Who cares about PED use?

[JayBruceFan]

What I don't get in all of this is how there is never any legal ramifications for these guys when they get caught with illegal drugs. The only legal charges that have stemmed from PED use, whether actual or speculated, have been possible perjury charges. Why don't they throw the book at these guys?

[kaldaniels]

Originally Posted by JayBruceFan

What I don't get in all of this is how there is never any legal ramifications for these guys when they get caught with illegal drugs. The only legal charges that have stemmed from PED use, whether actual or speculated, have been possible perjury charges. Why don't they throw the book at these guys?

It's not illegal to test positive if I'm correct. Just illegal to be caught in possession.

[jojo]

Originally Posted by Brisco

I want to know that when Joey Votto hits a line drive home run it is because of the skill, effort or luck that are part of the game. I want to be able to compare Votto to Gehrig and feel like there is a basis of comparison... the constant connection to history is what makes baseball special. Yes, I know that science and health care are always improving... but before PEDs it seemed to make sense to compare Mickey Mantle to Tris Speaker even though they played half a century apart.

PEDs use doesn't complicate that comparison.

It never really was appropriate to compare players whose careers were 50 years apart without normalizing for the eras that they played in...

That's the fallacy of 714.

But ya, baseball fans more so than any other fanbase (and it isn't even close) spend more time looking in the rear view mirror than they do out the windshield but surprisingly their view of the past tends to be more romanticized than reality.

[RFS62]

It's a very complicated issue. Of course players have used every edge, legal and otherwise, to enhance their performance since the dawn of sports.

The biggest reason I'm against juicing is that it places implied pressure on young players trying to make their way to the bigs to use drugs they would otherwise never use.

If there were no negative health implications, I'd have no problem with steroids, just like advanced nutrition or training methods.

Many marginal prospects would sleep in the road for a shot at the show. Don't make it necessary for them to juice to keep up.

[scott91575]

I am not really too worried about the stats and integrity of the game. My problem is if you don't crack down on it's use, any kid who even dreams of being a big league baseball player will use them. That number is higher than most of you realize. Every minor leaguer, most college kids, and even a ton of high school kids think they could possibly make the majors even though the odds are slim. If PED's are allowed to proliferate, there is no doubt the vast majority of them will use them.

As for their safety, there is no info on their long term detriments because many of the drugs have no medical use, are not used in the way intended (so not tested that way), and in many cases are illegal. Why would anyone use money to test their long term benefits/negatives when the drugs cannot be sold for those purposes or simply cannot be sold? On top of that, the illegal ones are in fact illegal to run tests. That is why the long term negatives of anabolic steroids are still not fully understood. The only info you have is from people that abused them years ago. So you won't know the long term effects of these newer drugs until 20 or 30 years from now.

So no, taking random unapproved drugs are not safe just because you have not heard anything bad about them (in fact, steroids were not considered dangerous long term at one time). Allowing PED's to proliferate is dangerous for thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people nationwide. So there is a moral obligation for MLB to cut down on PED's.

[LegallyMinded]

Originally Posted by JayBruceFan

What I don't get in all of this is how there is never any legal ramifications for these guys when they get caught with illegal drugs. The only legal charges that have stemmed from PED use, whether actual or speculated, have been possible perjury charges. Why don't they throw the book at these guys?

It's largely a matter of prosecutorial discretion. Steroids may be a controlled substance under federal law, but US Attorneys generally have bigger priorities.

[Unassisted]

Originally Posted by DGullett35

If I fail a drug test at work Im terminated,

That's because you being under the influence the drugs tested for at your workplace would make it dangerous to work with you. If there were drugs that could make you perform your job better or more productively, without introducing danger to the workplace, would your employer test for them? Unless your employer is testing for PEDs, it would appear the answer is no.

The element of danger in PEDs is to the user. Taking them makes the MLB player play better, but it also endangers his health.