-
Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Would you rather live in a world without PEDs?
strong enough?
Member
I will give you some real life examples of what you are saying is interesting -
The riders who can't keep up with the pack in tour de france
The sprinters that don't make the olympic finals or for that matter the olympic team
Honestly at that elite level if they are using PED's it is probably 1/100th of the equation they already have something we never will; natural ability, drive, genetics, mental strength and years (normally decades) of hard training. It isn't the drugs that make them great athletes it's a combination of all the above factors.
Callans example is perfect no matter how much test & GH you jacked your not gonna bench 200kg unless you are 1) naturally gifted 2) built for benching 3) Trained for many many years. Don't diminish peoples achievements. Whether your Mr O a competitive PL'er, sprinter, cyclist the drugs don't make the athlete.
A counter-example for you. Prior to the mid 1980s, the IPF did not test for PEDs. At that stage, the IPF was pretty much it when it came to international powerlifting federations. It had the oldest record books and the most competitors (still has the highest participation). The introduction of drug testing was one of the factors that led to splitting into various factions of the sport. But a curious thing happened - the old records were never wiped - they stayed on the books.
In 2010, the IPF changed the weight divisions. Part of the reason for this I suspect was to indirectly expunge drug assisted records from the books.
If you look at the IPF world records prior to 2010 (when the weight divisions changed), you'll find most of the squat and bench records were set recently, due to advancements in supportive equipment. However, looking at the deadlift is the most interesting. There is very little to gain from equipment in the deadlift so it's more of a test of raw strength.
Most of the deadlift records were set in the 1980s before the introduction of drug testing and were never broken in the IPF. How sports have world records that survived for 30 years? one of the athletes that broke one of the pre-drug test records subsequently tested positive to steroids twice and was banned for life (Ed Coan).
The same thing can be seen after the introduction of drug testing in Australian powerlifting. There used to be one federation which competed in the IPF. After the introduction of drug-testing there was a split, thereby creating PA (IPF) and CAPO (WPC). PA wiped the records set before 1991 but they are still around to look at (because they are still on the CAPO record books). Most of the pre-drug testing records were never been beaten in PA before the introduction of the new IPF weight divisions and the old records were frozen. The talent pool never reduced - participation removed high, the coaching IP was still there, and the supportive equipment actually improved, but the pre-drug testing records were rarely beaten. I wonder why.
PEDs won't make Joe Average an elite athlete. But they will make an elite athlete a better elite athlete than he or she would have otherwise been. Which is exactly why anti-doping started in the first place.
In a pure strength sport like powerlifting, I am confident that PEDs have the potential to allow an elite gifted athlete to gain 10-20% over what they would otherwise be capable of.
strong enough?
Member
and FYI, there is now a reliable test for HGH and IGF-1. A UK rugby player was the first to be busted. The only problem is you have to test within a 24 hour window of the person taking the substance. Its not hard to target test though, because you'd be looking for the guy recovering from an injury - this is where the biggest performance benefit is. Elite olympic athletes will be the subject of targetted out of comp testing a lot more in the near future now they have a workable test.
There were rumours on Twitter that Dane Swan was taking HGH. ASADA tested the bloke several times within several days while he was on a recovery trip in Arizona. The tests were done sometimes at 6am and he was woken up by the testers to do them.
Also, NRL players are tested - even second grade NSWRL players. In fact, they have one of the biggest hit rates. Several guys in the NSWRL have been banned in the past few years for various substances. You can look up historical results on ASADA's website. Technically, ASADA can test in amatuer aussie rules too, but it isn't well resourced - it depends on the league and the level. VFL gets tested, but generally not the lower grade comps. The WAFL gets a grant from the WA government to conduct testing. A few guys have been caught - total amateur players - some for game day stimulants (pseudoephedrine, DMAA etc), others for steroids.
FWIW, powerlifters competing in PA get tested way more than most of these athletes. They do out of comp tests at Melbourne Uni at least 4-5 times a year. Some guys get tested out-of-comp 10 times a year (plus however many times at actual comps), which is a lot compared to many professional/olympic athletes.
There were rumours on Twitter that Dane Swan was taking HGH. ASADA tested the bloke several times within several days while he was on a recovery trip in Arizona. The tests were done sometimes at 6am and he was woken up by the testers to do them.
Also, NRL players are tested - even second grade NSWRL players. In fact, they have one of the biggest hit rates. Several guys in the NSWRL have been banned in the past few years for various substances. You can look up historical results on ASADA's website. Technically, ASADA can test in amatuer aussie rules too, but it isn't well resourced - it depends on the league and the level. VFL gets tested, but generally not the lower grade comps. The WAFL gets a grant from the WA government to conduct testing. A few guys have been caught - total amateur players - some for game day stimulants (pseudoephedrine, DMAA etc), others for steroids.
FWIW, powerlifters competing in PA get tested way more than most of these athletes. They do out of comp tests at Melbourne Uni at least 4-5 times a year. Some guys get tested out-of-comp 10 times a year (plus however many times at actual comps), which is a lot compared to many professional/olympic athletes.
PEDs won't make Joe Average an elite athlete. But they will make an elite athlete a better elite athlete than he or she would have otherwise been. Which is exactly why anti-doping started in the first place.
In a pure strength sport like powerlifting, I am confident that PEDs have the potential to allow an elite gifted athlete to gain 10-20% over what they would otherwise be capable of.
Interesting points you have made looking at powerlifting specifically and all very very valid. My post was directed at the op that was writing off athletes achievements because of their PED use. I guess in a purely strength based sport then yes it may equate to 1/10 of the equation but there are so many other variables to take into account genetics, pre-disposition to injury, mental strength etc etc.
Something that makes me curious is at the top level of sport how much the PED's are responsible for the performance enhancment and how much is psychological with the athlete having mental edge in thinking he has an advantage over his competitors.
Using Usain Bolt as the example if every other day his coach gave him a shot of placebo and told him it was an undetectable PED would the subsequent mental advantage make him faster and stronger or is he already equipped with such mental strength that he is at his physical limits and can only go faster through the use of a compound that makes physical changes in the body?
Last edited:
strong enough?
Member
It would depend on the drug. "game day" PEDs like stimulants could have a mental component.
I think there's no doubting that AAS is predominantly a physical advantage - I would be surprised if there was a mental advantage unless the athlete was unusually mentally weak. But it only really works over a period of time by allowing you train harder than otherwise would have been able to. Those with the mental attitude to train like a maniac will take the most advantage of AAS.
I think there's no doubting that AAS is predominantly a physical advantage - I would be surprised if there was a mental advantage unless the athlete was unusually mentally weak. But it only really works over a period of time by allowing you train harder than otherwise would have been able to. Those with the mental attitude to train like a maniac will take the most advantage of AAS.
It would depend on the drug. "game day" PEDs like stimulants could have a mental component.
I think there's no doubting that AAS is predominantly a physical advantage - I would be surprised if there was a mental advantage unless the athlete was unusually mentally weak. But it only really works over a period of time by allowing you train harder than otherwise would have been able to. Those with the mental attitude to train like a maniac will take the most advantage of AAS.
There was a study done but fucked if I can find it again. They gave one group placebo and told them it was gear and another group nothing. The group taking the placebo gear gained much more muscle and strength than the group that didnt take anything.
strong enough?
Member
There was a study done but fucked if I can find it again. They gave one group placebo and told them it was gear and another group nothing. The group taking the placebo gear gained much more muscle and strength than the group that didnt take anything.
Well there you go!
On the other hand, there was a generation of Eastern Bloc athletes who were involuntarily doped by their coaches and dominated sport until the West caught up. Pretty sure the athletes were just told they were "vitamins". This is what pioneered AAS supplementation for sport in the first place.
An interesting study would be to use a group given steroids as the control group, and see how strong the placebo effect is relative to the physical changes.