# HGH in the league?



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

> Investigations must happen before anything can be said with any real certainty. Once the facts are had, we can distort them however we choose to. We can play them up, or set them on an angle, or misrepresent them altogether. Sourced, hard information must come before anyone is accused in earnest.
> 
> But with that said, please have a look for yourself at photographs of the body types of NBA players in the 1980s compared to those today. Hell, look at those as recently as 2000. There is a very clear trend: players are bigger, stronger, faster, and more athletic than ever before.
> 
> ...


Brings up some good points and points a suspicious finger toward Phoenix...

http://theondeckcircle.net/2009/03/the-needle-and-the-damage-done-the-nba-and-hgh/

When the **** hit the fan in baseball and in the NFL to an extent, I wondered why people didn't ever consider basketball. I guess it's one of those in the back of your minds things.

I don't really think it would directly effect production the way it does in baseball, but it would definitely keep players fresh, allowing them more workout time and to still be strong at the end of games.


----------



## Dwho15 (Dec 7, 2007)

Makes since , they should really check people like DH12 and Lebron , before it gets out of there system .


----------



## unluckyseventeen (Feb 5, 2006)

I wouldn't go as far to say that they are using HGH or anything. It's undenyable that the use of supplements and huge amounts of protein in your diet has skyrocketed since the mid-90's, and I'd say that along with ridiculous training (and additional conditioning coaches) is the reason for the supreme athletes in today's league.


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

LeBron has been 220+ Pounds since he was a sophmore in HS...If he was taking steroids, he's probably been taking them since he was 15 years old


----------



## sknydave (Apr 27, 2006)

lol.. "if"


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

It's not about Lebron or Dwight, I'm not pointing fingers. But you have to admit in general, HGH would benefit a lot of players in the league. I think it's very naive to think in a league of hundreds of players noone uses or has used it.


----------



## Jakain (Sep 8, 2006)

It is definitely naive and borderline stupid if you think players in the NBA don't use illegal substances like HGH.

The NBA seems to have one of the most lax drug policies of the big sports and has players that definitely don't "look right" however that can also be attributed to being a human phenomenom and life-long and professional atheletic training.

Nate Robinson comes to mind...he's a beast athletically but for some reason his body/head doesn't look "right". I've always wondered how much juice he's used.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Poor Tmac...looks like the one guy who needs it and refuses to use it.



> Nate Robinson comes to mind...he's a beast athletically and for some reason his body/head doesn't look "right".


WTH!!!!


----------



## Jakain (Sep 8, 2006)

HB said:


> WTH!!!!


Yea, as much as I want to pull for a dunk champion thats as tall as I am...something about his physique seems unnatural.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

Absolutely not!!


















That James has gained weight is as much a mystery to him as anyone else. He doesn't gulp protein shakes or pound down extra carbs, instead eating three square meals (such as oatmeal, chicken, salmon) prepared by his chef, with the occasional candy snack in between. "It's kind of crazy," James says. "My body's, like, reversed."



It's all about eating the right oat meal at the right time. You don't need no carbs, no proteins, no supplements to make up for your heavy duty workout regiments.

You just need the oat meal and some chicken. Comeee onnn buddy. NBA's a joke.


Oh and yeah - just blame it all on "evolution" of weight lifting and "better athletic coaches".

Yup.

Human budy got all of a sudden better, muscles evolved due to better coaches.

Damn I never thought books could alter basic human genetics.


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)




----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

Yeah...his biceps' look enormous in that last picture...almost like Mister Olympia, but bigger...


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

Dre™;5892044 said:


> I don't really think it would directly effect production the way it does in baseball, but it would definitely keep players fresh, allowing them more workout time and to still be strong at the end of games.


How does this make any sense?

If they use now PED's - which I'm sure they all are - they can play for 40 minutes at the same pace like players 10 years ago played for 30 minutes. Figuratively speaking.


Listen to someone who actually...played...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xm6vBTbB5Q

and at the end of this interview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OckW3Ayg2A


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)




----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

This year -









Rookie -









Because we know LeBron has gotten SOOOO much bigger since he was a rookie, and that his weight / muscle gain is something unheard of.

DNKO turn off your LeBron James nightlight and go to bed.


----------



## Vuchato (Jan 14, 2006)

^he doesn't look that much bigger


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Most NBA players are trying to get smaller, not 'bigger'


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

I didn't know Getty images does photo manipulation?

He doesn't have any neck anymore.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Lebron was 18 as a rookie!

God I gained 30 pounds of muscle between the ages of 15 and 17 and another 20 between the ages of 20 and 21. And today I'm only 6'4" 200 pounds. Lebron just started off with a better base than most people.

Hell **** put up a Kobe pic of 1996 versus 2001 or 2.

Robert Horry in 92 versus 98.

Lamar Odom... etc....


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

Damn, if only some of you went to play pro basketball with those god given genes.

So you're saying that you build your muscle mass with regular food and workouts?

DAMN those body builders are dumb as hell, if only they knew about the "NBA" - a place where you make your muscles grow while you work out and make up for burned calories with simple steak from kwiki mart.

It's so simple man...so simple.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

^Lol at this guy. I suggest you watch a real NBA training camp clip, specifically the Hornets and tell me how a player doesn't come out of that not being in shape. Do you know how many people who have guarded Bron have commented on how insanely strong he is? Do you see how high he jumps? There's no one in the MLB that can even come close.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

HGH isn't a drug.It's a hormone that every human has inside them(unless you're a dwarf in which case you should go get some).Therefore it's virtually impossible to detect it's use.In fact some people naturally produce a lot more HGH than others.This makes it extremely unlikely that any reliable test will be available in the short term and even if you had a test it'd still be hard to make the results stick.


Of course this makes it extremely likely that it's being used instead of steroids which are detectable and more dangerous as well.Personally I'm not sure that HGH is ideal for basketball.It would make you bulkier and stronger(if you also worked out to increase strength only),but other than that the advantages for basketball are not clear.If you're a child and you're growing then HGH will make you grow taller,but I don't know that you'd get taller after you naturally stopped growing as an adolescent or young man.Then if you grew like Kenny George that wouldn't make you well coordinated or skilled...being a giant really isn't a magical panacea that makes you a great basketball player.It only helps you if you can play.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

Again...I find this theories about HGH too complex for average person to comment.

Someone who actually knows about it, could elaborate even more on the subject. And the mere fact that it's so complicated makes me ignore it, and so do many NBA fans.

I don't care. I hope they take it as much as they can so their heads bloat to a point when other players mistake them for basketball. 

I stopped caring for WWE: NBA a long time ago.


----------



## Spaceman Spiff (Aug 2, 2006)

HB said:


> Poor Tmac...looks like the one guy who needs it and refuses to use it.


Don't be so sure, see that right arm.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

DNKO said:


> Damn, if only some of you went to play pro basketball with those god given genes.
> 
> So you're saying that you build your muscle mass with regular food and workouts?
> 
> ...


Yeah they probably consume in the 6,000 calorie mark a day.

If you saw what I ate in a day when I was 19, it was enough for a sedentary man to eat in a week.

When I hit my growth spurt I grew 5 inches in 4 months. My weight didn't grow much with it. I was 6'4" 144 pounds. My body was begging me to add muscle. And I put on those 30 pounds in the summer just from lifiting weights and eating a **** ton, not even much protein shakes... and that was while I was playing AAU.

If a 35 year old gains 40 pounds of muscle in months like Bonds that's a little different, but 18, 19 year olds? Come on now.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Lebron was 18 as a rookie!
> 
> God I gained 30 pounds of muscle between the ages of 15 and 17 and another 20 between the ages of 20 and 21. And today I'm only 6'4" 200 pounds. Lebron just started off with a better base than most people.
> 
> ...


So you weighed 150 lbs and gained 50lbs of pure muscle? Go to hell with that bull****.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> ^Lol at this guy. I suggest you watch a real NBA training camp clip, specifically the Hornets and tell me how a player doesn't come out of that not being in shape. Do you know how many people who have guarded Bron have commented on how insanely strong he is? Do you see how high he jumps? There's no one in the MLB that can even come close.


You're arguing against PED's by saying Lebron is a physical oddity? Not a very good platform to take on your agrument.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

R-Star said:


> So you weighed 150 lbs and gained 50lbs of pure muscle? Go to hell with that bull****.


When you are 6'4" and 144 pounds it's easy to gain 50 pounds of muscle. Especially on a college basketball division one weight training routine. 

But was it 100% muscle? Probably some fat mixed in there. Today I only have an average/athletic build with 11% body fat. But anyways don't believe doesn't matter.


----------



## SamTheMan67 (Jan 4, 2004)

HGH helps when you are older and stop producing testestorone so the young guys in the league would have 0 use for it..


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Anyone who thinks HGH isn't rampant in the NBA is a moron. Lebron was supposed to be a once in a life time physical beast. An oddity. Then Dwight Howard comes in, and the word man child goes from being only used on Lebron, to being thrown around left right and center. Enter Greg Oden, who is a child who must somehow be the larger black version of Benjermin Button seeing as how he looks 45.

Do any of you arguing against the use of HGH understand what it does? It is not akin to steroids. Its not all about muscle growth and weight lifting. It makes your body go through a forced second puberty, where insane gains are seen, injuries are healed from at a much faster rate, ect. 

One of the easiest tell tales on who uses HGH is the cave man forehead it gives you from over use. Look at the majority of muscle bound wrestlers today to see what I'm talking about. HHH is the easiest showing, if you look at old photos when he first came into wresting, as to pictures now you'll see two changes. 80+ lbs of extra muscle, and a sloped forehead with protruding bones at the eyebrows. Did he work out so hard his forehead muscles got stronger? No, obviously not.

While having nothing to do with the NBA, take the physical changes into account, and go look at the majority of the "manchilds" of the NBA. For most of them its quite obvious they're long time HGH users.


----------



## SamTheMan67 (Jan 4, 2004)

I was always under the impression HGH doesn't do crap unless you are like 30.. but when you are a young man at the peak of test. growth it really didn't help..


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> When you are 6'4" and 144 pounds it's easy to gain 50 pounds of muscle. Especially on a college basketball division one weight training routine.
> 
> But was it 100% muscle? Probably some fat mixed in there. Today I only have an average/athletic build with 11% body fat. But anyways don't believe doesn't matter.


I could beat you up Jamel. You know it, I know it too. Don't lie to me.

I'm 5'11, 190lbs of insanity. Sure some would say I'm fat, old and out of shape, but I beg to differ. Ill break your legs Jamel, Ill break your god damn legs.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

SamTheMan67 said:


> I was always under the impression HGH doesn't do crap unless you are like 30.. but when you are a young man at the peak of test. growth it really didn't help..


I know people who have used it far younger, and turned from string beans to monsters who look like they're out of a video game. Some were also using a wide variety of steroids, but HGH can have huge effects taken any time after your growth has stopped.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

we need to slip tyson chandler's twiggy looking butt some of this magical stuff.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Most of what Bron is doing now, he was doing in high school. Unless of course HGH helped his shooting improve.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> Most of what Bron is doing now, he was doing in high school. Unless of course HGH helped his shooting improve.


What a generalization. _Most_ of what he is doing now?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Also, whats your explanation for Greg Oden? The guy honestly looks like hes 45.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

R-Star said:


> What a generalization. _Most_ of what he is doing now?


Traveling?


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

It just doesn't help you as much in basketball. Most of these guys can't ever keep any muscle on them because they do so much cardio playing basketball, and the ones that do just have that natural meat and potatoes type build that they've had since they were young. Basketball is a free flowing sport unlike baseball and football and that kind of raw strength just isn't as useful in such a fast moving game. Most guys in the league are ridiculously skinny anyways compared to average joes because they do way too much cardio playing basketball to keep any muscle on them. If they are not eating thousands and thousands of calories a day, they actually lose muscle, which is why so many players have such a low percentage of fat but also very little muscle.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

Sir Patchwork said:


> If they are not eating thousands and thousands of calories a day, they actually lose muscle, which is why so many players have such a low percentage of fat but also very little muscle.


Thanks for this. 

So with that in mind, how can James say he eats THREE MEALS a day, NO supplements and...then you compare his before and after picture.

Makes no sense.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

R-Star said:


> What a generalization. _Most_ of what he is doing now?


No generalization, his high school games were on ESPN remember.


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

I don't really care to speculate on this kind of stuff, but...

Anybody who thinks HGH wouldn't be tremendously helpful to a basketball player is being naive. Look how dominant Dwight Howard is with almost no skills to speak of. 

Bigger, faster, stronger - how does that not help basketball players?

15 years ago nobody thought steroids could be beneficial to baseball players because it was a game of technique and hand eye coordination.

How many hundreds of college playes do you see every year that have the skills to play in the NBA but not the bodies?


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

Some of you are so impressed with a change in bicep size that you immediately assume its steroids or HGH. Personally I think HGH should be allowed in sports. If you research and know anything about it you'd find that it differs from steroids in numerous ways. HGH will not make you gain major muscle mass unless its used in conjunction with anabolic steroids. However HGH would help their recovery time and their metabolism in maintaining a low body fat. I am almost 100% positive that within the next 10 years HGH will not only become acceptable in sports but just for regular people also.

Please educate yourself before you go posting pictures of people who are blessed with incredible physical genetics and work ethics. Barry Bonds is one thing but there is nothing incriminating about LeBron or Dwight Howard in comparison to their rookie years.


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

SamTheMan67 said:


> I was always under the impression HGH doesn't do crap unless you are like 30.. but when you are a young man at the peak of test. growth it really didn't help..


It would help a younger man gain muscle mass if used with anabolic steroids. It would also help a younger guy lose fat and recover. There's nothing that you can take that can give you the physique of LeBron or Dwight if you dont get in the gym and do the work anyway.


----------



## dubc15 (May 15, 2004)

there's no doubt nba players take supplements, either hgh or something similar. i'm not basing my arguments on weight increase or the pictures in this thread, but purely on human nature. if these players can get a competitive advantage without getting caught, i think the large majority of the players would do it. remember, this is their profession and they are paid by how well they perform; it would be stupid of them not to take supplements when every other player is and fall behind in performance.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

There are legal supplements that I know. Anyone can walk into a GMC store and pick up some. AS for DNKO who said Bron was smaller in high school and is bloated now, ummm you do realize he signed a 100 million dollar contract right out of high school, that alone changes his whole lifestyle.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Dre™ said:


> It's not about Lebron or Dwight, I'm not pointing fingers. But you have to admit in general, HGH would benefit a lot of players in the league. I think it's very naive to think in a league of hundreds of players noone uses or has used it.


The benefit of HGH is more psychological than anything else. It doesn't really help with performance (though it can help obese people looking to lose weight, albeit only slightly). They would need to be injecting rHGH as teens for any real benefit. If they're using anything, it would be real steroids, since those can actually boost performance. (It comes down to boosting testosterone production, and rHGH just isn't terribly effective at that.)


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Yeah Jamel brought up a really good point about Kobe. He's one of the few that put on a ton of muscle mid-way through his career. Most rookies come in and put on bulk instantly because they are working out everyday, and have access to better facilities. Look at Kobe from like 4 or 5 years ago when he was already well into his career, and then look at him now. He got yakked in a matter of almost one season. I think people think it's harder to bulk up than it really is. If you have a good base, and good genes, it's not impossible to look like LeBron. It may be hard for your average Joe that has work every morning, kids to take care of, little access to facilities and expensive dietary supplements. It's a lot easier (not that I'm saying it doesn't take a ton of hard work) when your job every morning is to go show up in the gym.


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

ehmunro said:


> The benefit of HGH is more psychological than anything else. It doesn't really help with performance (though it can help obese people looking to lose weight, albeit only slightly). They would need to be injecting rHGH as teens for any real benefit. If they're using anything, it would be real steroids, since those can actually boost performance. (It comes down to boosting testosterone production, and rHGH just isn't terribly effective at that.)


Theres nothing only slightly about it. HGH will shed fat on a person if used daily for 3 months straight...


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Geaux Tigers said:


> Some of you are so impressed with a change in bicep size that you immediately assume its steroids or HGH. Personally I think HGH should be allowed in sports. If you research and know anything about it you'd find that it differs from steroids in numerous ways. HGH will not make you gain major muscle mass unless its used in conjunction with anabolic steroids. However HGH would help their recovery time and their metabolism in maintaining a low body fat. I am almost 100% positive that within the next 10 years HGH will not only become acceptable in sports but just for regular people also.
> 
> Please educate yourself before you go posting pictures of people who are blessed with incredible physical genetics and work ethics. Barry Bonds is one thing but there is nothing incriminating about LeBron or Dwight Howard in comparison to their rookie years.


There is nothing known of the long term effects of HGH, you failed to mention that.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Geaux Tigers said:


> Theres nothing only slightly about it. HGH will shed fat on a person if used daily for 3 months straight...


But the benefit declines rapidly after that, which is why I said slightly. And when studied, using groups on similar diet/workout regimens the weight loss difference was something around 5%. Is that beneficial? Yes. But it's not a wonder drug. It's really helpful for teens and people past the age of 40. Not so much during the peak years. And probably negligible in professional athletes whose bodies naturally produce more testosterone anyway (because if they didn't they wouldn't be athletes). There are far more effective PEDs than HGH. Basketball, at its heart, is a track & field sport (running, jumping, stop/start, etc.), and they'd be better off with the same PEDs the runners use.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Geaux Tigers said:


> It would help a younger man gain muscle mass if used with anabolic steroids. It would also help a younger guy lose fat and recover. There's nothing that you can take that can give you the physique of LeBron or Dwight if you dont get in the gym and do the work anyway.


Working hard in the gym and working hard in the gym using HGH and steroids provide two very different results.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> There are legal supplements that I know. Anyone can walk into a GMC store and pick up some. AS for DNKO who said Bron was smaller in high school and is bloated now, ummm you do realize he signed a 100 million dollar contract right out of high school, that alone changes his whole lifestyle.


Changes his whole lifestyle how? His workout regime?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> The benefit of HGH is more psychological than anything else. It doesn't really help with performance (though it can help obese people looking to lose weight, albeit only slightly). They would need to be injecting rHGH as teens for any real benefit. If they're using anything, it would be real steroids, since those can actually boost performance. (It comes down to boosting testosterone production, and rHGH just isn't terribly effective at that.)


HGH is not mainly used as a weight loss supplement. You have no idea what you're talking about.


----------



## dubc15 (May 15, 2004)

if not hgh then nba players are taking steroids, whichever of the two benefits performance more. the scope of this thread shouldn't be hgh, it should be performance enhancing drugs.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

I honestly don't care if they do use PED's, its the big leagues, of course people will try to get an edge, any way they can.
But for people to come in and make excuses, or give false facts on PED's is what annoys me.

There are PED's used in every major sport. That's not debatable.


----------



## dubc15 (May 15, 2004)

R-Star said:


> Changes his whole lifestyle how? His workout regime?


just think about it for one second... he has a chef, who probably has a background in nutrition, preparing meals for him. that's a day and night difference between his uneducated mom cooking crap for him every day and a chef preparing meals.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> HGH is not mainly used as a weight loss supplement. You have no idea what you're talking about.


I'm very well aware of why people that don't understand the drug use it. But, what I'm saying is that its effect would be negligible for a professional athlete. It doesn't boost testosterone production very effectively, and that's what it takes to build more muscle mass. It's effects are more dramatic after the age of 40 when the body's production of of the hormones that we call HGH and testosterone plummet. But for a 25 year old athlete whose body is a testosterone pumping machine? Not so much. No need to have the argument with me, talk to a doctor, they'll explain it. The real benefits come from the steroids, not the HGH.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

dubc15 said:


> just think about it for one second... he has a chef, who probably has a background in nutrition, preparing meals for him. that's a day and night difference between his uneducated mom cooking crap for him every day and a chef preparing meals.


Understandable, but eating healthy more than anything helps with keeping fat off, a protein heavy diet using shakes and working out hard in the gym is where the muscle would come from.


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

R-Star said:


> There is nothing known of the long term effects of HGH, you failed to mention that.


Yeah I did fail to mention that. But that was the reason I said within the next 10 years it should become much more of a household thing.



R-Star said:


> Working hard in the gym and working hard in the gym using HGH and steroids provide two very different results.


I don't classify HGH and steroids together. And obviously you are correct once again, but the fact that these guys are 1) competing with other guys that are likely doing the same thing and 2) other unique physical specimens that are natural, the difference is marginal in comparison.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> I'm very well aware of why people that don't understand the drug use it. But, what I'm saying is that its effect would be negligible for a professional athlete. It doesn't boost testosterone production very effectively, and that's what it takes to build more muscle mass. It's effects are more dramatic after the age of 40 when the body's production of of the hormones that we call HGH and testosterone plummet. But for a 25 year old athlete whose body is a testosterone pumping machine? Not so much. No need to have the argument with me, talk to a doctor, they'll explain it. The real benefits come from the steroids, not the HGH.


I already stated the difference between HGH and steroids on a previous page. Muscle gain is not the only athletic help you can get from PED's.


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

ehmunro said:


> I'm very well aware of why people that don't understand the drug use it. But, what I'm saying is that its effect would be negligible for a professional athlete. It doesn't boost testosterone production very effectively, and that's what it takes to build more muscle mass. It's effects are more dramatic after the age of 40 when the body's production of of the hormones that we call HGH and testosterone plummet. But for a 25 year old athlete whose body is a testosterone pumping machine? Not so much. No need to have the argument with me, talk to a doctor, they'll explain it. The real benefits come from the steroids, not the HGH.


Yes in terms of power. But as far as muscle and tendon rejuvination HGH could be key to professional athletes. Which is why Im actually a proponent of it. With fans and owners pushing for longer seasons and demanding off season routines such as the World Baseball Classic, Pro Bowl, Olympics etc...these guys almost DESERVE to take HGH. I think HGH is lumped in with performance enhancing drugs unfairly...its much more a performance maintaining drug...


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

I have to say I'm very disappointed seeing that most of you here are OK with athletes using something other than iron and natural food.

So basically people like you will approve genetic engineering to create superior athletes in 20-30 years messing with DNA and all that.

Because the standpoint "I'm ok with HGH" is one step away from "Sure, if you can tweak that embryo to grow to 7'0 300, do it".


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Geaux Tigers said:


> Yeah I did fail to mention that. But that was the reason I said within the next 10 years it should become much more of a household thing.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't classify HGH and steroids together. And obviously you are correct once again, but the fact that these guys are 1) competing with other guys that are likely doing the same thing and 2) other unique physical specimens that are natural, the difference is marginal in comparison.


I'm not arguing if it should be used, as I said I doesn't bother me. Legal or not, players will use it to get an edge, no matter what. So if other players are going to use it, many probably see the need to use as well to keep up with the competition.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

DNKO said:


> I have to say I'm very disappointed seeing that most of you here are OK with athletes using something other than iron and natural food.
> 
> So basically people like you will approve genetic engineering to create superior athletes in 20-30 years messing with DNA and all that.
> 
> Because the standpoint "I'm ok with HGH" is one step away from "Sure, if you can tweak that embryo to grow to 7'0 300, do it".


I don't see how anyone can be against a player taking protein or creatine shakes. You get protein from regular eating. To buy bulk protein powder to make sure you're getting as much in your system as possible is not cheating. Its eating healthy.
Steroids on the other hand are a different matter, but eating healthy and working hard in the gym is not cheating.


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

DNKO said:


> I have to say I'm very disappointed seeing that most of you here are OK with athletes using something other than iron and natural food.
> 
> So basically people like you will approve genetic engineering to create superior athletes in 20-30 years messing with DNA and all that.
> 
> Because the standpoint "I'm ok with HGH" is one step away from "Sure, if you can tweak that embryo to grow to 7'0 300, do it".


Laughable. Hey let's just ban boob jobs, prosthetic limbs, stem cells (woops), anti-biotics, contact lenses, heart stints, lasik surgery, envitro fertilization, and blood transfusions while we are at it. ALL things that were controversial in their beginnings and have become common place...


----------



## dubc15 (May 15, 2004)

DNKO said:


> I have to say I'm very disappointed seeing that most of you here are OK with athletes using something other than iron and natural food.
> 
> So basically people like you will approve genetic engineering to create superior athletes in 20-30 years messing with DNA and all that.
> 
> Because the standpoint "I'm ok with HGH" is one step away from "Sure, if you can tweak that embryo to grow to 7'0 300, do it".


there's no comparing of the two. hgh is "enhancing" your physical attributes, genetic engineering is "changing", a completely different subject. it's like wearing make-up or having plastic surgery.


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

Sir Patchwork said:


> It just doesn't help you as much in basketball. Most of these guys can't ever keep any muscle on them because they do so much cardio playing basketball, and the ones that do just have that natural meat and potatoes type build that they've had since they were young. Basketball is a free flowing sport *unlike baseball and football and that kind of raw strength just isn't as useful in such a fast moving game.* Most guys in the league are ridiculously skinny anyways compared to average joes because they do way too much cardio playing basketball to keep any muscle on them. If they are not eating thousands and thousands of calories a day, they actually lose muscle, which is why so many players have such a low percentage of fat but also very little muscle.


This is as far off as you can get.

Strength is the backbone of athleticism, period. This explains why world class sprinters and long/high jumpers squat 2.5-3 x their weight. This explains why many Olympic lifters, who carry 300 pounds, a good part of it fat, have near 35+ inch standing verticals (higher than the average NBA player's vertical). You don't have to look very far to realize this, just look at the NFL. There's a reason NFL players blow NBA players' speed and jumping out of the water, despite weighing tons more. We're lucky to find NBA players who can jump 40 inches from a running start, while there's numerous guys every year in the NFL combine who do this from a standstill. 

Playing basketball doesn't stimulate endurance adaptations to the point where you lose muscle. Only sports like cross country, long distance racing in track, and cycling will do that to you- sports in which all you're trying to do is go longer, and that you don't get a break in.


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

R-Star said:


> I don't see how anyone can be against a player taking protein or creatine shakes. You get protein from regular eating. To buy bulk protein powder to make sure you're getting as much in your system as possible is not cheating. Its eating healthy.
> Steroids on the other hand are a different matter, but eating healthy and working hard in the gym is not cheating.


I agree, not to mention you get creatine from food also.


----------



## Jakain (Sep 8, 2006)

Here's an article from a couple of years ago but its probably still valid now:



> Report: Players union will not allow HGH testing
> 
> Despite the recent media attention over human growth hormone, don't expect the NBA to start testing for it any time soon.
> 
> ...


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2480231


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

That post pretty much sums it up. They wont allow HGH blood testing? Why? Because a large number of athletes are taking it.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> I already stated the difference between HGH and steroids on a previous page. Muscle gain is not the only athletic help you can get from PED's.


Except that rHGH doesn't really enhance performance. Post-puberty, in sedentary people, especially those that suffer from low levels of testosterone, and in older people, it will have more of an effect because the slight testosterone boost, relatively speaking, is dramatic (to put in mathematical terms, going from 1 to 2 doubles the total, going from 15 to 16 isn't so dramatic). But in professional athletes, whose testosterone levels are many times what you and I will ever see, it just won't have much of an effect. Some older athletes use it thinking it will speed up the healing process, but there are far more effective ways of speeding recovery than mild testosterone boosts. For athletes the benefits are probably more psychological than anything else.



Geaux Tiggers said:


> Yes in terms of power. But as far as muscle and tendon rejuvination HGH could be key to professional athletes. Which is why Im actually a proponent of it. With fans and owners pushing for longer seasons and demanding off season routines such as the World Baseball Classic, Pro Bowl, Olympics etc...these guys almost DESERVE to take HGH. I think HGH is lumped in with performance enhancing drugs unfairly...its much more a performance maintaining drug..


I agree with most of this, except that the effect on professional athletes is overrated. Because their bodies are producing testosterone and the protein/hormone string in large quantities anyway. The reason it impacts muscle/tendon recovery in sedentary people is that it boosts testosterone levels and essential proteins. But there are far more effective ways of getting there for professional athletes than HGH. HGH would have a greater effect on an overweight forty-something like myself than LeBron.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

Geaux Tigers said:


> Laughable. Hey let's just ban boob jobs, prosthetic limbs, stem cells (woops), anti-biotics, contact lenses, heart stints, lasik surgery, envitro fertilization, and blood transfusions while we are at it. ALL things that were controversial in their beginnings and have become common place...



Tell me how do you compare NBA player taking HGH and roids and running for 48 minutes versus anti-biotics?

LOL


Apples and oranges.


Stem cells could benefit HUMAN HEALTH



DWIGHT HOWARD RUNNING UP AND DOWN FOR 48 MINUTES AT FULL SPEED CAN ONLY BENEFIT ADIDAS, ORLANDO'S GM AND STERN.

NBA is WWE and I don't see how will humanity benefit when they stuff those players with god knows what just to make them jump higher.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> That post pretty much sums it up. They wont allow HGH blood testing? Why? Because a large number of athletes are taking it.


Or because blood tests are also an incontrovertible way of detecting the sorts of chemicals that NBA players _really_ use. Recreational drugs.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

> That post pretty much sums it up. They wont allow HGH blood testing? Why? Because a large number of athletes are taking it.


Yet you say I am generalizing. Where's the proof they are taking it?

And I hope you can do much better than Dwight Howard and Lebron James.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Except that rHGH doesn't really enhance performance. Post-puberty, in sedentary people, especially those that suffer from low levels of testosterone, and in older people, it will have more of an effect because the slight testosterone boost, relatively speaking, is dramatic (to put in mathematical terms, going from 1 to 2 doubles the total, going from 15 to 16 isn't so dramatic). But in professional athletes, whose testosterone levels are many times what you and I will ever see, it just won't have much of an effect. Some older athletes use it thinking it will speed up the healing process, but there are far more effective ways of speeding recovery than mild testosterone boosts. For athletes the benefits are probably more psychological than anything else.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with most of this, except that the effect on professional athletes is overrated. Because their bodies are producing testosterone and the protein/hormone string in large quantities anyway. The reason it impacts muscle/tendon recovery in sedentary people is that it boosts testosterone levels and essential proteins. But there are far more effective ways of getting there for professional athletes than HGH. HGH would have a greater effect on an overweight forty-something like myself than LeBron.


Again, HGH is not just a testosterone booster shot.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

Either way, it's a joke.

One thing I don't understand is why do they even ban substances?

They won't sanction anyone for anything so why bother?



Let NBA players really be our Guinea pigs and let them take anything available, jump 60", run 1 second full court, and die from heart attack after 2 quarters. Who even cares.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> Yet you say I am generalizing. Where's the proof they are taking it?
> 
> And I hope you can do much better than Dwight Howard and Lebron James.


Im pretty sure Im going to just quit replying to your idiotic posts. Its like having a debate with a child.

"There's no proof! PROVE IT R-STAR PROVE IT!" My answer to your moronic posts? No, I wont prove it, because I cant. Obviously if there was documented evidence of players using HGH in the NBA, we wouldn't be debating here would we HB?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

R-Star said:


> Changes his whole lifestyle how? His workout regime?


You really need me to explain this?

Lol and what the heck type of response is that above? Your the one acting like you have some insight to these players lives. Obviously you know something we don't, must be why your so adamant Bron cant gain those muscles naturally.


----------



## sonicFLAME6 (Dec 19, 2006)

I guess I always had the wrong impression about the NBA's performance enhancer tests. HGH is banned yet it is not tested properly among NBA athlete's. Well that makes sense lol.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Or because blood tests are also an incontrovertible way of detecting the sorts of chemicals that NBA players _really_ use. Recreational drugs.


They would only allowed to test what they were sanctioned to of course. But I do understand what you're getting at. Some player who snorts coke on the weekends isn't going to vote to allow blood testing.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

S2theONIC said:


> I guess I always had the wrong impression about the NBA's performance enhancer tests. HGH is banned yet it is not tested properly among NBA athlete's. Well that makes sense lol.


Did you miss ehmunro's post where it says testing for HGH can only be done through blood tests, and the players union would be insane to allow that BECAUSE NBA players actually use drugs like marijuana


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

DNKO said:


> Tell me how do you compare NBA player taking HGH and roids and running for 48 minutes versus anti-biotics?
> 
> LOL
> 
> ...


Im not trying to say they are the same in terms of importance to humanity obviously. Im saying that all those things are unnatural to the body or introduced to the body unnaturally. Who gets to draw the line between what aids human function and what is a PED? The argument against PEDs is often so fool heartedly naive that many people in effect argue against anything but what the body does naturally. I was just drawing a parallel between HGH, steroids, and the THOUSANDS of other things humans do on a daily basis that is "unnatural"


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

HGH is a string of proteins, the form commonly used is rHGH (a synthesised variant). It's effects aren't dramatic (excluding adolescents), except for people that don't naturally produce sufficient levels. But, athletes aren't going to be found in that group. Their bodies produce much higher levels of testosterone.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

ehmunro said:


> HGH is a string of proteins, the form commonly used is rHGH (a synthesised variant). It's effects aren't dramatic (excluding adolescents), except for people that don't naturally produce sufficient levels. But, athletes aren't going to be found in that group. Their bodies produce much higher levels of testosterone.


So simple yet so hard to understand. A friggin 20 something year old Lebron does not need it.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> You really need me to explain this?
> 
> Lol and what the heck type of response is that above? Your the one acting like you have some insight to these players lives. Obviously you know something we don't, must be why your so adamant Bron cant gain those muscles naturally.


99.9% of the world could not gain that much muscle mass naturally. That's science HB, not opinion. Why do you think PED's even exist if its simple to gain pounds of muscle mass. 

As per usual you have no idea what you're talking about, and just say "Uh uhhh, you cant prove that!" and then you attack the poster. Good work.

Prove to me that no NBA players use any PED's. Oh, you cant? Well you must be wrong then if I'm going by your standard of debate.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

LOL funny how few of you think you know everything about HGH yet nobody in the NBA wants to get tested on it.

Things that make you go hmmm...


----------



## sonicFLAME6 (Dec 19, 2006)

HB said:


> Did you miss ehmunro's post where it says testing for HGH can only be done through blood tests, and the players union would be insane to allow that BECAUSE NBA players actually use drugs like marijuana


I actually did not miss it. I know they take marijuana and others illegal substances. I know it from personal experience. I have seen it.
All of those drugs are banned by the NBA yet they are not tested for properly. That is what gets me mad about the whole drug testing policy of the NBA/professional sports.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

R-Star said:


> 99.9% of the world could not gain that much muscle mass naturally.


It's called...superior genetics!


http://www.instantrimshot.com/



R-Star said:


> Why do you think PED's even exist if its simple to gain pounds of muscle mass.


LOOOOOOL can't wait to hear the answer to this one


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> HGH is a string of proteins, the form commonly used is rHGH (a synthesised variant). It's effects aren't dramatic (excluding adolescents), except for people that don't naturally produce sufficient levels. But, athletes aren't going to be found in that group. Their bodies produce much higher levels of testosterone.


Funny, I know weight lifters and body builders, whom you would assume also have very high levels of test, who use HGH, and it has had huge effects on their physique, performance in the gym, and recovery times. When compared to steroid use alone, combining it with HGH has huge benefits.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

R-Star said:


> 99.9% of the world could not gain that much muscle mass naturally. That's science HB, not opinion. Why do you think PED's even exist if its simple to gain pounds of muscle mass.
> 
> As per usual you have no idea what you're talking about, and just say "Uh uhhh, you cant prove that!" and then you attack the poster. Good work.
> 
> Prove to me that no NBA players use any PED's. Oh, you cant? Well you must be wrong then if I'm going by your standard of debate.


99.9% of the world is not Lebron James. Geez man, does he have to cheat to be that good. There's always an exception for everything. Did Shaq also use PED's to be that big? There's always a generational athlete that makes everyone else look normal, that would be Lebron James or Dwight Howard for that matter. I dont even know why I am responding to your post, its the usual tired rant rant rant type argument and when its not going your way you throw in personal attacks. 

Look if you dont like my posts, at least look at ehmunro's. There's no point as to why Lebron should take HGH. He's friggin 24 or so years old.

You can't compare the training regimen he got in high school to that of the NBA. Better facilities, better trainers, he's also a zillion times richer meaning he can afford better nutrition. Now lets see you respond to that with logic.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

HB said:


> he's also a zillion times richer meaning he can afford better nutrition.


_He doesn't gulp protein shakes or pound down extra carbs, instead eating three square meals (such as oatmeal, chicken, salmon) prepared by his chef, with the occasional candy snack in between.
"It's kind of crazy," James says. "My body's, like, reversed."_

LOL

Blaming it on superior genetics was kinda predictable.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> So simple yet so hard to understand. A friggin 20 something year old Lebron does not need it.


Im glad you're acting like you know anything about HGH HB. Again you know jack **** about it, but feel the need to quote other people who are continuing the debate. What are you bringing to the debate HB? ehmunro is making good points his side of the argument, and you are, what? Saying no one uses in the NBA because thats your opinion, and quoting other posters who make actual points. Why are you even in this thread? What do you bring to it?


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

If, if, if...

The NBA and every other major sports league in America has no interest in an extensive anti-drug policy or program. And why would they ? These are professional leagues with grown (read closed) structures, positive tests would be bad PR. It's almost laughable how little testing and controls they do compared to Olympic Sports, the new WADA anti-doping code that came into effect at the beginning of the year and most WADA rules are not being used. 

Athletes must be available for testing each and every day, they have to submit the date and location for at least an hour every day, otherwise they will be sanctioned immediately. NBA players would be horrified of the idea to be under control that much. There has also been a massive protest against the new code by a lot of athletes, it doesn't look like changes will be made though. This is only the tip of the iceberg, comparing the anti-drug policy of the IAAF or FIS to NBA, NFL or even MLB is not possible because it is no match. 

Btw, I think HGH and THG is being confused in this thread.


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

Let's forget about the sports world for a moment. HGH has immense benefits to humanity and it's completely being lumped in with steroids and recreational drugs by idiots at Sports Illustrated and ESPN etc. HGH helps with fat loss, skin rejuvenation, injury recovery time, muscle enhancement, growth in height (in young adults and children), organ rejuvenation, immune system boost, supports health for hair and nails. But because it's so new and the long term effects are not clear it's still taboo. But I promise eventually it will be like Botox...


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> 99.9% of the world is not Lebron James. Geez man, does he have to cheat to be that good. There's always an exception for everything. Did Shaq also use PED's to be that big? There's always a generational athlete that makes everyone else look normal, that would be Lebron James or Dwight Howard for that matter. I dont even know why I am responding to your post, its the usual tired rant rant rant type argument and when its not going your way you throw in personal attacks.
> 
> Look if you dont like my posts, at least look at ehmunro's. There's no point as to why Lebron should take HGH. He's friggin 24 or so years old.
> 
> You can't compare the training regimen he got in high school to that of the NBA. Better facilities, better trainers, he's also a zillion times richer meaning he can afford better nutrition. Now lets see you respond to that with logic.


Respond to what? You saying Lebron is a athletic freak with lots of money? Or you trying to ride ehmunro's coat tails because hes posting facts?

Lets say Lebron doesnt use HGH, that means no one in the league is? I'd like you to answer that question.

Also, I'd like you to quit acting as though you have any idea of what HGH is or what it does. And dont quote wiki bull**** me. You have no idea what it is or what it does, so theres no reason for you to say things like "Yea, hes only 24, so it would obviously have no effect on him." You have no idea what you're talking about.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

Geaux Tigers said:


> Let's forget about the sports world for a moment. HGH has immense benefits to humanity and it's completely being lumped in with steroids and recreational drugs by idiots at Sports Illustrated and ESPN etc. HGH helps with fat loss, skin rejuvenation, injury recovery time, muscle enhancement, growth in height (in young adults and children), organ rejuvenation, immune system boost, supports health for hair and nails. But because it's so new and the long term effects are not clear it's still taboo. But I promise eventually it will be like Botox...


LOL so botox is acceptable and healthy?

Sweet lord what has this world come to...


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Geaux Tigers said:


> Let's forget about the sports world for a moment. HGH has immense benefits to humanity and it's completely being lumped in with steroids and recreational drugs by idiots at Sports Illustrated and ESPN etc. HGH helps with fat loss, skin rejuvenation, injury recovery time, muscle enhancement, growth in height (in young adults and children), organ rejuvenation, immune system boost, supports health for hair and nails. But because it's so new and the long term effects are not clear it's still taboo. But I promise eventually it will be like Botox...


I don't disagree that it will probably be widely used in the future if it turns out to have no severe long term effects. But I doubt it will be like Botox. HGH at the moment looks to be the closest thing there is to the fountain of youth. If everything pans out, it should be widely used to help men and woman age in general.


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

DNKO said:


> LOL so botox is acceptable and healthy?
> 
> Sweet lord what has this world come to...


You can debate whether its right or wrong and I won't bother you one bit...but yes it is extremely acceptable in this day and age. Thats just facts. I didn't say it's ethical or moral or correct or anything. But it will be acceptable in the future...


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

DNKO said:


> How does this make any sense?
> 
> If they use now PED's - which I'm sure they all are - they can play for 40 minutes at the same pace like players 10 years ago played for 30 minutes. Figuratively speaking.
> 
> ...


So what was Wilt on back then? They played at an even faster pace back then, and he played over 48 minutes a game in some seasons.

I think what people are missing is that weight training has become a bigger part of basketball.

Guys back in the 80s didn't work out like they started to in the 90s, or do now.

Also they have more people devoted to these players. More money, more training. Could there be some HGH? Possibly.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

Geaux Tigers said:


> Let's forget about the sports world for a moment. HGH has immense benefits to humanity and it's completely being lumped in with steroids and recreational drugs by idiots at Sports Illustrated and ESPN etc. HGH helps with fat loss, skin rejuvenation, injury recovery time, muscle enhancement, growth in height (in young adults and children), organ rejuvenation, immune system boost, supports health for hair and nails. But because it's so new and the long term effects are not clear it's still taboo. But I promise eventually it will be like Botox...


This is true, at the same time even steroids were not developed to help professional athletes initially, most drugs started out as normal medicine for sick people. Somewhere along the way, doctors, coaches and athletes started to recognize the benefit of these and other drugs in sports, this is also when normal drugs developed for those in need became PEDs.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

DNKO said:


> Damn, if only some of you went to play pro basketball with those god given genes.
> 
> So you're saying that you build your muscle mass with regular food and workouts?
> 
> ...



Don't be an ass?. The physique of a bodybuilder is much different than one of a basketball player. Go look up pictures of the biggest ball players and a picture of a professional body builder. Two completely different types of builds.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

Geaux Tigers said:


> You can debate whether its right or wrong and I won't bother you one bit...but yes it is extremely acceptable in this day and age. Thats just facts. I didn't say it's ethical or moral or correct or anything. But it will be acceptable in the future...


Man you're outlook is so wrong on so many levels.

Abortion is accepted in many parts of the world. And I'm talking about "oops we did it but I'm too young" type, just so you don't come with some extreme examples here.

Silicone implants are accepted. Lypo is accepted. Vanity is accepted.

Go to Brazil. You know how Tony said "but for a green card, I gonna carve him up real nice". In Brazil if you got the money they will also carve you up real nice, and do anything to you.

So who's to say what's acceptable or not?


There is this doctor in US now that can alter the color and hair color of your baby, while it's still in womb...

So..designer kids will be acceptable also.


Therefore, my opinion - no restrictions, give them anything possible. And don't bother people with HGH or A-Rod stories.

just entertain us, die if necessary, have heart problems by the age of 30, or whatever, but as long as the fans get their moneys worth = it's all good.


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

croco said:


> This is true, at the same time even steroids were not developed to help professional athletes initially, most drugs started out as normal medicine for sick people. Somewhere along the way, doctors, coaches and athletes started to recognize the benefit of these and other drugs in sports, this is also when normal drugs developed for those in need became PEDs.


Well people still get steroid shots when they are really sick. Even steroids have health benefits. However the prolonged use of steroids seems to hurt more than help over time. I guess its the Libertarian in me that says a person should be able to chose when he would like to be healthy at age 20 or age 80, but I'm normally not a proponent of steroids at all. HGH is just another matter IMO. I really laugh about most of the people who walk into a gym once in a blue moon and see some guy who's in there every day working his *** off and say he's on steroids automatically. It really goes to show the education level in this country when it comes to the human anatomy. That's why so many people get rich off of silly weight loss fads. People really do believe in magic pills...


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Tragedy said:


> So what was Wilt on back then? They played at an even faster pace back then, and he played over 48 minutes a game in some seasons.
> 
> I think what people are missing is that weight training has become a bigger part of basketball.
> 
> ...


Wilt was supposed to be a once in a life time freak, and he was. So was Shaq. Now you get Lebron, Howard, Oden (even if he sucks) ect all in a short period of time. Of course there will be athletic freaks like Lebron to come along every once in a while, but it seems to be happening more and more often these days, which has to raise questions.

Have Lebron or Dwight used PED's, who knows, I wouldn't be surprised, but I don't know for a fact that they have. But Oden? Come on, he doesn't look like an old man because its some sort of fluke or oddity. The guys been on something. He looks like a failed super soldier project. I wouldn't be surprised if Oden turned out to be a PED guinee pig from a very young age.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

S2theONIC said:


> I actually did not miss it. I know they take marijuana and others illegal substances. I know it from personal experience. I have seen it.
> All of those drugs are banned by the NBA yet they are not tested for properly. That is what gets me mad about the whole drug testing policy of the NBA/professional sports.


Right, there are ways to beat the pee test, but not the blood test, and the players have already given the NBA the right to test for drugs. If they allow blood panels then they're basically letting the NBA test for anything and everything. Ricky Davis would go from zero to lifetime ban after his first blood test. There are just way too many players toking the wacky tabacky for the the NBAPA to get a yes vote on blood testing.


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

DNKO said:


> Man you're outlook is so wrong on so many levels.
> 
> Abortion is accepted in many parts of the world. And I'm talking about "oops we did it but I'm too young" type, just so you don't come with some extreme examples here.
> 
> ...


Wait did you just try and argue a point that I said you can win if you want? Wow. I told you man it's not about what I believe is right or wrong I'm just saying it will happen. That doesn't mean I'm for it or against it...it just mean I can see the trend and I'm predicting. Acceptable does not equal justified. I'm just predicting here not judging.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

DNKO said:


> Man you're outlook is so wrong on so many levels.
> 
> Abortion is accepted in many parts of the world. And I'm talking about "oops we did it but I'm too young" type, just so you don't come with some extreme examples here.
> 
> ...


If someone decides to use PED's to improve their ability, why should the blame be on the fans heads?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

R-Star said:


> Im glad you're acting like you know anything about HGH HB. Again you know jack **** about it, but feel the need to quote other people who are continuing the debate. What are you bringing to the debate HB? ehmunro is making good points his side of the argument, and you are, what? Saying no one uses in the NBA because thats your opinion, and quoting other posters who make actual points. Why are you even in this thread? What do you bring to it?


Am I surprised by your response. Nope! Typical R-star. What am I bringing into the debate, only what I have been saying from the get go, there's no point as to why Bron should take HGH. Is that simple enough?


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

Geaux Tigers said:


> Acceptable does not equal justified.


Yes! And that's what I was saying. 

But NBA by blackballing the results are making it justified.


And my perspective is that it's wrong. 


So my new opinion is - if they want to do it - DO it. Just...flat out do it, anything, in any quantities. And we'll see what will come out of it.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

R-Star said:


> If someone decides to use PED's to improve their ability, why should the blame be on the fans heads?


Fans pay for that PED.


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

DNKO said:


> Fans pay for that PED.


Yeah. Fans gobbled up the Mark Maguire Sammy Sosa race for the HR record. Fans gobble up a 100+ games in a baseball season. Fans gobble up a best of 7 playoff series through the entire NBA playoffs. Fans gobble up big dunks on 12 foot goals.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

Geaux Tigers said:


> Well people still get steroid shots when they are really sick. Even steroids have health benefits. However the prolonged use of steroids seems to hurt more than help over time. I guess its the Libertarian in me that says a person should be able to chose when he would like to be healthy at age 20 or age 80, but I'm normally not a proponent of steroids at all. HGH is just another matter IMO. I really laugh about most of the people who walk into a gym once in a blue moon and see some guy who's in there every day working his *** off and say he's on steroids automatically. It really goes to show the education level in this country when it comes to the human anatomy. That's why so many people get rich off of silly weight loss fads. People really do believe in magic pills...


That point should also be reiterated. No matter how many drugs or pills you take, it won't do anything for you without incredibly hard work. It enables you to recreate faster, train longer and harder, eating pills while resting on your laurels doesn't make you faster, stronger or better. Just like some people truly believe that if you take a tablet against headaches, it will kill your pain immediately after one second, that's just as bad. There is definitely an additional placebo effect in some cases.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> Am I surprised by your response. Nope! Typical R-star. What am I bringing into the debate, only what I have been saying from the get go, there's no point as to why Bron should take HGH. Is that simple enough?


Because Lebron is already big? Then you're right, there was no point for Arnold to use steroids. 

You also decided not to answer any of my other questions, but Im not surprised. Chalk it up to me being R-Star and cop out, as per usual. 

Funny, I haven't seen you in the Tyler Perry thread in a while either.


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

croco said:


> That point should also be reiterated. No matter how many drugs or pills you take, it won't do anything for you without incredibly hard work. It enables you to recreate faster, train longer and harder, eating pills while resting on your laurels doesn't make you faster, stronger or better. Just like some people truly believe that if you take a tablet against headaches, it will kill your pain immediately after one second, that's just as bad. There is definitely an additional placebo effect in some cases.


Exactly! I know a guy who took steroids and sat on his *** and you know what he got?...tits.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

Geaux Tigers said:


> Yeah. Fans gobbled up the Mark Maguire Sammy Sosa race for the HR record. Fans gobble up a 100+ games in a baseball season. Fans gobble up a best of 7 playoff series through the entire NBA playoffs. Fans gobble up big dunks on 12 foot goals.


Fans pay for those players to have facilities, trainers, arena, jersey, etc.


And if you think I'm wrong - please - try to imagine NBA season with out ANY coverage (TV, newspapers, internet, radio) for a year.

And of course, without ANY tickets.

I hope you understand what I'm trying to say.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

DNKO said:


> Fans pay for that PED.


So if a salesman decides to use PED's to get a better looking physique, then its on the consumers heads? No, the fans don't pay for the PED's, thats a backwards approach of how to look at it.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> Funny, I know weight lifters and body builders, whom you would assume also have very high levels of test, who use HGH, and it has had huge effects on their physique, performance in the gym, and recovery times. When compared to steroid use alone, combining it with HGH has huge benefits.


They're lying to you. If they're getting the big benefits it's because they're pumping huge amounts of testosterone and/or precursors to boost the production. That's where the muscle mass comes from. Medical studies show that the lean muscle mass gain from rHGH/diet/exercise is around 5% vs. exercise/diet alone. That's not anecdotal weightlifters' stories, that's actual medical studies. I'll put my faith in the science, thank you.


----------



## sonicFLAME6 (Dec 19, 2006)

ehmunro said:


> Right, there are ways to beat the pee test, but not the blood test, and the players have already given the NBA the right to test for drugs. If they allow blood panels then they're basically letting the NBA test for anything and everything. Ricky Davis would go from zero to lifetime ban after his first blood test. There are just way too many players toking the wacky tabacky for the the NBAPA to get a yes vote on blood testing.


Exactly, some get caught here and there, IMO to make it seem like they are doing a good job at the anti-drug policy when in reality it's a joke. But when it comes to performance enhancing as fan/ex competitive athlete I would like to know if some of these guys are really so genetically superior athletic wise or they have tampered with their bodies.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

croco said:


> That point should also be reiterated. No matter how many drugs or pills you take, it won't do anything for you without incredibly hard work. It enables you to recreate faster, train longer and harder, eating pills while resting on your laurels doesn't make you faster, stronger or better. Just like some people truly believe that if you take a tablet against headaches, it will kill your pain immediately after one second, that's just as bad. There is definitely an additional placebo effect in some cases.


I had a friend who used steroids thinking it was a miracle drug and sat on his *** never going to the gym. Needless to say he got fat as **** in the process.


----------



## dubc15 (May 15, 2004)

HB said:


> Am I surprised by your response. Nope! Typical R-star. What am I bringing into the debate, only what I have been saying from the get go, there's no point as to why Bron should take HGH. Is that simple enough?


nba players workout 4 hours a day, play a full game every other day, it's very possible that lebron takes hgh to recover from the heavy physical wear and tear. not for the purposes of muscle growth (who knows, he might be on steroids) but for the purposes of recovery.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> They're lying to you. If they're getting the big benefits it's because they're pumping huge amounts of testosterone and/or precursors to boost the production. That's where the muscle mass comes from. Medical studies show that the lean muscle mass gain from rHGH/diet/exercise is around 5% vs. exercise/diet alone. That's not anecdotal weightlifters' stories, that's actual medical studies. I'll put my faith in the science, thank you.


When did I say HGH is for muscle gain. I've made it very clear thats not my standpoint. Recovery time, muscle endurance, peak limits, ect are as big of factors as straight muscle gains due to testosterone.


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

I just want to go on record as saying I have never done steroids or HGH ever in my life.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

> Because Lebron is already big? Then you're right, there was no point for Arnold to use steroids.
> 
> You also decided not to answer any of my other questions, but Im not surprised. Chalk it up to me being R-Star and cop out, as per usual.
> 
> Funny, I haven't seen you in the Tyler Perry thread in a while either.


Lol I stopped responding because your posts werent making sense in that thread. Coates already said most of what I wanted to. But hey if it makes you feel better you can go around beating your chest that you won.

Same thing as this thread, no need responding when others have said everything I wanted to. Look man, do you think Lebron's high school gym comes close to what he has with the Cavs? Do you also think a kid whose mom was barely struggling to take care of him in high school will still live the same way when he comes across millions? His lifestyle changes immediately, more access to better quality goods and services.










Oh yeah such a 'tiny' teenager. Do you think when NBA scouts say so and so has some room to fill, they mean by taking HGH?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

dubc15 said:


> nba players workout 4 hours a day, play a full game every other day, it's very possible that lebron takes hgh to recover from the heavy physical wear and tear. not for the purposes of muscle growth (who knows, he might be on steroids) but for the purposes of recovery.


No, not according to HB. Lebron could do most of what he does now in highschool and he has a good cook, so thats not possible.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> Lol I stopped responding because your posts werent making sense in that thread. Coates already said most of what I wanted to. But hey if it makes you feel better you can go around beating your chest that you won.
> 
> Same thing as this thread, no need responding when others have said everything I wanted to. Look man, do you think Lebron's high school gym comes close to what he has with the Cavs? Do you also think a kid whose mom was barely struggling to take care of him in high school will still live the same way when he comes across millions? His lifestyle changes immediately, more access to better quality goods and services.


Lebron having more money and the perks that come with that is the only point you've made. Its valid, but its the only point you've made. Don't point to people once again who post actual facts you are unaware of and say "He said just what I wanted to, but beat me to it." You haven't argued against the fact that you know nothing about HGH, because its clear that you don't.

You also refuse to answer this question. Are you saying that no one in the league uses HGH?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Geaux Tigers said:


> I just want to go on record as saying I have never done steroids or HGH ever in my life.


I've taken supplements, and even DNP when I was younger, but nothing like steroids or HGH, but I know many who have.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

R-Star said:


> So if a salesman decides to use PED's to get a better looking physique, then its on the consumers heads? No, the fans don't pay for the PED's, thats a backwards approach of how to look at it.


I didn't mean the fans literally pay - but fans make teams generate money.

With money there are expectations and players want to meet those so they can make more money.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

DNKO said:


> I didn't mean the fans literally pay - but fans make teams generate money.
> 
> With money there are expectations and players want to meet those so they can make more money.


So a highschool or college player who uses PED's to improve his game to make the big leagues, are fans also to blame there? No. The are taken to get an edge, or out of fear of keeping up with the playing field.


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

R-Star said:


> I've taken supplements, and even DNP when I was younger, but nothing like steroids or HGH, but I know many who have.


Well...I wouldn't have pissed clean in the MLB I can say that...but not anabolic steroids. I probably would've had a false positive for prohormones. :biggrin:


----------



## dubc15 (May 15, 2004)

seriously just connect the dots... supplements---> better performance---> more money. my god, use some common sense. more reason to take them since the nba has some of the weakest drug testing policies in professional sports.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

HB said:


> Oh yeah such a 'tiny' teenager. Do you think when NBA scouts say so and so has some room to fill, they mean by taking HGH?


I don't know man what do scouts mean but he specifically, filled A LOT of room.










I'm not nowhere near body building / fitness expert...but this picture looks...disturbing.

Like freaking veins popping out of his bicep and he's not even flexing it...he's just holding the basketball...


----------



## unluckyseventeen (Feb 5, 2006)

It's kind of funny (and sad) how DKNO is parading around in this thread acting as if he's some sort of nutritionist or athletic trainer, then posts pictures of LeBron 4 years ago and today (and they honestly don't look that much different) in an attempt to prove that LeBron is on something.

Let's not any of us pretend like we know a damn about the effects of using HGH or steroids because none of us are professional athletes, none of us are personal trainers and honestly this entire discussion is pretty ridiculous because it's one fan's uneducated guess vs another fan's uneducated guess. 

However, comparing one picture to another and then assuming that you cannot add 20+ pounds of muscle in a few years without the help of radical supplements is extremely ignorant. I've added 10-15 pounds of muscle in the past year and I casually lift maybe a couple times per week. Given my own dietician, cook, personal trainer and the time to work out as a professional athlete I'm sure I could put on 20 pounds of muscle in a year without a problem. Saying that it's inhuman to be muscular and add weight between the ages of 19 and 24 is one of the dumbest claims I've ever heard.

With that said, I'm not doubting that there are some players in the league that use HGH, but acting like you know anything and looking at one picture is a piss poor way to make a claim.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

DNKO said:


> I don't know man what do scouts mean but he specifically, filled A LOT of room.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ill admit Lebron is a freak of nature and he could have got to where he is with hard work and healthy eating. I think he probably uses something to improve his heal time, but either way the guy had to work his *** off one way or another to get that big.

As far as the veins go, athletes with large amounts of muscle tend to have very visible veins because you become more vascular with the increase of muscle needing blood. Its by no means uncommon. 

I do agree though that going from HB's picture to the current Lebron, saying he had room to fill out by no means meant the scouts thought he was going to gain 50+ pounds of solid muscle.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

unluckyseventeen said:


> It's kind of funny (and sad) how DKNO is parading around in this thread acting as if he's some sort of nutritionist or athletic trainer, then posts pictures of LeBron 4 years ago and today (and they honestly don't look that much different) in an attempt to prove that LeBron is on something.


Also it's kind of funny and sad how half of you get very emotional at every post about James that isn't written in superlatives and awe.

Moving on.

If you think there's isn't much difference between those 2 pics I posted then I really can't help you.

It is what it is.

That's 5 pounds gain according to NBA. And, since this is a free democratic community, 5 pounds to you obviously doesn't weigh as 5 pounds to me.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

unluckyseventeen said:


> It's kind of funny (and sad) how DKNO is parading around in this thread acting as if he's some sort of nutritionist or athletic trainer, then posts pictures of LeBron 4 years ago and today (and they honestly don't look that much different) in an attempt to prove that LeBron is on something.
> 
> Let's not any of us pretend like we know a damn about the effects of using HGH or steroids because none of us are professional athletes, none of us are personal trainers and honestly this entire discussion is pretty ridiculous because it's one fan's uneducated guess vs another fan's uneducated guess.
> 
> ...


There's a difference between adding muscle and adding 50+ pounds of muscle. Is it that hard to get in shape and gain 10-25lbs of muscle? No, not with hard work. But the average person has a ceiling to how far they can go. Could any of us work our asses off and get to Lebrons size if we had his facilities, cook, trainers, ect? No. He is a freak of nature. Could a lot of guys get to Lebrons size and build with PED's and hard work? Yea.


----------



## dubc15 (May 15, 2004)

unluckyseventeen said:


> It's kind of funny (and sad) how DKNO is parading around in this thread acting as if he's some sort of nutritionist or athletic trainer, then posts pictures of LeBron 4 years ago and today (and they honestly don't look that much different) in an attempt to prove that LeBron is on something.
> 
> Let's not any of us pretend like we know a damn about the effects of using HGH or steroids because none of us are professional athletes, none of us are personal trainers and honestly this entire discussion is pretty ridiculous because it's one fan's uneducated guess vs another fan's uneducated guess.
> 
> ...


only thing funny is how you always discount people's knowledge. ("go watch a jazz game", like the jazz aren't ever televised on national tv) hgh and steroids are not rocket science. it's pretty safe to say that these drugs have a positive affect on a player's physical attributes. yes yes yes, it is possible to make those gains on a strict diet and hard work, but you can only get so far on a natural diet. steroids raises the ceiling on gains and makes gains easier to attain.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

lmao @ some people in here saying that HGH has NO effect on athletic performance.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Hibachi! said:


> lmao @ some people in here saying that HGH has NO effect on athletic performance.


Nope. Its just a weight loss supplement right?


----------



## unluckyseventeen (Feb 5, 2006)

DNKO said:


> Also it's kind of funny and sad how half of you get very emotional at every post about James that isn't written in superlatives and awe.


What does this have to do with anything I've said? All I'm gathering is that you're launching an attack on LeBron and making claims by comparing two pictures to another, which gives you very little credibility and that credibility dwindles with each additional post.

If you had some sort of background in nutrition or athletic training then your claims might have some validity to them. But it sounds to me like you see LeBron in his rookie year, and then now and say "he can't gain that much muscle!!" and then act as if you know his entire workout routine, diet, schedule and natural lab values.

Give it a rest.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

> You also refuse to answer this question. Are you saying that no one in the league uses HGH?


Nope. There probably are athletes who use it, but they are in the minority.


----------



## sonicFLAME6 (Dec 19, 2006)

I don't even think it's all about Lebron at this point. It's about the use period that we are mainly discussing. Lebron is just an example, but it is not certain and can not be proven unless proper testing is allowed by the players union.
Of-course the superstars of the league might be the most overused, but again it can not be proven, at-least not yet. But if it comes out in the near future that these guys did partake in such actions then I will not be surprised.
I just don't think these types of results and players can be manufactured without outside sources and only by proper nutrition and hard work in the gym. Not to the rarity of their physical and athletic superiority.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> Nope. There probably are athletes who use it, but they are in the minority.


That is your opinion. You have no facts to back it up, just as though I have no facts to prove that they do. The difference is, I haven't said your opinion doesnt matter because you dont have indisputable facts to back it up.


----------



## unluckyseventeen (Feb 5, 2006)

dubc15 said:


> only thing funny is how you always discount people's knowledge. ("go watch a jazz game", like the jazz aren't ever televised on national tv)


(Let's see.. what's his favorite team, oh, the Jazz! I got it, I'll insult the Jazz! I ****ing rule.)

I don't see what the Jazz have to do with this at all, and it seems like you're reaching for some way to take a stab me for whatever reason. It was pathetic, but nice try.

I discount people's knowledge because they talk themselves in circles the entire time and don't provide any scientific knowledge whatsoever when making these claims. If you're uneducated on the subject, then why does anybody act as if their opinion on the matter is any more valid than anybody else? Please, if you have some kind of background with the supplement or any athletic training experience whatsoever, then please share. But going to the gym and lifting weights for a few minutes a day doesn't count. Any goon can do that but that doesn't mean they can start making such wild claims. And the fact of the matter is that nobody is really going to know unless a doctor, trainer or the player themselves come forward and admit it. Speculating without any knowledge seems pretty pointless, if you ask me.



> hgh and steroids are not rocket science. it's pretty safe to say that these drugs have a positive affect on a player's physical attributes. yes yes yes, it is possible to make those gains on a strict diet and hard work, but you can only get so far on a natural diet. steroids raises the ceiling on gains and makes gains easier to attain.


Yes, nobody is arguing with that. But the concensus among certain people here seems to be "Gasp! He added muscle.. he's juicing." Just the fact that nobody can provide any scientific background or any knowledge on nutrition or anything relevant to the topic makes me not take their opinions seriously at all.

Actually, I think baseball has really tainted everyone's view on substance abuse. For a lot of you it seems like you say "hmm, this could make him a lot better. He's good, so he's got to be using it" and that's just really, really sad. Not on your part, perhaps, but the fact that baseball has gotten so bad that you can't take the entire industry seriously because you suspect everyone of using it.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

R-Star said:


> That is your opinion. You have no facts to back it up, just as though I have no facts to prove that they do. The difference is, I haven't said your opinion doesnt matter because you dont have indisputable facts to back it up.


I am pretty sure you started the personal attacks not me.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

these guys are professional athletes. part of the job is to workout. that some are big shouldn't be a surprise. they're not mr olympia big. some are "i work out alot" big. do some take ped's? sure - there will always be those looking for an edge. but most of their builds are perfectly in line with what i would expect from a professional athlete population paid to work out alot. look at the arms of basketball players and then look at football players. there's still a noticable difference between a lebron james from even a terrell owens. they spend alot of time in the gym. they put on muscle. they're not bodybuilders, and they don't look like bodybuilders. of course, again, that doesn't mean they're clean.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

unluckyseventeen said:


> What does this have to do with anything I've said? All I'm gathering is that you're launching an attack on LeBron and making claims by comparing two pictures to another, which gives you very little credibility and that credibility dwindles with each additional post.
> 
> If you had some sort of background in nutrition or athletic training then your claims might have some validity to them. But it sounds to me like you see LeBron in his rookie year, and then now and say "he can't gain that much muscle!!" and then act as if you know his entire workout routine, diet, schedule and natural lab values.
> 
> Give it a rest.


OK first off all

Since we're talking here about PED's and all

I think you can't blame me for picking the BIGGEST athletic freak of the league as an example?

And if you seen what I've posted - it was based on his weight "mystery" - which is not much of a mystery to me because I would have to be blind to believe he's 250.

He said in the interview he eats 3 square meals.



So, crazy training on a daily basis, with LOADS of aerobic exercise, playing pro ball (aerobic 95% of the time), eating 3 square meals and saying that he doesn't even sip protein shakes or stuff carbs?

And then you look at those two pictures...in the last one...god dammit man he has no neck!

I mean...I'm not saying he's A-Rod...but looking at him and saying "oh that's just another of those superathletic freaks" is also kinda naive.


----------



## sonicFLAME6 (Dec 19, 2006)

It's not just baseball, it's football it's Olympic athletes, wrestling, MMA, ect... it's something that has become a complement of professional sports.


----------



## dubc15 (May 15, 2004)

seriously, youre the worst type of skeptic. usually it's smart to question data people give you but not to the point where you even deny common knowledge. i honestly believe if i told you 1+1=2, you would not believe it. sorry, i do not have a phd in calculus. steroids and hgh are nearly household items for people who lift weights. there are millions of resources online and thousands of people's testimonials. just look on google. the short-term affects are undeniable. md's, phd's, nutritionists, whatever, they will tell you the same exact thing that people on this board are saying. however, when it comes to long-term health risks, etc, this part becomes a little murkier. there is no consensus on it.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

unluckyseventeen said:


> (Let's see.. what's his favorite team, oh, the Jazz! I got it, I'll insult the Jazz! I ****ing rule.)
> 
> I don't see what the Jazz have to do with this at all, and it seems like you're reaching for some way to take a stab me for whatever reason. It was pathetic, but nice try.
> 
> ...


We know that many are using because of the drastic changes in athleticism, strength, speed, injury recovery time, ect in the past 10 years or so. Yes yes, Im sure new and better training has helped, but when that was used as an excuse for the performance of MLB players, how did that turn out in the end?

Is the entire league using? Of course not, and not every athletic freak is injecting himself with PED's, but are a lot of players using? Without a doubt. 

My experience in the whole PED's sector? I wouldn't like to go into it in too much detail, but my brother did win the body building title for western Canada a few years back.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

S2theONIC said:


> Exactly, some get caught here and there, IMO to make it seem like they are doing a good job at the anti-drug policy when in reality it's a joke. But when it comes to performance enhancing as fan/ex competitive athlete I would like to know if some of these guys are really so genetically superior athletic wise or they have tampered with their bodies.


Oh, I'm sure that use of designer steroids is probably common, there are ways to beat the pee test (disguise the levels of testosterone in urine), so I'm positive that NBA players with their multimillion dollar contracts and expensive training consultants are as susceptible to using as athletes in other sports. (Again, basketball is basically a track sport, and you can see the prevalence of performance enhancers there.) All I'm doubting is that they waste a lot of time with relatively ineffective ones like HGH. I would expect their trainers to know better.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> I am pretty sure you started the personal attacks not me.


So we agree that you refuse to add anything to this debate other than Lebron having more money for food and training then I take it?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

dubc15 said:


> seriously, youre the worst type of skeptic. usually it's smart to question data people give you but not to the point where you even deny common knowledge. i honestly believe if i told you 1+1=2, you would not believe it. sorry, i do not have a phd in calculus. *steroids and hgh are nearly household items for people who lift weights.* there are millions of resources online and thousands of people's testimonials. just look on google. the short-term affects are undeniable. md's, phd's, nutritionists, whatever, they will tell you the same exact thing that people on this board are saying. however, when it comes to long-term health risks, etc, this part becomes a little murkier. there is no consensus on it.


Yes, yes it is. Thats not opinion, its fact for anyone who has any sort of insight into body building. Or you could just go to a weight lifting forum and see, either it will be full of PED related posts, or the site will have a disclaimer saying not to talk about any PED's on their forum.

To have guys with no idea what they're talking about come and say "Sure a couple use, but not many" is laughable. As I've said, there is plenty of PED's to use where the gain isnt muscle. Straight muscle gains is not the only benefit from PED's. With the rigors of playing a professional sport, increased heal time would be a huge plus.


----------



## unluckyseventeen (Feb 5, 2006)

DNKO said:


> OK first off all
> 
> Since we're talking here about PED's and all
> 
> ...


OK, this tells me nothing relevant other than your simplistic formula of freakishly athletic + adding muscle + pretending like I know anything about his training, eating or natural lab values = something's fishy. Anyway...



> And then you look at those two pictures...in the last one...god dammit man he has no neck!


A couple pictures are what you're making these claims off of?

I can tell you that weight in comparison to look can very often be very deceiving. I, by no means, am that muscular but I weigh around 190. Most people estimate my weight at about 170, including a soon-to-be nutritionist and an avid body builder. By comparison, I have a friend that hits the weights hard and looks huge, and he weighs 205. Most people guess him at around 220, including that same soon-to-be nutritionist. Several factors, including muscle and bone density have a lot to do with weight. If LeBron came into the league weighing 210 or whatever it was with the build he had (and at 6'8") then I'd personally speculate that he's on a relatively light frame to begin with because he already had an NBA body coming out of high school. Saying he's around 250 with as much as I've seen of him does not seem unusual at all, to me. Not to mention that weight distribution has a lot to do with how a person looks compared to what they weigh.

It seems like you have some sort of personal agenda what with the other thread you started, freaking out about LeBron's weight. With what little supporting evidence and background to your claims it's impossible for anybody to take it seriously.

And I also don't know why you care so much. If he's on HGH or any rigorous protein supplement, what does that mean to you? Anything? Are you going to get personal satisfaction if you wound up being right that he was using something else to get more muscular? I just really don't see why it matters.



> I mean...I'm not saying he's A-Rod...but looking at him and saying "oh that's just another of those superathletic freaks" is also kinda naive.


You seem to be loosely throwing around naivety like it's going to help prove your point. The fact of the matter is that nobody knows except trainers, doctors and the players themselves. I just really don't see why it's important to make a big deal out of it with such little evidence to back yourself up.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

> So we agree that you refuse to add anything to this debate other than Lebron having more money for food and training then I take it?


Sigh*

Nvm if that makes you feel better. Anything to stop this back and forth


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Oh, I'm sure that use of designer steroids is probably common, there are ways to beat the pee test (disguise the levels of testosterone in urine), so I'm positive that NBA players with their multimillion dollar contracts and expensive training consultants are as susceptible to using as athletes in other sports. (Again, basketball is basically a track sport, and you can see the prevalence of performance enhancers there.) All I'm doubting is that they waste a lot of time with relatively ineffective ones like HGH. I would expect their trainers to know better.


Again, muscle recovery time, muscle endurance and other factors are benefits you are not looking at.


----------



## unluckyseventeen (Feb 5, 2006)

dubc15 said:


> seriously, youre the worst type of skeptic. usually it's smart to question data people give you but not to the point where you even deny common knowledge.


First off, who are you talking to, and secondly what is common knowledge that I have denied, if you are talking to me?


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> When did I say HGH is for muscle gain. I've made it very clear thats not my standpoint. Recovery time, muscle endurance, peak limits, ect are as big of factors as straight muscle gains due to testosterone.


Recovery time and muscle endurance are a function of oxygenation of the blood and red blood cell production, things that HGH does poorly. There are far better drugs that get you there, like equipoise, anavar, and clenbuterol. Clenbuterol usage is pretty universal amongst weight lifters, and probably responsible for most of the effects that they're attributing to HGH (assuming that that's what they're using and not THG, which is actually effective). And because it's such an effective bronchodilator it's one whose use I would expect to be rampant in the NBA. As oxygenation is far more important for a basketball player than the mild benefits provided by rHGH.


----------



## unluckyseventeen (Feb 5, 2006)

R-Star said:


> We know that many are using because of the drastic changes in athleticism, strength, speed, injury recovery time, ect in the past 10 years or so. Yes yes, Im sure new and better training has helped, but when that was used as an excuse for the performance of MLB players, how did that turn out in the end?
> 
> Is the entire league using? Of course not, and not every athletic freak is injecting himself with PED's, but are a lot of players using? Without a doubt.


I'm just saying it's not like it's out of the question that from 19-24 a person can bulk up like crazy without using steroids, HGH or whatever else people tend to frown upon.

David Robinson and Karl Malone were HUGE when they played.. barely any body fat, muscular to all hell. I don't see how those to are any different in terms of a physical specimen as LeBron or Dwight are. Just because there are oddities in today's NBA doesn't mean they never existed. Basketball is as competitive as ever so you lose an edge if you don't train your *** off. It comes with the territory of being expected to perform at an extreme level, every day, and getting paid millions more dollars to do it (compared to past generations).


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Recovery time and muscle endurance are a function of oxygenation of the blood and red blood cell production, things that HGH does poorly. There are far better drugs that get you there, like equipoise, anavar, and clenbuterol. Clenbuterol usage is pretty universal amongst weight lifters, and probably responsible for most of the effects that they're attributing to HGH (assuming that that's what they're using and not THG, which is actually effective). And because it's such an effective bronchodilator it's one whose use I would expect to be rampant in the NBA. As oxygenation is far more important for a basketball player than the mild benefits provided by rHGH.


So what you're trying to say, weightlifters, the pioneers of the PED industry have no idea what they're taking? 
WWE wrestlers have no idea what they're taking?

I know of clenbuterol. HGH is not poor at recovery time and muscle endurance.


----------



## dubc15 (May 15, 2004)

ehmunro said:


> Recovery time and muscle endurance are a function of oxygenation of the blood and red blood cell production, things that HGH does poorly. There are far better drugs that get you there, like equipoise, anavar, and clenbuterol. Clenbuterol usage is pretty universal amongst weight lifters, and probably responsible for most of the effects that they're attributing to HGH (assuming that that's what they're using and not THG, which is actually effective). And because it's such an effective bronchodilator it's one whose use I would expect to be rampant in the NBA. As oxygenation is far more important for a basketball player than the mild benefits provided by rHGH.


yes, oxygen is important; without oxygen, the human race would not exist. nothing tops oxygen/water, obviously, but the point is hgh does benefit an nba player.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Going for a smoke break (I'm not nearly as health conscious as I once was) I realized there's no point arguing about HGH in this thread ehmunroe. While we may have different opinions on its effects, I think I may be arguing just for the sake of arguing it with you.

I agree that there are plenty of other options for players to use to enhance their performance, and HGH and steroids are obviously not the only options. You agree that players are probably using other PED's and I agree. HGH and its uses don't seem all that relative to the general topic of players using PED's.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> So what you're trying to say, weightlifters, the pioneers of the PED industry have no idea what they're taking?
> WWE wrestlers have no idea what they're taking?


Are you seriously arguing that juiceheads and high school drop outs know more about biochemistry than actual researchers that specifically study the effects of HGH on the human body? You can try to make the argument, but I don't think it's going to be very convincing. Especially when we have studies on the placebo effect to explain the superstitions. 



R-Star said:


> I know of clenbuterol. HGH is not poor at recovery time and muscle endurance.


Compared to the available choices for professional athletes? Yes, yes it is.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

dubc15 said:


> yes, oxygen is important; without oxygen, the human race would not exist. nothing tops oxygen/water, obviously, but the point is hgh does benefit an nba player.


I do understand what he is saying though. There are drugs that enhance the bloods ability to carry oxygen to muscles, which greatly improves muscle repair time.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Are you seriously arguing that juiceheads and high school drop outs know more about biochemistry than actual researchers that specifically study the effects of HGH on the human body? You can try to make the argument, but I don't think it's going to be very convincing. Especially when we have studies on the placebo effect to explain the superstitions.
> 
> 
> 
> Compared to the available choices for professional athletes? Yes, yes it is.


Where are the results of these studies?

Also, acting like you're a guru in the PED industry, and then calling its users juiceheads and high school drop outs is laughable to say the least.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Essentially that's part of what the Suns do. They have their guys work out in those multi-million dollar oxygen chambers year round. I'm sure there's a lot of clen running around behind the scenes there, as well. Though obviously there's no proof of it. Just a suspicion given how much stress they put on proper oxygenation for their guys (that and the fact that all those old guys don't want to leave Phoenix, leading me to suspect that they don't want to be parted from their dealer).


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Essentially that's part of what the Suns do. They have their guys work out in those multi-million dollar oxygen chambers year round. I'm sure there's a lot of clen running around behind the scenes there, as well. Though obviously there's no proof of it. Just a suspicion given how much stress they put on proper oxygenation for their guys (that and the fact that all those old guys don't want to leave Phoenix, leading me to suspect that they don't want to be parted from their dealer).


While that all makes sense and I'm not arguing any of that, I don't see how that proves that HGH is used mainly as a weight loss supplement.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> Where are the results of these studies?


Here's an abstract for you to look over.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Here's an abstract for you to look over.


From my understanding its a study that takes other studies into account from searching the words growth hormone and randomized controlled trial? I will read it and get a better opinion on it, but from what I've read so far:

_Limitations: Few studies evaluated athletic performance. Growth hormone protocols in the studies may not reflect real-world doses and regimens._

Im not sure how much stock I will put into this article to be honest.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Oh by the way, Blake Griffin has Lebron type build, Lebron type athleticism, and to a lesser extent Lebron type skills, and he's just a college sophomore. Does that mean he also takes HGH? Especially when at his age, there's really no need for it.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

HB said:


> Oh by the way, Blake Griffin has Lebron type build, Lebron type athleticism, and to a lesser extent Lebron type skills, and he's just a college sophomore. Does that mean he also takes HGH? Especially when at his age, there's really no need for it.


Steroids were supposed to be rampant even in high school a few years ago: i.e. where did all those 300 pound lineman come from?
HGH may be harder to get but I don't know much about the synthesization process. 

Hard to know how this applies to guys like James and Howard who seemed to gain weight appropriately for age. i.e. they bulked up in the late teens, early 20's. Like Jamal Irief I'm a string bean but I definitely gained a ton of muscle mass at that age working out and eating elephant sized portions. Is there anybody who went Barry Bonds in there 30's though? Can't think of any of the top of my head


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

Why do you act so blind to facts? Why?

First of all - HGH and EPO Mircere don't necessarily have to affect your VISIBLE muscles.

It doesn't mean you will bloat as soon as you take it. But what it does it makes muscles recover quick as hell. Quick recovery = more effective time in the gym = more muscles. And that's cheating. If you ask me.

But definitely not if you ask NBA since they know they will lose this few fans they have if they let A-Rod happens to them.

NBA doesn't make doping tests approved by WADA. 

Of course they don't.

It would ruin the league.

But I'm curious to see how will it look in summer olympics in 2012, because they will have HGH test there. But on the other hand, NBA players are aware of that too...


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

> Steroids were supposed to be rampant even in high school a few years ago: i.e. where did all those 300 pound lineman come from?
> HGH may be harder to get but I don't know much about the synthesization process.
> 
> Hard to know how this applies to guys like James and Howard who seemed to gain weight appropriately for age. i.e. they bulked up in the late teens, early 20's. Like Jamal Irief I'm a string bean but I definitely gained a ton of muscle mass at that age working out and eating elephant sized portions. Is there anybody who went Barry Bonds in there 30's though? Can't think of any of the top of my head


^Malone?


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> While that all makes sense and I'm not arguing any of that, I don't see how that proves that HGH is used mainly as a weight loss supplement.


It's used, primarily, to treat height deficiency in adolescents. It's also used by expensive clinics in the anti-aging and weight loss businesses as a sort of wonder drug (which it isn't, under strict medical supervision it can have some benefits). The myths associated with rHGH sprung up in the wake of a study done nearly 20 years ago, but most of the claims of the Rudman study have proven to have been exaggeration. 

Are there probably still weightlifters that use it as a result of bad information? Probably. And the placebo effect of its use is undoubtedly the biggest benefit associated with it. Given the money involved, I expect NBA players to be getting better information from their trainers. So, no, I don't think that HGH use is prevalent amongst NBA players because it's a relatively ineffective performance enhancer.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

I'm not sure that any of this really matters. None of this distorts the game of basketball. In Baseball the big thing that matters is the historical stats and legacy. You should be able to compare eras in baseball. That's the appeal to the sport.

Basketball has never been about that. The stats are nice, but what people care about is winning, and highlight reel plays. And they don't reaaaally compare eras in doing so, beyond Kobe vs. Jordan. But I mean, no one really does an indepth comparison of Shaq vs. Kareem. Stats in basketball are almost meaningless.

So if the league is based mostly on wins, and highlights--style and flair--and everyone is using the same HGH drugs...I don't see why it matters then?

And for the record, just having a good body won't make you a player. Compare Tim Duncan to the career of Drew Gooden. Extra strength won't give you a jumpshot, or good footwork, balance or timing. It won't tell you when someone is open in the corner for a 3 and give you the ability to throw a pass through traffic to get to them.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> From my understanding its a study that takes other studies into account from searching the words growth hormone and randomized controlled trial? I will read it and get a better opinion on it, but from what I've read so far:
> 
> _Limitations: Few studies evaluated athletic performance. Growth hormone protocols in the studies may not reflect real-world doses and regimens._
> 
> Im not sure how much stock I will put into this article to be honest.


If you click the footnotes, you find links to all the available literature. Though given the paucity of data that shows any athletic enhancement in healthy adult males, and your absolute belief that NBA players are mainlining it in mass quantities, I can well see why you'd dismiss it without even reading.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

futuristxen said:


> I'm not sure that any of this really matters. None of this distorts the game of basketball. In Baseball the big thing that matters is the historical stats and legacy. You should be able to compare eras in baseball. That's the appeal to the sport.
> 
> Basketball has never been about that. The stats are nice, but what people care about is winning, and highlight reel plays. And they don't reaaaally compare eras in doing so, beyond Kobe vs. Jordan. But I mean, no one really does an indepth comparison of Shaq vs. Kareem. Stats in basketball are almost meaningless.
> 
> ...


Geezus you really shouldn't be talking.

*HOW CAN LETTING PLAYERS USE SUBSTANCES THAT MAKE THEM GO PAST EVERY LAW OF HUMAN GENETICS BE A GOOD THING?!? *

For crying out loud who mentioned stats?


It's the fact that they are playing on a level beyond ANY logical explanation other than "oh.....he's a genetic freak! yeah..so he can do it...plus he's rich...so I guess he can do it..."


We're not talking about MAKING SHOTS. So far they didn't come up with a drug that will make you make every shot.


This is about them cheating on *endurance, power, stamina, training effectiveness, athletic abilities, injury recovery*.

Not about stats.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> If you click the footnotes, you find links to all the available literature. Though given the paucity of data that shows any athletic enhancement in healthy adult males, and your absolute belief that NBA players are mainlining it in mass quantities, I can well see why you'd dismiss it without even reading.


I still haven't read the whole article, but you're right, I am prepared to dismiss it. It says very clearly that it is a flawed study in many ways.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> I still haven't read the whole article, but you're right, I am prepared to dismiss it. It says very clearly that it is a flawed study in many ways.


Actually it doesn't say that at all. It says that some of the studies may not reflect the usage levels in the real world.


----------



## Idunkonyou (Feb 23, 2003)

HGH just doesn't make you bigger, but it makes your recovery time from an injury less. I seriously doubt guys like Howard or Lebron are using HGH. Both have only put on about 30 pounds of mass since entering the NBA and it took them a few years to do that.

It wouldn't be used in the NBA any way for bulking up. More or less used to help with recovery if anything. Guys like Howard and James are just freaks of nature.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

they are freaks of nature in terms of height and athleticism. they have impressive physiques, but are not freaks of nature in terms of build. certainly not compared to other athletes. most of the other athletes just aren't 6'8 or 7'.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

kflo said:


> they are freaks of nature in terms of height and athleticism. they have impressive physiques, but are not freaks of nature in terms of build. certainly not compared to other athletes. most of the other athletes just aren't 6'8 or 7'.


That's a good point: not a lot of guys look dispropiortantely big compared to there height versus NFL guys. Plus I can't think of anyone whose actual head has grown like Barry "Mr. Potato" Bonds


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

here's terrell owens. wr.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

this all said, to the extent there are loopholes in the testing and there are things to take that work that will go undetected, players will use. no question.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

kflo said:


> here's terrell owens. wr.


To quote the immortal George Scott, "That ain't lifting weights and grandma's beefsteak."


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

Terrell Owens is another one of those freaks of nature...trust me. I'm not saying he's not on anything but not many people could get like that with a little help from Balco


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

futuristxen said:


> Extra strength won't give you a jumpshot, or good footwork, balance or timing. It won't tell you when someone is open in the corner for a 3 and give you the ability to throw a pass through traffic to get to them.


Just like it can't improve your hand eye coordination, the physics of your swing, or the action on your curveball. Somehow it still has been wildly beneficial to both hitters and pitchers alike in baseball.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

ehmunro said:


> To quote the immortal George Scott, "That ain't lifting weights and grandma's beefsteak."


Maybe TO was cutting few days before photoshoot


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Corey Maggette was also naturally ripped coming into the league. He said he didnt start lifting weights until recently.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

TO could have been working out right before the shoot. Also he's flexing. As far a Corey Maggette being ripped. Go play ball in the summer. There's tons of guys who are ripped off playing basketball dayy day long.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

DNKO said:


> Why do you act so blind to facts? Why?
> 
> First of all - HGH and EPO Mircere don't necessarily have to affect your VISIBLE muscles.
> 
> ...


After saying all this how can you justify your early posts where all you did was post before and after pictures of LeBron and say that was evidence that he used HGH?

I'm not saying the man isn't on something at all, but to claim the only way a man puts on 20, 30 or 40 pounds of muscle between the ages of 17 and 24 is thru use of HGH? Get out in the real world.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Seriously... Have you ever played basketball at a gym or at your school? I know at the Rec Cen at the gym there are guys there that are freaks of nature. I assume you think they take HGH too? There are guys that you can TELL have had some HGH. 










He was 27 in 1991... He was 40 at the point of the picture. Look at his frame, he isn't naturally built for that. But you can already see LeBron has a frame for it, you can see his arms in high school are huge for high-school. It wasn't some sudden flare-up.


----------



## NewAgeBaller (Jan 8, 2007)

HB said:


> Corey Maggette was also naturally ripped coming into the league. He said he didnt start lifting weights until recently.


I really doubt that. He's been in the league for years, he hasn't picked up weight lifting till recent?


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Illegal drugs should be tested, few excuses not to. But they don't benefit NBA athletes that much, we would have heard about rampant usage by now. Basic law of human idiocy says it would have been revealed around the time it was in baseball many years ago.


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

NBA players may use, but some of the reasoning here is so stupid it practically drools.

Don't any of you have friends who are gym junkies or just good amateur athletes? Most of these guys are regular people who have the right body types for gaining muscle, and who lift weights a lot. One of my close friends in high school gained 15 lb of muscle in 12th grade just from lifting 4-5 times a week. I have friends now who have the build of pro basketballers and who I am certain do not use steroids or HGH. Some people can just do it. 

Players lift weights more these days than ever before. Jordan and Olajuwon only started lifting very regularly around 1990, five years into their careers. It just wasn't considered critical back then.

Another reason why players back then may not have looked as muscle-bound as today's is that their diet wasn't as good. More body fat makes muscles appear less prominent and well-defined. 

There are plenty of stories of guys back then eating junk food regularly. Compare Shaq's confessed diet in 2000 of strictly low-saturated-fat foods and herbal teas prepared by his personal chef with special instructions from the trainers, to what he described his game-day meals as in his first autobiography in 1993: giant bowl of pasta between lunch and dinner, soft drinks and pizza/hamburgers after the game. 

Put the bucket of fried chicken Hakeem Olajuwon described eating every eveining with Moses Malone and everyone else who spent the offseason at Fonde Recreation Center in Houston next to the carefully-prescribed diets nearly every player today adheres to. 

These days players joke of scoffing a Big Mac to scare their trainers; back then it actually was Big Macs three times a week.

But it's not like the players back then were significantly less athletic than those we watch today. David Robinson could jump almost as high as Dwight Howard despite being 2" taller, had a quicker first step, and had rippling muscles. Shawn Kemp had a 40" vertical leap. Charles Barkley was 6'6", 270 lb and had a 39" vertical leap. He could dunk from standing on one foot. Clyde Drexler and Michael Jordan had 42" vertical leaps. Hakeem Olajuwon's vertical leap of 36" was the same as pre-injury Amare's. James Worthy and Scottie Pippen had comparable speed in the open court to LeBron. Shaq came into the league 7'1", 300 lb with tremendous athleticism. Anthony Mason was bigger than Ron Artest. 

It's likely that players use HGH, but suggesting that it is impossible to add considerable amounts of muscle to one's frame just from lifting weights reguarly over five years, and posting pictures of LeBron James today in the act of flexing next to a pic of him as an 18-year old with his arms hanging limply by his side is painfully simplistic and only detracts from your credibility.


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

Cap said:


> Illegal drugs should be tested, few excuses not to. *But they don't benefit NBA athletes that much,* we would have heard about rampant usage by now. Basic law of human idiocy says it would have been revealed around the time it was in baseball many years ago.


If your talking anabolic steroids then you're completely wrong.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

I dont understand the whole "steroids wouldnt help in basketball" idea. If you're a big man, steroids would be a huge asset. And why do runners get caught for juicing all the time? The whole muscles make you slower is plain stupid.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

not that it makes you slower, but runners are trying to run hard and fast for a short period of time. For basketball players they rely more on endurance on the court, and the game is more about skill than strength.

In football strength is a huge part of the game, in baseball the same is true, for hitting and pitching.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Tragedy said:


> not that it makes you slower, but runners are trying to run hard and fast for a short period of time. For basketball players they rely more on endurance on the court, and the game is more about skill than strength.
> 
> In football strength is a huge part of the game, in baseball the same is true, for hitting and pitching.


Strength is a huge factor for forwards, rebounds, boxing out, the inside game in general revolves mainly on strength and skill.

But I do see what you're saying.


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

Strength is a huge factor for guards too. Don't forget about lower body strength. That's what you need to be fast/jump high. That's where strength comes in for a guard.

Steroids wouldn't dramatically effect conditioning. If a fat guy like Shaq could run up down the court for 40 minutes, then so could a guy on steroids.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

lets not be naive here steroids and HGH make good athlete's better why wouldn't it help make a player faster, quicker, or stronger and translate into the NBA game. With lots of athlete's from different sports using the same trainers and same training techiniques I'm sure there are some guys in the NBA using illegal performace enhancers.


----------



## buduan (Jun 10, 2002)

Diable said:


> HGH isn't a drug.It's a hormone that every human has inside them(unless you're a dwarf in which case you should go get some).Therefore it's virtually impossible to detect it's use.In fact some people naturally produce a lot more HGH than others.This makes it extremely unlikely that any reliable test will be available in the short term and even if you had a test it'd still be hard to make the results stick.
> 
> 
> Of course this makes it extremely likely that it's being used instead of steroids which are detectable and more dangerous as well.Personally I'm not sure that HGH is ideal for basketball.It would make you bulkier and stronger(if you also worked out to increase strength only),but other than that the advantages for basketball are not clear.If you're a child and you're growing then HGH will make you grow taller,but I don't know that you'd get taller after you naturally stopped growing as an adolescent or young man.Then if you grew like Kenny George that wouldn't make you well coordinated or skilled...being a giant really isn't a magical panacea that makes you a great basketball player.It only helps you if you can play.


HGH is amazing for recovery. I used it for 6 months and saw huge improvements in how quickly I rebounded from workouts and games. A mysterious foot injury that orthotics couldn't fix has gone away. Shin splints I had since I was a sophomore in HS (17 years ago) have disappeared and never come back. I could go on and on but you get the picture. And I was only on 2 IU's a day.

HGH is the bomb. Only problem is that it's so damn expensive or else I would still be on it.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

buduan said:


> HGH is amazing for recovery. I used it for 6 months and saw huge improvements in how quickly I rebounded from workouts and games. A mysterious foot injury that orthotics couldn't fix has gone away. Shin splints I had since I was a sophomore in HS (17 years ago) have disappeared and never come back. I could go on and on but you get the picture. And I was only on 2 IU's a day.
> 
> HGH is the bomb. Only problem is that it's so damn expensive or else I would still be on it.


According to ehmunro, you're lying through your teeth. You may have lost some fat due to the HGH, but anything else was just due to a placebo effect.


----------



## buduan (Jun 10, 2002)

Who the hell is ehmunro and WTF does he know?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

buduan said:


> Who the hell is ehmunro and WTF does he know?


He is a poster on this forum. He knows everything on HGH and says its mainly used as a weightloss supplement, and has little to no effect on muscle recovery time and endurance.


----------



## buduan (Jun 10, 2002)

LOL. I didn't lose any weight, I actually gained about 15lbs of lean muscle mass while on it. And that was with very little weight training due to a dislocated shoulder and rotator cuff surgery. I was restricted to low weight high rep upper body workouts.

Anybody who says that there isn't any benefits to athletes using HGH obviously has never used it. I spent 6 months and countless trips to different doctors and specialists trying to figure out why my foot hurt so bad I couldn't walk around the block. And I had given up on trying to get over my shin splints years ago. I just knew I had to pop a couple of ibuprofen every time I played ball.

Haven't had a issue since. And I've been off of HGH since December. I play back to back games Saturday in LA, and back to back games again on Sunday in Palm Springs. This time last year I would be down and out after those first two games. Now I'm running stairs Monday evening and doing plyos in between.


----------



## buduan (Jun 10, 2002)

When I get the $$$ to do it again I'm going to jump it up to 4 IU's a day for 3 months, not change my workout, get monthly body composition tests done, and I'll post them so you can see the difference it makes.

HGH is the fountain of youth.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

buduan said:


> When I get the $$$ to do it again I'm going to jump it up to 4 IU's a day for 3 months, not change my workout, get monthly body composition tests done, and I'll post them so you can see the difference it makes.
> 
> HGH is the fountain of youth.


I would be doing the same if I could afford it. I've been arguing the whole thread of the benefits of HGH, its nice to have someone else come in that isnt making up facts on HGH when they have no clue of what they're talking about.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

Too bad that this thread will go silent now...arguments on the "other" side are dead...

But if it's not a problem...I would like to discuss some more about this.

Specifically - long term effects?

And just for the sake of argument;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxICWGK5rVo

This ignorance really annoys me. Reminds me of forum discussions.

"I won't get bigger tomorrow"

Well DOH you juicehead, you won't, because I would figure that HGH won't alter you in 24 hours..

The way they're twisting the argument, retarded...


----------



## sknydave (Apr 27, 2006)

A lot of people have some sort of hero worship with professional athletes and simply refuse to believe that their heroes are on steroids/HGH


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

sknydave said:


> A lot of people have some sort of hero worship with professional athletes and simply refuse to believe that their heroes are on steroids/HGH


Conversely there are a lot of people who are just jealous of the fact that they are the bottom of the gene pool, and anyone else must be using something.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

^Truff!


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> He is a poster on this forum. He knows everything on HGH and says its mainly used as a weightloss supplement, and has little to no effect on muscle recovery time and endurance.


Is Buduan a professional athlete? I sincerely doubt it.



R-Star said:


> He is a poster on this forum. He knows everything on HGH and says its mainly used as a weightloss supplement, and has little to no effect on muscle recovery time and endurance.


 I understand that reading isn't your strong suit, but it's not like I'm speaking another language here. I have repeatedly said that it's primarily used to treat deficiency of HGH production, _something that professional athletes don't suffer from_ (_especially_ under 25s). In fact, they're exactly the opposite, they produce large quantities of the stuff. The sorts of performance enhancers available to pro athletes outstrip HGH by many many orders of magnitude, so, no, I don't expect pro athletes to waste their time on something that has a marginal effect on them when there are so many better alternatives available.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

Tragedy said:


> Conversely there are a lot of people who are just jealous of the fact that they are the bottom of the gene pool, and anyone else must be using something.


Yeah...that superior gene syndrome is really hitting the league these days...


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Is Buduan a professional athlete? I sincerely doubt it.
> 
> 
> 
> I understand that reading isn't your strong suit, but it's not like I'm speaking another language here. I have repeatedly said that it's primarily used to treat deficiency of HGH production, _something that professional athletes don't suffer from_ (_especially_ under 25s). In fact, they're exactly the opposite, they produce large quantities of the stuff. The sorts of performance enhancers available to pro athletes outstrip HGH by many many orders of magnitude, so, no, I don't expect pro athletes to waste their time on something that has a marginal effect on them when there are so many better alternatives available.


Nice backstep, but the problem is, I do read your posts, and my reading comprehension is actually pretty good. You first explanations of HGH was that is was used mainly as a weight loss supplement, then it was said it was used as that in older men (which HB took the ball and ran with :lol. Now you're acting like you don't have to try to counter buduans posts, because you really meant all this for pro athletes, and not the average Joe? Yes, you mentioned athletes having higher test levels, but you also linked to HGH testing done to the average man, which you obviously put a lot of stock in. So no, your post isn't going to work to cop out of the argument.

This is what I find funny though. Are you still the HGH and supplement guru ehmunro? And is buduan just another juicehead or highschool drop out as you said previously?


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> Nice backstep, but the problem is, I do read your posts, and my reading comprehension is actually pretty good. You first explanations of HGH was that is was used mainly as a weight loss supplement,


Really? Is that what I said? Let's have a look, shall we?



ehmunro said:


> The benefit of HGH is more psychological than anything else. It doesn't really help with performance (though it can help obese people looking to lose weight, albeit only slightly). They would need to be injecting rHGH as teens for any real benefit. If they're using anything, it would be real steroids, since those can actually boost performance. (It comes down to boosting testosterone production, and rHGH just isn't terribly effective at that.)


I guess you're not quite as attentive a reader as you thought, eh? I see nowhere in that post where I said anything at all about its primary use, I can see where I said that it wasn't much of a performance enhancer (and it isn't, the science backs that up), though that it can help overweight people slightly (and only slightly because extended use leads to insulin resistance and can induce type 2 diabetes). Thanks for playing, though.


----------



## buduan (Jun 10, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Is Buduan a professional athlete? I sincerely doubt it.
> 
> 
> 
> I understand that reading isn't your strong suit, but it's not like I'm speaking another language here. I have repeatedly said that it's primarily used to treat deficiency of HGH production, _something that professional athletes don't suffer from_ (_especially_ under 25s). In fact, they're exactly the opposite, they produce large quantities of the stuff. The sorts of performance enhancers available to pro athletes outstrip HGH by many many orders of magnitude, so, no, I don't expect pro athletes to waste their time on something that has a marginal effect on them when there are so many better alternatives available.


Professional athletes also produce a lot more testosterone than the average joe. Does that mean taking testosterone would have little to no effect on them?

And you're right, there are other performance enhancers out there which will produce faster results than HGH. Problem with them is that they are easy to detect and the effects with many of them disappear quickly after using them. On top of being very dangerous.

I've been off of HGH for 3 months now and have retained all the mass I put on and still enjoy the healing effects it had on me. I haven't had a single issue that plagued me before.

And I wouldn't call myself a "average joe" in terms of size and athleticism. I'm 6'3 235lbs and played college ball in the Pacific NW back in the mid 90's. I've been a avid weightlifter and ball player for the past 16 years. 

Several MMA fighters in my gym use it, 2 of whom are in the WEC. A pretty prominent Arena League football player at my gym uses it. Several trainers and bodybuilders (pro and amateur) use it. 

Are we all wrong? Are we all experiencing a "placebo" effect?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Really? Is that what I said? Let's have a look, shall we?
> 
> 
> 
> I guess you're not quite as attentive a reader as you thought, eh? I see nowhere in that post where I said anything at all about its primary use, I can see where I said that it wasn't much of a performance enhancer (and it isn't, the science backs that up), though that it can help overweight people slightly (and only slightly because extended use leads to insulin resistance and can induce type 2 diabetes). Thanks for playing, though.


Your pick and choose tactics are very cute. So your argument is now "Well I never said its _primary_ use was weight loss." Well that's great, I guess you didn't, but you did mention it multiple times throughout this thread.

Not to mention, you failed to touch half of my last post, I guess you like to play dumb when someone asks you a tough question. So here it is again. Do you think buduan is a juicehead or highschool drop out? That was your previous standpoint on people who say HGH works well for muscle repair and other helpful factors.

Or hey, could it be just like you said, and him using the HGH just made him think his ankle was healed? His brain must be blocking out the pain for him, because theres no way the HGH had anything to do with it.

So no ehmunro, don't come in here, pick and choose sections of my post you think you can twist to your argument, leaving out any tough questions or points that don't go along with your "doctor knows best" argument.


----------



## YoYoYoWasup (Nov 14, 2004)

Anywho, I'm pretty positive Howard isn't doing anything illegal. First of all, he has some of the biggest shoulders I've ever seen, which lends itself towards building more muscle mass. Second, there's nothing abnormal about his appearance. He's more lean and trim than enormous, bulging muscles. His body looks like what it should with lots of weight training. Plus, he still has the same small head he came into the league with.

He could be on HGH potentially, I dunno, but he's certainly not 'roiding.


----------



## sonicFLAME6 (Dec 19, 2006)

For all the boring last few months here, the past 2 days have been very entertaining. Makes up for it I guess.
To me it's not even about HGH anymore, although I do believe it is being used by NBA players) it's about doping in general. Illegal substances and performance enhancers are being used and the anti policy of the NBA is a joke. Guys come back from injuries in months in advance or go into the locker room at half time not being able to walk and miraculously are back in form for the second half. It's just too obvious for me.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

^Lol its some miracle ankle healing drug they give them. Come on now! You really think journalists wouldn't report such


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

You guys don't seem to completely understand the benefits of steroids.They make you stronger if you use them while you're training for strength.Many of the baseball players who used them weren't interested in getting stronger.Like Andy Pettitte they used them to help recover from injurys.However steroids also help you recover from working out,no matter what you're training for.If you're a basketball player steroids would help you train harder than you could without them and that makes you a better basketball player.


The guy the finger always gets pointed at is Karl Malone because of the strange fact that the best years of his career occurred at a time when nearly every other player in the history of the nba was on the decline.Steroids would be of enormous benefit if you were an aging player who might otherwise end up getting a much lesser role or playing his way out of the nba.


Personally most of what I've read about HGH concerns it's use in conjunction with steroids so I'm not even sure what benefits it would have beyond using it in concert with strength training regimes.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> ^Lol its some miracle ankle healing drug they give them. Come on now! You really think journalists wouldn't report such


Pain killers I would assume, although I would assume that would only happen with the older players. I doubt they'd number Lebrons knee and tell him to get back in the game if he was honestly hurt. But an old role player? I'm sure it happens quite often with how sore they get, and the fact that its not the same worrying about an old role player playing injured as it is worrying about Lebron going out on a sore knee.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

buduan said:


> Professional athletes also produce a lot more testosterone than the average joe. Does that mean taking testosterone would have little to no effect on them?


Testosterone has an exponentially larger effect on performance though, which is why when studied it's easily seen. HGH isn't much of a performance enhancer for professional athletes however, because there are more effective ways of increasing oxygenation of the blood and red blood cell production than HGH. The less of the stuff you have, the greater the short term impact. The debate was whether guys like Dwight Howard, LeBron, et al, were using HGH. I find it unlikely because there are far better alternatives for them than a mild enhancer like HGH, which isn't going to have much of an effect on immediate post-pubescent athletes. Things like THG, Winsterol, EPO, etc. have a much more dramatic effect, and would be more likely. And, really, basketball involves track athleticism, so you just need to look at the sorts of performance enhancers that trackthletes use to figure out what NBA players would be using. Clenbuterol is probably common, HGH? Not so much. (Maybe some of the older players to make up for deficiency, but that's not an issue for 21 year olds.)



buduan said:


> And you're right, there are other performance enhancers out there which will produce faster results than HGH. Problem with them is that they are easy to detect and the effects with many of them disappear quickly after using them. On top of being very dangerous.


They're easy to detect in blood tests, which isn't an issue in the NBA. Urine tests can be beat. Ask your dealer, he'll explain to you how to confuzzle them. And rHGH has its own nasty side effects (insulin resistance being one of the biggies) when used long term. You need to be pretty careful when using the stuff. Like all drugs.



buduan said:


> And I wouldn't call myself a "average joe" in terms of size and athleticism. I'm 6'3 235lbs and played college ball in the Pacific NW back in the mid 90's. I've been a avid weightlifter and ball player for the past 16 years.


So, you're not a world class athlete (i.e. you didn't win the genetic lottery the way that athletes did) in your mid thirties? That would be an indication that your natural production of HGH would be well into its decline, so it would have more of an effect for you than Dwight Howard. You might legitimately need it, D-Ho isn't going to see much of a benefit as his production levels are still at peak levels and the protein string is a declining return type of drug.



buduan said:


> Several MMA fighters in my gym use it, 2 of whom are in the WEC. A pretty prominent Arena League football player at my gym uses it. Several trainers and bodybuilders (pro and amateur) use it.
> 
> Are we all wrong? Are we all experiencing a "placebo" effect?


The short answer would be yes. If it were a miracle drug, the miracles would show up when put to scientific study. But guess what? They don't. Either rHGH is a sentient protein string that refuses to work when it knows that medical researchers are present, or the anecdotal stories of users involve other conditions and chemicals. As a friend that deals steroids explained to me (while trying to get me to use a short term rHGH regimen because I'm in my mid 40s and overweight), most people using it are pumping themselves full of other drugs that produce the overwhelming majority of what they're attributing to the miracle drug. (He was suggesting to me a three month cycle of HGH augmented by clen to speed up the weight loss). Testosterone and clenbuterol will accelerate the healing process, for example, more effectively. Especially for pro athletes.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Testosterone has an exponentially larger effect on performance though, which is why when studied it's easily seen. HGH isn't much of a performance enhancer for professional athletes however, because there are more effective ways of increasing oxygenation of the blood and red blood cell production than HGH. The less of the stuff you have, the greater the short term impact. The debate was whether guys like Dwight Howard, LeBron, et al, were using HGH. I find it unlikely because there are far better alternatives for them than a mild enhancer like HGH, which isn't going to have much of an effect on immediate post-pubescent athletes. Things like THG, Winsterol, EPO, etc. have a much more dramatic effect, and would be more likely. And, really, basketball involves track athleticism, so you just need to look at the sorts of performance enhancers that trackthletes use to figure out what NBA players would be using. Clenbuterol is probably common, HGH? Not so much. (Maybe some of the older players to make up for deficiency, but that's not an issue for 21 year olds.)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


First off, so now your steroid dealer is someone we should take facts from? Because before you lumped people like that into the high school drop out, juicehead group. Strange. 

Second, the debate between us was about HGH in general, not HGH in Dwight Howard. If it was, why the hell would you post a study done on HGH used in average people? You know, average like Buduan, me, yourself, not Lebron James or Dwight Howard. You hitched your whole arugments to the "facts" from that study. Now you're saying "oh, I only meant older people and non athletes." Its funny how you keep trying to talk your side of the debate into something it never was. I mean come on.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> Your pick and choose tactics are very cute. So your argument is now "Well I never said its _primary_ use was weight loss." Well that's great, I guess you didn't, but you did mention it multiple times throughout this thread.


As a matter of fact, I didn't. Even when you first accused me of saying that HGH was a weight loss supplement and I corrected you. That was one remark, an aside, about one of the few non-official uses that it shows _some_ positive benefits. And when Geaux Tigers mentioned it as a wonder-weight loss drug, I specifically corrected him, because it isn't. It can help for a three month cycle. But after that you need to be very careful because there can be some nasty side effects that will reverse the benefits.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> Second, the debate between us was about HGH in general, not HGH in Dwight Howard. If it was, why the hell would you post a study done on HGH used in average people? You know, average like Buduan, me, yourself, not Lebron James or Dwight Howard. You hitched your whole arugments to the "facts" from that study. Now you're saying "oh, I only meant older people and non athletes." Its funny how you keep trying to talk your side of the debate into something it never was. I mean come on.


The debate was clearly _not_ about HGH in general, and was specifically an accusation that LeBron James & Dwight Howard were using (among other young athletes, you specifically accused Greg Oden of using them). I simply responded that I expect that their trainers to know better and get them more effective performance enhancers than HGH (if they're using them). As for my friend that deals them, it's his sideline, he's a physical therapist that works out religiously, and deals to juiceheads in his area. He gave me a recitation of the benefits and complications of HGH, and when I looked it up for myself, he turned out to be (mostly) right.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> As a matter of fact, I didn't. Even when you first accused me of saying that HGH was a weight loss supplement and I corrected you. That was one remark, an aside, about one of the few non-official uses that it shows _some_ positive benefits. And when Geaux Tigers mentioned it as a wonder-weight loss drug, I specifically corrected him, because it isn't. It can help for a three month cycle. But after that you need to be very careful because there can be some nasty side effects that will reverse the benefits.


Again, you are only answering portions of my posts, while attempting to side step any other questions. Let me know when you feel like having a full debate. One part of that debate being why you would base your arguments off a study done of HGH on average men, the other being that buduan, and guys like your steroid dealer are uninformed juiceheads and highschool dropouts.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> The debate was clearly _not_ about HGH in general, and was specifically an accusation that LeBron James & Dwight Howard were using (among other young athletes, you specifically accused Greg Oden of using them). I simply responded that I expect that their trainers to know better and get them more effective performance enhancers than HGH (if they're using them). As for my friend that deals them, it's his sideline, he's a physical therapist that works out religiously, and deals to juiceheads in his area. He gave me a recitation of the benefits and complications of HGH, and when I looked it up for myself, he turned out to be (mostly) right.


No, I stated many times that guys like Lebron and Howard are freaks of nature, and that while its possible they may not be using any PED's I think PED's are rampant in the NBA.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

The most important things in basketball are shooting, speed and length. None of which steroids would help with. If a basketball player is taking steroids, the only thing it would do is shrink his nuts, because he certainly won't be paid more because of it.

Hitting 500 ft bombs when you typically hit 300 foot fly balls is useful in baseball. Dunking with more force doesn't mean anything. Additionally the additional weight might be a disadvantage. Having huge calves would make it harder to do things like crossovers. Also, the sporadic differences in strength that would occur would mess up a guy's jump shot.


Steroids may or may not be used by some players, but it doesn't make them any better, at least in basketball. It's like the NFL freaking out because Ricky Williams smoked pot or Michael Phelps smoking pot. Smoking pot didn't make either of them better performers at their respective sports. It's a big deal in baseball because they are messing up with records and numbers that are being improved significantly, that's not the case with basketball.


----------



## dubc15 (May 15, 2004)

for those saying that strength isn't important in basketball... have you ever picked up a basketball? or ever played in a competitive game? because charles barkely would beg to differ.. not the tallest or lengthy player, yet one of the best post players in the game.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

dubc15 said:


> for those saying that strength isn't important in basketball... have you ever picked up a basketball? or ever played in a competitive game? because charles barkely would beg to differ.. not the tallest or lengthy player, yet one of the best post players in the game.



Some theories in this thread are truly breathtaking.


Height also doesn't matter in basketball. It's all about ....


D-FENCE! D-FENCE!



And of course, HEART!


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> Again, you are only answering portions of my posts, while attempting to side step any other questions. Let me know when you feel like having a full debate. One part of that debate being why you would base your arguments off a study done of HGH on average men, the other being that buduan, and guys like your steroid dealer are uninformed juiceheads and highschool dropouts.


Because HGH is a declining returns substance, studies on average men would show _more_ of an effect than studies done on people with naturally high levels. I thought that my response to buduan was sufficient, I saw no reason to type it up a second time as an answer to you.



R-Star said:


> No, I stated many times that guys like Lebron and Howard are freaks of nature, and that while its possible they may not be using any PED's I think PED's are rampant in the NBA.


You were not the original poster, this thread has clearly been one long "LeBron is usin' teh HGH!!!" exercise.


----------



## dubc15 (May 15, 2004)

ehmunro said:


> The debate was clearly _not_ about HGH in general, and was specifically an accusation that LeBron James & Dwight Howard were using (among other young athletes, you specifically accused Greg Oden of using them). I simply responded that I expect that their trainers to know better and get them more effective performance enhancers than HGH (if they're using them). As for my friend that deals them, it's his sideline, he's a physical therapist that works out religiously, and deals to juiceheads in his area. He gave me a recitation of the benefits and complications of HGH, and when I looked it up for myself, he turned out to be (mostly) right.


i hate to get in between your guys argument but all i have to say is, you are really reaching now. actually a lot of your posts in this thread are.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

dubc15 said:


> i hate to get in between your guys argument but all i have to say is, you are really reaching now. actually a lot of your posts in this thread are.


Reaching for what?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Reaching for what?


An attempt to save face. The majority of your posting has been back and forth with me, but then you write "but you weren't the original thread starter." Or you come up with a bull**** reason as to why you keep arguing that you were only talking about pro athletes, but how your average man test still follows that same argument line. You are constantly trying to switch what your core argument is about. And it isn't working.

Not to mention you skip over parts of my post when you don't want to answer them.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

dubc15 said:


> for those saying that strength isn't important in basketball... have you ever picked up a basketball? or ever played in a competitive game? because charles barkely would beg to differ.. not the tallest or lengthy player, yet one of the best post players in the game.


Barkley did not succeed in the NBA because of strenght, its the skill that helped him. Steroids doesn't make a basketball player more skilled.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> Barkley did not succeed in the NBA because of strenght, its the skill that helped him. Steroids doesn't make a basketball player more skilled.


So take away Barkleys strength and he would have been the same player?


----------



## Full Effect (Dec 12, 2004)

I heard Darius Miles was suspended for taking Steroids or another performance enhancing drug. That was the rumor at least.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

> So take away Barkleys strength and he would have been the same player?


No, he wouldnt be able to play the power position. But the point remains, Barkley without the skills is no better than Danny Fortson- A GOON! not a top 50 player of all time.

Skills are more important than strength in basketball.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> No, he wouldnt be able to play the power position. But the point remains, Barkley without the skills is no better than Danny Fortson- A GOON!


And Barkley without the strength is no different than Luke Jackson, a nobody. 

Im not arguing that skill is the most important part of the game HB. That has to be obvious to anyone who's every watched a game. What I am saying is that strength is a very important aspect to the game. Take away skill and the players nothing more than a goon, take away strength and many players are nothing more than Carl English.

Steroids wont improve your ability to shoot, dribble, pass, see the court and so on, but it will make it a lot easier for you to muscle a guy around in the paint.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

R-Star said:


> An attempt to save face. The majority of your posting has been back and forth with me, but then you write "but you weren't the original thread starter." Or you come up with a bull**** reason as to why you keep arguing that you were only talking about pro athletes, but how your average man test still follows that same argument line. You are constantly trying to switch what your core argument is about. And it isn't working.
> 
> Not to mention you skip over parts of my post when you don't want to answer them.


R-Star: "This thread was clearly about general HGH usage, not pro athletes!"
Me: "No it wasn't, the OP clearly singled out LeBron & Dwight Howard as users and you accused Oden."
Someone else: "That's reaching!!!"
Me: "For what?"
R-star: "You're trying to save face!!!"

ummmmmm... OK? Do you have anything to add outside your oxymoronic claims that HGH is a super-mystery drug whose miraculous powers are strangely undetectable by medical science in people with lower natural levels and therefore people with far higher levels must be seeing gigantic benefits from its use?


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

Without strength you can't express your basketball skills.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Full Effect said:


> I heard Darius Miles was suspended for taking Steroids or another performance enhancing drug. That was the rumor at least.


Miles got suspended for taking a banned weight loss drug. Outside the explosive diarrhea, I'm not sure how much of a performance enhancer it was.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> R-Star: "This thread was clearly about general HGH usage, not pro athletes!"
> Me: "No it wasn't, the OP clearly singled out LeBron & Dwight Howard as users and you accused Oden."
> Someone else: "That's reaching!!!"
> Me: "For what?"
> ...


Why yes, yes I do. But seeing as how you refuse to answer sections of my posts you don't want to touch, I find it funny that you're trying to call me out on my content.

Also funny seeing as how your whole foundation is based off an article you've contradicted, then run back to later on.

Also, I'd like to see how many times you quoted the OP, and how many times you quoted me. But hey, keep talking in circles, who knows, maybe things will change and it will start to work out for you.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Miles got suspended for taking a banned weight loss drug. Outside the explosive diarrhea, I'm not sure how much of a performance enhancer it was.


Portland fans were saying he was getting fat as **** during his lengthy rehab. I'd figure that's why he decided weight loss drugs would be a good idea. I wouldn't think its very common for pro sports players to use weight loss supplements unless they slacked off in the offseason, or in a case like Miles.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Actually I just checked, Miles was suspended for using phentermine, which is an appetite suppressant. It was the other half of fen-fen that gave people explosive diarrhea.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Actually I just checked, Miles was suspended for using phentermine, which is an appetite suppressant. It was the other half of fen-fen that gave people explosive diarrhea.


Appetite suppressant. Jesus. I love how people think that taking an appetite suppressant will fix all their problems. You can cut your hot dog consumption from 10 to 5 a day, you're still eating like ****.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

You can't possibly believe that Charles Barkley did steroids, can you? Barkley was one of the most out of shape basketball players his entire career. Heck Scottie Pippen mentioned that he couldn't believe how little Barkley worked out when they played together in Houston. Barkley was a 6'6 PF, with long arms that could shoot, pass, handle and leap out of the effing gym. He is the definition of a freak.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HKF said:


> You can't possibly believe that Charles Barkley did steroids, can you? Barkley was one of the most out of shape basketball players his entire career. Heck Scottie Pippen mentioned that he couldn't believe how little Barkley worked out when they played together in Houston. Barkley was a 6'6 PF, with long arms that could shoot, pass, handle and leap out of the effing gym. He is the definition of a freak.


No, I don't think Barkley juiced, he was just an oddity. By looking at him you'd think he'd be slow and sluggish, which was obviously not the case. Barkley was brought up though, so I just thought it worthwhile to mention that if he didnt have his strength, he wouldnt be anywhere near the player he was.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

It's a common myth about fat Barkley.

He was a great athlete, but he had a big....romp 

So everyone called him fat.

There was nothing really fat about him.


----------



## buduan (Jun 10, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Testosterone has an exponentially larger effect on performance though, which is why when studied it's easily seen. HGH isn't much of a performance enhancer for professional athletes however, because there are more effective ways of increasing oxygenation of the blood and red blood cell production than HGH. The less of the stuff you have, the greater the short term impact. The debate was whether guys like Dwight Howard, LeBron, et al, were using HGH. I find it unlikely because there are far better alternatives for them than a mild enhancer like HGH, which isn't going to have much of an effect on immediate post-pubescent athletes. Things like THG, Winsterol, EPO, etc. have a much more dramatic effect, and would be more likely. And, really, basketball involves track athleticism, so you just need to look at the sorts of performance enhancers that trackthletes use to figure out what NBA players would be using. Clenbuterol is probably common, HGH? Not so much. (Maybe some of the older players to make up for deficiency, but that's not an issue for 21 year olds.)


My argument isn't that NBA players are using it to throw on mass. I agree there are more efficient ways to do so. But for recovery? Hell yeah. An NBA schedule is grueling and the ability to recover quickly and rehab nagging injuries is critical. It also creates new muscle cells so while the mass won't pack on as fast as with steroids, you will keep your gains much longer.

And what makes you think that track athletes don't use HGH. Several have either been busted or admitted to taking it. The whole reason I started using HGH was because Marion Jones in a interview said she had a foot injury that would not heal or go away. Since I was suffering from the same thing it grabbed my attention. She said after using HGH the pain not only went away she couldn't remember which foot was hurting her.





> So, you're not a world class athlete (i.e. you didn't win the genetic lottery the way that athletes did) in your mid thirties? That would be an indication that your natural production of HGH would be well into its decline, so it would have more of an effect for you than Dwight Howard. You might legitimately need it, D-Ho isn't going to see much of a benefit as his production levels are still at peak levels and the protein string is a declining return type of drug.


I don't disagree I would benefit more. I disagree that D Howard wouldn't benefit from it. For reasons stated previously.




> The short answer would be yes. If it were a miracle drug, the miracles would show up when put to scientific study. But guess what? They don't. Either rHGH is a sentient protein string that refuses to work when it knows that medical researchers are present, or the anecdotal stories of users involve other conditions and chemicals. As a friend that deals steroids explained to me (while trying to get me to use a short term rHGH regimen because I'm in my mid 40s and overweight), most people using it are pumping themselves full of other drugs that produce the overwhelming majority of what they're attributing to the miracle drug. (He was suggesting to me a three month cycle of HGH augmented by clen to speed up the weight loss). Testosterone and clenbuterol will accelerate the healing process, for example, more effectively. Especially for pro athletes.


Well, I didn't use any other PED while using HGH and have never used anything other than HGH. I saw first hand the healing, recuperative, and mass building effects.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

DNKO said:


> It's a common myth about fat Barkley.
> 
> He was a great athlete, but he had a big....romp
> 
> ...


He was on HGH though.

As was Wilt.

I mean what human being gets big muscles on their own right? Especially if they used to only have an athletic build.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> He was on HGH though.
> 
> As was Wilt.
> 
> I mean what human being gets big muscles on their own right? Especially if they used to only have an athletic build.


Im confused as to where anyone said all NBA players and previous greats use PED's. Saying that we think some players use PED's is not saying every player ever juiced. 

Quit being over dramatic.


----------



## sonicFLAME6 (Dec 19, 2006)

I'm also confused. No one said Barkley was on HGH from what I recall. It was just an example as why strength matters just like skills in the NBA.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Im confused as to where anyone said all NBA players and previous greats use PED's. Saying that we think some players use PED's is not saying every player ever juiced.
> 
> Quit being over dramatic.


DKNO specifically said LeBron putting on muscle meant he was on PED's because he just ate oatmeal.

All I'm saying is that he may of used them, but that it is possible that eating and lifting a lot are enough to put on muscle in your developing years. Earlier players are evidence of that as well.


----------



## DNKO (Dec 23, 2008)

Well, actually, no.

On the James part, I merely said that he is flat out lying about NOT taking silly **** like protein shakes.

That's just a blatant lie.

As for PED - I don't know and really - I don't care.

But saying he doesn't drink some whey or similar shakes is lying. That's all. And I don't know who buys those stories...what, I'm supposed to believe him and be impressed?

"Wow, you bulked up 50 pounds of pure muscle in 5 years while playing on a pro level all the time, playing on high level all the time, working out every day, going to Olympic games and god-knows-what tournaments during the off season and you never touched nothing but oatmeal and chicken and similar foods"

Yes.

And look up in the sky while its still yellow.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> DKNO specifically said LeBron putting on muscle meant he was on PED's because he just ate oatmeal.
> 
> All I'm saying is that he may of used them, but that it is possible that eating and lifting a lot are enough to put on muscle in your developing years. Earlier players are evidence of that as well.


Cant argue with that. As far as Lebron goes, he could be using PED's, he could not. The guy was labeled a freak of nature coming into the league, so who knows.

My stance is that I'm quite sure many players use PED's, but I'm not pointing any fingers, other than at Oden, who looks like a bad science experiment.


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

KennethTo said:


> The most important things in basketball are shooting, *speed* and length. *None of which steroids would help with.* If a basketball player is taking steroids, the only thing it would do is shrink his nuts, because he certainly won't be paid more because of it.
> 
> Hitting 500 ft bombs when you typically hit 300 foot fly balls is useful in baseball. *Dunking with more force doesn't mean anything.* Additionally the additional weight might be a disadvantage. Having huge calves would make it harder to do things like crossovers. Also, the sporadic differences in strength that would occur would mess up a guy's jump shot.
> 
> ...


Way off.

Steroids help a lot in gaining muscle mass. Gaining muscle mass is 1 of 2 ways to gain strength, the other being neural efficiency.

And as I've already said in this thread, strength is the backbone of athleticism (speed).

This explains why world class sprinters and long/high jumpers squat 2.5-3 x their weight. This explains why many Olympic lifters, who carry 300 pounds, a good part of it fat, have near 35+ inch standing verticals (higher than the average NBA player's vertical). Just look at the NFL. There's a reason NFL players blow NBA players' speed and jumping out of the water, despite weighing tons more- STRENGTH. We're lucky to find NBA players who can jump 40 inches from a running start, while there's numerous guys every year in the NFL combine who do this from a standstill. 

I didn't even have to go through all that either. If steroids didn't help with speed, why the **** do sprinters get caught all the time for steroids? 

And steroids wouldn't help you dunk with more force, it help you generate more force with your legs, meaning you can get up high whenever you jump- during a rebound, when you're challenging a shot, or when you're finishing at the rim. It also means you're faster too, which I just explained why.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

LamarButler said:


> Way off.
> 
> Steroids help a lot in gaining muscle mass. Gaining muscle mass is 1 of 2 ways to gain strength, the other being neural efficiency.
> 
> ...


You need consistent speed which extra bulk would harm. Unless you are in the game for 1 minute increments it wouldn't do much to help. Additionally, in basketball there is something called dribbling, it's not a sprinting exercise for 10 seconds.

Good job ignoring my points about the varying strength roiders would have. If you were in the NFL, if you didn't roid up for a week and ran a guy slower, you just run slower. In the NBA, shooting form would be to hard to keep up with sporadic changes in leg strength that would occur.

You mention how much more athletic NFL players are, yet at the same time you ignore the fact that no NFL player is able to transfer to the NBA (where players are payed more and have guaranteed contracts). At the same time, scrubs in college basketball can turn into elite TEs because of their basketball jumping abilities.

Basketball is very much a finesse game and worrying about roids in the league is stupid. It might be dangerous for the health of the players if they take it but I don't see any advantage. There is a reason why you don't see 270 lbs 6'3 point guards in the league. You can also look at Kobe who was a lot more vulnerable to injuries when he tried to bulk. The extra weight and muscle doesn't help much if at all. I think it's more harmful to your basketball game then anything.


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

KennethTo said:


> 1. You need consistent speed which extra bulk would harm. Unless you are in the game for 1 minute increments it wouldn't do much to help. Additionally, in basketball there is something called dribbling, it's not a sprinting exercise for 10 seconds.
> 
> 2. Good job ignoring my points about the varying strength roiders would have. If you were in the NFL, if you didn't roid up for a week and ran a guy slower, you just run slower. In the NBA, shooting form would be to hard to keep up with sporadic changes in leg strength that would occur.
> 
> ...


1. Extra bulk doesn't seem to hurt LeBron or Dwight, or D-Wade in "consistent speed." 300+ pounds of bulk didn't keep Shaq from playing the game at an MVP level for 40 minutes per game. This is basketball dude- you stop/rest, then make a maximal effort, and repeat. There's halftime, time out breaks all the time, free throws, and the bench. This isn't endurance running or cycling where you never get a break. You act like NBA players have to be like these Ethiopian/Kenyan/Moroccan marathon runners the way you talk.

2. I ignored them because I didn't say anything in the first place about steroids and a guy's jumpshot. I just thought you saying steroids not making a guy fast was stupid.

3. Lmao, you think athleticism is the limiting factor for an NFL player to get into the NBA? Lemme show you something ok, cause you don't know what you're talking about.

Combine Results: Vertical Jump - DB's 
Written by NFL Draft Bible 

1. Donald Washington, Ohio St., CB - *45.0*
2. Darius Butler, UConn, CB - *43.0*
3. David Bruton, Notre Dame, S - *41.5*
(Tied) C.J. Spillman, Marshall, S - *41.5*
5. D.J. Moore, Vanderbilt, CB - *39.5*
(Tied) Ryan Mouton, Hawaii, CB - *39.5*
7. Kevin Barnes, Maryland, CB - *38.5*
(Tied) Bradley Fletcher, Iowa, CB - *38.5*
9. Glover Quin, New Mexico, CB - *38.0*
(Tied) Morgan Trent, Michigan, CB - *38.0*
(Tied) Darcel McBath, Texas Tech, S - *38.0*

RB's 

1. Donald Brown, UConn - *41.5*
2. Cedric Peerman, Virginia -* 40.0*
3. Mike Goodson, Texas A&M - *39.5*
4. Brannan Southerland, Georgia - *38.0*
5. Andre Brown, NC State - *37.0*
(Tied) Shonn Greene, Iowa - *37.0*
(Tied) Kory Sheets, Purdue - *37.0*
8. Glen Coffee, Alabama - *36.0*
(Tied) Anthony Kimble, Stanford - *36.0*
(Tied) Branden Ore, West Liberty St. - *36.0*
(Tied) Bernard Scott, Abilene Christian - *36.0*

WR's

1. Jarett Dillard, Rice- *42.5*
2. Tiquan Underwood, Rutgers - *41.5*
3. Mike Thomas, Arizona - *40.5*
4. Mike Wallace, Mississippi - *40.0*
5. Darrius Heyward-Bey, Maryland - *38.5*
6. Jordan Norwood, Penn St. - *38.0*
(Tied) Aaron Kelly, Clemson - *38.0*
(Tied) Greg Orton, Purdue - *38.0*
9. Brian Robiskie, Ohio St. -* 37.5*
10. Kenny Britt, Rutgers - *37.0*


These are ALL from a _standstill._ Most of these guys jump around 10% better from a run up. You do the math, and you'll realize NBA verticals don't compete with the NFL's.

Here's the verticals of the widely considered best jumpers (not measured today, but earlier in their careers) in the NBA- I looked from classes 89-08:

Standstill Vert: Max Vert:
Tracy McGrady N/A 40.0
Vince Carter 36.0 43.0
Jason Richardson 32.5 39.5
Jamario Moon 33.0 43.0
Amare Stoudemire 32.0 35.5
Josh Smith 32.5 39.5
Nate Robinson 35.5 43.5
Tyrus Thomas 34.0 39.5
Joe Alexander 32.5 38.5
Patrick Ewing Jr. 35.0 42.0
Derrick Rose 34.5 40.0

Note: Kobe and LeBron don't have official measurements

So basically, I can find NFL players from one year, who have better STANDSTILL verticals than the running verticals of all the great leapers drafted into the NBA in the past 10 years. 

It's stupid to say that athleticism is the limiting factor for an NFL guy to transfer to the NBA. NFL players are bigger, stronger, faster, and jump higher. The real limiting factor is skill...You know, since in basketball you gotta know how to dribble, shoot, pass, etc.

4. Oh yea, extra muscle, which leads to extra strength, which leads to more speed/explosiveness and a better vertical is definitely harmful to your basketball game. And so is having the ability to take hits and bounce people off your shoulders inside is harmful too. Ideally we want NBA players to look like Haile Gebrselassie...


----------



## buduan (Jun 10, 2002)

The best vertical of those NBA players is Nate Robinson who is a former football player who isn't doing too shabby in the league.


----------



## Omega (Apr 11, 2005)

lest not forget. Lebron was also a former football player. and well he's doing a little more than not to shabby in the league


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

buduan said:


> My argument isn't that NBA players are using it to throw on mass. I agree there are more efficient ways to do so. But for recovery? Hell yeah. An NBA schedule is grueling and the ability to recover quickly and rehab nagging injuries is critical. It also creates new muscle cells so while the mass won't pack on as fast as with steroids, you will keep your gains much longer.


Thing is, for pro athletes there are more effective ways of boosting the key factors that speed recovery time, rHGH's returns decline at high levels, which male athletes in their early 20s absolutely have.



buduan said:


> And what makes you think that track athletes don't use HGH. Several have either been busted or admitted to taking it. The whole reason I started using HGH was because Marion Jones in a interview said she had a foot injury that would not heal or go away. Since I was suffering from the same thing it grabbed my attention. She said after using HGH the pain not only went away she couldn't remember which foot was hurting her.


According to her ex-husband, Marion Jones was taking everything, including the Lindbergh baby, at the 2000 Olympics. What she was primarily using according to the actual accusations, were THG & EPO. I'm sure that there was probably also Winsterol & clenbuterol involved (since runners love them). But, her drugs of choice were actual performance enhancers.




buduan said:


> Well, I didn't use any other PED while using HGH and have never used anything other than HGH. I saw first hand the healing, recuperative, and mass building effects.


Your mass building probably had more to do with your workout regimen than anything else.


----------



## buduan (Jun 10, 2002)

I was doing very little weight training because of a dislocated shoulder and torn rotator cuff. I'm still not doing any upper body workouts other than physical therapy. Don't want to endure that hell again.


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

LamarButler said:


> It's stupid to say that athleticism is the limiting factor for an NFL guy to transfer to the NBA. NFL players are bigger, stronger, faster, and jump higher. *The real limiting factor is skill*...You know, since in basketball you gotta know how to dribble, shoot, pass, etc.


And height. How many of those guys with the 40" standing verticals you posted are 6'8"?


----------



## dubc15 (May 15, 2004)

KennethTo said:


> You need consistent speed which extra bulk would harm. Unless you are in the game for 1 minute increments it wouldn't do much to help. Additionally, in basketball there is something called dribbling, it's not a sprinting exercise for 10 seconds.
> 
> Good job ignoring my points about the varying strength roiders would have. If you were in the NFL, if you didn't roid up for a week and ran a guy slower, you just run slower. In the NBA, shooting form would be to hard to keep up with sporadic changes in leg strength that would occur.
> 
> ...


sorry but your post is incredibly short-sighted. it fails to mention anything about the other half of basketball, defense, rebounding, boxing out, etc, etc etc. strength is a necessary component of basketball, that's why you see every player entering the nba bulking up. rafer alston as an and1 player would not last 1 second in this league, that's why he bulked up. the list goes on forever. plus, more muscle weight protects you from injury, increases durability, etc, etc.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

DNKO said:


> It's a common myth about fat Barkley.
> 
> He was a great athlete, but he had a big....romp
> 
> ...


is it a myth that barkley wasn't that thin when he was younger?


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

DNKO said:


> Well, actually, no.
> 
> On the James part, I merely said that he is flat out lying about NOT taking silly **** like protein shakes.
> 
> ...


he bulked up from age 18. on a big frame. lifting weights. again, suggesting it's impossible without whey is absurd. he's not mr. freakin olympia. he has decent size. if he was a slow pf he wouldn't stand out as a freak simply on his build. he's not. he's a freak because of his total package.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

LamarButler said:


> The real limiting factor is skill...You know, since in basketball you gotta know how to dribble, shoot, pass, etc.


Good job proving all the rest of your posts wrong. Like I said before, roids would not significantly improve any player. You could give the Timberwolves, the Clippers and the Bucks a healthy diet of roids and they would still be at the bottom of the league.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

KennethTo said:


> Good job proving all the rest of your posts wrong. Like I said before, roids would not significantly improve any player. You could give the Timberwolves, the Clippers and the Bucks a healthy diet of roids and they would still be at the bottom of the league.


marginal improvements can go a long way. extra speed, extra strength, extra leaping ability can all lead to improved performance. if roids can't significantly help, neither can weight training in the first place. but that's not true. guys lift because of the benefits. and if you increase those benefits, you have better players.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

KennethTo said:


> Good job proving all the rest of your posts wrong. Like I said before, roids would not significantly improve any player. You could give the Timberwolves, the Clippers and the Bucks a healthy diet of roids and they would still be at the bottom of the league.


If you think steroids wouldn't help a post player, then I don't know what to tell you. You seem as though you want to believe basketball is the last bastion of class in sports, where they're above the use of PED's.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

dubc15 said:


> sorry but your post is incredibly short-sighted. it fails to mention anything about the other half of basketball, defense, rebounding, boxing out, etc, etc etc. strength is a necessary component of basketball, that's why you see every player entering the nba bulking up. rafer alston as an and1 player would not last 1 second in this league, that's why he bulked up. the list goes on forever. plus, more muscle weight protects you from injury, increases durability, etc, etc.


Too much weight, whether from muscle or fat makes it easier to get injured. That's why Shaq was always riding the bench later in his career with toe injuries. His playing weight was much better when he was younger and leaner.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

KennethTo said:


> Too much weight, whether from muscle or fat makes it easier to get injured. That's why Shaq was always riding the bench later in his career with toe injuries. His playing weight was much better when he was younger and leaner.


He was on the bench because he carried around the frame of a monster over a lengthy career. And no, he wasn't a much better player in his younger years. Look back to 2000 and see if you still believe that. That is when many believe he played his best basketball.

He was also on the bench because he has no heart. You never see Shaq sidelined in the playoffs with injury, but if he doesn't feel like playing in the regular season, he isn't going to play. That's just Shaq.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

R-Star said:


> If you think steroids wouldn't help a post player, then I don't know what to tell you. You seem as though you want to believe basketball is the last bastion of class in sports, where they're above the use of PED's.


I never said it was the last bastion of class, I'm just saying it wouldn't help the players much at all. It's like have Michael Phelps gold medels taken away because he smoked pot or a skier having his medals taken away because he used heroin. The drugs don't help the athletes in the sport much in any way.

You guys seem to think that a 6'9 chump who roids up from 210 lbs to 270 lbs suddenly becomes an allstar and has advantages because of the drugs. Kevin Durant can stay a scrawny little ***** and it won't help him much at all to gain lots of muscle mass.


----------



## Omega (Apr 11, 2005)

KennethTo said:


> I never said it was the last bastion of class, I'm just saying it wouldn't help the players much at all. It's like have Michael Phelps gold medels taken away because he smoked pot or a skier having his medals taken away because he used heroin. The drugs don't help the athletes in the sport much in any way.
> 
> You guys seem to think that a 6'9 chump who roids up from 210 lbs to 270 lbs suddenly becomes an allstar and has advantages because of the drugs. Kevin Durant can stay a scrawny little ***** and it won't help him much at all to gain lots of muscle mass.


thats a foolish thing to say


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

The difference between baseball and basketball is this.

Roids can turn a minor leaguer into a major league all star or at least a solid starter. Roids can not even turn D-league player into a 12th man on the worst squad in the league even if he is the heaviest user int he game.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

KennethTo said:


> The difference between baseball and basketball is this.
> 
> Roids can turn a minor leaguer into a major league all star or at least a solid starter. Roids can not even turn D-league player into a 12th man on the worst squad in the league even if he is the heaviest user int he game.


why do guys work out?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

KennethTo said:


> The difference between baseball and basketball is this.
> 
> Roids can turn a minor leaguer into a major league all star or at least a solid starter. Roids can not even turn D-league player into a 12th man on the worst squad in the league even if he is the heaviest user int he game.


Why do you refuse to take 4s and 5s into account? Rugged, post playing, defensive type players are put out there to overpower other players in the post, box out, grab rebounds, ect.

Steroids would help.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

but everyone works out. pg's to centers. why?


----------



## Omega (Apr 11, 2005)

look at chauncy billups. backs people down all day. its because he's bigger than all the other PGs. to say strength wouldnt help a players game is ludicrous. both on offense and defense.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

I can't believe anybody would believe that something that makes players stronger and more explosive wouldn't help a basketball player. Hell my weak *** improved after I started lifting: longer range on my shots, more boards, quicker first step. Performance enchancing drugs do the same thing as lifting


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Pioneer10 said:


> I can't believe anybody would believe that something that makes players stronger and more explosive wouldn't help a basketball player. Hell my weak *** improved after I started lifting: longer range on my shots, more boards, quicker first step. Performance enchancing drugs do the same thing as lifting


Well yea, but you still have to lift when you're on them though.


----------



## dubc15 (May 15, 2004)

KennethTo said:


> The difference between baseball and basketball is this.
> 
> Roids can turn a minor leaguer into a major league all star or at least a solid starter. Roids can not even turn D-league player into a 12th man on the worst squad in the league even if he is the heaviest user int he game.


you're hopeless. full of theories but none that are applicable in the real world. a word of advise to you my friend, pickup a basketball before you pose more theories.


----------



## Sleepepro (Oct 24, 2008)

I don't think it is as prevalent as some ppl here are making it out to be. It's not that hard to lose weight and gain muscle at the same time. I lost 60+ lbs and added muscle to my frame in less than a year and I did that when I was a full time high school student/college student and I never took anything it was just legit workout and eating right. 

Now healing time is different because it really depends on the severity of the injury and what type it is. Sprains only take a days until you can go back to normal levels. Surgeries today are a lot different then in the past. I tore my ACL and my doc says it is an outpatient surgery, I can go get the surgery really quickly and be stuck in bed for 2 weeks and after that I can walk normally again. Teams have personal doctors, trainers, etc to make sure that they heal as quickly as possible and these guys are always trying to use uncommon surgeries as long as they come back faster. 

It's not like those who come back to early don't suffer the consequences sometimes. Look at Hill, Penny Hardaway, Arenas, etc. These guys said they were ready to play and were ahead of schedule and look what happened to them they weren't ready and had to get more surgeries or had to sit out even longer. Look at TMac and Nash guys who have back problems you don't see them magically coming back injury free.


----------

