round-trip to get refilled on the right date.

  6. bird_spit says:

    chuck – You and I have something in common. I have a bright kid that has struggled for years. I finally relented, and discussed his situation with his doctor. The effects of Vyvanse are unreal for him. It is like putting on a pair of glasses for the first time. Even his handwriting changed to something that is legible.

    Because my sons story, and my own are parallel, I asked the doctor to evaluate me. The effects of Vyvanse for me hard to describe to someone with out ADHD.

    I am a very successful technology worker. I dont have to work 14 hrs in a day, I can accomplish my goals in a regular 9 hr day. These players need to get the proper paperwork into the league. I have no doubt that for most of these guys, they have a legit reason to be taking these drugs.

  7. Singularitarian says:

    “caffeine included” Well let’s start piss testing for coffee, or god forbid green tea. The assumption is that these guys don’t know what they’re putting into their bodies or what they are doing. I say the opposite. They are college educated players. They know exactly what’s going in their bodies. If any player can be allowed to take it than all players should be allowed to take it. Plain and simple

  8. Singularitarian says:

    bird_spit- From what I understand it is very hard to get the ok from the nfl. If Richard Sherman graduated from Harvard without a prescription than there is no way the NFL gives him the go ahead.

  9. GeorgiaHawk says:

    What’s this? The times are now charging to read a sports article now and then? My beer budget takes another hit.

  10. SlickToxic21 says:

    It still would be really nice to know whether it’s actually Adderall or steroids that they’re taking.
    I don’t like that they can just claim it’s adderall if they are found guilty of taking PED’s.
    To me it’s a much bigger deal if it’s steroids.

  11. chuck_easton says:

    SlickToxic21,

    Adderall isn’t going to suddenly make you bigger and look like you’ve power lifted the entire gym in one go around.

    In fact the most common side effect to the ADHD meds is that you lose your appitite so weight loss can be a problem. For an old fat guy like me it’s been great! :) I’m now getting down to a weight my doctor will accept and I’m not dieting. I’m just never that hungry.

    Yes, it is now the in thing for any positive PED test to be blamed on Adderall by the player and/or his agent. The team and the league are not permitted to release what the actual substance was.

    So, if you want to know if, say Irvin, was on Adderall or a steroid look at the before and after pictures. Not casting stones but I couldn’t help but notice Irvin looked waaaaaayyy more ripped and defined in the pictures from OTA’s than he did last season. Just sayin…

  12. SlickToxic21 says:

    Yeah chuck, I guess that’s what I’m saying…..once they’re found guilty they should have to confirm what substance was found.
    Using steroids is flat out cheating. Adderall is “kinda” cheating, if you know what I mean.
    However, HGH is still legal…or at least not tested for.
    You watch the Real Rob Report, and there are a lot of guys walking around that locker room looking “ripped”.
    I just don’t want the team to be known as cheaters, just because a few guys are trying to take a short cut.

  13. Southendzone says:

    Georgia,

    Try clearing your cookies or using a different browser for the Times articles. A friend of mine told me that works.

  14. Eric – solid article. Thanks. And chuck – thanks for chiming in with some experience in this. I respect your opinion.

    As for comments are that players are ‘stupid’ for using adderal, or any other PED, I really have to question what people think they are talking about.

    We applaud Russell Wilson for “living in film room” and studying morning noon and night. How many people have that level of concentration? How about kids who played sports all their lives and barely made it though high school and college? Want them studying more, harder, more effectively? That is exactly what they are accomplishing by using adderall.

    Is it ‘stupid’? The NFL minimum salary is $375,000 a year. The minimum wage if you don’t make the team is $9.19 an hour. Players on the bubble are going to do anything possible to improve, get an edge and make it. These guys have trained all their lives to be the most competitive humans on the planet. Think they are going to say ‘no thanks’ to any edge they can get on their competition?

    Is it ‘stupid’ when an established player takes a PED to get an edge? Richard Sherman makes $550,000 a year. Darrelle Revis makes $15,000,000 a year. How is Richard Sherman going to someday make Darrelle money? Only by taking advantage of any edge he can to prove day in and day out he is as good good. That includes focused film study morning, noon, and night, and maintaining an unreal level of energy for about six months straight every year.

    And I’m not saying it all about the money. I think what Richard Sherman wants most is to be “The Best”, same thing Russell Wilson wants.

    Some can say it is ‘stupid’ to take a drug that might have dangerous side-effects, but the proof is out there that many successful athletes had record-breaking careers doing just that. If it weren’t for steroids, Barry Bonds and Mark McGuire might have been average baseball players with short careers.

    What these guys do for a living is inherently dangerous – they are professionals at smashing into each other head-first. If they were afraid of danger or side-effects, they wouldn’t choose to be football players. Expect them to compete. Expect them to compete at all costs.

  15. RDPoulsbo says:

    I think the aderall issue has more to do with lots of younger players not knowing they have to turn in their paperwork. While I think football players in general are more likely to be legally on aderall with a perscription, it’s pervasive use on campuses probably lends to the idea that it’s no big deal. It’s widely abused on college campuses nowadays not just by athletes, but by students in general looking for better focus on their work. They aren’t nicknaming it Study Buddy for nothing.

    As for Irvin’s case in particular, aderall is perceived as less of a problem than sterioids, so it’s better for the public image to just say that’s what it was, but he hasn’t done that. We also know he needed to bulk up while maintaining his speed. Put 2 and 2 together, and it’s more likely he tested positive for some sort of steroid.

    I’ve disabled all cookies for the Seattle Times website. I don’t post there, so I don’t care about logging in. I don’t even have to be bothered with the 10 article limit anymore.

  16. SlickToxic21 says:

    Stevos, some of what you wrote makes sense…but it’s still cheating.

    I understand that a lot of people would do a lot of things to increase their salary from $9 an hour to $15 million a year….but again, it’s still cheating. It’s an unfair advantage, unless everyone is allowed to do it.

    Also, players like Bonds and McGwire would have still been stars in MLB, as they were before they started growing gigantic heads….they just wouldn’t have been hitting outrageously long bombs 73 times a season!!

  17. chuck_easton says:

    Stevos,

    Any professional is going to use whatever edge he/she can get to move ahead in their chosen field. We are both on the same page here. The line is drawn when competitive edge crosses into committing illegal or unethical acts to achieve their goal.

    Steriods, HGH, and other substances will give an athelete a bigger body and allow him/her to succeed. The reason WADA and professional sports decided to make this ‘illegal’ was it was giving people an unfair competive advantage over other competitors. (i.e. the entire East German Olympic team’s in the 1980′s).

    So, you are correct, the solution is either a) ban the Performance Enhancers or b) make them perfectly legal and anything goes.

    Let’s not kid ourselves. There wasn’t a player in the NFL in the 1970′s that wasn’t on something, Steriods, pain killers, uppers (amphetimines). you name it. Problem was they didn’t know what a toll the stuff took on their bodies. Lyle Alzado admitted to steriod use his entire career. He also died of a brain tumor directly linked to steroid abuse. Here’s a quote from Alzado in the last part of his life.

    “ I started taking anabolic steroids in 1969 and never stopped. It was addicting, mentally addicting. Now I’m sick, and I’m scared. Ninety percent of the athletes I know are on the stuff. We’re not born to be 300 lb (140 kg) or jump 30 ft (9.1 m). But all the time I was taking steroids, I knew they were making me play better. I became very violent on the field and off it. I did things only crazy people do. Once a guy sideswiped my car and I beat the hell out of him. Now look at me. My hair’s gone, I wobble when I walk and have to hold on to someone for support, and I have trouble remembering things. My last wish? That no one else ever dies this way ”

    You say it’s OK if the athelete uses knowing what he’s doing to his body it’s his choice. But we also have a situation where you have thousands of former NFL players suing the league due to the lingering effects of concussions. The claim is “the NFL knew about this and didn’t warn us or do anything to protect us. They owe us money”

    If the NFL, or any professional sports organization for that matter, says all bets off. Use what you want. Sure it will be great for the fans. How can bigger, faster, stronger be wrong? But at some point the players, and this usually happens when the money runs out, are going to then sue the league because the league knew of the effects of steriod use on the body and the NFL not only didn’t stop them from doing it, the league incouraged it.

    Everyday 9 to 5rs don’t grasp that. Our thought is hey, if they want to and it makes the product better, it’s their choice.

    But put this in a perspective even us working stiffs can understand. I’m old enough to remember first hand smoking in planes, restaraunts, bars, work environments. Heck when I was young people would light up anywhere, anytime inside or out without having to ask.

    We now know the harmful effects smoking takes on the human body. We know the dangers of second hand smoke. I grew up in a household of chainsmokers. I went to school every day reeking of cigarettes. I had constant sinus infections, constant chest colds, and asthma as a kid. I’ve never smoked a single cigarette in my life.

    I love that I can go to work and not smell that stuff wafting through the office. I love I can go to a restaraunt and not have to smell cigarettes and breath someone elses smoke.

    But look how hard the smokers and the industry fought against the smoking bans. Even though they knew the dangers it was ‘their choice’. Well that was until the smokers started suing everybody when they got sick.

    Sure in Alzado’s day 90% of the NFL players were on roids. They didn’t know any better. Now everybody does and they are banned. Useage has come down. Someone testing positive is a story. Perceptions of the use of PED’s has and is changing just as the acceptance of smoking in public had to change for the sake of people’s health.

    My kid would eat ice cream every meal. He knows it isn’t good for him, but he likes it. I, as a parent, have to stop him from doing this, for his own health.

    The NFL, as the parental arm of the sport, has to step in and tell the players that roids are not good for them healthwise and nobody cares if it makes them a better, stronger, faster, meaner player. They can’t have their workout in a pill.

  18. SlickToxic21 says:

    Well put chuck

  19. HawkFromDay1 says:

    Stevos – I’m in total agreement.

    These guys have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to secure their families’ future for generations to come. Who wouldn’t at least consider sacrificing their own health and well-being to do that?

  20. bird_spit says:

    I know a son of a one-time semi great Chicago bear. His whole family would give it all back to have their dead father alive, and the years that the concussions / early-dementia stole from him.

    Just saying..perspective. Your health and the joy you give your kids in your later years isn’t measurable by you, but it is measurable by them.

  21. chuck_easton says:

    HawkFromDay1,

    That is until they sue the NFL later in life because all the money is gone and the NFL did nothing to stop them from sacrificing their own health.

    To go back to my smoking analogy. The reason the tobacco companies finally lost and had to pay billion doller settlements was due to the fact that even though the smokers knew or ought to have known that smoking was bad for their health and chose to do it anyway, the tobacco companies made hugh profits of the smokers addictions and willingly sold the smokers their ‘drug’ without at least providing an upfront warning that the use of their product could, you know, lead to your eventual painful death.

    That is how this would play out in the NFL. The NFL could easily say “ok, you want to use steriods? Be my guest, but sign this waiver” Problem is the NFL has now profitted off allowing their players to knowingly harm their bodies for life. Waiver out the window. You can’t, at law, knowingly profit off someone else’s choice to do damage to themselves. Especially if it is known that by simply not allowing the person to do something would have stopped the damage.

    It’s why in any adventure sport such as SCUBA, sky diving, or such before a tour company can take you out and allow you to seek your thrill you have to sign that very ominous and threatening waiver that says things like “YOU MAY DIE…” and “WE’VE TOLD YOU THAT YOU MAY DIE” and “EVEN THOUGH WE TOLD YOU THAT YOU MAY DIE YOU ARE STILL CRAZY ENOUGH TO DO THIS…” Even then signing the waiver isn’t enough to protect the company unless they can actually prove that they really did tell you all of this. This is why you now have to watch a video of all the things that may/can go wrong and listen to a lecture about the fact that “YOU MAY DIE…” before they let out out the door.

  22. Interesting points of view.

    I guess my take is that irrespective of the varying opinions above and the moralities of it all – the bottom line is that this usage is currently illegal in the profession in which these guys are playing, and it is costing our guys games in a crucial season. I don’t care as much about blame as I do about the practicalities of it all. And maybe it’s perceived, but it does feel like we’ve got a particularly bright light shining on our team these days, and need to do everything possible to make sure we don’t lose any more players over this issue.

  23. SlickToxic21 says:

    pdway – totally agreed

    I just don’t want my ‘hawks to be linked to past cheaters, like the Pats “Spygate”, and the Broncos and 49ers “salary manipulation” tactics of the past……….after we win 2 or 3 of the next 5 Super Bowls.

  24. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I go back and forth a lot with this subject. Should Peds be legal or not? Should Roids be legal or not? Do I fault the players for taking them anyways if they are illegal?

    Take all the illegal stuff out of the picture and the players will still have issues with the legal drugs, especially Alcohol.
    Take Alcohol and all the legal drugs, ( like prescription drugs ) out of the picture then they would will have issues with their diet, like the four major food groups that most American consume.- Fat, Cholesterol, sugar, and salt.
    Take that out of the picture and put them on the best natural diet known to mankind and things will all be fine and dandy, right?

    Well not so right. The physical nature of playing a controlled violent sport, ( for our enjoyment ) is doing as much if not more harm to the players bodies then perhaps any other thing that they put in their mouths.
    Again, I go back and forth with this issue, and see good points made from different views on this.

    I just try and stay focused on what’s best for the teams success and push my thirst for watching controlled violent sports aside and pretend they really are not hurting each other as much as they are.

  25. HawkFromDay1 says:

    I guess my only point is that I understand why players would try to push the limits of the rules, and even flat-out break the rules in the hopes they don’t get caught. The money at stake makes such risk-taking understandable – some might even say your a fool to NOT at least try to get away with it if it would help you land a $20M contract.

    The NFL (AND the players’ union!) needs to tilt that calculation in the other direction. The consequences must be so abhorrent that getting caught even once eliminates the player’s opportunity for generational wealth. That is not the case currently – PED users can still become free agents and sign massive deals.

    How about a rule that if you get caught on a PED test, your salary cannot exceed the league minimum for 5 seasons. That would do it. Have to hit the player in the wallet – and hard.

  26. With my comments I’m certainly not saying that cheating is okay with me. Its not. That goes for football and everything else in life. That said, people all around us will bend every rule every day to be successful. The higher the reward, the greater incentive to get an edge.

    Something that I think needs to be a part of the conversation is that the NFL should stop trying to live in the last century. The NFL suspends people for using “PEDs” as if “PED” means something. It means nothing.

    Pharmaceuticals are everywhere; everyone uses them. Wealthy athletes can pay top dollar for the latest designer drugs and designer masking agents. Adderall isn’t even in the category of being a real performance enhancer. Yet this is what the NFL is causing the public to focus on.

    Tell me why 30 years ago there were no (extremely few) human beings on planet earth who weighed over 300 pounds yet ran a sub-5.0 40 with a 26-inch vertical leap, yet today there are lots and lots of them coming out of the NCAA and into the NFL every year. Are we supposed to believe they create those bodies with Met-Rx milkshakes?

    I think the NFL doesn’t want to admit they are years behind the science of advancements in pharmaceuticals, and they will never catch up since all the incentive for advancement is in the hands of those selling new designer drugs. So the NFL randomly suspends a few guys here and there and hopes the public is fooled into thinking they are on top of this.

  27. mocarob says:

    Red Bryant & Jacob Green were on a NFL Films segment today. (NFL Network)
    The episode is called “Dynamic Duos” and it on again Sunday 830am

  28. jawpeace says:

    Good logic and points Chuck-e.
    I totally hear you on cigaret smoke. That is the number one thing I hate about apartment living; and I can’t wait to get into my first home next month and escape that.

  29. RDPoulsbo says:

    Perhaps they need to do something similar to what they do in cycling now and take baseline blood tests. If future tests deviate from the baseline, it can call attention that something’s up whether it’s a known or unknown substance. This would help prevent players claiming false positives with substances like HGH and such.

    As for adderall, if it’s deemed medically necessary by a doctor, I don’t have a problem with a player taking it. If they don’t have a prescription, then it has to be dealt with as any PED issue. Making it an exception opens up a can of worms with prescription drug abuse, like Favre and vicodin.

    Given all the health concerns surrounding PEDs and the status of star athletes being role models for children whether they accept it or not, I don’t think they should be a part of sports. Perhaps they have to do something such as HawkFromDay1 suggests. Being denied the ability to cash in even after a suspension will no doubt hurt, though I can see the Players Association not going along with that.

  30. SlickToxic21 says:

    Players that take Adderall should be suspended (for example) 1 game
    Players that take Steroids should be suspended for much longer than that.

  31. mocarob – thanks, that sounds like a good one not to miss.

  32. Seahawks22360 says:

    So it’s no different than a cup of coffee, what’s the big deal?

  33. Skavage says:

    Eric,

    Great article. (And I hope you know I mean that sincerely.) :)

  34. bbnate420 says:

    Seahawks22360, it’s a more powerful stimulant than caffeine. Though obviously dose matters. If, for example, you took 800 mg of caffeine or 20mg of Adderall the effect would likely be similar. Different people can have significantly different reactions to the same drug though. I don’t believe that there is sufficient proof to label Adderall as a PED, but it isn’t exactly the same thing as caffeine.

    RDPoulsbo, they must already do baseline tests on players, at least for testosterone. I’m sure most people know that humans produce testosterone naturally. What are colloquially referred to as steroids are testosterone and synthetic compounds that are very similar chemically. They couldn’t simply test for testosterone. They have to test for elevated levels of testosterone. You can’t determine what an elevated level of testosterone for an individual is if you don’t have a baseline.

    Chuck_Easton, I have to take issue again as you are passing speculation off as fact again. First off, there isn’t a scientific consensus that HGH leads to muscle growth in adults. It is believed to have a regenerative/reparative effect on muscles, tendons, etc., but that’s not the same thing as making a healthy muscle grow. It will lead to the growth of long bones in younger people whose epiphyseal plates in their long bones have not yet fully ossified yet. If HGH is a PED due to it’s healing properties, then the NFL needs to ban a lot of drugs it currently does not.

    As far as Alzado’s cancer being “directly” linked to his steroid use, that is ABSOLUTELY FALSE! Alzado made that connection. You won’t find many doctors lining up to agree with that. Regardless, even if it were true, it’s one, anecdotal case that has no scientific significance.

    The vast majority of the purported negative side effects of steroid use is based on shaky scientific evidence. Steroids are illegal for healthy individuals. You can’t conduct a study where you have a placebo group and a group receiving steroids where both groups are made up of healthy individuals. They make their assumptions by comparing people who are being prescribed steroids for medical issues to the general population. Obviously, the population being prescribed steroids due to medical issues are more likely to have medical issues than the general population. It is the best study that can be done given the law, but it is still rife with problems. Regardless, if steroids being bad for you is a reason for the NFL to ban them, then the game as a whole should be banned. Anabolic steroids are PEDs, and I do believe they should be banned in the NFL for that reason.

    Again, I think you comparing the concussion issue to PEDs is unfounded. The issue with concussions is that the players claim that the NFL had knowledge of the dangers of concussions, hid it from the players, and did nothing to try to prevent concussions. The concussions result directly from the activities required in the league. The difference is that the NFL does not have to prescribe any PEDs to players. There would be NO DIRECT connection between the players, NFL, and PEDs.

    BTW, anabolic steroids are not a “workout in a pill”. You still have to do the work. It just increases the frequency with which you can lift and gives better results. You can take all the steroids you want, but if you just sit on the couch you won’t turn into a silverback gorilla.

  35. bird_spit says:

    Like a cup of coffee but with out the caffeine fog you feel after.

    I have a long history of slamming caffeine, but ADHD drugs are much much better at allowing me to access the working memory in my job.

    I would guess the players will have to remember a large dataset on the play called, identifying the opponents play, and the tendencies of the opponent. Maybe someday there will be a google glass app for these guys to access data real time. Of course then it really wont be the NFL.

    In my opinion, whats wrong with adderall for these types of applications. Proper dosing, and these guys will have no ill effects.

    Pain killers are a very separate animal. Pain killer abuse will mask many legit issues. Adderall is like a pair of glasses for the mind.

  36. bbnate420 says:

    singularitarian, though I agree that Adderall shouldn’t be banned as a PED, it and every other drug affects people differently. I don’t believe it’s logical to say that if anyone can take it, then everyone should be able to. That’s why you have to get a prescription.

    SlickToxic, not that I have any love for Bonds, but he would’ve been a HOF player even if he had never taken PEDs. This is assuming that he didn’t take anything before the point where it is popularly believed he started taking PEDs. The PEDs took Bonds from a HOF player to a player that put up numbers never seen before for a few years. You could definitely argue that McGwire is a different story.

  37. chuck_easton says:

    Bbnate, MLB has banned HGH and tests for it. The NFL is trying to get it banned but the NFLPA won’t approve the testing procedure.

    Once the NFL starts testing for HGH you are going to see a significant increase in PED suspensions.

  38. bbnate420 says:

    Chuck_Easton, yes I know that MLB has banned it and tests for it. That’s hardly proof that it’s a PED. I wasn’t arguing if it is banned in some sports. I was arguing that there is no conclusive evidence or scientific consensus that it is a PED, which is true.

  39. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I think what it all comes down to is the players awareness of the rules. Even if they are silly rules, if players continually break them it hurts the team.

    We could argue forever what we think should be banned or not, however the reality is that if a player breaks a rule, ( no matter how silly that rule may be ) the team ultimately suffers, and so do us fans.

    I don’t care if we have a squeaky clean team ,( regarding rule breaking ) however I think we have had far too many incidents in the last year or so to make it a problem.

    Thankfully the leaders are stepping up now to resolve it.

  40. chuck_easton says:

    Well bbnate, you can continue this silly little vendetta you seem to have or you can just accept that HGH along with Testosterone are both on the MLB list of steroids. While they both occur naturally in the human body if taken in excessive concentrations they give a person a greater ability to build muscle mass.

    So maybe you should write to MLB and tell them they are wrong.

    Or you can produce the results of some scientific research that states that HGH isn’t a PED because all the lists are on my side bucko.

    But by all means continue to tell. Me I’m wrong while not producing a shred of evidence other than your hot air to try and prove you are right.

  41. bbnate420 says:

    Georgia, you are right that it hurts the team when they are suspended. I also think they should refrain from using them if they are banned due to the risk of suspension. The exception would be if they truly need the Adderall and the NFL’s doctors won’t sign off on it. If it was me and that was the case, I would sue them. That said, I believe that the league should have to prove that something is a PED to ban it or require that a player see a doctor of their choosing for a prescription.

  42. bbnate420 says:

    chuck_easton, I’m not sure why you have your draws in a twist. I did not personally insult you in my post. You’re toeing the line in yours. I will try to take the high road for once and not respond in kind. I don’t have a vendetta. I just believe in science and logic. Your post defies both IMO. It seems that you have issues with that.

    Higher levels of testosterone will help to build muscle mass. The same has not been shown with HGH. You talk about hot air, well that’s a good example. You’re just repeating a commonly held belief. Maybe it’s true. Maybe it’s not, but it hasn’t been proven. Your opinion about HGH is no more valid than someone who believes in the healing power of crystals.

    I’m not sure what you mean exactly by lists, but that’s complete nonsense. Being on a banned list of PEDs for a sport is proof of nothing but that the sport has outlawed it. If you think HGH being banned by MLB is proof that it is a PED, then you really don’t know anything about the scientific method. If you mean that there is a bunch of scientific evidence and a consensus that HGH builds muscle mass in healthy adults and improves strength, then you are dead wrong. There is scientific evidence on both sides. It is contested. Like with anabolic steroids, HGH is illegal without a prescription. This makes it hard to optimally study it’s effects on humans.

    Regardless, it’s not on me to produce ANY EVIDENCE that HGH isn’t a PED. I don’t know for sure if it is or not. I’m NOT the one making a claim. YOU are. So it’s incumbent on YOU to prove your claim. I can’t PROVE a negative. That’s basic logic right there.

    Here’s what the Mayo clinic has to say: “Human growth hormone, also known as gonadotropin, is a hormone that has an anabolic effect. Athletes take it to improve muscle mass and performance. However, it hasn’t been shown conclusively to improve either strength or endurance. It is available only by prescription and is administered by injection.”

    http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/performance-enhancing-drugs/HQ01105

    Do you want some info from Wikipedia?

    “There has never been an adequately large randomized controlled trial showing definitively that HGH provides benefits to athletes and that there are no significant adverse drug reactions; there have been many small studies and several of these studies were recently reviewed and analyzed in a meta-analysis. [4] While the authors indicated that the meta-analysis was limited by the fact that few of the included studies evaluated athletic performance and by the fact that dosing protocols in the studies may not reflect real-world doses and regimens, their conclusions were as follows:

    “Claims that growth hormone enhances physical performance are not supported by the scientific literature. Although the limited available evidence suggests that growth hormone increases lean body mass, it may not improve strength; in addition, it may worsen exercise capacity and increase adverse events. More research is needed to conclusively determine the effects of growth hormone on athletic performance.”[4]”

    “Researchers are still debating whether the more noticeable muscles are larger in size as well. It should be clarified, though, that muscle mass is not the same as muscle strength. Some say that human growth hormone will build muscle mass through raised insulin-like growth factors levels leading to heightened protein synthesis without any side effects[8] while other researchers argue that there have been no such findings on young healthy adults.[6] The second argument is more supported by research discoveries that HGH affects muscle protein synthesis no differently than a placebo does.[3]”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_hormone_in_sports

    So what were you saying about hot air?

  43. chuck_easton says:

    Well bbnate,

    You can have that argument with WADA, the NHL, MLB, the NBA.

    WADA defines growth hormone as a banned substance if it appears in concentrations that cannot be produced naturally.

    The NFL is the only pro sport that doesn’t test for it.

    The science is there. You just don’t like it so you refuse to accept it.

    That’s your issue, not mine.

  44. bbnate420 says:

    I just gave you a mountain of evidence even though you are the one with the burden of proof. Your view is pure religion. The science is not there. Waiting for you to provide any. Anytime. All you’ve come up with is hot air, as you so eloquently put it. I’m not sure why you are so attached this belief? Regardless, it is futile to argue with someone that won’t accept empirical evidence. Anyone on here that is intelligent can see who provided evidence and who didn’t. Especially since you are the one with the responsibility to support your claims. I made none about HGH being a PED or not. Good day.

  45. chuck_easton says:

    Bbnate,

    Here’s evidence that contains a link to the original FDA research that started the whole HGH ban

    http://images.nflplayers.com/mediaResources/files/Banned%20Substance%20List.pdf

    And again. As I’ve said, every major sporting league has banned the use.

    Send them the evidence. Until you convince them the use remains illegal and your argument is moot.

  46. chuck_easton says:

    Bbnate,

    More evidence.

    http://hghwatch.com/

    The FDA has banned HGH use I except in specific instances.

    Pro athletes are using it illegally because they believe it will assist in faster recovery from injury, building lean body mass, and increasing overall muscle growth.

    So, that is why it is a banned substance. Athletes are using it illegally to try to get a performance edge. Or the athletes believe it is a performing enhancement drug PED.

    Doesn’t make a bit of difference if it works. It’s being illegally marketed in that manner so it is banned.

    Add the FDA to your list of organizations you can have this fight with.

    My argument stands. The substance is banned because athletes are illegally using it as a PED.

    Maybe you should start a letter writing campaign to the NFLPA and give them all your research that HGH isn’t really a performance enhancer.

    The players think it is a PED, and they are using it illegally. Thus sports organizations have banned the substance under their PED policy.

    So it isn’t ‘religion’ as you say

  47. bbnate420 says:

    Your “evidence” is nonsense. The FDA bans HGH without a prescription because they believe it has negative health effects if taken improperly. It has NOTHING to do with whether or not it is a PED. That’s laughable. Total non sequitir.

    Whether or not it is illegal is also beside the point. The NFL is not a law enforcement organization. It’s up to the players whether or not they can get a prescription for it or choose to use it illegally.

    So whether or not it is actually a PED doesn’t matter? LOL. It only matters if the players believe it is a PED and take it as such? So, what about if players start taking caffeine pills believing that they are PEDs. Should they be banned? How about sugar packets? Pepper? I could go on. That makes ZERO sense.

    Again, whether or not any sports league bans it has provides ZERO proof of whether or not it is a PED. Perception can be reality. As long as uninformed fans such as yourself believe that it has been proven to be a PED, they believe it could hurt their bottom line. These leagues are not scientific organizations, and they don’t have the scientific evidence to back up their bans.

    The article you linked was just one anecdotal story. ZERO significance. Plus, we have no idea what other things this guy could’ve been taking. If you don’t know the difference between anecdotal evidence and large, randomized, controlled, peer-reviewed scientific studies, then there’s not much point in arguing science with you. You’re not going to convince any intelligent person who believes in the scientific method with your “evidence”.

    You’ve done everything but address the actual issue I brought up. Is there significant scientific evidence suggesting that HGH is a PED? No, there isn’t. Could it be? Sure. But the ones making the claims have the burden of proof. I don’t have to prove a negative. How many cases do you think a prosecutor would win if he simply walked into a courtroom and said for the defendant to prove he didn’t do it? None, that’s how many.

    There is evidence that HGH will help regrow muscle, tendons, ligaments, etc. in an injured individual. This is not the same thing as causing an increase in muscle strength in healthy adults. This has NOT been shown. Studies have suggested that HGH causes some increase in lean body mass in healthy adults. This is not synonymous with an increase in muscle strength and endurance. You clearly don’t have a strong understanding of anatomy and physiology.

    First, there are 2 types of tissue growth. Hypertrophic and Hyperplastic. Hypertrophy is when the SIZE of a cell increases. Hyperplasia is when the NUMBER of cells increase. Hypertrophic cell growth leads to a decrease in function and efficiency if the cell grows past a certain point. It has to do with the surface area to volume ratio of the cell. It is the reason you don’t see cells over a certain size. An enlarged heart is actually called hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. The heart muscle is larger but it actually pumps less efficiently. It leads to congestive heart failure. So larger doesn’t necessarily mean stronger or better.

    There are also 3 types of muscle fiber. Slow oxidative, fast oxidative, and fast gycolytic. They each have a different purpose. We don’t know what type of muscle growth and type of fibers that HGH grows in healthy adults.

    So, your beliefs here are religion in that you don’t have any sufficient evidence to back it up.

  48. chuck_easton says:

    bbnate,

    Fact HGH is banned by every sport except football and that is about to change.

    Only fact I need. Don’t like it. Buy a team and start fighting the system.

    Until then all you are doing is shouting at the room full of people that matter while locked outside.

    You just don’t like that someone has the nerve to disagree with you.

    While get used to it. You’re wrong in this and there is nothing that will change that.

    As long as players continue to illegally take HGH in an ‘off-label’ manner the league will continue to ban its use and will eventually force the NFLPA to agree to a test.

    Can’t wait to listen to all the hand wringing from you at that point about how unfair it is. :)

    It’s not that I disagree with you about HGH being more of a supliment to steriods. The fact is the synthetic drug was developed and approved by the FDA for the primary purpose of helping children with stunted growth to have an opportunity to live a better life.

    It was never developed so 300 lb giants could use it to heal quicker and get back on the field sooner. Mis use = illegal. Illegal = banned.

    You can’t refute that. Nobody cares about whether you think it shouldn’t be clasified as a PED. All the sports have done it. So again. Your argument is moot.

  49. bbnate420 says:

    Actually, YOU don’t care if I think it should be banned as a PED. That doesn’t mean everyone. I guess you’re narcissistic and egomaniacal enough to think that translates to everyone. I’m not arguing with anyone in any of those sports. I’m arguing with YOU. Apparently you can’t read very well.

    “Steriods, HGH, and other substances will give an athelete a bigger body and allow him/her to succeed. The reason WADA and professional sports decided to make this ‘illegal’ was it was giving people an unfair competive advantage over other competitors. (i.e. the entire East German Olympic team’s in the 1980′s).”

    YOU said that! Not the NFL. Not the NBA or anyone else you want to use to skirt the issue since you can’t logically defend your post. YOU. YOU made that stupid and unsubstantiated statement. Own up to it. I never argued that players shouldn’t refrain from using substances that could get them banned. I questioned the validity of the ban and your ignorant statement. Try reading my posts and you could see that.

    And you don’t have to buy a team to question what the owners do. They can’t just do whatever they want to because they own a team. I would think that as a lawyer you would know that laws could be enacted or interpreted that would prevent the owners from banning these. Though maybe judging by the type of logic that you employ you do not.

    “Synthetic human growth hormone was developed in 1985 and approved by the FDA for specific uses in children and adults. In children, HGH injections are approved for treating short stature of unknown cause as well as poor growth due to a number of medical causes, including:

    Turner’s syndrome, a genetic disorder that affects a girl’s development.
    Prader-Willi syndrome, an uncommon genetic disorder causing poor muscle tone, low levels of sex hormones, and a constant feeling of hunger.
    Chronic kidney insufficiency.
    HGH deficiency or insufficiency.
    Children born small for gestational age.

    In adults, approved uses of HGH include:

    Short bowel syndrome, a condition in which nutrients are not properly absorbed due to severe intestinal disease or the surgical removal of a large portion of the small intestine.
    HGH deficiency due to rare pituitary tumors or their treatment.
    Muscle-wasting disease associated with HIV/AIDS.

    But the most common uses for HGH are not FDA-approved. Some people use the hormone, along with other performance-enhancing drugs such as anabolic steroids, to build muscle and improve athletic performance. Yet HGH’s effect on athletic performance is unknown.”

    http://www.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/human-growth-hormone-hgh

    That’s from WebMD. Try to read it and understand it. So, it wasn’t just developed for children with stunted growth. Even if a drug is developed for one purpose, that doesn’t mean it can’t be used for others if found to be helpful. Again, you are ignorant about medicine which makes your arguments and attempts at logic sad.

    There’s a difference between a medication being APPROVED by the FDA for certain uses and being BANNED or RESTRICTED by the FDA. For MOST medications, an FDA approval of a medication for certain treatments does NOT prohibit a doctor from prescribing it for other purposes.

    The argument is stupid anyways. Was Tramadol developed so that 300 pound men could destroy each others’ bodies? Were NSAIDs? Corticosteroids? No. As I said before, if you think the NFL has a responsibility to ban anything that is bad for the players, then they should ban the game. You’re a hypocrite if you disagree.

  50. bbnate420 says:

    I also think it’s funny that you still haven’t bothered to address any of the specifics that I brought up. You have no factual backing to your statement so you’re reduced to the one argument that sports leagues have banned it. I never argued that they hadn’t. You are reduced to a straw man argument.

    And it’s not just that I don’t like that you disagree with me. That’s just another deflection due to your inability to support your statements. I have provided relevant evidence. You have not. And this is in spite of the fact that you were the one with the burden of proof. You’re analogous to a dog with a bone at this point.

  51. chuck_easton says:

    Bbnate,

    That’s the thing. I don’t have to prove anything to you. And even if I did you wouldn’t accept it because it isn’t what you want to believe.

    I don’t have to justify to you, who are nothing, why the sports leagues have listed HGH as a PED. The fact is they have and there is nothing you can do to change that no matter how much you whine and cry. Deal with it.

    As I was taught as a child, ” never waste your time trying to teach a pig to sing. It just frustrates you and annoys the pig,”

    Your singing lessons are over.

    Try arguing with someone who actually gives a damn what you think is or isn’t a PED. You don’t have a say, and the people that do have determined t is.

    Have fun being an insignificant whiner. I will be here to further gloat when the NFL bans HGH as a PED. It will be so much fun to watch you implode!

  52. bbnate420 says:

    You are a pathetic, idiotic, illogical loser. It’s quite sad what you’ve reduced your argument to. You couldn’t back up your statement with any science or logic. You flail about with the one, pathetic straw man argument you have left. I can definitely see why you were a cop, but I can’t imagine that you’ve ever won a case as a lawyer with these pathetic tactics. Enjoy your life, loser.

  53. Chuck got jobbed….. Hehehe : )

  54. bbnate420 says:

    Jusjamn, what do you mean?

  55. Jusjamn says:

    I mean that IMO you made your point, proved it and Chuck must have been having a bad day. Good job Nate

  56. bbnate420 says:

    Thanks. I wasn’t sure. I apologized to Sluggo too, if you care.

  57. GeorgiaHawk says:

    bbnate420- Time to apologize to Chuck.

  58. bbnate420 says:

    Georgia, not sure that’s going to happen. Go back and read through the argument. I was hardly the one attacking him unprovoked. This wasn’t at all the same situation that it was with Sluggo. I could’ve taken the high road, but I was hardly the one most at fault IMO.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0