Is the live and let live approach the only way?

[Swedish Viking]

   Tons of drug users vs non arguments on this board.  Inevitably the drug users all have the live and let live approach 'as long as it's not hurting anyone' attititude.  My question is, is that even a possibility?  Just because you're not blowing up every two seconds and going on rages doesn't mean you're not hurting anyone.  Dramatically increased test levels lead to more agression, which often leads to subtley poor decisions, which add up over time and create problems for people via chain reactions. 
   On the other hand, dramatically increased test levels when test levels are low to begin with can lead to a much more fufilling life and all around better decision making.  Same with a sense of well being and fufillment with ones life which, in some cases, might not be met at that particular moment in time with a deeper sense of understanding of life, meaning something superficial might be just what the doctor ordered until the person can get their good vibes from something longer lasting than big muscles. 
   The extreme anger of non drug users towards users doesn't do a whole lot for their argument that drug users cause problems in society.  The lack of acknowledgment by the drug users that something as significant as dramatically increased test levels effects their personality and their decision making doesn't do a whole lot for their case. 
   The answer here is that people have to live and let live but understand that part of living and letting live is allowing other people their beliefs and feelings towards your life as well...bit of a double edged sword there. If you can take accept other people's reactions towards your life and can continue doing as you do, then so be it...but they have to have the right to react-that's part of you letting them live.   

[210 and growing]

Meltdown

[Dr Kincaid]

If someone wants to get high it is not my job to stop them.

[DK II]

i wholeheartly agree, but then, on the other side, i don't like people glorifying drugs and saying they aren't bad for you. That's showing a weak mind or simple addiction.

If someone wants to do roids, it's his own decision but in most cases it's too early or the nutrition and training knowledge is poor. If the base is right and someone starts roids, it's fine with me, as long as the person acknowledges that there are problems involved, starting with the illegality of doing it in the first place (wether that makes sense is not a topic here), and side effects.

If someone says to me, "i don't give a fuck about gyno, hair loss and everything else", it's fine with me. I just can't stand the type that trains for 3 months, then goes on 500mg Test e3d with 100mg Dianabol, and one year later all that reminds of the cycle is the bald head. I call these people "idiots".

 

If someone wants to get high it is not my job to stop them.

That idea is ok if you talk about college kids, but some people have responsibilities they fail to realize.

[TechnoViking]

   Tons of drug users vs non arguments on this board.  Inevitably the drug users all have the live and let live approach 'as long as it's not hurting anyone' attititude.  My question is, is that even a possibility?  Just because you're not blowing up every two seconds and going on rages doesn't mean you're not hurting anyone.  Dramatically increased test levels lead to more agression, which often leads to subtley poor decisions, which add up over time and create problems for people via chain reactions. 
   On the other hand, dramatically increased test levels when test levels are low to begin with can lead to a much more fufilling life and all around better decision making.  Same with a sense of well being and fufillment with ones life which, in some cases, might not be met at that particular moment in time with a deeper sense of understanding of life, meaning something superficial might be just what the doctor ordered until the person can get their good vibes from something longer lasting than big muscles. 
   The extreme anger of non drug users towards users doesn't do a whole lot for their argument that drug users cause problems in society.  The lack of acknowledgment by the drug users that something as significant as dramatically increased test levels effects their personality and their decision making doesn't do a whole lot for their case. 
   The answer here is that people have to live and let live but understand that part of living and letting live is allowing other people their beliefs and feelings towards your life as well...bit of a double edged sword there. If you can take accept other people's reactions towards your life and can continue doing as you do, then so be it...but they have to have the right to react-that's part of you letting them live.   

There needs to be a movement on education of drugs...Most man made drugs are absolute garbage and are fucking us all up...Psychedelics just to get high is a problem...But these drugs to expand your thinking is the answer...

[andreisdaman]

Look, we all love looking at the physiques of guys that juice...but lets face it..there are too many people in the bodybuilding and wrestling industry just keeling over and dropping dead in their thirties and early forties with heart failure.....you can't keep ignoring this fact and then say that the drugs don't kill...there is a very heavy correlation of drug use leading to either early death or major problems with body organs failing at an early age...we can't keep claiming that the person had a "predisposition" whenever a guy gets sick suddenly and dies prematurely. The list of BB'ers (and especially of wrestlers) is staggering.  althougth I will admit that especially in the case of wrestlers, I'm sure most of those guys are juiced to the gills and also involved in heavy illegal drug use as well which might be a big time contributing factor.

[DK II]

There needs to be a movement on education of drugs...Most man made drugs are absolute garbage and are fucking us all up...Psychedelics just to get high is a problem...But these drugs to expand your thinking is the answer...

Mankind has searched for that since day one.

There's a great drug already in existance that will do that: Learning. It's not easy, but it will make you high as well. The moment, when you understand something that you haven't understood yet is one of the greatest things man can encounter. And it will expand your mind and lead to a better life.

[Swedish Viking]

Look, we all love looking at the physiques of guys that juice...but lets face it..there are too many people in the bodybuilding and wrestling industry just keeling over and dropping dead in their thirties and early forties with heart failure.....you can't keep ignoring this fact and then say that the drugs don't kill...there is a very heavy correlation of drug use leading to either early death or major problems with body organs failing at an early age...we can't keep claiming that the person had a "predisposition" whenever a guy gets sick suddenly and dies prematurely. The list of BB'ers (and especially of wrestlers) is staggering.  althougth I will admit that especially in the case of wrestlers, I'm sure most of those guys are juiced to the gills and also involved in heavy illegal drug use as well which might be a big time contributing factor.

  Excellent, excellent response.  People have the right to do these things but if it hurts them or kills them, then it effects other people-it's effected all of us just hearing about it.  On a smaller scale, even minor hormonal changes are effecting people's decision making and thus effecting other people.  So there isn't any 'this is my life and I'll do what I want with it as long as I'm not hurting anyone else.''.....but that doesn't exist anywhere.  We're talking about degrees here.  If they have the right to do this to themselves, then others have the right to point out that it actually is there business, that they're not just doing it to themselves...because none of us do something just to ourselves, it all effects us.  My thought is that other people's moods as a result of their lifestyles effect us more than any of us think; and performance enhancing drugs are notorious mood altering drugs.  Just some food for thought.

[Tapeworm]

By that logic women with PMS shouldn't leave the house because they might ruin someone's nice day.  When I do something bad then prosecute me, tell me off, whatever, but keep the thought police away from me. 


"Say live and let die."

[DK II]

By that logic women with PMS shouldn't leave the house because they might ruin someone's nice day.  When I do something bad then prosecute me, tell me off, whatever, but keep the thought police away from me. 


"Say live and let die."

[DroppingPlates]

We all know -well the wise one- that the war on drugs is an (too) expensive one which only increase it's price, which is only beneficial for the dealer and that there is a serious chance of shitty products and wrong adviced dosages. So why not let them describe after a intake by specialized doctors with knowledge of products, dosages and control of side effects. I'm not afraid that there will be a run on gear since it's already available. I'm a true natural but I say live and let live 

[Swedish Viking]

We all know -well the wise one- that the war on drugs is an (too) expensive one which only increase it's price, which is only beneficial for the dealer and that there is a serious chance of shitty products and wrong adviced dosages. So why not let them describe after a intake by specialized doctors with knowledge of products, dosages and control of side effects. I'm not afraid that there will be a run on gear since it's already available. I'm a true natural but I say live and let live 

  That's another approach...probably a good one, at least better than what we've got right now.  I'm not trying to knock anyone's choices, I'm just trying to see both sides of this story.  This whole idea that it doesn't effect anyone else is nothing more than un-true.  Alternatively, the idea that it's not as bad as people think, given the right circumstances, very well could be right.

[Swedish Viking]

By that logic women with PMS shouldn't leave the house because they might ruin someone's nice day.  When I do something bad then prosecute me, tell me off, whatever, but keep the thought police away from me. 


"Say live and let die."

  Women aren't paying for and willingly recieving their pms for the sake of vanity.  When you do something bad, it's a result of your state of mind at the time.  I don't want to take anyone's rights away, I just want people to acknolewdge the whole truth here:1. These drugs, given under the right circumstances, might not be as bad as non drug users make them out to be, 2. These drugs are worse than their users often make them out to be; any significant change in test levels is going to have a significant effect on the person taking it-that basically goes without saying-and we know that agressive people generally make worse decisions than calm, in addition to the fact that there have been far too great a number of early deaths of performance enhancing drug using athletes to blame it all on genetic predispostions. 

[DroppingPlates]

  That's another approach...probably a good one, at least better than what we've got right now.  I'm not trying to knock anyone's choices, I'm just trying to see both sides of this story.  This whole idea that it doesn't effect anyone else is nothing more than un-true.  Alternatively, the idea that it's not as bad as people think, given the right circumstances, very well could be right.

The potential social effects are indeed a serious concern. There are plenty of well documented (and sad!) cases about guys (and sometimes woman) with roidrages and similar behaviour like that.
But when you compare my 'liberal' idea with, for example tobacco and alcohol, a big difference is a better control of the dosage and the ability to monitor/control the possible side effects. I think it's time for a good protocol for this. Unfortunately at this moment politicans, doters and Joe Public refuse to open their minds this way...

[Tapeworm]

  Women aren't paying for and willingly recieving their pms for the sake of vanity.  When you do something bad, it's a result of your state of mind at the time.  I don't want to take anyone's rights away, I just want people to acknolewdge the whole truth here:1. These drugs, given under the right circumstances, might not be as bad as non drug users make them out to be, 2. These drugs are worse than their users often make them out to be, any significant change in test levels is going to have a significant effect on the person taking it-that basically goes without saying-and we know that agressive people generally make worse decisions than calm. 

You're not going to find me making a pro-steroid argument here.  I think they're potentially harmful and should generally be left alone, particularly by the people who seem most eager to indulge - teen and early 20's males.  I'm not going to debate the question of their legality either.

What I disagree with is your assertion that since a persons state of mind can influence their actions, it follows that drugs which 'negatively' affect one's state of mind are bad (and I presume should be legislated against for the betterment of society, etc).  Essentially you're proposing to police people's moods and thoughts.  I disagree and feel that only actions can be legislated against.  If I want to take something that puts me in a bad mood, that's my right, and I don't want anyone telling me what I'm allowed to feel or think.  That's some 1984 shit right there.

Fwiw, low carb dieting puts me in a way more aggressive mood than testosterone ever did so you'd have to outlaw that before drugs if bad mood=bad actions is the crux of your argument.  Oxandrolone has no effect on my mood whatsoever.  HCG just makes me really horny.

[Swedish Viking]

You're not going to find me making a pro-steroid argument here.  I think they're potentially harmful and should generally be left alone, particularly by the people who seem most eager to indulge - teen and early 20's males.  I'm not going to debate the question of their legality either.

What I disagree with is your assertion that since a persons state of mind can influence their actions, it follows that drugs which 'negatively' affect one's state of mind are bad (and I presume should be legislated against for the betterment of society, etc).  Essentially you're proposing to police people's moods and thoughts.  I disagree and feel that only actions can be legislated against.  If I want to take something that puts me in a bad mood, that's my right, and I don't want anyone telling me what I'm allowed to feel or think.  That's some 1984 shit right there.

Fwiw, low carb dieting puts me in a way more aggressive mood than testosterone ever did so you'd have to outlaw that before drugs if bad mood=bad actions is the crux of your argument.  Oxandrolone has no effect on my mood whatsoever.  HCG just makes me really horny.

   Those are all really good points, especially that some drugs don't have any mood altering effect on you, as far as you can tell.  If I'm coming across as wanting to police people's moods, then I'm not representing myself clearly enough; that's very against how I want my reality to be, I'm very against excess policing and already think that we have to many regulations. 
  What I am saying is that the users that say it doesn't effect anyone else if they are just using it for their themselves are kind of ignoring the facts-that's just not the case, there is more than enough evidence that it definitely does effect others, even in cases not having to do with physical abuse-ie:depression, anxiety, verbal abuse...etc  If we're going to police something, it's going to be actions of course and the reason we have laws against these drugs is because they can clearly cause bad actions to arise out of generally good people, right? 

[Tapeworm]

   Those are all really good points, especially that some drugs don't have any mood altering effect on you, as far as you can tell.  If I'm coming across as wanting to police people's moods, then I'm not representing myself clearly enough; that's very against how I want my reality to be, I'm very against excess policing and already think that we have to many regulations. 
  What I am saying is that the users that say it doesn't effect anyone else if they are just using it for their themselves are kind of ignoring the facts-that's just not the case.  If we're going to police something, it's going to be actions of course and the reason we have laws against these drugs is because they can clearly cause bad actions to arise out of generally good people, right? 

If we're talking about US law then I think that's incorrect.  I'm no expert so someone will surely correct me if I'm wrong, but I think steroid legislation was pushed through basically as a political tool.  The main argument at the time was their danger to health (with Lyle Alzedo being very vocal about how steroids caused his cancer, even though his doctor disagreed), although I think the rage thing got pushed pretty hard too.  The recent witch hunt in congress was just a big, expensive red herring, but that's another matter.

Based on my experience, I don't believe they'll cause bad actions from good people (although I don't really believe in "good people" and "bad people").  The difference I noticed in my own aggression level was pretty slight, but I noticed I was a little quicker to anger when driving.  The reports I got from others in my life, however, were 100% positive (since I injected testosterone on a strong HRT dose because of naturally low levels).  Everyone commented that I seemed in a better mood and I agree that I was almost all of the time.

Aggression is a factor though, but in order to act on it you'd basically be a "bad person" to start with, or more likely a kid with very little emotional maturity or coping ability who would be prone to lashing out anyway.  In truth, I don't think roid rage is the genuine reason for steroid laws, but it's the most marketable one.  I've never raged out, never seen anyone rage out irl, and never even heard a real life story of someone raging out.  My main objection to steroid use would be potential health consequences, but that's a lot less 'sound-bitey' than the apocryphal 'roid rage.'

[Swedish Viking]

I'm not into the good and bad people thing either, I didn't have a better way of putting it.  You're also right about US law against their usage-it's for health reasons primarily, but I think the health of others is taken into account there, could be wrong. 
  So you have noticed agression on the road at least.  That's something.  You might not be flipping people the bird or threatening people, but you might be driving a bit faster, you might be cutting in and out more than usual, you might be showing your agression more than you would otherwise.  These are the things I am referring to.  I'm definitely not for more laws...what I'm for is more truth-'ok, yea my drug usage does effect others, even if it's just a little.'  The reason being that I think 'just a little' in reality turns out to be a whole lot more, one agressive person begets another and these are the things I would like people to comprehend when thinking about what they end up doing with their lives.  There's no such thing as just effecting them.  There's also a whole lot more truth to this story than 'roid users are rageaholics and beat people up all the time' attitude.       

[gordiano]

I don't necessarily agree with the "it doesn't affect me or anyone else" attitude. The obese person who eats themselves sick.....the smoker, the junkie and even the juicer, It really does affect us all, whether directly or indirectly. They choose to do things that come with consequences.....I have a hard time sympathizing with someone who chooses their ill fate. Smokers are a perfect example of this. They KNOW that shit could very well give you cancer (among other things) and STILL CONTINUE to do it. 

[Swedish Viking]

I don't necessarily agree with the "it doesn't affect me or anyone else" attitude. The obese person who eats themselves sick.....the smoker, the junkie and even the juicer, It really does affect us all, whether directly or indirectly. They choose to do things that come with consequences.....I have a hard time sympathizing with someone who chooses their ill fate. Smokers are a perfect example of this. They KNOW that shit could very well give you cancer (among other things) and STILL CONTINUE to do it. 

  Damn good example. Damn good.  What about our right to not have something be done to our body?  You can do what you want to yours as long as it doesn't effect mine...but it always effects mine.  So we're talking about degrees here and I'm not for more regulation so those who are upset have to start being vocal about it even more than they are now-but we're not encouraged to because then we are considered jerks. 

[Tapeworm]

I'm not into the good and bad people thing either, I didn't have a better way of putting it.  You're also right about US law against their usage-it's for health reasons primarily, but I think the health of others is taken into account there, could be wrong. 
  So you have noticed agression on the road at least.  That's something.  You might not be flipping people the bird or threatening people, but you might be driving a bit faster, you might be cutting in and out more than usual, you might be showing your agression more than you would otherwise.  These are the things I am referring to.  I'm definitely not for more laws...what I'm for is more truth-'ok, yea my drug usage does effect others, even if it's just a little.'  The reason being that I think 'just a little' in reality turns out to be a whole lot more, one agressive person begets another and these are the things I would like people to comprehend when thinking about what they end up doing with their lives.  There's no such thing as just effecting them.  There's also a whole lot more truth to this story than 'roid users are rageaholics and beat people up all the time' attitude.       

I didn't drive irresponsibly or behave any differently than normal on the road (as far as I'm able to accurately self observe).  Basically, the things that pissed me off already pissed me off a little bit more (like someone else driving badly or rudely), but for a guy with doc diagnosed low testosterone and universally positive reports from other people, in my case the result my drug use had on others was positive.  More than a few people said so directly.  I'm considering HRT but I'm not at ease with the use of HCG to offset infertility long term.

Anyway, I reckon steroids are overvillified by the media and the government but are occasionally treated without the proper respect/fear on bodybuilding boards.  No one should take a cavalier approach when it comes to juice.