Author Topic: Open response to Millard Baker re letter  (Read 6435 times)

lax

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3768
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #50 on: June 05, 2009, 11:01:11 AM »
trust me they will find one in there little ifbb rule book to squash that fast,they dont want theses guys haveing minds of there own...go ahead and do g4p go ahead and burn a woman in a trunk do drugs but dont start a union takes away there control..

1978 Kal S and others tried for union
Even Arnold endorsed it
no go

lax

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3768
Re: Open response to Millard Baker
« Reply #51 on: June 05, 2009, 11:03:26 AM »
what an amazing reply.  The NPC:  we report to no one.

one must consider that tax dollars are used to build pro sports stadiums
thus
the people should have some kind of voice in the running of these sports

why not the IFBB?

Tapeworm

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 29030
  • Hold Fast
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #52 on: June 05, 2009, 11:13:06 AM »
trust me they will find one in there little ifbb rule book to squash that fast,they dont want theses guys haveing minds of there own...go ahead and do g4p go ahead and burn a woman in a trunk do drugs but dont start a union takes away there control..

Surely not.  Wouldn't that be against state or federal laws?


1978 Kal S and others tried for union
Even Arnold endorsed it
no go

Participants weren't getting arrested left and right back then.  You might have more luck now.


You're probably never going to get the law changed, but an organization which retained a lawyer would be attractive.  Also, a lot of bodybuilders have endocrine problems from past steroid abuse, so an HRT doctor who could prescribe the appropriate remedy would be a nice thing for athletes too.  The question is which organization will put together an attractive package first: the IFBB or an athletes union.

Mr Nobody

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40197
  • Falcon gives us new knowledge every single day.
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #53 on: June 05, 2009, 02:20:58 PM »
1978 Kal S and others tried for union
Even Arnold endorsed it
no go
Chick what about a union? It always gets shot down.

hazbin

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5750
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #54 on: June 05, 2009, 02:30:20 PM »
Millard-

did you right the exact letter to every single sports organization  in the world? you think steroid use is isolated to bodybuilding?

lax

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3768
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #55 on: June 05, 2009, 02:32:52 PM »
Millard-

did you right the exact letter to every single sports organization  in the world? you think steroid use is isolated to bodybuilding?

exactly

timfogarty

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7115
  • @fogartyTim on twitter
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #56 on: June 05, 2009, 02:55:52 PM »
Millard-

did you right the exact letter to every single sports organization  in the world? you think steroid use is isolated to bodybuilding?

should a fan of baseball write to the NFL?    I don't understand the outrage at what Millard wrote.   Sure no organization likes to have their dirty laundry exposed, but when it is, attacking the messenger usually only gives the writer more publicity, extending the crisis.



Vince G, CSN MFT

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 25721
  • GETBIG3.COM!
Re: Open response to Millard Baker
« Reply #57 on: June 05, 2009, 05:51:46 PM »
True. But the indictment of NPC chair is quite a bit of attention already not mention other recent arrests... I'm worried that the attention is already squarely upon them

An indictment is more or less an accusation and Lee definitely should not be treated guilty by association. 

That would be like arresting a bank robber and then arresting his mother because he lived at home with her. 
A

Topskin69

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1965
  • Deshay with the gauge, Vanilla with the nine.
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #58 on: June 05, 2009, 06:17:05 PM »
Chick  most of us here, (even though a lot of us wont admit it), have a passion for bodybuilding, otherwise we wouldn't have wound up here in the first place. This also means that we condone anabolic steroids for the purpose of improving body composition, and lastly this means that we are well aware of the legal implications. In other words we all accept that part of the trifecta for serious bodybuilding is training, nutrition, and drugs.

It doesn't take a great amount of deductive reasoning skills to ascertain that to be a serious/competitive bodybuilder, one must be willing to break the law in the process. This is obvious to everyone, and with the exception of a few, no one hear judges anyone for that choice, and none of us really care one way or another.

However must of us do like like to be pissed on and told its rain. You constantly feed us bullshit, and go to incredible lengths to come up with the most contrived explanations, in an attempt to justify the hypocritical, (and transparent), stance of the IFBB, NPC, and many of the central figures therein.

If you would just stop acting like this is a real sports organization, that has something to lose, and treat it like the SUB-CULTURE that it is, then you would be coming off much better, and respectably.

I don't think you are a bad guy, and your passion for bodybuilding is obvious. However bodybuilding will never change unless those with some juice at the higher end of the spectrum are willing to start calling bullshit on problems that have been plaguing it since the beginning. This could be you, it could be someone like Jay Cutler, (which will never happen), or someone else, but to see you simply be content with towing the party line is rather abhorrent.

M!   

"He must be very ignorant for he answers every question he is asked"
Voltaire

Chick

  • The Pros
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12899
  • sometimes you get the elevator, somtimes the shaft
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #59 on: June 05, 2009, 06:35:22 PM »
Chick  most of us here, (even though a lot of us wont admit it), have a passion for bodybuilding, otherwise we wouldn't have wound up here in the first place. This also means that we condone anabolic steroids for the purpose of improving body composition, and lastly this means that we are well aware of the legal implications. In other words we all accept that part of the trifecta for serious bodybuilding is training, nutrition, and drugs.

It doesn't take a great amount of deductive reasoning skills to ascertain that to be a serious/competitive bodybuilder, one must be willing to break the law in the process. This is obvious to everyone, and with the exception of a few, no one hear judges anyone for that choice, and none of us really care one way or another.

However must of us do like like to be pissed on and told its rain. You constantly feed us bullshit, and go to incredible lengths to come up with the most contrived explanations, in an attempt to justify the hypocritical, (and transparent), stance of the IFBB, NPC, and many of the central figures therein.

If you would just stop acting like this is a real sports organization, that has something to lose, and treat it like the SUB-CULTURE that it is, then you would be coming off much better, and respectably.

I don't think you are a bad guy, and your passion for bodybuilding is obvious. However bodybuilding will never change unless those with some juice at the higher end of the spectrum are willing to start calling bullshit on problems that have been plaguing it since the beginning. This could be you, it could be someone like Jay Cutler, (which will never happen), or someone else, but to see you simply be content with towing the party line is rather abhorrent.

M!   

"He must be very ignorant for he answers every question he is asked"
Voltaire

Your problem lies in the fact that yoiu believe I'm "feeding you bullshit"...

Just what "change" are you looking for?

timfogarty

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7115
  • @fogartyTim on twitter
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #60 on: June 05, 2009, 06:45:21 PM »
Your problem lies in the fact that yoiu believe I'm "feeding you bullshit"...

Just what "change" are you looking for?

well, lets start with transparency.

for drug tested shows, list exactly who was tested, and what the results were.  For something like the IFBB Worlds, if 18 people fail the drug tests, was that 18 out of 18 random tests?  For the NPC Team Universe, no one in its history has ever been disqualified for failing the drug test.

Without such transparency, it appears that the IFBB and NPC are only doing the minimum required to be able to tell the public "we're against the use of drugs" while telling the athletes "we know you need to do what you need to do".

TechnoViking

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4518
  • Too weird to live, too rare to die...----HST
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #61 on: June 05, 2009, 06:54:56 PM »
IS THE IFBB A NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION?

The Showstoppa

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26879
  • Call the vet, cause these pythons are sick!
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #62 on: June 05, 2009, 06:55:50 PM »
IS THE IFBB A NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION?

Not by choice.  8)

Chick

  • The Pros
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12899
  • sometimes you get the elevator, somtimes the shaft
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #63 on: June 05, 2009, 06:57:12 PM »
well, lets start with transparency.

for drug tested shows, list exactly who was tested, and what the results were.  For something like the IFBB Worlds, if 18 people fail the drug tests, was that 18 out of 18 random tests?  For the NPC Team Universe, no one in its history has ever been disqualified for failing the drug test.

I dont deal with IFBB worlds...It's an amateur show.


timfogarty

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7115
  • @fogartyTim on twitter
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #64 on: June 05, 2009, 07:02:31 PM »
I dont deal with IFBB worlds...It's an amateur show.

You don't deal with the NPC amateurs either, but you replied to Millard's letter.

Chick

  • The Pros
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12899
  • sometimes you get the elevator, somtimes the shaft
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #65 on: June 05, 2009, 07:05:22 PM »
You don't deal with the NPC amateurs either, but you replied to Millard's letter.

I replied to his letter as it was sent to me...

Millard Baker

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 36
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #66 on: June 08, 2009, 07:19:32 AM »
should a fan of baseball write to the NFL?    I don't understand the outrage at what Millard wrote.   Sure no organization likes to have their dirty laundry exposed, but when it is, attacking the messenger usually only gives the writer more publicity, extending the crisis.

Tim,

The outrage was largely limited to a couple of individuals who publicly claimed that Lee Thompson had no involvement in the recent Fort Bend County bust and were embarrassed when I published my article(s) refuting their claims. The response elsewhere has been overwhelming positive.

Several NPC officials, NPC contest promoters and NPC judges have personally thanked me for "my letter defending Lee". Although there has been no "official" response from IFBB/NPC, the letter was well-received by all individuals that have contacted me, without exception, who have strong associations with the IFBB or NPC.

Lee Thompson and Stacey thanked me for my factual, professional and supportive approach to his legal predicament when I saw them at the NPC Lone Star Classic this weekend in Plano where we had a long discussion about his predicament. Lee strongly encouraged me to continue to "do my thing" with my criticism of steroid laws and advocacy for steroid law reform; he told me that once his legal situation is resolved he will become a vocal critic of the steroid witch-hunt.

Several people warned me of the risks of criticizing the IFBB/NPC. But if the primary person involved at the heart of the matter welcomes my support, an official negative response from the IFBB/NPC may not materialize. Those who expressed outrage here on Getbig may have their own reasons for outrage independent of the IFBB/NPC.

The question of the what/how the IFBB/NPC officially response, to what I would call a crisis involving law enforcement/prosecutors targeting steroid-using bodybuilders, remains to be seen.

SteroidEducation.com

LurkerNoMore

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 30819
  • Dumb people think Trump is smart.
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #67 on: June 08, 2009, 09:09:40 AM »
Chic, can you ask and see how many years Lee is getting?  He got any priors?  Huh?  HUH??????


stuntmovie

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8946
  • Getbig!
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #68 on: June 09, 2009, 10:08:43 AM »
This whole steroid/felony/jail-time/ situation seems to be a miscarrage of justice and a violation of one's basic American rights.

I sure ain't no lawyer and have never been involved with roids since they became illegal, but there is definitely something NOT RIGHT and very wrong about what many athletes and others feel to be an out and out WITCH HUNT.

It's difficult for me to believe that this is actually happening in America - the land of the free, the home of the brave.

But as far as I know, no one has ever been brave enough to stand up and stick their neck not to abolish this modern day WITCH HUNT.

A politician can't do it because it would mean political suicide.

A sports federation can't do it because it would put them in the cross hairs of the Federal government.

I can't do it because I don't have the slightest idea how to "get a law removed from the books".

Maybe some sports federation or a combine of sports federations should clandestinely hire someone like Millard in an attempt to do something about this travesty of justice.

That individual would have to be unassociated with any organization or individual who has something to lose because I am almost certain that the government would come after them with a silver mallet and IRS scrutiny.

I am definitely not a steroid advocate, but I am definitely against the government's ability to ruin someone's life for using steroids.

Something's wrong here and should be fixed.

Got more to say if anyone's interested.



hazbin

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5750
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #69 on: June 09, 2009, 12:06:26 PM »
This whole steroid/felony/jail-time/ situation seems to be a miscarrage of justice and a violation of one's basic American rights.

I sure ain't no lawyer and have never been involved with roids since they became illegal, but there is definitely something NOT RIGHT and very wrong about what many athletes and others feel to be an out and out WITCH HUNT.

It's difficult for me to believe that this is actually happening in America - the land of the free, the home of the brave.

But as far as I know, no one has ever been brave enough to stand up and stick their neck not to abolish this modern day WITCH HUNT.

A politician can't do it because it would mean political suicide.

A sports federation can't do it because it would put them in the cross hairs of the Federal government.

I can't do it because I don't have the slightest idea how to "get a law removed from the books".

Maybe some sports federation or a combine of sports federations should clandestinely hire someone like Millard in an attempt to do something about this travesty of justice.

That individual would have to be unassociated with any organization or individual who has something to lose because I am almost certain that the government would come after them with a silver mallet and IRS scrutiny.

I am definitely not a steroid advocate, but I am definitely against the government's ability to ruin someone's life for using steroids.

Something's wrong here and should be fixed.

Got more to say if anyone's interested.




well thought out Stunt!

stuntmovie

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8946
  • Getbig!
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #70 on: June 09, 2009, 02:38:48 PM »
Thanks, Haz!

Here's a bit more of what I feel I gotta say about this situation .......

Back in my day, roids were legal and easily obtainable. Most of the guys (no ladies in competitive bodybuilding then) would go to a doctor and ask for a prescription. In most cases I was involved with, the doctor would simply search the subject in his PDR and write out a subscription and most everyone I knew would adhere to the prescribed dosage.

If I recall right Decca-Durabolin and Anavar and Primobolin were the roids to use back then. There were probably others which I don't recall at present.

The AMA was still claiming that steroids did nothing to enhance muscle mass but we all knew that that was an outright prefabrication because everyone on the "sauce" was making great gains which were most often claimed to be 10% better than those who chose not to use them or simply didn't make the effort to obtain them.

The AMA stand that roids were ineffective was surprising to most of us due to the fact that all of us knew that steroids were used to treat WW2  burn patients at Tripler Hospital in Hawaii and there was no secret about their effectiveness. And many of the top movie stars were making frequent trips to European "spas" to obtain "treatment" which would keep them looking young for future movie roles, and there was no secret about this either.

Still, many doctors thought that they didn't so a damn thing. Eventually one such doctor sought me out and apologized about his previous stand against steroids claiming that medical school taught him how to treat illnesses and not now to prevent illnesses. (He was also anti-suppliments and anti-vitamins as well.)

All of this happened before the stigma that steroids are receiving today.

Then over the years, athletes began to think that "more" would be better but their doctor would be somewhat reluctant to prescribe "more"; so the individuals would find another doctor for an additional prescription without the first doctor's knowledge. So "more" became more easily obtained.

Still ... even with "more" no one seemed to suffer any medical discomfort and some individuals would even get a physical to insure that all was well.

I was never privy to any serious medical problems attributed to roid usage back then.

But the IOC soon became concerned. The "playing field had to remain level" and some of the players were apparently playing with an apparent advantage.
The "playing field" was tilted and had to be readjusted.

And steroid usage as we knew it became illegal which made it very profitable, more desirable, and somewhat more easily obtainable. (How come those who make these laws don't pay attention to history?)

Rick Collins best described this transition in his book "Legal Muscle" which I understand is now out of print.

If I recall it correctly ..... Here is a synopsis how roids usage actually became illegal.

Please feel free to correct me it I'm wrong or if you can add some facts to my memory ...... DOn't take any of this as the gospel truth as I am writing this based on my memory banks.....

When steroids were easily obtainable with or without a doctor's prescription, there was a young Naval Academy athlete who tried out for the football team, but the other guys were bigger and faster and stronger due to their steroid intake and he failed to make the team.

It so happened that his father was a US Congressman or a US Senator and when he heard that his son didn't make the team and that those who did make the tram were competing at an unfair advantage, he decided to do something about it.

And that something that he did do was to make usage a felony (gotta do some actual research on what that law states again, but I think you all get the idea).

And even though the AMA and many others objected, the new law against steroid usage passed and henceforth many people could be processed through the courts and receive a felony conviction.

And the media jumped on it and made it a bigger thing than it actually was. And the public bought it. And it developed into what appears to be mass-hysteria. A modern day witch hunt in the making without the torches and burnings at the stake - but just as destructive and possibly even more so.

And now some say that one can actually be committing a crime simply by thinking or talking about something that the government claims to be illegal!

Something's wrong here! 

This ain't justice! This is not the America I once committed my life to defend or am willing to accept peacefully.

But all I've actually done in an effort to stop this injustice is write my Congressman.

But what the hell is he gonna do?

Writer me back and say, "Thanks"!?











Spicy Shushi

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 892
  • KNOW HOMO?
Re: Open response to Millard Baker
« Reply #71 on: June 09, 2009, 05:24:09 PM »
The relevant issue, is that you have no standing. You are not an official of the IFBB/ NPC, you're not a part of the Pro League, you're not even an athlete within the organization, and no one has asked for YOUR input as to how we should address issues that pertain to the IFBB/ NPC.

If you dont like the laws, then take your case to your Senator/ congressman...

Sorry there, Bob. but the guy isn't knocking on the door of a closed IFBB meeting, he's putting his friggin' opinion on the internet. For that he has "standing".
Enjoy your dish...

Chick

  • The Pros
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12899
  • sometimes you get the elevator, somtimes the shaft
Re: Open response to Millard Baker
« Reply #72 on: June 09, 2009, 05:35:20 PM »
Sorry there, Bob. but the guy isn't knocking on the door of a closed IFBB meeting, he's putting his friggin' opinion on the internet. For that he has "standing".

Disagree....he wrote specifically to the IFBB/ NPC. Putting a thread here on this forum would be considered an "opinion on the internet"....or making a comment in his own blog, etc....

hazbin

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5750
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #73 on: June 09, 2009, 06:03:46 PM »
Thanks, Haz!

Here's a bit more of what I feel I gotta say about this situation .......

Back in my day, roids were legal and easily obtainable. Most of the guys (no ladies in competitive bodybuilding then) would go to a doctor and ask for a prescription. In most cases I was involved with, the doctor would simply search the subject in his PDR and write out a subscription and most everyone I knew would adhere to the prescribed dosage.

If I recall right Decca-Durabolin and Anavar and Primobolin were the roids to use back then. There were probably others which I don't recall at present.

The AMA was still claiming that steroids did nothing to enhance muscle mass but we all knew that that was an outright prefabrication because everyone on the "sauce" was making great gains which were most often claimed to be 10% better than those who chose not to use them or simply didn't make the effort to obtain them.

The AMA stand that roids were ineffective was surprising to most of us due to the fact that all of us knew that steroids were used to treat WW2  burn patients at Tripler Hospital in Hawaii and there was no secret about their effectiveness. And many of the top movie stars were making frequent trips to European "spas" to obtain "treatment" which would keep them looking young for future movie roles, and there was no secret about this either.

Still, many doctors thought that they didn't so a damn thing. Eventually one such doctor sought me out and apologized about his previous stand against steroids claiming that medical school taught him how to treat illnesses and not now to prevent illnesses. (He was also anti-suppliments and anti-vitamins as well.)

All of this happened before the stigma that steroids are receiving today.

Then over the years, athletes began to think that "more" would be better but their doctor would be somewhat reluctant to prescribe "more"; so the individuals would find another doctor for an additional prescription without the first doctor's knowledge. So "more" became more easily obtained.

Still ... even with "more" no one seemed to suffer any medical discomfort and some individuals would even get a physical to insure that all was well.

I was never privy to any serious medical problems attributed to roid usage back then.

But the IOC soon became concerned. The "playing field had to remain level" and some of the players were apparently playing with an apparent advantage.
The "playing field" was tilted and had to be readjusted.

And steroid usage as we knew it became illegal which made it very profitable, more desirable, and somewhat more easily obtainable. (How come those who make these laws don't pay attention to history?)

Rick Collins best described this transition in his book "Legal Muscle" which I understand is now out of print.

If I recall it correctly ..... Here is a synopsis how roids usage actually became illegal.

Please feel free to correct me it I'm wrong or if you can add some facts to my memory ...... DOn't take any of this as the gospel truth as I am writing this based on my memory banks.....

When steroids were easily obtainable with or without a doctor's prescription, there was a young Naval Academy athlete who tried out for the football team, but the other guys were bigger and faster and stronger due to their steroid intake and he failed to make the team.

It so happened that his father was a US Congressman or a US Senator and when he heard that his son didn't make the team and that those who did make the tram were competing at an unfair advantage, he decided to do something about it.

And that something that he did do was to make usage a felony (gotta do some actual research on what that law states again, but I think you all get the idea).

And even though the AMA and many others objected, the new law against steroid usage passed and henceforth many people could be processed through the courts and receive a felony conviction.

And the media jumped on it and made it a bigger thing than it actually was. And the public bought it. And it developed into what appears to be mass-hysteria. A modern day witch hunt in the making without the torches and burnings at the stake - but just as destructive and possibly even more so.

And now some say that one can actually be committing a crime simply by thinking or talking about something that the government claims to be illegal!

Something's wrong here! 

This ain't justice! This is not the America I once committed my life to defend or am willing to accept peacefully.

But all I've actually done in an effort to stop this injustice is write my Congressman.

But what the hell is he gonna do?

Writer me back and say, "Thanks"!?












yeah, it's amazing how much they messed things up. the Deca you mentioned was called the safest, but it has the longest detection time. so when testing came out, people opted for things with faster clearance times. this means more toxic to the organs.

when they made them illigal, it opened the door for fakes and counterfeits. people made way more money and doctors saw 10 times the side effects from dirty drugs than they ever did from pharmaceutical items.

when they publisized guys like Ben Johnson and Lyle Alzado, it drove steroid use into the public eye. and kids everywhere that hadn't heard of steroids and weren't even athletic couldnt' wait to get on them.

they ended up with an epidemic of young non athletes using tons of dirty steroids that often weren't even what was labelled.

good job gov't and media.

karu

  • Time Out
  • Getbig II
  • *
  • Posts: 241
Re: Open response to Millard Baker
« Reply #74 on: June 09, 2009, 08:27:28 PM »
horton, you sound like one of these lying steroid junkies known as "pros"...

everyone knows that drugs use in IFBB >>>>100x NFL


WADA - what

But confronting the government would only focus attention on themselves.
Lets let the politicians think their policy is working while everyone with half a brain knows that every single competitive sportsman uses some for of "supplement".

Perhaps Nike should step forward and campaign for a change in the law. They have a lot of sponsorship money tied up in "clean" athletes :-)