What we can all learn from Thomas Voeckler

Some background, and yes, this post will serve a larger message.

For the few of you left who have been reading me for a while, you know that, despite my baseball background, the Tour de France is my favorite sporting event in the world.

I first fell in love with it the year that Greg LeMond burst on the scene. Not the first American to ride the Tour (Jonathon Boyer was, LeMond, really the second) he was the first to ride on a powerhouse French team, La Vie Claire, and of course the first to win.

In his first great year, the first American team rode (7 Eleven), and on that team was Eric Heiden (now Dr. Eric Heiden) who had shattered every speed skating record in the world, and won every speed skating medal in the 1980 Lake Placid Olympics. If you don't know him, it is hard to describe just how much of a sporting giant Heiden was. His victories are the equivalent of the man who wins the 100 meters, also winning the Olympic marathon.

Well, the first year Heiden raced, LeMond won, and Heiden couldn't even finish. This giant couldn't make it up the mountains and said, at the time, that nothing he had ever done could compare to the Tour. That was enough to reel me in.

Flash forward to this year. It was generally regarded that the Tour would be between Andy Schleck of Luxembourg, who was second the last two years, and Alberto Contador, the 3 time defending champion.

Also given some consideration was Cadel Evans, an Aussie who had also been the runner up twice in the past but who made the Tour his entire focus this year.

Others mentioned were Ivan Basso, the 2 time winner of the Giro d'Italia, the Italian equivalent of the tour, and perhaps an even harder race; Frank Schleck, Andy's older brother; Samuel Sanchez, the Olympic Road racing champion; Chris Horner, an American on the powerful Radio Shack team who had just won the Tour of California; Bradley Wiggins another multiple Olympic track champion on his best all time form; Jurgen Van den Broeck, a Belgian, and a few others.

In the tour, the winner has the best combined time over 21 stages, 3 weeks of racing an average of about 125-150 miles a day including all sorts of climbing, sprints, individual time trials, etc.

Generally, the best climbers start their careers as climbing specialists and develop their time trialing skills to become overall winners.

The lesser riders will go all out, sacrificing their bodies for one day, to try and win ONE stage of the race (each stage is considered a separate race by the international cycling organizations).

French cycling has suffered greatly since LeMond's mentor turned foe, Bernard Hinault, last won the tour in 1985.

Early in the race, Thomas Voeckler of the French Europcar team, went on a breakaway, and took the "yellow jersey", the maillot jeune, the race lead.

It's not unusual for a lesser rider to lead the race early on as the favorites actually don't WANT to lead, because of the greater responsibility it places on them.

Voeckler has been a journeyman pro for 10 years or so. His most famous moments came as a young cyclist, when, in a similar situation he held the yellow jersey over Lance Armstrong. In that year, 2000, however, there were no imaginings of victory and he held the jersey during stages that were flat, when everyone finishes together. On the one mountain stage, the famed "Plateau de Beille" in the Pyrenees, he lost more than 5 minutes to Armstrong (more than a miles ride on flat ground).

This year, a similar thing happened. Voeckler went on a breakaway in the 9th stage of the Tour. That was the stage in which the most horrific crash took place, with a TV car hitting two of the other breakaway cyclists.

From the beginning of his days in the yellow, Voeckler said he had no chance to win the race. More than that, he said that, with the upcoming Pyrenees, he would hold the yellow only a day or two.

And then a funny thing happened. He tried. There is an old saying in the Tour, the yellow jersey makes you ride like two men.
Well, Voekler not only stayed with the storied climbers over the iconic Col de Tourmalet, the Col d'aubisque but this time he was right there on the Plateau de Beille, where he had lost 5 minutes to Armstrong.

Every day, he assured the now crazed French that he could not win the race, but that he would honor the Yellow Jersey.

And he continued to fight.

They had said he could not do it in the Pyrenees. In fact, to the commentators, it was almost a joke. There were new reasons every day why he still wore the yellow. And every day, Thomas Voekler got on his bike and pushed himself to do things he didn't think he could.

And every day, he did.

They said that, of course, he made it through the steeper, but shorter climbs of the Pyrenees, but that the monsters of the Alps would destroy him. The leading commentator, Phil Liggett, who I love, actually said "When the Tour is over, you'll need binoculars to see Voeckler"

Yesterday's stage was called the queen of stages. The hardest stage in the history of this more than 100 year old race. 3 "Hor's Category Climbs" meaning so long and steep as to not be able to be classified by the international standards.

Starting with the absurd Col D'ignol, and ending with the iconic Col de Galibier.

And yet, there was Thomas, to the cries of "Allez Thomas" (Go Thomas) from the French crowds, literally grinding his way up, evening dropping the 3 time champion, Alberto Contador, on the last climb up the Galibier.

When the stage ended, he had maintained a 15 second lead and his face was wracked with pain.

Finally, today, on the final stage in the Alps, back over the Galibier and the even more famous Alpe D'Huez (where LeMond had made his name) bad luck came his way. I won't get into the racing strategy but he lost the lead and is now in fourth place.

The last time a French rider was as high as fourth in the Tour, was 1996, 15 year ago.

Voeckler, like the little engine that could, won over the hearts of the entire nation of France, and the entire cycling community. Even as one of his teammates and a fellow Frenchman, won the stage, Voeckler received the loudest cheers. It was said by the French, in their highest compliment, that he had defended the jersey with panache.

But more importantly, he won himself over. Every day he seemed as amazed as everyone else that he was able to match up with all of the prerace favorites.

There will be no trophy for Thomas Voeckler, at the end of the Tour de France, but there will be something more important.

In this day and age, we give trophies for everything. You finished 22d in the spelling bee in school? Here's your ribbon and certificate of achievement. Your little league team finished 9th? Take that trophy young man!

But Voeckler showed us all that it is the effort to achieve, the journey to success that is it's own reward. No trophy is necessary when you find that you can exceed even your own limitations simply by making the effort. When you aim for the best, and make your best efforts, you are always rewarded. It is the effort that matters. Eventually, the victories in life come.

ALLEZ THOMAS!

What's the difference between Nixon and Reagan, Clemens and Pettite

A comment on a previous post made me decide to post this.

To refresh some memories.

Nixon, obviously, covered up the Watergate scandal (as an aside, those who know about the whole thing and who have heard the Watergate tapes, know he didn't plan it, but he did cover up the lies).

Nixon, famously, when caught said "The American people need to know if their President is a thief. Well, I am not a thief." An out and out lie.

Reagan, in a situation that has now been forgotten (interesting isn't it?) was enmeshed in what was arguable a worse situation. His administration was enmeshed in what became known as the "Iran-Contra Affair" or the arms for hostages scandal.

The scandal entailed illegal funding and arming of Nicaragua’s right-wing contras fighting the leftist Sandinista regime as well as illegally trading arms with Iran in exchange for the release of seven American hostages held by Iranian-sponsored militants in Lebanon. Profits from arms sales to Iran were to be used to buy weapons for the contras.

An independent counsel, Lawrence Walsh was appointed. He concluded that the President's most senior advisers and the Cabinet members on the National Security Council participated in the strategy to make National Security staff members McFarlane, Poindexter and North the scapegoats in the scandal. Walsh discovered much of the best evidence of the cover-up in the final year of active investigation, too late for most prosecutions. This actually bled into the Bush administration and was partially responsible for his being limited to one term.

The difference with Nixon? Reagan first appointed his own board, in addition to the independent counsel appointed by the Attorney General. The report of the board was highly critical.

When the findings came out, Reagan went on national TV, just like Nixon. But instead of saying what Nixon did, a blanket denial, Reagan, looking old, and for the first time to the public, a bit confused, said:

"I've studied the Board's report. Its findings are honest, convincing, and highly critical; and I accept them. And tonight I want to share with you my thoughts on these findings and report to you on the actions I'm taking to implement the Board's recommendations.

First, let me say I take full responsibility for my own actions and for those of my administration. As angry as I may be about activities undertaken without my knowledge, I am still accountable for those activities. As disappointed as I may be in some who served me, I'm still the one who must answer to the American people for this behavior. And as personally distasteful as I find secret bank accounts and diverted funds - well, as the Navy would say, this happened on my watch.

Let's start with the part that is the most controversial. A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not As the Tower board reported, what began as a strategic opening to Iran deteriorated, in its implementation, into trading arms for hostages. This runs counter to my own beliefs, to administration policy, and to the original strategy we had in mind. There are reasons why it happened, but no excuses. It was a mistake."(my emphasis in both places).

Those of us with some subtly understand that much of the differences in the response to these two speeches had to do with the way they were perceived BEFORE their individual scandals. But one, even as he waffled, confessed, the other denied.

Clemens and Pettite?

While easy, that's one's subtle as well. Reagan lied, Nixon lied. In Reagan's "confession" he still said in his heart it's true that he never traded arms for hostages (huh? ) but he still ultimately confessed. Do I wish it had been full and unequivocal? Yes.

Clemens, as anyone who knows anything, was a serial abuser of Performance enhancers. Dan Duquette the GM of the Red Sox famously said that Clemens was done and let him leave the Red Sox. He went to Toronto and suddenly he was better than ever.

He was caught lying to Congress, denying that he had ever used HgH and other drugs.

His teammate and training partner, Pettite, admitted that he had used HgH "3 times" (meaning 3 injections) that he got from his father.

Now, for me, Pettite's "admission" made him almost worse than Clemems. He was clearly still lying, worse, he threw his own father under the bus.

But ultimately, the way the public viewed it, is that Pettite admitted it, Clemens did not.

Now, Clemens is being prosecuted for lying to Congress, and Pettite will probably end up in the hall of fame, or at least, have a career as a Yankee legend.

This is why, I am constantly stunned by politicians who do not offer a mea culpa. Imagine Bill Clinton simply saying what he did AFTER 4 years of Lewinskygate, right away, early on in the scandal. The Country would have been spared and we might be talking about him as one of the great Presidents in history. Instead, he is the butt of an unlimited number of sex jokes.

One of the things that most frustrates people about me is that I have rigid morality. When I'm right, I say it. And loudly. Does that sound arrogant? Yes.

But when I'm wrong I say it. Just as I publicly pronounced my apology to Mysst, in my personal life I say frequently, "I was wrong".

I am always amazed at what happens when I say this. People don't know how to react. I frequently have to say it over and over again. They are so used to people saying "...but...".

I don't (say but). I'm wrong. It's really not that hard.

We ALL make mistakes. That is what makes us human.

There is a difference in what has gone on here recently. Some are now defending their actions. Others are defending the offenders.

I hope everyone recognizes the differences between those two.

The first, by their actions are really admitting that they are wrong, but they are too embarrassed, or whatever their personal reasons are, to admit what happened.

But by NOT defending the offenders, they are acknowledging what happened.

What does this say? Simple, that their values are actually in place. That they CAN recognize right from wrong.

What is sad, is that for a while, they let that get away.

Now, though, but defending their own actions, they are trying to justify. Is this frustrating? Of course, but I would ask you to recognize the difference between the groups.

The first are good folks gone astray. The second group are Nixon and Clemens.

To the first group, I would say, just say "mea culpa".

The very reason you feel persecuted is a) because you are wrong and more importantly b) because people liked you before and WANT to like you again (like is a weenie word but I'm getting tired of typing). People want simply to know that you recognize what REALLY happened. That you weren't neutral. You didn't ignore. You didn't NOT take sides.

You enabled.

Well, just as in my marriage, I enabled my wife. Did that make me the borderline who abused her husband and children?

No, of course not, but I still played my part. And I will be dealing with that forever.

We all recognize that you are NOT the offender. But you played a part.

We want to have open arms. We like you. We really like you.

All we are asking is that you let us.

It's Finally Over!

Most of you are newer readers of my blog but several years ago I wrote a serious of posts about performance enhancing drugs in sports:
A brief history of steroids and performing enhancing drugs - Part one
A brief history of steroids and performing enhancing drugs - Part two
A brief history of Steroids and performing ehnhancing drugs - Part 3: Naming names!
A brief history of Steroids and performing ehnhancing drugs - Part 4: How the testing works .
HgH, Sly Stallone and me: An update to "A Brief History of Steroids...", Part 5
The Hall of Fame, McGwire, Dick Pound and WADA: an update to: A brief history of Steroids.....
A new study: An update to "A brief History of Performing Enhancing Drugs..." Part 7
The Tour de France today: An update to "A Brief History of Steroids...."
An update to: "A brief history of Steroids and performing ehnhancing drugs "

You'll notice the Tour De France installment. I have never been a fan of Lance Armstrong. Let me correct that. When he was a young up and comer, before his cancer, and he won the World Championship - usually a portent of big things to come for a young cyclist.

And even when he began to win the Tour, well he had been a protege of my cycling hero, Greg LeMond.

Of course I knew he used drugs, every world class athlete does. But then things changed. He became "Lance the superhero". The man who had been tested "more times than any other athlete" according to him (well, at least the same # of times as the other cyclists in the tour with him).

And then, worse, he became so holier than thou about the whole thing.

His Dr. busted for providing for blood doping all his clients earning the nickname "Dr. Blood"? Nothing

The fact that his blood, used as a test sample for the new test for EPO, the drug cyclists use most to build additional aerobic capacity, test positive for his 2d tour victory but b/c it was for a past tour he couldn't be suspended? Not a chance

The fact that every top rider who ever rode in support of him has been busted for drugs or admitted to using them? No way, NOT Lance!!

Floyd Landis saying that he personally used drugs with Lance, from testosterone to EPO? Not a chance, Floyd was busted and lost HIS tour de france win and he is just vindictive (why against Lance, Lance has never explained).

Test positive at the 2001 Tour de Suisse? No,not Lance! (oops well maybe, but if we deny it enough maybe people will forget).

Frankie Landreu (another longtime teammate on the US Postal Team) and his wife testifying that Lance openly discussed his drug use with his oncologists (cancer doctors)? LIARS!!

But now, this Sunday, 60 minutes will be airing an interview with Tyler Hamilton, yet another teammate will be saying yet again, that he used drugs with Lance.

But don't worry, Lance the Great has already come out and reiterated the most tested athlete mantra, and of course Tyler is only doing it because he is writing a book. Oh, and that funny Grand Jury testimony.

But now. OOOOPS. George Hincapie, who Lance described as "like my brother" who was his roommate for years and his teammate for EVERY one of his Tour de France Victories, has apparently ALSO testified to the Grand Jury that he and Lanced used Testosterone and EPO repeated during all the Tour de France wins.

Let's see. George is STILL cycling so it would look really bad for him to admit this.

But, it's just another person out to get Lance the great.

My hero Greg LeMond tells a story. LeMond won the Tour 3 times. He would have won at leat 5 if not Lance's 7 if not for a hunting accident when he was shot by his brother in law. LeMond came back and won two more Tours after that accident, but later in his career, the shotgun pellets left in his body caused a blood infection and so he had to take a few years off again to get healthy.

When he came back, LeMond said he was in the best shape of his life, riding faster times than he ever had. And then he went to the Tour and in a Mountain day he said he saw people doing things that he knew were impossible, and that he knew he could never do. He knew WHY they were able to do them. So he dropped out of the Tour and retired.

Funny, but that is exactly what Frankie Andreu said, but he said it to explain why he and Lance DID use drugs.

Busted. The myth of Lance, with his good friend George's testimony should now finally be over.

Willing suspension of disbelief, .... or too good to be true?

If you've never heard of the first expression, it is what movie/TV folk talk about needing to engender in an audience.

i.e. you know that the killer didn't REALLY chop off their heads with that chain saw, but you willingly stop thinking about all the special effects and just jump out of your seat.

Well, it happens in sports too.

Perhaps you heard that the "amazing" Usain Bolt broke the world record in the 100 meter dash this weekend at the world championships in Germany.

He ran a 9.58.

His previous world record was 9.69.

However, he had lowered the last record to not be held by him, from 9.74.

So, in about a year, he has lowered the world record by .16 of a second.

Why the willing suspension of disbelief?

Well, he lowered the world record by a greater amount than had ever been achieved since the advent of electronic timing in 1977.

Even more unbelievable was the fact that since that 1977 change in the rule, the record had gone from 9.93 to 9.74. A total of .19 seconds. However that was done by 13 different races. A total of 6 different runners. Calvin Smith, Carl Lewis, Leroy Burrell, Donavan Bailey, Maurice Greene, and Asafa Powell.

Each and every one of these runners has been somehow linked to drug use, whether through associations, disallowed tests, etc.

Is it humanly possible that ONE man could be such a genetic freak, such an awesome improvement on the human species that he could do more in one day than has been done in 30 years?

Unlikely.

It brings to mind an article I wrote here before the Olympics in which a Chinese company was advertising that for $20K they would engage in genetic alterations to improve athletic performance.

Have we seen the first truly "bionic" man.

I have no doubt. Whatever he is using, and remember, there is currently an investigation of the Jamaican Olympic team with several suspensions already handed down, is so advanced, that there is no test for it yet.

This is truly frightening stuff.

Goodbye "Bird"

I was truly saddened to learn of the death today in Massachusetts of Mark "The Bird" Fidrych on his farm of an apparent accident.

Many of you won't know who he was, but he was like a giant smiley face meteor that burned across the baseball, and the country's, sky, for one season in 1976.

He went 19-9 with 24 complete games (24!!) but that was not the important thing with Fidrych. He brought to the game, and the country, during a rough time for all of us, (remember the Carter Years?) an unbridled joy, and joie de vivre, to the game.

Talking to the ball, getting on his hands and knees to groom the mound and pat the dirt smooth, high fiving teamates in the middle of the field, and, getting his nickname from his uncanny resemblance to Big Bird from Sesame Street.

About talking to the ball, the Yankees' Graig Nettles tells a story about hitting against Fidrych when he was going through his routine, as usual, talking to the ball before pitching to him. Nettles said he told his bat, "Never mind what he says to the ball--hit it over the outfield fence!" Nettles struck out. "Damn," he said. "Japanese bat. Doesn't understand a word of English."

Injuries derailed him after that one glorious summer, but he was never bitter, and truly loved his one year in the spotlight.

We need more like him in sports. Or even just one more. RIP "Bird"

The A-Rod case: Wrong questions and wrong answers...

This is primobolan, the steroid that A-Rod and many others used. Do you think he didn't know he was taking this?

Please see the series on PED's (Performance Enhancing Drugs) that I wrote a few years ago.

They are here
A brief history of steroids and performing enhancing drugs - Part one
A brief history of steroids and performing enhancing drugs - Part two
A brief history of Steroids and performing ehnhancing drugs - Part 3: Naming names!
A brief history of Steroids and performing ehnhancing drugs - Part 4: How the testing works .
The Hall of Fame, McGwire, Dick Pound and WADA: an update to: A brief history of Steroids.....
HgH, Sly Stallone and me: An update to "A Brief History of Steroids...", Part 5
Lost in the shuffle: Anna Nicole and HgH
The Tour de France today: An update to "A Brief History of Steroids...."
Barry Bonds, Hank Aaron and a lesson in hypocrisy.
Landis 1; USADA 1; Justice ? 0 ?
A new study: An update to "A brief History of Performing Enhancing Drugs..." Part 7
An update to: "A brief history of Steroids and performing ehnhancing drugs "

So, my take on A-Rod? Well, as to his using, if you read those posts you'll see that everyone is using, so no big deal. Or should I say, can anyone possibly be surprised?

What bothers me is the idea that he should either be condemned, or applauded for what? Being honest (which he still is NOT being). Should someone be commended for doing what should be the minimum for conducting our lives?

Just like his teamates Andy Pettite (the worst offender to me, who used his father to cover his gH prescription) and Jason Giambi, even his confession contained as many lies as any truths.
Note that he DID not say that it was 2001-2003. Peter Gammons said that, and Rodriguez said that that was about right. Do you honestly believe that?

Frankly, here's what should have been said, just as I wrote some time ago that Clemens should have said...

1) That everyone is using.
2) That you'd have to been insane if given the opportunity to make $25 million dollars a year, to NOT do it
3) That of COURSE he knew what he was taking. Who doesn't know what they are injecting into their bodies?
4) That the dangers are vastly overrated when medically supervised

Once one big name just comes out and says the above, then we can have the honest discussion and explain to kids why it is dangerous for them, as opposed to an adult male (if you want to know why it's dangerous for females, just talk to a female bodybuilder. Note how their voices are deeper than yours. Other parts of their bodies are more masculine than yours as well, and I don't mean their muscles).

What is once again lost in this discussion is that to date, more than 50% of the players that have been caught, have been pitchers.
So, does that mean that A-Rod and Bonds' and everyone elses stats are not valid?

And of course, baseball certainly has no worse a problem than the NFL or any other spo

Joe fall down... go "OOOPS"

So, it had to happen. The master of malapropism's that is Joe Biden, who tends to speak with his brain before his political filter sets in, admitted what those of us who have fear of Obama have been saying for a long time.

It's not surprising though, because only a few months ago Biden was calling Obama inexperienced, wrong, etc.

So what did he say? Well, he told an audience at a rally that due to Obama's inexperience in foreign policy, he is sure that the world will "test" him (note to Joe: testing Obama means putting us all in danger).

But that wasn't enough. He then told the Democratic audience that it was vital that they continue to back Obama after he makes the inevitable mistake in that test, due to his lack of experience (and might I add, notoriously bad judgment).

The funny thing is that Obama has likened his campaign to John F. Kennedy. Perhaps the worst foreign policy President of modern times.

It's an interesting comparison.

Kennedy also campaigned with the idea of meeting "without preconditions" with foreign leaders. As such, he set a meeting in 1961 with Nikita Khrushchev about Berlin.

As Kennedy himself said to Scotty Reston of the NY Times upon returning to the States the meetings were "the toughest of my life". He described himself as having been steamrolled by Khrushchev.

More tellingly, Khrushchev, as revealed in papers now declassified in Russia, said to his top aides that he simply could not believe that the American People had elected such a "pathetic" person as President.

He described the meeting as a bear facing a chipmunk.

Kennedy was taken aback by Khrushchev indifference to Kennedy's concerns about nuclear war and the possibility of 70 million deaths. Apparently he forgot that the Soviet leader had just come from a Russian revolution and war that left upwards of 50 million dead.

Hmm, does this sound like another apparatchik, blow hard leader in the world today?

This meeting led directly to erecting of the Berlin Wall, and worse, to the Cuban missile crisis.

What most Americans simply don't understand is the humiliation suffered by Kennedy and the US as a result of the crisis.

Kennedy fell hook line and sinker for Khrushchev's bluff and removed American missiles from Turkey AND guaranteed no interference in the Cuban Revolution.

Worse, as Kennedy discussed with his advisers, he needed a "shooting war" to demonstrate his strength and the only shooting war was in Southeast Asia. This was the impetus for his beginning the military buildup in Vietnam.

So, for those of you that don't think experience is important, well Joltin' Joe just told you why it is.

The beauty of September Baseball ... on seeing greatness

I'm a Mets fan. By definition that means I'm a masochist. (not so much as being a Jets fan, but that's another story).

And once again, the Muts, as my dad called them for so many years with that unique NY combination of affection and resignation, are making what should have been a runaway, high drama.

But you know what? This is why baseball is the greatest game.

Have you noticed the parallel with the presidential election?

It seems to go on forever, tracking the seasons.
Changing daily.

Is it the Brewers? The Phillies? The Mets? Can anyone stop the seeming inevitability of the Cubs finally breaking the REAL curse? (I never considered the Red Sox cursed because they were so good all the time. Try being a Cubs fan for a 100 years or so).

But it is the joy of the ride, the excitement of watching the changing fortunes day to day.

And we have seen real greatness in the last few weeks.

With all his problems, who can argue that Ryan Howard is the Most Valuable Player in the national league? As great as Albert Pujols is, has anyone, anytime, any year, ever come up with SO many clutch hits? The guy is a machine when it counts.

How can you have 150 RBI's and strike out 200 times in a season? Perhaps David Wright ought to study tapes of Ryan's approach.

But every once in a while, once a decade or so, you see something for the ages in baseball.

And we saw it today.

Coming into this season, Johan Santana was known as a great pitcher with one HUGE fault. He just never finished games. In fact, last year, pitching a one hit shutout, he asked out of a game b/c he was tired.

But this year, and today, he has simply been transcendent.

After throwing a career high 125 pitches, he came back today on 3 days rest, and against one of the best hitting teams in the National League, and one whose sole mission seems to be to torment Mets fans (see last years final weekend) spun a 3 hit, complete game shutout in what can only be called one of the great, clutch pitching performances of all time.

Whatever happens for the rest of his career, Santana is now locked into that rarest of NY Pantheons - the do no wrongers. The Messiers, the Jeters, the Reeds, the Seavers, the Namaths...

Welcome to NY Johan, glad to meet ya!

The Mitchell Report

I am taking some time to digest the Mitchell Report before writing a full post.

However a few initial points.

First, please go back and read my previous posts The History of Performance Enhancing Drugs in Sports.

First, Mitchell did try to correct one frequently cited mistake. He stated correctly that steroids have been illegal since 1971 and the controlled substances act. Use of a prescription medication for any purpose other than it's FDA approved usage is illegal.

Steroids are currently not approved for use in the United States for any purpose.

Hgh is ONLY legal for conditions of low growth hormone. Not injury rehab or anything else.

Second, the names. He also correctly stated that the names are simply the beginning.

However, the report itself will create a situation in which people think this is it.

As many of you will note in my previous posts on the issue of Drug use in sports, Roger Clememns stands out, and is an obvious user of HgH.

However, as I have pointed out repeatedly, their use is far more rampant, not just in baseball, but in all sports than anyone would like to believe.

For anyone working in the health and fitness field, it is quite simple to detect a Drug user.

Unfortunately, their use has become so ubiqitous, that most people no longer recognize them.

Steroids became prevalent in the 1950's and '60's.

Yes, 50 or sixty years ago.

Their use in baseball became obvious, not in the 1990's as Major League Baseball would have you believe, but in the late 1970's and 1980's. They were used during my time in the sport.

They became rampant in the late 1980's. People have forgotten the home run year of 1987. Formerly known as singles hitters, people like Brady Anderson of the Orioles, Lenny Dykstra, Juan Samuel, all became home run hitters.

Finally, what continues to be overlooked, is the ease in beating the tests.

Regardless of how often, how unannounced, or otherwise secure the tests are, as long as a ratio of 4 to 1 epitestosterone to testosterone is used (see my previous posts on the explanation of this) the tests will always be a joke.

Lost in the shuffle: Anna Nicole and HgH

I think most of you have by now heard about the autopsy of Anna Nicole Smith (Vicky Lynn Marshall) and her death being ascribed to an accidental overdose, principally from two central nervous system depressants, her anti anxiety medication and her sleeping medication.

What is getting glossed over, b/c for whatever reason no one wants to bring charges, is the fact that the medical examiner described her fever as resulting probably from her injecting herself in her buttocks.

Interestingly one of the 8 drugs found in her system was growth hormone, in this case I believe somatatrope.

As I mentioned in my earlier post about Sly Stallone, HgH is the new "wonder drug" being used all over Hollywood and of course with thousands of people seeking the fountain of youth.

While it's benefits are many, it can also be quite dangerous if abused. Principally as a cancer agent, and in unusual growth of various body tissues.

It is not easily, legally prescribed, but the FDA is simply too swamped to pursue the "life extension" physicians who are prescribing this all over the country.

HgH, Sly Stallone and me: An update to "A Brief History of Steroids...", Part 5

For those who have not heard, Sly Stallone last week was caught in customs carrying 68!!!, yes 68, vials of human growth hormone (I believe somatotropin but that is a brand name and does not matter).

I have known people from my days in the fitness industry who worked with him and knew of his cosmetic surgeries and steroid use over the years and had always assumed he used Growth Hormone as well, but this was a rather egregious amount.

This post is not to condemn Sly, however. As you may have picked up in the earlier posts on this subject, I really don't take issue with Performing Enhancing Drugs. They are largely just hormonal manipulation, no different than birth control or fertility drugs, or other efforts at changing our hormonal makeup for some perceived or actual benefit.

I am doing this update because of the INCREDIBLE explosion in the use of HgH. Living here in NY, second only to LA as a land of Plastic Surgery, Botox, etc. virtually every middle aged woman I know has either tried Hgh or inquired about it.

What the problem is, is quite simple. It was not designed as cosmetic drug, but rather it's initial applications were in treatments of dwarfism and other pituitary malfunctions.

To give you an example of what can happen when you have unchecked amounts of Hgh in your body, think of Andre the Giant, the wrestler, or Georgie Mhuresan the former 7'7" NBA center.

They both suffered from a somewhat common condition (relative to other "bizarre" abnormalities). They each had tumors on their pituitary gland which caused a continual release of Growth Hormone. It eventually killed ANdre which is what happens when the condition is untreated.

What Hgh does, is cause the increase of cells, ALL cells. That is why abusers of it in the athletic sphere will develop cro magnon like protuberances on their facial features, or one foot larger than the other.

Most obvious is when you look at a national level bodybuilder, 100% OF whom use Hgh. They all posses what is impossible levels of body fat. Ripped abs that you and I could never achieve (unless of course we also Partook of the various performing enhancing cocktails) and yet when the turn sideways, it looks as if they have POTBELLIES. Why, because their organs have grown and are pushing out!!!!

Worse, if you see them in the winter, they are all wearing shorts and tank tops, and no, it is not to show off their physiques. It is because Hgh raises your metabolism to such levels that they are always hot.

That is why, we regularly hear of football players dying from heat exhaustion, supposedly unexplained, in summer training camp. Remember Corey Stringer of the Vikings 3 years ago? They tested for ephedrine, but never mentioned his obvious growth hormone usage.

So, if you are tempted to try it, and it is something of a wonder drug, beautiful skin, low bodyfat, extreme muscularity, BE CAREFUL and keep in touch with your physician!!!

The Hall of Fame, McGwire, dick Pound and WADA: an update to: A brief history of Steroids...

The recent elections to the Baseball Hall of Fame holds a particular interest to me. As some know, I both played baseball and worked in both the major and minor leagues.

In addition, this past Sunday's New York TImes Magazine had a rather negative article about dick Pound, head of WADA (World AntiDoping Agency).

McGwire, as most know, not only did not get elected to the hall of fame, but did not come close. In fact he was closer to not qualifying to be back on the ballot next year than to being elected.

Let's examine the issue a little more closely.

McGwire really made his name in St. Louis. A very knowledgeable baseball town with a storied history (the gashouse gang, Stan the Man, etc). Second only to the Yankees in terms of championships won. At the same time however, they are know to be very forgiving of their heroes. Rather than boo under performers they will cheer in order to promote better performance.

McGwire became a media darling because of a confluence of circumstances. He came from Oakland, but when he had a chance to leave St. Louis he took less money to stay. A single dad, he wanted to be closer to his son. In fact, he made child abuse, his charity of choice and was vocal in his support of it.

In addition, in his chase of Roger Maris' record (a truly under appreciated player) he showed real class. He invited Maris' wife and kids to his games and he even broke down crying the night he broke the record as he touched Maris' bat. Who could help love the guy.

The press happily ignored the almost mythological changes in McGwire's body. He had always been a prolific homerun hitter, hitting 49 as a rookie but his output doubled in the second half of his career. What no one noticed was just how almost comically big he had become. This can really be seen the night he hit the 62nd homerun as he was swarmed by his team, he dwarfed even them.

Those of us that had even a basic knowledge of the "real" world of sports knew what was going on. It was so known that it was not eve discussed. As I have written before, everyone was on, so what was the big deal?

Of course, it was only later revealed, largely through the Bond's case, and McGwire's former teammate Jose Canseco - who wrote a tell all book - which is pretty good other than Jose taking credit himself for introducing steroids to baseball- They were widely used LONG before Canseco and McGwire--that McGwire, and Sammy Sosa who was chasing Maris' record with him, were "users".

Surprise, surprise. So, the hall of fame vote came to be seen as a ballot on steroid users.

What is fascinating to me, is that until AFTER McGwire failed to be elected his actual qualifications as an alltime great began to be discussed. He is quite simply, a nice, Dave Kingman. For those that don't know, Kingman was a well traveled homerun hitter of the '70's who many thought might break the season record.

For those that don't know, Kingman's career conveniently ended just before he hit his 500th homerun. He was blackballed because "baseball" simply did not want to deal with the issue of whether to elect someone who was a totally one dimensional player making the hall. 500 HR's is considered one of the "locks" to get in. 3000 hits, 300 wins, etc.

McGwire was not viewed this way because until his testimony, or lack thereof in baseball's Senate hearings, the press liked him, as did those in baseball, unlike Kingman who was considered a malcontent.

If you don't believe me about the HR totals of Kingman, simply look at McGwire's teammate Canseco. He mysteriously disappeared from baseball with a HR total amazingly similar to Kingman's. He was hated inside baseball, but he was truly an all around player and no one wanted to deal with the issue of electing him to the hall of fame.

In fact, Canseco was on this years ballot as well. But he received so few votes that he will not reappear on the ballot. (under 5% and you don't get on the ballot ever again). Canseco was unquestionably a more dangerous hitter than McGwire and early in his career could even play a little defense.

So, what I am saying is that this whole thing, like the steroid issue, is a SHAM. McGwire simply was not a good enough player to be elected.

What is hypocritical though, is the reason most gave, his failure to "come clean" in front of Congress. This was seen as a betrayal of his campaign for kids and destroyed his image. He was no longer a "good" guy, but a pariah.

Two points here. The first is that OVER 50% of the players that have tested positive for steroid use are PITCHERS. HMMM, I guess the writers, sportscasters and voters don't want to address that sticky issue.

The second is that next few years, Rafael Palmeiro will be eligible for the Hall. Palmeiro is one of only three players in the history of the game, I repeat, one of only 3 players in baseball history with 3000 hits, 500 home runs and 500 stolen bases. Now, granted, he was never the dominant hitter of his day, nor did he even win an MVP award, but these #'s alone would indicate a first ballot election.

The sticky part is that Palmeiro had the balls to wave his finger at Congress and swear he was clean. Of course, he was caught the next year failing a drug test. He then tried to blame it on a vitamin B12 shot from a teammate, Miguel Tejada (also a user, by look). Interestingly, Canseco had named Palmeiro in his book. Palmeiro made excuses etc and finally tried to say he had JUST started using them but that when he testified before Congress he was telling the truth. Of course, the threat of perjury had something to do with that "admission".

So, the question becomes, what are the voters going to do when Roger Clemons becomes eligible. Clemons -what do you mean? you ask. Well, look at Clemons in films from the 1986 World Series and look at him now. Amazing that a 43 year old continues to get bigger, throw harder, and be stronger than as a 25 year old.

So, quite simply, I am happy McGwire didn't make it, but saddened by the hypocritical reason.

Which leads to dick Pound.

dick Pound is one of the truly accomplished men of our time. An Olympic 100 meter swimmer, he is the last Canadian to make the finals. He is an accomplished Tax attorney, a partner in one of the most prestigious firms in Canada. He also is chancellor of McGill University, the Harvard of Canada. Just for good measure he has also published 6 books and been on the IOC for over 20 years.

So, the article in the Times basically accuses him of making things up. About Carl Lewis, Lance Armstrong etc. What they simply fail to see is that Pound, as head of WADA, knows better than any, how absurd the excuses given by caught athletes are, how rampant the drug use REALLY is, and and how ignorant the press remains. SO, to me, he demonstrates incredible restraint.

I actually wish he would come out and say, "come on Lance, you took EPO in order to recover from Chemo, we know you were on it, you know you were on it, just admit it." Or to Marion Jones "Marion, EVERY man you have relationship with has been banned for life, and not only didn't know, you weren't doing it - PLEASE!!!"

But to his credit, he goes about it in the best way he can.

I will leave you with another quote of his about Floyd Landis, and I invite you to go back and read about testing in the last installment.

In talking about Landis' epitestosterone to testosterone levels (remember "normal" is 1:1) Pound said "I mean, it was 11 to 1! You'd think he'd be violating every virgin within 100 miles. How does he even get on his bicycle?!"

You can see the frustration on Pound's that the press is even entertaining the idea that Landis may be innocent. In fact, these test results are SO absurd that I even entertained the idea that someone had poured pure testosterone into his urine sample. I have NEVER heard of a level that high!!

So, in summation, look at these athletes honestly. The press malarkey about an "even playing field" is crap. There is an even playing field. Every one is "on". And it will never stop.

A brief history of Steroids and performing ehnhancing drugs - Part 4: How the testing works .

So, now the question becomes, OK, if you believe that every athlete is using something - how come no one gets caught?

Well, here is how the testing works.
First, as you may have heard, testing is incredibly expensive. If expense were not an issue, many more would indeed be caught.

In addition, blood testing is obviously more effective than urinalysis. This has to do with the metabolizing of the various substances and the specificity with which the testers can seek the different products.

Specifically, there is no real urine test for Growth Hormone. Worse, since GH has begun to be used again by legitimate physicians their are more companies making it the new recombinant DNA technology is more difficult to discern from natural. However, since their is very rarely blood tests performed, Gh will never be "caught".

The tests that you hear about are urinalysis.

As discussed previously all anabolic steroids are artificial testosterone derivatives. We (humans) have another metabolite of testosterone in our systems known as epitestosterone.

Since it is impossible for the testers to look for the chemical makeup of every know steroid, what they look for is the ratio of epitestosterone to testosterone.

This is the critical part. The "average" human male has a ratio of 1:1 epitestosterone to testosterone. I repeat 1:1. So if your ratio is 2:1 it effectively means you have DOUBLE the amount of muscle building hormone.

So, the "rules" say you can't have a level over 1:1 right? 2:1 right? Oh come on 3:1!!!!

Wrong, current Olympic standards allow for a ratio of 4:1 testosterone to epitestosterone.

Even more ridiculous was that the NFL, until the pressure of the baseball Senate hearings, allowed a ratio of 6 to 1!!!

What this means is that effectively you can have 400% of the testosterone of a normal male before they then, and only then, began to look for what steroid might be responsible.

Now, are there the rare exceptions, "normal" men who might fall into that number. Yes, but statistical it would be somewhere in the ratio of one in a billion. I repeat, one in a billion.

So, you do the math. What this means is that if you get caught using steroids, you, are, quite simply, an idiot.

In addition, since the testing is very infrequent there is a fairly good chance you won't be tested at any particular moment in time, so you can take a chance and be "on" only to cycle down in time for the competition (in the NFL during training camp and randomly during the season).

10 years ago, that is why steroids were still rampant. But as Gh has become more commonly available, it has replaced steroids as the "baseline" product.

What of the other substances being used? Well, as we know, there is no effective test for EPO, the product that distance athletes use. You can't determine if the additional red blood cells are the result of medication or natural. There is a way to determine if the blood cells are yours or not, however. This is how Tyler Hamilton, the US cyclist was caught, blood doping.

Cycling has THE most effective testing protocols and discovered that there were red blood cells in Hamilton's body that were not his.

As to women. Do the math, the ratios they use in the testing protocols are the same. So a woman failing a steroid test has effectively become a high testosterone man.

Now you know why you never saw Flo-Jo without pancake makeup. And why she had a mustache.
Detecting it with women is truly simple. They develop what are known as the secondary \bsexo?\b characteristics of men. Deeper voices, facial hair, and enlarged clitoris' (yes, it's effectively becoming a penis).

So what of all the other crazy things athletes are using now? Insulin, insulin growth factor, pituitary hormones, etc. Well, none of them can be tested for, so it simply becomes more and more dangerous.

These are the reasons why, when you here an athlete claim, "I don't know how it got in my system", "It's from supplement/medicine/birth control pill, etc" you can see how ridiculous this is. Nothing would put you at these levels.

A brief history of Steroids and performing enhancing drugs - Part 3: Naming names!

So, in the paper this week it was reported that the Russian Champion in the 300 meter steeple chase was suspended for testing positive for steroids.
For those who don't know, the steeple chase is a long distance run with various obstacles in the runners way. That's right, along distance runner was suspended for using drugs that most of you associate with size and strength.

So who else is using drugs? Well, as I have discussed in the previous posts, everyone. OK, not 100% but as near as you can get with considerations for economic limitations, medical uncertainty and statistical anomalies.

Lance Armstrong - of course!! This is one of the classic. Armstrong, as part of the standard recovery from chemotherapy was given EPO. This is a drug that was created in order to help chemo patients replace the red blood cells that were destroyed by chemo. It is also what is most commonly associated with bike riders and other distance athletes.

In fact a very telling story is told by Greg LeMond. He has often discussed how, in what would be his last year in the Tour, when he was one of the favorites again, the other riders just seemed to be able to do things that they hadn't in the past.

In regards to baseball, one of the fascinating aspects of the whole Jose Canseco/Mark McGwire story was how the media forget a very important fact. When Pete Rose was banned from baseball, he was associated with a ring of felons, through and including his bookies. What were these individual sent to prison for... that's right steroid distribution. One look at Rose during his playing days, and after speaks volumes.

Additionally, the hitting coach during the McGwire/Canseco heyday with Oakland was none other than Reggie Jackson. Seen Reggie lately, he has gotten bigger and bigger since his playing days.

The greatest laugh is when we here the excuses for people that get caught that it was in a supplement they took. Imagine a supplement company substituting what is essentially a cost free substance for an illegal and expensive prescription medication - huh? I don't think so.

Or when women, such as the swimmer Michelle DeBruin claims that it is in their birth control pills. Strange how an estrogen pill can make your testosterone go up.

So the easiest tact for this is, if you would like to know if your favorite star is using, assume yes, or if you would like to ask, I'd be happy to discuss it.

NEXT PART: How the testing works.

A brief history of steroids and performing enhancing drugs - Part two

NOTE: SEE PART ONE OF THIS SERIES POSTED ON BELOW

So, we left off last time with what I assume was a provocative statement. That steroids, in and of themselves, are not dangerous.

That's right. Carefully monitored as to liver and kidney function with regular lipid profiles and they are not dangerous.

In fact, many of the "life extension" facilities popping up out West use testosterone treatment as the key to this life extension.

There is research being done as to the effects of this treatment on reversing the aging process by reputable scientists all over the world.

In addition, as mentioned in the previous entry, testosterone will be the principal component of the male "pill" if and when it is approved.

Actually, I will go farther and say that they are beneficial.

Remember, these were drugs that were used medicinally for the first three decades of their existence.

One of the issues with athletes and the medical community is that for literally decades, the official stance of the AMA was that steroids had no real performing enhancing benefits, i.e. no real anabolic effect.

They were saying this at the same time that the entire purpose of the drugs was for "wasting" diseases. In fact, in the early phases of the AIDS epidemic there was serious discussion to reintroduce them because they were so effective at stopping, and reversing the wasting effects of this horrible disease. In addition to the quality of life issues, they also, by enabling the victims to regain strength. allowed them to be able to physically resist the opportunistic aspects of some of the results of the disease.

The drugs were also initially used in misguided attempts to aid people with various growth issues, i.e. little people.

This was quickly eliminated as a usage but also helped lead to the development of artificial or man made human growth hormone (more about this in part three).

As discussed during the previous post, the usage of steroids began in the 50's and accelerated through the 60's and 70's. Believe it or not, by the 1980's their usage was now considered simply a baseline, an entree into the world of performance enhancing drugs.

Now, a primer. If you work out at a gym probably at least 25% of the men in that gym have used or are currently using them.

How do I know this. Well besides my experience of actually having to clean up syringes from locker rooms, or cancel memberships of people found selling, it is actually fairly easy to tell.

This will also clue you in as to your favorite professional athlete who is using them as well.

Remember, in the last post, I discussed the fact that steroids allow you to overcome genetic limitations.

The way they are used properly is, to be brief, stacked, and cycled.

An effective program involves, slowly building up the dosages, using more than one and generally a combination of oral and injectable. (I won't go into it here, but because of the need to metabolize through your digestive system, i.e. liver and kidneys, oral are much more harmful, but they are also metabolized faster and leave your system faster).

By combining the two types you ensure quick effects and a longer lasting effect.

The cycle will peak in 4-6-8 weeks depending on you and the cycle you have chosen and then you begin to cycle down. As also previously discussed, this is the best way to allow your body to re regulate it's own natural production.

SO what happens? Well, as any kinesioligist or physiologist can tell you, certain parts of the body have the natural ability to develop more easily than most. Legs, upper arms, etc. Why? Because the muscles corresponding to these body parts are designed to help overcome the effects of gravity. In addition, these muscles are either acting on weight bearing joints, or joints that are acting as a fulcrum (the knee and the elbow).

The opposite is true though of certain joints. Prime example is the shoulder. The shoulder, as most orthopedists will tell you, is the knee of the 90's, 2000's etc. In other words, years ago, as the baby boom kept active into middle age, knee problems were most common. However, the shoulder is not a weight bearing joint. So time in the weight room inevitably leads to shoulder problems. The most common injury to those who lift weights? Shoulder impingement. More properly known as an osteophyte of the acromium-clavicular joint.

So, how to tell if someone you know is "juicing". Well, if their anterior deltoids (front shoulder) shows real development, particularly out of proportion to the other two heads of the deltoid, it is a good bet. The human body does not want to develop this muscle. As stated above, this is because the shoulder was not meant to develop this way, so, we must overcome human evolution and our natural limitations.

Another sure sign is rapid gains, or unusual "definition". The human body MUST carry a certain level of body fat. Women more than men. (avg. man approx. 15-25%; woman 20-30% ). Bodybuilders that you see on stage at a show are carrying under 2% and usually under 1%. This is why it is such an unhealthy sport - among other reasons. More about that later as well.

So, that guy that you see that is "ripped" may also be using. This is less reliable as there is a huge variation in what the average person can achieve naturally, but the prevalence of these and other drugs is so severely underestimated we have lost our ability to judge the "natural" physique.

Did you know that professional models use asthmatic inhalers to lose weight? Why because they contain albuterol which is a metabolic optimizer. i.e. an upper.

In fact, just last week, a professional football player in the NFL was suspended for a finding of clenbuterol in his system. Clenbuterol is closely related to albuterol and is what used to be in asthma inhalers. Funny, this player had weight issues! But of course he claims it was a mistake from his asthma medication. Despite clenbuterol having been banned for this use some time ago.

So, these are gross generalities, but the trained eye can pick up on this visual clues easily.

Another indicator is a certain puffiness of the features. As I described in the previous post, steroids aid in the osmotic process, forcing water into the muscle cells which increases the power of the contraction. Well, it causes cellular water retention throughout so someone on "roids" can develop a puffy look to their face.

So, you are now convinced your best friend, boyfriend, girlfriend, highs school football star, etc. is "juicing". You confront them. They deny it up down and sideways. You believe them because they never lie. They volunteer to take a lie detector test. What the heck you think, OK. And they pass!! Does this mean they're clean. NO.

This will lead us into part three, but, unfortunately as I have stated here steroids are now to performing enhancing drugs as crayons are to oil paints. An entree, a base.

So what happens today is a truly bizarre development. People who are big time users of PED (Performing enhancing drugs) will claim to be clean if they are JUST doing a cycle of steroids. They genuinely believe this to be true.

They are SO ubiquitous and so accepted in athletic circles that the only reason you WOULDN'T be "on" is because you're cleaning out your system, in between cycles, etc. So when you are JUST using steroids, you are clean.

So, your boyfriend may be being honest, as far as he can be, if he says he is "clean".

In part three I will get into the "new" drugs and drug testing AND NAMING NAMES!!!

A brief history of steroids and performing enhancing drugs - Part one

OK, so today I read one more Barry Bonds story and the hypocrisy and lack of knowledge on the part of EVERY single public published, or filmed discussion of this topic is driving me crazy. More about Barry later too.

The only close to admirable statement came from Dick Pound, a man who I generally respect, head of WADA (World Anti Doping Agency) and a respected Canadian attorney when he was interviewed on Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel about Floyd Landis.

For those who don't know, Landis was the American who won this years Tour De France and then was disqualified for having a positive drug test. More about that later.

Anyway, Dick Pound when presented with Landis statements basically said "Floyd , give me a break, the tests were positive, we all know it, and all the explanations you give don't change that."

First, a little about me. For those who don't know, I speak about this topic from a fairly unique perspective. I spent 15 years in the fitness industry and before that was a competitive drug free bodybuilder and powerlifter. I worked for a number of top bodybuilding shows and even on the IFBB (International Federation of Bodybuilders)Medical Committee. I have a Master's in Sports Management in addition to my time at Columbia Law School.

In addition, I played professional baseball and worked in both the major and minor leagues.

I have also worked in professional tennis and football in various capacities.

I have friends who have been Olympic athletes. So I am familiar with the testing protocols of both WADA and the major sports leagues.

Finally, yes, I have used steroids. Now, I repeat, I have used steroids, not other performing enhancing substances that are illegal.

So, there is the jumping off point. Are steroids illegal? NO. That is myth #1. Years ago they were put into a class with certain narcotics in the United States which meant that the illegal distribution of them was prosecutable. Possession over a certain amount was also illegal as the legal assumption, as with cocaine, heroin, pot, etc. was that possession of large amounts meant, de jure, that you intended to distribute for sale.

However, what we know as steroids, more correctly called anabolic/androgenic steroids are LEGAL in most of the rest of the world. That is one of the problems. Distributors can easily go to Mexico and purchase them legally. Athletes in Europe and the rest of the world as well. If a Dr. writes them a prescription, they can easily get them. They still have to pass their test, but again, more about that later.

So, what is a steroid. Again, the key word here is that they are correctly called anabolic/androgenic steroids. This is as opposed to cortico steroids. A VERY critical difference. Cortico steroids, products like prednisone are still legal in the US and are commonly prescribed as anti-inflammatories for various purposes. They have become so common that sometimes even asthmatics are prescribed them to reduce the inflammation in their lungs and make breathing easier.

Cortico steroids, though, have what is known as a CATABOLIC effect. The OPPOSITE of ANABOLIC. That means they destroy muscle tissue. Athletes can fail a drug test if cortico steroids are found in their system, e.g. it they get a cortisone injection in a sore joint.

So, getting back to steroids. All anabolic/androgenic steroids are man made variations of testosterone. Hence the epitestosterone to testosterone test you may have heard about in sports drug testing - this is what nailed Floyd Landis. More about that later. An androgen is something that produces secondary sex characteristics. Body and facial hair growth in men, thickening of the vocal chords causing the deeper voices, etc. This is why women who use steroids are essentially changing themselves into men. It is shy female athletes who use steroids will have deep, raspy voices almost as if they are lifelong smokers. What you can't see is that they will also have enlarged, and in some cases seriously enlarged labia and clitoris'. Many female bodybuilders will actually have plastic surgery to reduce this effect.

The anabolic part is the part of the drug that people are looking for. Anabolism is essentially, the process of building tissue, muscle tissue. Hence the extreme musculature you see on users. IF they use them correctly and eat correctly for their cycle.

What they allow you to do is overcome genetic limitations. This happens slightly differently than most people understand. What has been discovered is that their principal benefit is anti-catabolic. i.e when you train hard, the steroids prevent the normal release of cortisol that we all experience, the factor that causes the destruction of the muscle tissue and causes inflammation. They also increase the osmotic abilities of the cell. Remember, muscle fibers are electric impulses and electricity conducts more powerfully in water, so a more powerful muscular contraction.

So, less muscle breakdown, more powerful contraction, less inflammation, greater muscle development.

So you may be remembering people like Flo Jo, or her sister in law, Jackie Joiner. More recently Marion Jones. Yes, they all certainly had these effects. More importantly, they had the muscular development that is extraordinarily rare for a woman but not rare for a woman on steroids (or other drugs - see part 2).

OK,here's what very few know. The first anabolic steroid is still basically the best. By that I mean most anabolic. Called Dianabol it was isolated by Soviet scientists most probably in the 40's piggybacking on the work of Nazi geneticists who were looking to create their master race.

In the 1950's the United States produced what is to this day, the only weightlifting (Olympic vs. powerlifting)legend in our history. Paul Anderson, known as the Dixie Derrick was 5'10" about 370 pounds. Interestingly, he won his world championship in Munich in 1955. He had gained international fame earlier that year when he became the first man in history to press 400 pounds at a meet in Moscow. The Russians, the worlds leading weightlifters at the time, had taken notice of him when he started breaking every American record in the previous few years. He had been invited to the Soviet Union to train.

While never mentioned out loud. I will say it here. It is generally conceded that Anderson began training with the Russians in their use of Dianobol at this time. This training was brought back to the United States and after his world championship and subsequent Olympic gold medal at the 1956 Melbourne games these new training "methods" had the official seal of approval. Anderson eventually died of kidney failure, a not uncommon result of extensive steroid misuse.

What has now been forgotten by most is that in the subsequent decades there were literally dozens of cases of female Eastern bloc athletes whose sexuality was questioned and starting gin the mid to late sixties who actually failed the SEX tests given at the Olympics. This was before modern drug testing.

So, now a flash forward. We express surprise at the frequency at which athletes fail drug tests today. I don't understand this. If you rack your brain you will remember athletes in EVERY sport, male and female who have failed. And this has been going on for decades now, tennis, swimming, obviously track and field.

So here is the simple fact. EVERY, I repeat EVERY world class athlete is using performance enhancing drugs. You cannot compete at that level without them. Now obviously it is not 100% and there is no way of knowing exactly what the actual % is. but it is closer to100% than 50%, or 75%. Most likely those who aren't using them will be.

The true shame is that the same athletes would be winning without them if sport were "clean" More about "clean" later also. That is because drugs don't create genetic potential, they enhance it.

What the true shame is, is that steroids are not dangerous. I repeat they are not dangerous. Any woman who is taking the "pill" or estrogen therapy is doing the EXACT same thing. Hormonal manipulation, that is what it is about.

In fact, when and if it is approved, testosterone will be the male "pill". That's right, it doesn't shrink your testicles, but it does reduce your sperm count when you use artificial testosterone. Why? Because the first thing your body does is shut down your natural production. Your body knows what level your testosterone should be and if you are supplying it artificially it won't produce more. That is why the steroid dosages are high and also why you "cycle" to fool your body into NOT shutting off your own production.

So that being said, monitored by a doctor, they are not dangerous. Yes, they raise LDL's and can promote arteriosclerosis but the people who used to use them (again more about that later but what other "medications from the 50's haven't been surpassed) generally lead VERY healthy lifestyles in most other regards. There are not many world class sprinters, for example, suffering from heart disease.

LOOK FOR PART TWO SOON.