Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Interested Ump
Steroid use has a long list of scientific validation amd empirical evidence for enhanced sports performance. Anaboloc steroid performance gains are as solid as the science of gravity.
Those that argue to the difference have either a lack of practical knowledge or a personal agenda ala Mr. Rutledge.
|
I do not have a personal agenda; I personally do not care who used or who did not use. I think that the evidence that is being used is not based on scientific evidence. You cannot throw out a couple of people and say that is proof of steroids and that is proof that someone did not use steroids or any other performance enhancing drugs. Even the claims of Clemens' and his numbers are not based on any evidence that has been proven, just innuendo and assumptions. There are clearly other players in history that had similar success in their 40s and just because they were not a "power pitcher" does not mean they could not have used steroids to stay in the game. Players in the Majors have long used amphetamines to stay in the game long before a few years ago when they were outlawed as an illegal drug by MLB.
I also think that if drug use was such a big deal, then test for HGH.
Peace