Are steroids really harmful or there is a myth?
A long debate awaits every one who is keen to enter into a discussion surrounding the use or steroids. This is because some people think that steroids are harmful as they are not fully aware of its benefits and the fact that side effects starts erupting only when steroid abuse happens and not otherwise. There is also one group, which is right in saying that steroids have helped them to be better sportsmen and better individuals, which makes right use of steroids to stay ahead of the competition.
Let us read excerpts from a conversation between Rick Collins, J.D. –RC - and Norman Fost, M.D. – NF - to find if steroids are really harmful for its users and society.
From Steroidlaw.com:
RC: Anabolic steroids were placed under the Controlled Substances Act in 1990, limiting the scope of physician prescribing with the threat of criminal penalties. Do steroids belong there?
NF: Whatever the arguments about our regulatory system for narcotics and marijuana and so on, they simply don’t apply to steroids. This is not a source of violent criminal activity, school dropouts and all the social problems of illicit drugs. So putting this in that category strikes me as bizarre. If the government is really concerned about safety, if that is really the issue, the steroid situation screams for regulating the drugs through the FDA, and facilitating supervision by doctors. By driving this behavior underground, we have increased whatever risks exist by ensuring that safety studies are not performed, either short or long term. We have also lost control of manufacturing processes, so the user has no way of knowing what, in fact, he is using. The policy of a ban, coupled with criminal penalties, is even more incoherent if safety is the argument.
RC: You’ve hit on a key theme explored in Legal Muscle. But do you think that steroid administration for the purpose of building muscle in healthy adults could be safely accomplished under the supervision of physicians?
NF: There’s no drug in the world that has zero risks. The issues are whether the risks are manageable, whether they are in the same ballpark as other drugs that are widely prescribed and I think they are and whether the risks can be reduced to an acceptable level. I think the risks are most reduced under a knowledgeable doctor’s supervision. No question, there will always be adverse effects, but the life-threatening or irreversible and disabling adverse effects are likely to be low, and risks a competent adult may choose to take on even if properly informed. If the risks are greater than present evidence shows, the most efficient way to learn about that is through well-designed studies, as we do for other regulated drugs.
It can be easily concluded from the above statements that steroids do not bring side effects with them and side effects start occurring only when the user makes an indiscriminate usage of steroids. An individual on steroids but following the right dosage and usage instructions is not harmed by them, in any way.
