Steroid abuse and use, for many the two are one in the same, but for others, there is a stark difference. For some, any steroid use is abuse simply because in their eyes there truly is no legitimate reason for anabolic steroidal supplementation. Look at the steroid baseball hearings held by the U.S. congress in the early stages of the 21st century; the U.S. congress spent more time discussing anabolic steroids than it did on the war in Iraq or health care thereby simply reinforcing this demonized issue. Then we have those such as Dr. Gary Wadler, the go to guy for the anti-anabolic steroid crowd; in Dr. Wadler’s eyes the issue is clear; steroid abuse and use are so interconnected any studies surrounding anabolic steroids past or present are meaningless, and in his words studies that will never be done.
Then we have the big one, the one that blows all other examples out of the water. During the steroid hearings of the 1980’s, the U.S. congress called to the stand the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the American Medical Association (AMA) to testify against the use of anabolic steroids in an effort to classify the hormones as controlled substances. Of course, the three agencies all opposed the ban citing there was no medical evidence to classify such items; nevertheless, the issue of steroid abuse and use as one in the same was so entrenched in the hearts and minds of congress the DEA, FDA and AMA’s testimony was ignored. Consequently, the U.S. congress passed the Steroid Control Act of 1990, officially classifying anabolic androgenic steroids as Schedule III controlled substances, and since that time, there has been no turning back.
With all of this in mind, one question remains, and it is one that for decades has stared us in the face; how do we define and separate steroid abuse and use? Is there a separation, by U.S. law they can be prescribed legally to treat specific medical conditions, but in many cases, many physicians are so petrified of legal consequences they won’t prescribe them out of a fear of harsh legal repercussions. Of course, many more won’t prescribe them because they’ve been brainwashed by those such as Dr. Wadler, U.S. Congressmen Henry Waxman or Vice President Joe Biden, one of the principal players in the 1990 Act that ignored its own government’s testimony. Of course, luckily for you, we have the answer to this question; no, we cannot change the law with our answer, but we actually have answers that define steroid abuse and use, and more importantly, we have answers that make sense; now isn’t that a novel idea?
Under the Steroid Control Act of 1990, reinforced by the Steroid Control Act of 2004, anabolic androgenic steroids are classified as Schedule III controlled substances. By this legislation, it is against the law to manufacture, sell or possess anabolic androgenic steroids without a legitimate medical purpose. Such legitimate medical purposes includes treating hormone deficiencies such as low testosterone, Andropause or to combat specific menopause related symptoms, to combat severe muscle wasting diseases, to aid burn victims and of course, to aid one in becoming a member of the transgender community. Yes, you read that correctly, while living a transgender lifestyle is not a need but a desire, somehow it is protected by law when it comes to anabolic steroids.
Of the reasons one might be prescribed anabolic steroids hormone deficiencies are the most common, and they are often said to be the most abused. It is very difficult to clarify specifically what adequate hormone ranges are for a specific human being when we are all unique human beings, and this is where many physicians have a lot of fear. Because of this problem, many physicians skew away from truly helping patients with these problems for they fear steroid abuse and use might be viewed as one in the same in-regards to their treatment plan. As you can see, it is a messed up system, and because it’s one of the worst systems on planet earth many continue to take action into their own hands. In any case, by the definition of U.S. law, any person who supplements with anabolic androgenic steroids for the purpose of performance or any purpose not discussed above has crossed the line of steroid abuse and use; the question remains, is this a fair claim?
It doesn’t take a genius to see, the issue of steroid abuse and use as defined by U.S. law is beyond borderline idiotic, it crosses far beyond such a line; in-fact, it’s almost an insult to one’s intelligence. If you have cancer or aids, here are some anabolic steroids, they’ll not only save your life they’ll improve it. If you’re a woman, but you want to be a man, here you go have all the anabolic steroids you need because your desires are our needs. Suffer from an androgen deficiency, that’s fine we have steroids that will help you, but take just enough we don’t want you to be helped too much. In many ways, the steroid laws of the United States, especially in the manner that they define steroid abuse and use may indeed be some of the worst laws we’ve ever passed. Is that a stretch, maybe but not by much; after all, it is akin to modern day prohibition in many ways, but unlike alcohol which we know kills thousands every year, there is no reason for such laws regarding anabolic steroids in the U.S.; speaking of prohibition, how did that work out for us again?
As stated above, it doesn’t take a genius to see, the issue of steroid abuse and use as defined by U.S. law is more than flawed, but it begs the question, if that’s the case how should we define it? The answer to this question is quite simple and requires basic logic; something missing from the passing of the Steroid Control Acts. Put simply, if we supplement with anabolic steroids and cause ourselves or anyone else harm we can call this steroid abuse, and use is any use that does not cause harm to us or anyone else. Let’s break it down so even those in congress can understand:
By our sane definition above, steroid abuse and use are separated by any use that does not cause anyone including ourselves any harm; simple, yet to the point, and more importantly it makes sense. While the above is a solid definition, we can actually take it much further, and by doing so, we hold to the purest definition of liberty that could ever be provided. By this definition, we define steroid abuse and use as any use that causes no one else any harm; end of story. If we cause ourselves harm that is on us and us alone, but we are free to make this choice for ourselves. If we believe anabolic steroid use can help us, if we are supplementing in a way that does not infringe upon the liberty of another, and if we cause no harm to another we have not infringed upon their liberty then we are free to supplement. This is the same choice every human being makes when they smoke or drink alcohol; for that matter, this is a choice every human being makes when they get behind the wheel of the car. They are free to make a choice, they are free to drive a car; if they start driving the car into crowds of people they have abused this right, but if they lose control and hit a tree this was a risk they took but one that did not infringe upon the rights of others.
In either case, with our sane definition of steroid abuse and use or our enhanced model, both present sound claims with much more meat on them than the definition provided by U.S. law; of course, we can take it even further yet again. When it comes to the issue of abuse, many of the claims made that led to the steroid legislation and that are continually made by the anti-anabolic steroid crowd have time and time again proven to be false:
In the end, the truth is abundantly clear; the issue of steroid abuse and use has been blurred for reasons far outside their purported intent. The reasons such a distortion exists, now that is unclear, and your guess is as good as ours, and there are many sound arguments that can be made; nevertheless, the distortion is in full view. Of course, many people are fine with it; they have no desire to supplement with anabolic steroids for any reason; unlike prohibition, it affects far less people. Even so, by our own governments estimates more than six-million U.S. adults supplement with anabolic steroids for the purpose of performance enhancement, these are the numbers we know of, but market sales indicate it’s at least two times this amount if not three times. As you can see, that’s a whole lot of steroidal supplementation, and as such is an issue that affects many people, and if you’re reading this there’s a good chance it affects you.
Of course, many will claim “it is what it is”, they’ll shrug their shoulders and continue to supplement in the shadows like an ashamed scalded dog. In many ways, it’s a little odd; statistics have shown us the majority of anabolic steroid users in the U.S. are employed, they have no criminal records; they’re often college graduates, more often than those who don’t supplement, and for all intense purposes upstanding members of the community. If this is the case, and we assure you, it is, why are so many content with the way things are; why do they let the current definition reign supreme? This is a question that is both confusing yet provides an answer at the same time. Most who supplement just want to be left alone; they have jobs, and they have families and they’re not big on getting their hands dirty. You won’t find them protesting in Time Square for weeks on end without taking a shower; these people actually have lives to live. Unfortunately, the steroid users of the United States are shooting themselves in the foot; if there ever was a group of people who could change a piece of legislation this would be it. If the prohibition act could be reversed, if a constitutional amendment could be reversed could this horrific legislation not be turned just the same? Of course it could, but it will take anabolic steroid users like you to see such a change occur, and remaining silent will never get the job done. Keep this in mind; if this continues to go ignored the next thing you know is congress might start trying to take away other basic liberties. Who knows, they might actually try to limit how many french-fries you can eat; wait a minute, that’s already been proposed. All-in-all we say it again; the truth is simple, if the issue of steroid abuse and use is to ever hold to a true definition, if the law is to ever hold to true justices in a sense that protects liberty you’re going to have to be the one that makes a change, and that’s the bottom line.
