Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
hammerlockthree

Can we talk about PEDs on here?

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Boompa said:

Imagine a 35 year old John Wayne in WW2 when the average age of a frontline soldier was 19.  Woke!

Impossible the wild west was from 1865-1895 world war 2 was 1939-1945 he also died in the shootist in 1901 never even seeing the first world war :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am curious about what the range of substances the NCAA would consider to be PEDs, and what types of PEDs wrestlers would specifically use. Regarding the latter, I am guessing it would not only be substances that enhance strength, but also stuff that might help with weight cutting and recovery. As for the former, it's unclear what the parameters are for PEDs. 

Jordan Oliver was suspended by USAW after testing positive for a banned substance. I don't know if it was an FDA-approved drug but IIRC JO said it was a prescribed medication, and he tried filing for a medical use exemption. Another athlete in the Pac-12 got benched by his program because he had mono or something and a trainer gave him some kind of medication or herbal supplement without first clearing it with their compliance(?) department. He was disallowed from competing until the substance was no longer detectable in his system. Not to be Pollyanna-ish about it, but it sounds like there's a pretty broad definition of what constitutes a performance enhancing drug if athletes may not even know. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, PSUSMC said:

Vietnam was 19, WW2 was 26

35 is not 26 and even the 26 is not entirely true and for WW2 it is more like 20-25.  The biggest reason for that is over 50% of soldiers drafted for ground combat units were 18 but by 1945 were 20-25.  Of those 18 year olds that were drafted, over 80% went to replacement companies/battalions.  The draft was amped up a whole year before the outbreak of war in 1941.

Vietnam had a one year tour, hence 19.

It would've been extremely rare for a 35 year old to be drafted for a ground combat unit.  Maybe if he had a criminal record but was still in good physical condition.

You have to dig deeper than the headline on a google search.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Boompa said:

35 is not 26 and even the 26 is not entirely true and for WW2 it is more like 20-25.  The biggest reason for that is over 50% of soldiers drafted for ground combat units were 18 but by 1945 were 20-25.  Of those 18 year olds that were drafted, over 80% went to replacement companies/battalions.  The draft was amped up a whole year before the outbreak of war in 1941.

Vietnam had a one year tour, hence 19.

It would've been extremely rare for a 35 year old to be drafted for a ground combat unit.  Maybe if he had a criminal record but was still in good physical condition.

You have to dig deeper than the headline on a google search.

 To be clear, you’re disputing the average age of troops in WWII, but you agree Wayne was a douchebag, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/14/2019 at 2:18 PM, Boompa said:

35 is not 26 and even the 26 is not entirely true and for WW2 it is more like 20-25.  The biggest reason for that is over 50% of soldiers drafted for ground combat units were 18 but by 1945 were 20-25.  Of those 18 year olds that were drafted, over 80% went to replacement companies/battalions.  The draft was amped up a whole year before the outbreak of war in 1941.

Vietnam had a one year tour, hence 19.

It would've been extremely rare for a 35 year old to be drafted for a ground combat unit.  Maybe if he had a criminal record but was still in good physical condition.

You have to dig deeper than the headline on a google search.

I was using the Paul Hardcastle data, lol.

But I did "dig deep" in a gunfight or two. No google searches necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Serious question that I can't find an answer to. 

When did PED's become illegal for NCAA athletes?    Please no guesses, I'm looking for someone who has information on the actual year the rules went into place and what were the rules. 

Secondly, how do we judge teams and athletes who used different drugs or supplements that were legal at the time and later became banned?  John Smith use to do ads for creatine (Chewtrition I believe) and many wrestlers used it to help with muscle growth. If I recall correctly, in one season 3 wrestlers died of dehydration complications and all were using creatine. i'm not sure if it became banned or not, but if so, do we go back and strip any wrestlers of awards who used it in years it was legal.  

Same question with other drugs or supplements.  Such as, if a wrestler used HGH before it was banned, should their accomplishments be tarnished or negated. Suppose concentrated protein powders that help build muscle but became known to be harmful, became banned at some point. 

My feeling is that if it was legal to use at the time,  no foul. 

Edited by 77again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, 77again said:

Serious question that I can't find an answer to. 

When did PED's become illegal for NCAA athletes?    Please no guesses, I'm looking for someone who has information on the actual year the rules went into place and what were the rules. 

Secondly, how do we judge teams and athletes who used different drugs or supplements that were legal at the time and later became banned?  John Smith use to do ads for creatine (Chewtrition I believe) and many wrestlers used it to help with muscle growth. If I recall correctly, in one season 3 wrestlers died of dehydration complications and all were using creatine. i'm not sure if it became banned or not, but if so, do we go back and strip any wrestlers of awards who used it in years it was legal.  

Same question with other drugs or supplements.  Such as, if a wrestler used HGH before it was banned, should their accomplishments be tarnished or negated. Suppose concentrated protein powders that help build muscle but became known to be harmful, became banned at some point. 

My feeling is that if it was legal to use at the time,  no foul. 

Good question. I wondered how the banned substance list works with the NCAA. There’s so much stuff out there, especially today there’s a ton of designer & compounded drugs available, plus ways to evade detection, the FDA can’t keep up with it all. And like you said fad supplements and substances that are widespread could later be banned, like Ephedrine. It’s almost easier for the NCAA to have a whitelist of acceptable meds than a blacklist of banned substances. Or maybe they just describe stuff that would be banned very broadly, like “providing anabolic benefits by accelerating the metabolization of x,y, and z proteins” or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Gimpeltf. So testing started in 86.

I'm not sure that answers when the rules were first in place. I guess we could assume the rules were in the books right around then, but maybe a bit earlier and testing came later.

Pamela is correct about this being an ongoing battle of defining prohibited substances. 

It does not appear that creatine was banned, but marijuana is. Personally I would have been thrilled to have an opponent who was a heavy marijuana user. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, 77again said:

 

It does not appear that creatine was banned, but marijuana is. Personally I would have been thrilled to have an opponent who was a heavy marijuana user. 

That made me laugh.  Never read a sentence like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 77again said:

Thanks Gimpeltf. So testing started in 86.

I'm not sure that answers when the rules were first in place. I guess we could assume the rules were in the books right around then, but maybe a bit earlier and testing came later.

Pamela is correct about this being an ongoing battle of defining prohibited substances. 

It does not appear that creatine was banned, but marijuana is. Personally I would have been thrilled to have an opponent who was a heavy marijuana user. 

Creatine is legal as long as the school doesn't pay for it (no idea why). I don't know if they proved that the kids all took it. I think they knew 2 of the 3 did. All 3 did show increased levels of creatinin but that happens when the body overheats as these all did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, 77again said:

Serious question that I can't find an answer to. 

When did PED's become illegal for NCAA athletes?    Please no guesses, I'm looking for someone who has information on the actual year the rules went into place and what were the rules. 

Secondly, how do we judge teams and athletes who used different drugs or supplements that were legal at the time and later became banned?  John Smith use to do ads for creatine (Chewtrition I believe) and many wrestlers used it to help with muscle growth. If I recall correctly, in one season 3 wrestlers died of dehydration complications and all were using creatine. i'm not sure if it became banned or not, but if so, do we go back and strip any wrestlers of awards who used it in years it was legal.  

Same question with other drugs or supplements.  Such as, if a wrestler used HGH before it was banned, should their accomplishments be tarnished or negated. Suppose concentrated protein powders that help build muscle but became known to be harmful, became banned at some point. 

My feeling is that if it was legal to use at the time,  no foul. 

Nobody should ever be tarnished for using substances that were legal and allowed at the time they took them. If the wrestler took a permitted substance, then who is to say his opponents weren’t also taking them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/15/2019 at 7:34 PM, 77again said:

My feeling is that if it was legal to use at the time,  no foul. 

best way that I can compare it is to the UFC. 

Prior to USADA being adopted by the UFC, their testing policy was essentially a stupidity test.  You knew exactly when to cycle off so you could give a clean test the day of or day after a fight.

No one ever contests the validity of the fighters during that time's accomplishments because the universally accepted theory is - everyone was on something.  You do however hear praise for those that crossed from pre-USADA to post-USADA eras, continued the same amount of success and never tested hot.  (A prime example of the opposite of this is Johnny Hendricks - who's success fell off a cliff after USADA)

As far as your other questions in the post I really have no idea.  But what I do know is that the NCAA is still in that "stupidity test" area of testing for PEDs.  Coaches/Athletes know when the tests are coming and avoid testing hot during those times. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...