PDA

View Full Version : Report: Rick Ankiel got HGH from Florida pharmacy in 2004


IlliniSox4Life
09-07-2007, 04:07 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3008363
Ankiel has not been accused by authorities of wrongdoing, and stopped receiving HGH just before Major League Baseball officially banned it in 2005, The News reported.



This seems like it could put a cloud over an otherwise good story.

chaerulez
09-07-2007, 04:27 AM
This Signature Pharmacy business seems to be huge. They supplied to MLB, NFL, and WWE. Makes you wonder how many other companies like this exist with more famous athletes using HGH without the public's knowledge. Thanks to MLB and it's PA, we really have no idea if Ankiel is using or not.

stl_sox_fan
09-07-2007, 08:47 AM
St Louis is in major damage control today. Callers this morning keep using the argument that it was not illegal by MLB standards when he received them.<shakes head>
Really stinks because Rick was a major shot in the arm(pun intended) to the Cardinals. Good thing is 4 out of the next 5 games with the Cubs are at Busch.

balke
09-07-2007, 09:08 AM
Interesting timing for a story like this. Looks like he can't be suspended though, he had them before the ban. Again, MLB and the Player's association's faults.

Sockinchisox
09-07-2007, 09:34 AM
Alright, who's the a-hole that leaked this story? Let the guy have his time in the spotlight.

Jaffar
09-07-2007, 09:43 AM
Interesting timing for a story like this. Looks like he can't be suspended though, he had them before the ban. Again, MLB and the Player's association's faults.

Agreed! Why hasn't an entire list of players been "leaked" or released? It's a definite cloud unfortunately but it all falls on Pud and the players union.

soxfan13
09-07-2007, 10:17 AM
Alright, who's the a-hole that leaked this story? Let the guy have his time in the spotlight.

Who cares who leaked it. If he is doing something against the rules why should he get to enjoy the spotlight? I would wanna hope that he made it back without the help of any foreign substances.

WizardsofOzzie
09-07-2007, 10:32 AM
Keep in mind that I have no real idea how HGH works, but would it be benefiting him now if he stopped taking it 2 years ago? How much of his current success can be attributed to it if he did indeed take it but quit taking it in 2005?

Fenway
09-07-2007, 10:35 AM
The story from the Daily News. No paper in the country has done a better job covering this entire mess. It is rumored that they are getting leaks from MLB in New York.

Cards' Ankiel linked to HGH (http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/2007/09/06/2007-09-06_rick_ankiel_received_12month_supply_of_h.html)

Exclusive: Rick Ankiel, baseball's feel-good story of the season, received a 12-month supply of HGH in 2004 from a Florida pharmacy that was part of a national illegal prescription drug-distribution operation, the Daily News has learned.

soxfan13
09-07-2007, 11:02 AM
Keep in mind that I have no real idea how HGH works, but would it be benefiting him now if he stopped taking it 2 years ago? How much of his current success can be attributed to it if he did indeed take it but quit taking it in 2005?

The thing is no matter what he did or didnt do he now will always be looked at with skepticism.

donkeylips
09-07-2007, 11:13 AM
Keep in mind that I have no real idea how HGH works, but would it be benefiting him now if he stopped taking it 2 years ago? How much of his current success can be attributed to it if he did indeed take it but quit taking it in 2005?

There is nothing to say he stopped taking it. The shipments stopped but no one knows either way if he didn't use the year's supply all at once, didn't take any, or took them as prescribed. Who knows he could have had enough to last him a while. I thought scripts were always either 1 month or 3?

WhiteSox5187
09-07-2007, 01:51 PM
That's too bad, that was such a feel good story...I'm really disappointed by this, that's all I really have to say.

chisoxmike
09-07-2007, 01:51 PM
:rolling:

D. TODD
09-07-2007, 01:56 PM
Who cares who leaked it. If he is doing something against the rules why should he get to enjoy the spotlight? I would wanna hope that he made it back without the help of any foreign substances. It was not against the rules at the time. He had a perscription during his rehab, and used a non banned substance. Who cares what he did before the rule was put in place, just focus on enforcing the drug rules strictly NOW! Tons used stuff in the past that are banned now, I don't care to know any of them, Bonds, Clemens, etc. just focus on the enforcement in the present.

Domeshot17
09-07-2007, 01:57 PM
I dont know how I feel about this. This kind of like when Mcgwire was on Andro before Andro was banned. Part of me is like, cheater, and part of me is like, well did he break any rules if he did something that was not against the rules?

I am not condoning this, but just not sure how it is. When were steroids banned by MLB? Someone needs to develop a test for HGH, and MLB needs to test for it. This is getting to be a joke. Baseball is becoming as fake and inflated as pro wrestling and nothing has been done. The all time home rung king? Known User, still playing (Also holds the single season record). Cy young winners ? Huge Rumors around some of them (Clemens mainly). Sosa, Ivan Rodriguez, maybe as much as 40% of the all star teams from 01-05.

chaerulez
09-07-2007, 02:03 PM
Keep in mind that I have no real idea how HGH works, but would it be benefiting him now if he stopped taking it 2 years ago? How much of his current success can be attributed to it if he did indeed take it but quit taking it in 2005?

Well I think the real question is how do we know he's off of it? He could've just stopped buying from Signature Pharmacy and went somewhere else. MLB doesn't test for HGH, so they can't detect it. I hate the Cards, but I liked the Ankiel story because I felt bad for him, so I hope he didn't use.

rowand33
09-07-2007, 02:09 PM
Could this be any less of a story?

Seriously. Don't get swayed by this people, this is just the media trying to take something beautfiul and turn it ugly. I'm shocked mariotti didn't break this story.

This is how I understand it:

He took a non-banned substance to try to salvage his career from the scrap heap; all known information leads us to logically conclude he stopped taking it when it became a banned substance.

Any speculation he may still be taking it is just that, speculation.

I truly feel sorry for anyone that feels the Rick Ankiel story is tainted by this non-issue.

kittle42
09-07-2007, 03:12 PM
I'm not here to talk about the past.

thomas35forever
09-07-2007, 03:18 PM
Since it says Ankiel may have used HGH before MLB banned it, I'm not going to point fingers and cry "Shame on you." We'll have to see how this turns out.

chaerulez
09-07-2007, 03:19 PM
Could this be any less of a story?

Seriously. Don't get swayed by this people, this is just the media trying to take something beautfiul and turn it ugly. I'm shocked mariotti didn't break this story.

This is how I understand it:

He took a non-banned substance to try to salvage his career from the scrap heap; all known information leads us to logically conclude he stopped taking it when it became a banned substance.

Any speculation he may still be taking it is just that, speculation.

I truly feel sorry for anyone that feels the Rick Ankiel story is tainted by this non-issue.

He purchased an illegal drug. One that helps him play at an advantage to people who were clean. It's a story. Of course steroid apologists don't see it that way, it wasn't banned by MLB so who cares right? What if it was a recreational drug? The ones that MLB doesn't test for or offically say it's player can't use, if a player uses those is that alright?

soxfan13
09-07-2007, 03:42 PM
It was not against the rules at the time. He had a perscription during his rehab, and used a non banned substance. Who cares what he did before the rule was put in place, just focus on enforcing the drug rules strictly NOW! Tons used stuff in the past that are banned now, I don't care to know any of them, Bonds, Clemens, etc. just focus on the enforcement in the present.

So if your wife or girlfriend cheated on you 2 years ago and you just found out, you wouldnt care because it happened in the past and is not happening now? He received the HGH with a fake prescription which is against the law, just as steroids, although not against baseball rules at the time, were. Im sorry I would like to know if any player I enjoy watching play the game is clean or not. Sweeping things under the rug doesnt get rid of them it just makes a bigger mess later on.

Fenway
09-07-2007, 03:46 PM
Ankiel has 2 more homers than J. D. Drew :?:

SOXPHILE
09-07-2007, 03:50 PM
All you people defending him, saying it wasn't banned by MLB at the time, blah blah blah ...sound like the same ones who defend Bonds. Guess what ? It's an illegal drug. He cheated. Using your logic, let's go back to the often used comparrison: Johan Santana is tough on the White Sox, so they should just stab him the next time he is scheduled to face them. It's o.k., because stabbing the other teams' pitcher isn't banned in the MLB rule book.

Domeshot17
09-07-2007, 04:03 PM
Here is my thing. Its not known if it was illegal or not. HGH is legal with a prescription for a real cause. It is entirely possible he had a legit prescription for it. Odds are no, but its still possible. This is one of those Im reserving judgement until all the facts come out.

The Immigrant
09-07-2007, 04:08 PM
Man, these Signature Pharmacy allegations have really ruined the career of Gary Matthews, Jr.

:tongue:

getonbckthr
09-07-2007, 04:27 PM
Here is my thing. Its not known if it was illegal or not. HGH is legal with a prescription for a real cause. It is entirely possible he had a legit prescription for it. Odds are no, but its still possible. This is one of those Im reserving judgement until all the facts come out.
You can get prescriptions for steroids as well. Hell I was on steroids a year ago cause I was sick.

Lip Man 1
09-07-2007, 04:30 PM
Troy Glaus apparently did it as well according to ESPN.com

Lip

Over By There
09-07-2007, 04:55 PM
Dear Rick and Troy,

Just pretend you don't speak English.

Yours truly,
Sammy Sosa

kobo
09-07-2007, 04:59 PM
For everyone saying he cheated, the drug was illegal, etc., did any of you read the article? The article clearly states that Ankiel had prescriptions for HGH. The article also stated that the authorities have not accused him of any wrongdoing, so what is the problem here? If he had a legit prescription for HGH and was taking HGH under doctor's orders then I have no problem with it. How can you call him a cheater for taking something that was prescribed to him? Now, if it turns out the prescriptions were bogus and he was taking the stuff to bulk up, then by all means call him a cheater. But as of right now, there are no facts to backup anyone's assertion that the guy is a cheater.

stl_sox_fan
09-07-2007, 04:59 PM
Cardinals need to nip this in the bud ASAP. A non issue goes from speculation to premature fact the longer there is no response.
Ankiel was recovering from Tommy John surgery during the time he had a prescription for an at the time non-banned substance.

For all we know it could be similar to Jim Miller back in 1999, which ended my fantasy football season.

Cardinal Nation however are circling the wagons.
http://www.ksdk.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=128853

The Racehorse
09-07-2007, 05:46 PM
This isn't hard people.

Ankiel is just like the others who've used chemicals to enhance their numbers and on the field performance... he's just another drug user in MLB. Just like Bonds, Giambi, Palmeiro, etc.

If you want to justify his actions, then go ahead and spin it.

If using any performance enhancing drug, even if not against the laughable rules of MLB was ethical, then why aren't these guys open about it and endorsing them? The answer: it's wrong to use drugs to enhance your performance, period.

Once performance enhancing drug use becomes acceptable in MLB, the numbers of the past that are the very foundation to the sport become meaningless & the players become actors & circus side show attractions.

kobo
09-07-2007, 05:59 PM
This isn't hard people.

Ankiel is just like the others who've used chemicals to enhance their numbers and on the field performance... he's just another drug user in MLB. Just like Bonds, Giambi, Palmeiro, etc.

If you want to justify his actions, then go ahead and spin it.

If using any performance enhancing drug, even if not against the laughable rules of MLB was ethical, then why aren't these guys open about it and endorsing them? The answer: it's wrong to use drugs to enhance your performance, period.

Once performance enhancing drug use becomes acceptable in MLB, the numbers of the past that are the very foundation to the sport become meaningless & the players become actors & circus side show attractions.
And what if it turns out he had a legit prescription for it and was actually taking the drug for medical reasons? Would you feel differently then?

As of right now he had prescriptions for HGH. If those prescriptions turn out to be fake then I agree with you 100%. But right now it is premature to label him a cheater.

rowand33
09-07-2007, 06:01 PM
For everyone saying he cheated, the drug was illegal, etc., did any of you read the article? The article clearly states that Ankiel had prescriptions for HGH. The article also stated that the authorities have not accused him of any wrongdoing, so what is the problem here? If he had a legit prescription for HGH and was taking HGH under doctor's orders then I have no problem with it. How can you call him a cheater for taking something that was prescribed to him? Now, if it turns out the prescriptions were bogus and he was taking the stuff to bulk up, then by all means call him a cheater. But as of right now, there are no facts to backup anyone's assertion that the guy is a cheater.

Thank you!

Why do we have to jump to conclusions about **** and villify everyone?

Reign it in a little here people.

And honestly, can any of you answer what HGH does besides "make you big!" and "cheat!"?

Looking at his injury history and facts about HGH, I speculate he was using it to recover from Tommy John. This seems like a legit use for it and I'm very willing to believe he had a legit perscription; I hope he comes out to confirm this asap.

pierzynski07
09-07-2007, 06:09 PM
Is he still taking it in 2007? Otherwise, I don't care. He was a pitcher struggling with injuries and mental issues when he took the stuff.

The comeback is still amazing.

The Racehorse
09-07-2007, 06:14 PM
And what if it turns out he had a legit prescription for it and was actually taking the drug for medical reasons? Would you feel differently then?

Not really. Even if Ankiel comes out tonight with documentation showing the prescription was due to a medical condition, then why wasn't his condition noticed by the press? If a condition was that serious to involve prescribing a powerful drug for an extrended peroid of time, then whay wasn't he on DL? Too me, wouldn't pass the smell test.

As of right now he had prescriptions for HGH. If those prescriptions turn out to be fake then I agree with you 100%. But right now it is premature to label him a cheater.

Cheating is one thing, drug use is another. In my opinion, drugs are way worse then pitchers getting caught with sandpaper or batters using corked bats [not trying to sound preachy].

EDIT: oops! I forget Ankiel had Tommy John surgery... Question: I wonder if Dr Frank Jobe or Dr James Andrews prescribe HGH to their patients following UCL reconstruction surgery? Answer: I doubt it.

Huisj
09-07-2007, 06:20 PM
Thank you!


Looking at his injury history and facts about HGH, I speculate he was using it to recover from Tommy John. This seems like a legit use for it and I'm very willing to believe he had a legit perscription; I hope he comes out to confirm this asap.

I'm not sure I totally agree with that idea that it's ok to use that stuff to recover from injuries. Aren't most prescriptions of it given to combat growth deformities? Is elbow reconstruction recovery a growth deformity?

FarWestChicago
09-07-2007, 06:28 PM
I'm just completely in shock that a player under the Godfather of 'roids used an illegal substance. What's going on man? I just don't get it. How can this be.

The reality is, Tony traded his law degree in for a pharmacology degree a long time ago. :rolleyes:

FedEx227
09-07-2007, 06:51 PM
I'm just completely in shock that a player under the Godfather of 'roids used an illegal substance. What's going on man? I just don't get it. How can this be.

The reality is, Tony traded his law degree in for a pharmacology degree a long time ago. :rolleyes:

Yeah isn't it funny that most guys linked to steriods or HGH have been under the umbrella of Dusty the "Dude" or TLR. Big surprise I guess.

And I love the apologists. He didn't use them to gain an advantage over anybody he just used them to help recover from Tommy John Surgery. Newsflash guys, using a substance to accelerate recovery from injury is gaining an advantage. He is using something that not all pitchers, players have access to, thus he is gaining an advantage using a substance that is now banned and required a legit prescription at the time. Honestly, Ankiel doesn't look like much of a dwarf or appear to have severe growth retardation.

Oh but he had a prescription. So did Chris Benoit. It doesn't mean he needed it, Benoit didn't need 3 years worth every 6 months. BUT NO HE HAD A PRESCRIPTION. Like prescriptions can't be bought with a couple of Washingtons.

Get your head out of the sand guys.

getonbckthr
09-07-2007, 07:39 PM
Cardinals need to nip this in the bud ASAP. A non issue goes from speculation to premature fact the longer there is no response.
Ankiel was recovering from Tommy John surgery during the time he had a prescription for an at the time non-banned substance.

For all we know it could be similar to Jim Miller back in 1999, which ended my fantasy football season.

Cardinal Nation however are circling the wagons.
http://www.ksdk.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=128853
If you were banking on Jim Miller your season was over before it started.

Not really. Even if Ankiel comes out tonight with documentation showing the prescription was due to a medical condition, then why wasn't his condition noticed by the press? If a condition was that serious to involve prescribing a powerful drug for an extrended peroid of time, then whay wasn't he on DL? Too me, wouldn't pass the smell test.



Cheating is one thing, drug use is another. In my opinion, drugs are way worse then pitchers getting caught with sandpaper or batters using corked bats [not trying to sound preachy].

EDIT: oops! I forget Ankiel had Tommy John surgery... Question: I wonder if Dr Frank Jobe or Dr James Andrews prescribe HGH to their patients following UCL reconstruction surgery? Answer: I doubt it.
Every doctor doesn't do everything the same. I have diabetes my doctor chose Glucophage opposed to Insulin.

MisterB
09-07-2007, 07:49 PM
A legitimate prescription? Hmmmm.....let's see...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_hormone_treatment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_hormone_treatment)

Growth Hormone is prescribed for:


Growth Hormone Deficiency
Various other growth-stunting conditions such as Turner Syndrome, Prader-Willi Syndrome, Idiopathic Short Stature, etc.
Muscle wasting due to advanced AIDS
Severe burns
Restricted calorie obesity treatments
Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome


Considering Ankiel's 6' 1" and not in adolescence, I think the first two are out. There is a condition called Adult Growth Hormone Deficiency, but even the website of the outfit the gave him the prescription (http://www.tharc.com/hgh.php) specifically mentions patients over age 35 (Ankiel is 27). The other ones seem a bit unlikely as well...

getonbckthr
09-07-2007, 07:58 PM
A legitimate prescription? Hmmmm.....let's see...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_hormone_treatment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_hormone_treatment)

Growth Hormone is prescribed for:

Growth Hormone Deficiency
Various other growth-stunting conditions such as Turner Syndrome, Prader-Willi Syndrome, Idiopathic Short Stature, etc.
Muscle wasting due to advanced AIDS
Severe burns
Restricted calorie obesity treatments
Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
Considering Ankiel's 6' 1" and not in adolescence, I think the first two are out. There is a condition called Adult Growth Hormone Deficiency, but even the website of the outfit the gave him the prescription (http://www.tharc.com/hgh.php) specifically mentions patients over age 35 (Ankiel is 27). The other ones seem a bit unlikely as well...
Those are examples. TJ Surgery is a major procedure. This stuff helped him rehap quicker. Based on this reasoning I would assume you guys want Tylenol and Advil banned from locker rooms?

Medford Bobby
09-07-2007, 08:47 PM
On Chicago Tribune Live today future HOF writer Dick Van Dyke says this is just a "witch hunt" and wishes this would just go away.......:o:

Hendu
09-07-2007, 09:02 PM
Those are examples. TJ Surgery is a major procedure. This stuff helped him rehap quicker. Based on this reasoning I would assume you guys want Tylenol and Advil banned from locker rooms?

Tylenol and Advil do not enhance performance, or make you rehab more quickly.

Who's to say Barry wasn't using 'roids to rehab from nagging injuries. Does that make it OK?

pierzynski07
09-07-2007, 09:05 PM
Tylenol and Advil do not enhance performance, or make you rehab more quickly.
Yes it does.

getonbckthr
09-07-2007, 09:05 PM
Tylenol and Advil do not enhance performance, or make you rehab more quickly.

Who's to say Barry wasn't using 'roids to rehab from nagging injuries. Does that make it OK?
Was there a prescription?

Hendu
09-07-2007, 09:09 PM
Yes it does.

It relieves pain and thins the blood. Does it grow muscle mass?

getonbckthr
09-07-2007, 09:13 PM
Technically RedBull is a peformance enhancer.

Hendu
09-07-2007, 09:16 PM
Was there a prescription?

Anybody can get a prescription for anything, as has been stated in this thread previously. I'm not going to rip on Barry etc, but give Ankiel a pass because it's a good story.

In this day and age, it casts a shadow on everyone's career, and it's a damn shame.

Hendu
09-07-2007, 09:17 PM
Technically RedBull is a peformance enhancer.

So is eating. Drinking water. Breathing air. HGH is in a different league.

getonbckthr
09-07-2007, 09:19 PM
HGH is a long term enhancer, RedBull is a short term enhancer. Bottom line they both enhance performance and should be treated the same.

Huisj
09-07-2007, 09:24 PM
HGH is a long term enhancer, RedBull is a short term enhancer. Bottom line they both enhance performance and should be treated the same.

Are you serious? Getting a good night's sleep enhances performance too. Eating a balanced diet enhances performance. If you are dehydrated on a hot humid day, drinking some gatorade might enhance performance. The caffeine in redbull might be seen as being able to enhance performance for some people.

However, none of those things are controlled substances. HGH is a controlled substance. Food and drink are not. They should not be treated the same.

getonbckthr
09-07-2007, 09:30 PM
Are you serious? Getting a good night's sleep enhances performance too. Eating a balanced diet enhances performance. If you are dehydrated on a hot humid day, drinking some gatorade might enhance performance. The caffeine in redbull might be seen as being able to enhance performance for some people.

However, none of those things are controlled substances. HGH is a controlled substance. Food and drink are not. They should not be treated the same.
Clearly I wasn't serious with a touch of "devil's advocate." I'm tired of the phrase, "Performance Enhancers." When in truth "performance enhancers" come in all shapes and sizes, all strengths and effects.

Huisj
09-07-2007, 09:35 PM
Clearly I wasn't serious with a touch of "devil's advocate." I'm tired of the phrase, "Performance Enhancers." When in truth "performance enhancers" come in all shapes and sizes, all strengths and effects.

All right. I'll admit though that I really was having trouble detecting sarcasm vs. seriousness based on the string of posts you've made in this thread, and so with the lack of teal, I guessed and I guess I guessed wrong.

FarWestChicago
09-07-2007, 11:20 PM
Those are examples. TJ Surgery is a major procedure. This stuff helped him rehap quicker. Based on this reasoning I would assume you guys want Tylenol and Advil banned from locker rooms?No dude, you are the only one who wants all criminal behavior accepted. Nothing should be banned in your world. Players should be out in the field hooked up to IV lines and only disconnect them when they need to move to field a ball. I have never, ever seen anybody with less of a moral compass than you. Indeed, the Earth has no need of a magnetic field in your world.

santo=dorf
09-07-2007, 11:47 PM
HGH is a long term enhancer, RedBull is a short term enhancer. Bottom line they both enhance performance and should be treated the same.
So possessing Red Bull should be against the law?

Well, it would end those annoying commercials.

rowand33
09-07-2007, 11:50 PM
Ankiel responds to allegations:

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AvaGvhxjiCZ77ZxFGg9ukAwRvLYF?slug=ap-cardinals-ankiel-hgh&prov=ap&type=lgns

He says that the HGH was prescription, and he'd be glad to talk to major league baseball.


"Everything was legal," he said. "There was no violation of major league rules. There was no violation of any laws. At this point, if there's anything more to decide, major league baseball will look at it and let us know."


again, reign it in guys. at least wait for the facts before you condemn people.

If he took HGH legally and it wasn't an MLB banned substance when he took it, what's the issue?

Again:


I truly feel sorry for anyone that feels the Rick Ankiel story is tainted by this non-issue.

FarWestChicago
09-07-2007, 11:50 PM
So possessing Red Bull should be against the law?

Well, it would end those annoying commercials.No dude, he wants everything legalized. Read the whole body of his work. Nothing should be banned in his world. It's the only way to be "happenin'".

santo=dorf
09-07-2007, 11:56 PM
No dude, he wants everything legalized. Read the whole body of his work. Nothing should be banned in his world. It's the only way to be "happenin'".
Well apparently he has Ankiel on his side.
"There was no violation of any laws"

Really Ricky?

I couldn't help but lurk at an Angels' board and Cards' board today, and the blind defenders had the exact same excuse. "It wasn't against the rules."

:rolleyes:

FarWestChicago
09-08-2007, 12:05 AM
Well apparently he has Ankiel on his side.
"There was no violation of any laws"

Really Ricky?

I couldn't help but lurk at an Angels' board and Cards' board today, and the blind defenders had the exact same excuse. "It wasn't against the rules."

:rolleyes:Right on, Dorf. Can it get any more weak? You and I may disagree on some things, but we obviously believe you should have integrity and play the game, any game, right. :thumbsup:

rowand33
09-08-2007, 12:08 AM
Given the last few posts since mine, I'm going to repeat myself...

If he took HGH legally and it wasn't a banned substance when he took it, what's the issue?

I don't see one. If you have a problem with that scenario, please explain your viewpoint because I

voodoochile
09-08-2007, 12:13 AM
Given the last few posts since mine, I'm going to repeat myself...

If he took HGH legally and it wasn't a banned substance when he took it, what's the issue?

I don't see one. If you have a problem with that scenario, please explain your viewpoint because I

Legally, HGH has a very limited application at least as it has been recognized by the AMA. It isn't used for fixing baseball related injuries unless something has changed dramatically since the last time I looked.

South Side Irish
09-08-2007, 12:22 AM
Who's to say Barry wasn't using 'roids to rehab from nagging injuries. Does that make it OK?

Have you read "Game of Shadows?" What Bonds was (allegedly) doing to his body was terrifying. In addition to HGH, he was using almost 27 different kinds of horse tranquilizers and steroids in order expand his strength and recovery times. IF those allegations are true, then that's clearly cheating. Not much grey here. When his body size and numbers make a marked jump in 2000/2001, and Barry respond to the question "why do line drives that hit the wall not leave the park?" question with "ask God," such suspision is hardened, though of course not confirmed.

What did Ankiel do? He took a drug to recover from surgery. If people want to use a black and white approach to "drugs" then fine. But I just don't personally believe that many things can be looked at as easily. This "case" has lots of gray area. When it comes to "drugs," the truth is, most of us are on them. Whether its as minor as caffiene or acetometiphine (sp?!) or as major as pain-relieving drugs and muscle aids like creatine, many of us are on "drugs." Many of us rely on some sort of drug to get through pain, through the day, or stronger. It's a matter of personal opinion, really.

I just don't see what Ankiel did as wrong. He stopped taking them later that year, when recovery could have been complete. If more evidence comes up that Ankiel took drugs past '04, then I'll change my mind. That suspision is not hardened at all. His body type hasn't even changed.

Since the age of 17, Ankiel's power has been prodigious. His power streak isn't sudden or surprising, if you've followed him at all. Yes, I'm an Ankiel fan, so I wear colored lenses, but if you think I'm just a kool-aid drinking dope, you're wrong. Mark McGwire is a cheating ass, and I thought so in '97 when we traded for him. I actually give Sosa the benefit of the doubt, too. Don't know if he's clean, but I'm not some blowhard to thinks my guys are angels and everyone else sucks. I let Cub fans do that. :redneck

FarWestChicago
09-08-2007, 12:28 AM
Given the last few posts since mine, I'm going to repeat myself...

If he took HGH legally and it wasn't a banned substance when he took it, what's the issue?

I don't see one. If you have a problem with that scenario, please explain your viewpoint because IHey, there are people who agree with you!!

:nandrolone

You are my man rowand33. Join the Flubbie faithful. We love people like you who have no values. It's all about popularity. Come on down, my brother!

FedEx227
09-08-2007, 12:33 AM
Given the last few posts since mine, I'm going to repeat myself...

If he took HGH legally and it wasn't a banned substance when he took it, what's the issue?

I don't see one. If you have a problem with that scenario, please explain your viewpoint because I

Haha, he took them legally? In what sense? Because he paid a doctor money so he could rehab much quicker then a normal human body would without the aids of a controlled substance? Your reasoning is stupid.

No, it wasn't a banned substance at the time, but it was still a performance -enhancing drug. I don't think he should be suspended or thrown out of the league, but the respect I have for his comeback, etc is all but lost.

If you want to continue throwing your head in the sand because he had a prescription you can go right ahead. Unfortunately, I'd prefer my baseball played by human beings not science projects.

You're continued explination of it was prescribed to him shows just how ridiculous you and the defenders logic is. Just because it was prescribed doesn't make it okay. Do you know how easily I could obtain a Vicadin prescription? Am I in any pain right now? No. Am I in need of pain relief? No. But I can get it.

As I said before, prescription isn't exactly the holy grail. A quick flash of some money can get you just about anything you need. And if you don't think that's a fact then you REALLY need to pull your head out of the sand.

The fact of the matter is he used a controlled substance to gain an advantage by recovering from a major surgery much quicker then a normal man would. Plain and simple. I'm not calling for his head, but in my mind he's grouped with the cheaters, plain and simple. Maybe he didn't use it with that intention, but it still happened. Maybe Bonds didn't mean to rub cream all over his arms and forearms, but it still happened.

rowand33
09-08-2007, 12:46 AM
Hey, there are people who agree with you!!

:nandrolone

You are my man rowand33. Join the Flubbie faithful. We love people like you who have no values. It's all about populiarity. Come on down, my brother!

It's classy that you're taking personal shots at my moral code instead of responding to the question.

But really, insulting me just shows that you have no valid argument; maybe that's why the only argument against Ankiel has taken the form of throwing out phrases like "integrity of the game" and "cheater!"

If it wasn't a banned substance when he took it, and he took it with a legal prescription, then there's no issue. Plain and simple.

Now, if the guy took it to cheat, **** him. But as of right now, we have no reason to believe he did, aside for pure speculation and media sensationalism.

Seriously, explain your view point. If he took it legally when it wasn't banned, what's the problem?

I'm sure there are a TON of players that take creatine right now. Hell, I take creatine and I'm not even an athlete. Why do I take it? Because it enhances performance. I'm sure that a lot of players take it.
What if MLB banned it tomorrow, should we condemn players that took creatine today when it was legal and allowed by MLB?
Of course not.

No, I'm wrong. Let's come down on those guys. And let's crucify the guys that work out with trainers in the offseason to give them an advantage! Not everybody does that! And the guys that work with a nutritionist? **** them! The Babe did it on hot dogs!

So if the guy took it legally while it wasn't banned, how can you possibly come down on him?

I don't get it.

FedEx227
09-08-2007, 12:52 AM
It's classy that you're taking personal shots at my moral code instead of responding to the question.

But really, insulting me just shows that you have no valid argument; maybe that's why the only argument against Ankiel has taken the form of throwing out phrases like "integrity of the game" and "cheater!"

If it wasn't a banned substance when he took it, and he took it with a legal prescription, then there's no issue. Plain and simple.

Now, if the guy took it to cheat, **** him. But as of right now, we have no reason to believe he did, aside for pure speculation and media sensationalism.

Seriously, explain your view point. If he took it legally when it wasn't banned, what's the problem?

I'm sure there are a TON of players that take creatine right now. Hell, I take creatine and I'm not even an athlete. Why do I take it? Because it enhances performance. I'm sure that a lot of players take it.
What if MLB banned it tomorrow, should we condemn players that took creatine today when it was legal and allowed by MLB?
Of course not.

So if the guy took it legally while it wasn't banned, how can you possibly come down on him?

I don't get it.

Why are you comparing completely different things.

Creatine effects on a human body vs. HGH's effects on a human body.

They are two completely different subjects. HGH is 1,000 times more powerful because it is suppose to be used for severely under developed children, not 24-year old pitchers recovering from Tommy John.

Creatine Supplements are made specifically for athletes and have nowhere near the effect of HGH.

I took Creatine, I currently am on Whey Protein and haven't done Creatine in years. So don't try to give me a "you have no idea" thing... I've also had a friend dabble into HGH. They are a completely different world.


No, I'm wrong. Let's come down on those guys. And let's crucify the guys that work out with trainers in the offseason to give them an advantage! Not everybody does that! And the guys that work with a nutritionist? **** them! The Babe did it on hot dogs!

Again, that's available to EVERYONE legally. HGH isn't available to everyone legally. You can't go to a store or go to a training academy and get HGH. It's a CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE. Why can't you seem to understand that? Working out, eating right is NATURAL. HGH is not. The human body has no need for HGH outside of helping muscle growth in extreme cases.

voodoochile
09-08-2007, 12:54 AM
Anyone who thinks a prescription makes something acceptable should watch the Entourage episode where Drama gets a prescription for medical marijuana.

Even if we accept Ankiel's suggestion that he used it to speed up recovery (something it hasn't been approved for), is it a door we really want to open? How many guys are going to "twist an ankle" and get that prescription filled ASAP if they think they can get away with it.

Talk about a slippery slope. You'd effectively be legalizing HGH in the Majors...

:nandrolone
"Oh my knee... and my ankle... and my shoulder... I ache, doc. I ache everywhere."

South Side Irish
09-08-2007, 12:54 AM
Haha, he took them legally? In what sense? Because he paid a doctor money so he could rehab much quicker then a normal human body would without the aids of a controlled substance? Your reasoning is stupid.

No, it wasn't a banned substance at the time, but it was still a performance -enhancing drug. I don't think he should be suspended or thrown out of the league, but the respect I have for his comeback, etc is all but lost.

If you want to continue throwing your head in the sand because he had a prescription you can go right ahead. Unfortunately, I'd prefer my baseball played by human beings not science projects.

The fact of the matter is he used a controlled substance to gain an advantage by recovering from a major surgery much quicker then a normal man would. Plain and simple. I'm not calling for his head, but in my mind he's grouped with the cheaters, plain and simple. Maybe he didn't use it with that intention, but it still happened.

What? Who said he paid a doctor for a script? That's just pure speculation. He also raped goats and helped plan 9/11, while we're speculating.

And who said he was a science project? Bonds was a freaking science project. Again, did you really read about what he put into his body? That's freaky. And not "good freaky."

If you're views of people not using advanced science is consitent in all forms of human life, including treatments of various cancers, sicknesses, and other ailments, then fine. But if you're just drawing a line with thinking any form of supplement is "cheating," then you're unfairly picking and chosing.

This is nothing but speculation. Ankiel did nothing morally wrong. He did what many of us do - used medicine to heal more quickly. Is my head in the sand? Sure, think whatever you want. Some of you are so black and white when it comes to drugs, and I understand that. But I just personally think you need to look at cases more clearly. As with any percieved wrong doing, you must look at it on a case-to-case basis.

If you think putting ANY drug in your body is cheating, then fine. You'll have to understand that everything from Bonds' horsepills to Dye's cortizone shots is immorral and cheating. But not everyone "cheats" like Bonds allegedly cheats. There are shades of gray here, and I think people need to look into the story more.

rowand33
09-08-2007, 12:58 AM
What? Who said he paid a doctor for a script? That's just pure speculation. He also raped goats and helped plan 9/11, while we're speculating.

And who said he was a science project? Bonds was a freaking science project. Again, did you really read about what he put into his body? That's freaky. And not "good freaky."

If you're views of people not using advanced science is consitent in all forms of human life, including treatments of various cancers, sicknesses, and other ailments, then fine. But if you're just drawing a line with thinking any form of supplement is "cheating," then you're unfairly picking and chosing.

This is nothing but speculation. Ankiel did nothing morally wrong. He did what many of us do - used medicine to heal more quickly. Is my head in the sand? Sure, think whatever you want. Some of you are so black and white when it comes to drugs, and I understand that. But I just personally think you need to look at cases more clearly. As with any percieved wrong doing, you must look at it on a case-to-case basis.

If you think putting ANY drug in your body is cheating, then fine. You'll have to understand that everything from Bonds' horsepills to Dye's cortizone shots is immorral and cheating. But not everyone "cheats" like Bonds allegedly cheats. There are shades of gray here, and I think people need to look into the story more.

Said better than I could.

DeadMoney
09-08-2007, 12:59 AM
The fact of the matter is he used a controlled substance to gain an advantage by recovering from a major surgery much quicker then a normal man would. Plain and simple.

Let's go over this:
- He has re-constructive elbow surger threatens his career and his livlihood.
- He is among the top athletes in the world and to recover quickly and more effectively, his doctor (or maybe even his team, and team doctors) suggests and prescribes HGH.

It's not banned by MLB at the time. It's not illegal to take it with a prescription. He took it to recover, with a prescription. What is the issue?

If you were a construction worker with the same injury and a doctor prescribed the same treatment to you, is it wrong for you to take it too; are you too a cheater then? Just because he was suggested to take it by his doctor for recovery purposes, people want to group this guy in with the voluntary steroid users. Are you kidding me?

If ANYONE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD had an injury like this (or of any kind), regardless of occupation, you'd ask the doctor to get you better as quickly as possible! So you're calling this guy a cheater for that? Crazy.

voodoochile
09-08-2007, 12:59 AM
What? Who said he paid a doctor for a script? That's just pure speculation. He also raped goats and helped plan 9/11, while we're speculating.

From the article:

The New York Daily News reported Friday that Ankiel received a 12-month supply of human growth hormone in 2004 from a Florida pharmacy that was part of a national illegal prescription drug-distribution operation, citing records its reporters saw. That Orlando outfit, Signature Pharmacy, has been implicated in a steroids investigation run by Albany County (N.Y.) District Attorney P. David Soares, which has resulted in 22 indictments and several Florida clinic raids.

Doesn't sound like he got it from the Mayo Clinic now does it? Someone got paid because they were dispensing this stuff illegally or they wouldn't have been in business.

voodoochile
09-08-2007, 01:01 AM
Let's go over this:
- He has re-constructive elbow surger threatens his career and his livlihood.
- He is among the top athletes in the world and to recover quickly and more effectively, his doctor (or maybe even his team, and team doctors) suggests and prescribes HGH.

It's not banned by MLB. It's not illegal to take it for recovery purposes. He took it to recover. What is the issue?

If you were a construction worker with the same injury and a doctor prescribed the same treatment to you, is it wrong for you to take it too; are you too a cheater then? Just because he was suggested to take it by his doctor for recovery purposes, people want to group this guy in with the voluntary steroid users. Are you kidding me?

If ANYONE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD had an injury like this (or of any kind), regardless of occupation, you'd ask the doctor to get you better as quickly as possible! So you're calling this guy a cheater for that? Crazy.

:tool
"Um... just a minute there... we may have turned a blind eye to all the steroids that have been going on in the past 20 years, but there is no way in heck any team or team doctor prescriped these drugs... at least I hope no one was stupid enough to do that... God save us all if I am wrong."

South Side Irish
09-08-2007, 01:02 AM
How many guys are going to "twist an ankle" and get that prescription filled ASAP if they think they can get away with it.


So you would refuse treatment to an individual because others might potentially take advantage of that help? Won't those same players just find another way to cheat? Is that fair to the individual who needs help?

If you want to get technical, isn't reconstructive elbow surgery unfair? I mean, if this guy has brand new elbow ligaments and mine have been abused since the bronco leagues, is that fair?

You need to use common sense here. HGH for a sprained ankle? Give me a break, that's cheating and we all know it. But for a reconstructed elbow? That sounds like perfectly legal, moral, and fair medicine to help somebody recover. Just my opinion. And if anyone has a legal, fair, and justifiable reason for it, then I'll think the same thing.

Taking HGH for no medical reason and supplementing it with 27 different kinds of crazy and sometimes illegal medicines might not be legal, fair, or justifiable.

FarWestChicago
09-08-2007, 01:04 AM
It's classy that you're taking personal shots at my moral code instead of responding to the question. No, what's classy is you being ass handed by every other poster on this board with any sense of right versus wrong. But, you can just keep blaming us for your complete lack of any moral conviction. And you have inmate #4486902 (aka South Side Irish on your side - it's funny how easy it is to spot the guys who have been cracked by the man). You can always call on us the day you end up facing a judge in a serious situation since you don't think laws should apply to you.

voodoochile
09-08-2007, 01:05 AM
What? Who said he paid a doctor for a script? That's just pure speculation. He also raped goats and helped plan 9/11, while we're speculating.

And who said he was a science project? Bonds was a freaking science project. Again, did you really read about what he put into his body? That's freaky. And not "good freaky."

If you're views of people not using advanced science is consitent in all forms of human life, including treatments of various cancers, sicknesses, and other ailments, then fine. But if you're just drawing a line with thinking any form of supplement is "cheating," then you're unfairly picking and chosing.

This is nothing but speculation. Ankiel did nothing morally wrong. He did what many of us do - used medicine to heal more quickly. Is my head in the sand? Sure, think whatever you want. Some of you are so black and white when it comes to drugs, and I understand that. But I just personally think you need to look at cases more clearly. As with any percieved wrong doing, you must look at it on a case-to-case basis.

If you think putting ANY drug in your body is cheating, then fine. You'll have to understand that everything from Bonds' horsepills to Dye's cortizone shots is immorral and cheating. But not everyone "cheats" like Bonds allegedly cheats. There are shades of gray here, and I think people need to look into the story more.

Hey, I hope you are right. I really do, but like it or not, it's not in the same category as aspirin, Tylenol, Ibuprofen or even that cortisone shot Dye and many athletes get. None of those items help build muscle mass. If you can't see the difference, then honestly I don't know what else to say other than...

Denial... it's not just a river in Egypt...

DeadMoney
09-08-2007, 01:05 AM
"Um... just a minute there... we may have turned a blind eye to all the steroids that have been going on in the past 20 years, but there is no way in heck any team or team doctor prescriped these drugs... at least I hope no one was stupid enough to do that... God save us all if I am wrong."

It was more of a reference to team doctors suggesting it, not prescribing it (even though it may have sounded that way).

EDIT: And it's not like teams are going to say, "fine, take your time, we don't need you for a while." Athletics are some of the most competetive businesses in the world, and if a team thought you (or your doctors you choosed to go to, or were possibly sent to) weren't doing everything in your/their power to get you back as quick as possible, they'd have you gone in a second.

South Side Irish
09-08-2007, 01:06 AM
If ANYONE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD had an injury like this (or of any kind), regardless of occupation, you'd ask the doctor to get you better as quickly as possible! So you're calling this guy a cheater for that? Crazy.

Exactly what I'm saying. I tore several ligaments and muscles in my foot/ankle 2 years ago. I asked the doctor to help get healed as quickly as possible. I guess the teaching world should be appaled that I used something to heal more quickly than normal.

I also used cough drops last week when I had a sore throat. I guess my profession should ban me for life because I enhanced my performance, allowing me to speak for 30 minutes when a normal, untreated teacher could have only spoken for 22.

FarWestChicago
09-08-2007, 01:11 AM
Exactly what I'm saying. I tore several ligaments and muscles in my foot/ankle 2 years ago. I asked the doctor to help get healed as quickly as possible. I guess the teaching world should be appaled that I used something to heal more quickly than normal.

I also used cough drops last week when I had a sore throat. I guess my profession should ban me for life because I enhanced my performance, allowing me to speak for 30 minutes when a normal, untreated teacher could have only spoken for 22.Oh please. Get off your high horse. You have no moral compass. You have no conception of right and wrong. We can all agree on that. Indeed, I don't think you would disagree. So what. You can **** off on anything but your limited little world. I think we should be able to agree on that, too.

voodoochile
09-08-2007, 01:13 AM
So you would refuse treatment to an individual because others might potentially take advantage of that help? Won't those same players just find another way to cheat? Is that fair to the individual who needs help?

If you want to get technical, isn't reconstructive elbow surgery unfair? I mean, if this guy has brand new elbow ligaments and mine have been abused since the bronco leagues, is that fair?

You need to use common sense here. HGH for a sprained ankle? Give me a break, that's cheating and we all know it. But for a reconstructed elbow? That sounds like perfectly legal, moral, and fair medicine to help somebody recover. Just my opinion. And if anyone has a legal, fair, and justifiable reason for it, then I'll think the same thing.

Taking HGH for no medical reason and supplementing it with 27 different kinds of crazy and sometimes illegal medicines might not be legal, fair, or justifiable.

Okay... did you read the article? Did you see the place that was dispensing this stuff? It's effectively a black market operation. Do I think others would then fake an injury to take advantage of that black market situation? You bet your sweet ass I do. I think they are already doing it. I bet there are more names that are going to surface from this little scheme be that in baseball or other sports. I'd bet good money on it in fact.

Once again, HGH has NOT been approved for this type of use. So ANYONE taking it for the purpose of injury recovery is by definition bending the rules or outright cheating and risking a felony conviction to do it to boot.

How many more names have to surface where no injury was necessary to cheat to get ahead?

Bonds, McGwire, ShamME*, Palmeiro, Glaus, Canseco, etc.

And those are just the stars and all they had to do was buy it. Now if they could have acquired it "legally" why would they have risked their good names? Open that door and every borderline college/HS level player is going to run right through it. That's just human nature.

:scrawny kid trying to make the majors:
"Let's see, I can go become Al Bundy or I can go become Barry Bonds. Hey doc, can you take a look at this ankle I think I twisted it. Might need some surgery..."

South Side Irish
09-08-2007, 01:16 AM
Hey, I hope you are right. I really do, but like it or not, it's not in the same category as aspirin, Tylenol, Ibuprofen or even that cortisone shot Dye and many athletes get. None of those items help build muscle mass.

Denial... it's not just a river in Egypt...

I'm not an idiot. I realize the difference between those things and HGH. But those smaller things give you an advantage over whatever your idea of "normal" human healing or whatever is. I have no idea what HGH is used for. Lots of players may use it to heal or recover from major, high risk surgeries, but will any willingly admit that? Hell no! They'd be lambasted by posters, fans, and pundits who assume that every perscription was paid for, false, or who just plain assert that they cheat.

And this where the whole discussion about "cheating" ends. If you look beyond "black and white" and into the shades of gray, you're in denial, defeding a cheat, or just stupid, as one of our own moderators claims. Isn't that wonderful? I wish life was so clear and easy as to fit into black and white categories and make it easy to solve every problem.

I'm not saying you're wrong at all. I'm just stating what I believe. I deny nothing, and fully realize that Ankiel could be just another cheating athlete lieing to us. In the mean time, that's just speculation, and refuting such unfair speculation is not denial.

rowand33
09-08-2007, 01:16 AM
No, what's classy is you being ass handed by every other poster on this board with any sense of right versus wrong. But, you can just keep blaming us for your complete lack of any moral conviction. And you have inmate #4486902 (aka South Side Irish on your side - it's funny how easy it is to spot the guys who have been cracked by the man). You can always call on us the day you end up facing a judge in a serious situation since you don't think laws should apply to you.

I see you're still incapable of explaining to me how exactly legally taking an unbanned substance is morally wrong.

C'mon, explain your viewpoint instead of taking pot shots at me. I'm not doing that to the people on here that have a different opinion than me.

FarWestChicago
09-08-2007, 01:17 AM
Okay... did you read the article? Did you see the place that was dispensing this stuff? It's effectively a black market operation. Do I think others would then fake an injury to take advantage of that black market situation? You bet your sweet ass I do. I think they are already doing it. I bet there are more names that are going to surface from this little scheme be that in baseball or other sports. I'd bet good money on it in fact.

Once again, HGH has NOT been approved for this type of use. So ANYONE taking it for the purpose of injury recovery is by definition bending the rules or outright cheating and risking a felony conviction to do it to boot.

How many more names have to surface where no injury was necessary to cheat to get ahead?

Bonds, McGwire, ShamME*, Palmeiro, Glaus, Canseco, etc.

And those are just the stars and all they had to do was buy it. Now if they could have acquired it "legally" why would they have risked their good names? Open that door and every borderline college/HS level player is going to run right through it. That's just human nature.

:scrawny kid trying to make the majors:
"Let's see, I can go become Al Bundy or I can go become Barry Bonds. Hey doc, can you take a look at this ankle I think I twisted it. Might need some surgery..."LMAO, Voo. Let's see what the devoid of ethics, silly apologists come up with now. :roflmao:

FedEx227
09-08-2007, 01:18 AM
Ugh. I'm done with this argument.

Somewhere along the line people will realize playing a professional sport is a privilege, not a right.

He was hurt and had reconstructive elbow surgery? Join the line. There have been countless guys who have come back naturally to have great careers and there have been some who couldn't recover and had to live a normal life. Too bad.

Ankiel made his choice, he decided to take a controlled substance to get back. Fair enough, he made his bed and now he must lie in it.

If he didn't come back it wouldn't ruin his livelihood. There are still plenty of jobs that 98% of us have to do day in and day out. He could get an office job or work at a Fast-Food Resurtant.

It's not his god-given right to play baseball. It's a privilege he has been given through a life time of hard-work, luck and determination.

But when his privilege was suddenly taken away from him, he reached for a controlled substance instead of going back to what got him to this privilege. Sad, but true.

Oh and cut this legal prescription crap. Signature Pharmacy has been linked to 15 WWE wrestlers and countless MLB players for illegal substances. Do you honestly think that they LEGALLY filled Ankiel's presciption.

Yes, we traffic and sell illegal drugs, but hey this man has a prescription, great. If Ankiel's stuff was legal he could have gone to any place in the country, but instead decided to go to Signature Pharmacy.

Granted, it was 8 miles from his home, but something tells me his physician or the Pharmacy could have told him to stay out of trouble and go to another other pharmacy in the country. I'd venture to guess there was another place closer to his home? I'm sure you can find a couple of pharmacies in Jupiter, Florida with a little less baggage to fill your prescription in then one that was supplying countless wrestlers and baseball players with HGH and steriods from 2003-2006.

FarWestChicago
09-08-2007, 01:20 AM
I see you're still incapable of explaining to me how exactly legally taking an unbanned substance is morally wrong.

C'mon, explain your viewpoint instead of taking pot shots at me. I'm not doing that to the people on here that have a different opinion than me.Uh hello, you are an idiot. I'm not the one with the problem. You have no concept of right and wrong and don't even get it. When you get the least bit of a clue come back and talk again. Just stop your tired crap, please. The whole Ben Johnson was the man thing is so 70's. :rolleyes:

South Side Irish
09-08-2007, 01:20 AM
Okay... did you read the article? Did you see the place that was dispensing this stuff? It's effectively a black market operation. Do I think others would then fake an injury to take advantage of that black market situation? You bet your sweet ass I do. I think they are already doing it. I bet there are more names that are going to surface from this little scheme be that in baseball or other sports. I'd bet good money on it in fact.

Once again, HGH has NOT been approved for this type of use. So ANYONE taking it for the purpose of injury recovery is by definition bending the rules or outright cheating and risking a felony conviction to do it to boot.

How many more names have to surface where no injury was necessary to cheat to get ahead?

Bonds, McGwire, ShamME*, Palmeiro, Glaus, Canseco, etc.

And those are just the stars and all they had to do was buy it. Now if they could have acquired it "legally" why would they have risked their good names? Open that door and every borderline college/HS level player is going to run right through it. That's just human nature.

:scrawny kid trying to make the majors:
"Let's see, I can go become Al Bundy or I can go become Barry Bonds. Hey doc, can you take a look at this ankle I think I twisted it. Might need some surgery..."

I taught at a high school where 3 coaches/teachers were accused and eventually fired for inappropriate relationships with students. While I was trying to leave that hell hole, finding a job was impossible because I grouped in unfairly with those people.

Assuming everyone who ever did business with them is guilty is wrong, just as assuming every teacher that taught at my school porked a student. Is it possible, hell yes, but I don't think that suspicisionis hard enough to convict Ankiel of illegally obtaining HGH. It's just wrong to.

Nellie_Fox
09-08-2007, 01:20 AM
You just don't get it West. Ballplayers chew gum to relax, help them concentrate, and keep their mouth from drying out. Therefore, gum is a performance enhancer. If you criticize players for using HGH or roids while there are guys chewing gum and you give them a pass, you are a hypocrite! There is no black and white (like, oh, I don't know, maybe the criminal law,) it's just light gray and dark gray!

Edit: I really hope I didn't need to use teal here.

South Side Irish
09-08-2007, 01:22 AM
Uh hello, you are an idiot.

Seriously? Is that cool? Disagree with him if you want, but why do you have to call names. I've seen posters with far less posts get banned for that.

FarWestChicago
09-08-2007, 01:23 AM
Oh and cut this legal prescription crap. Signature Pharmacy has been linked to 15 WWE wrestlers and countless MLB players for illegal substances. Do you honestly think that they LEGALLY filled Ankiel's presciption.

Yes, we traffic and sell illegal drugs, but hey this man has a prescription, great. If Ankiel's stuff was legal he could have gone to any place in the country, but instead decided to go to Signature Pharmacy.

Granted, it was 8 miles from his home, but something tells me his physician or the Pharmacy could have told him to stay out of trouble and go to another other pharmacy in the country. I'd venture to guess there was another place closer to his home? I'm sure you can find a couple of pharmacies in Jupiter, Florida with a little less baggage to fill your prescription in then one that was supplying countless wrestlers and baseball players with HGH and steriods from 2003-2006.This is the best apologist burn I've seen on this site in, well, I don't know how long. FedEX, you rock!

FedEx227
09-08-2007, 01:23 AM
You just don't get it West. Ballplayers chew gum to relax, help them concentrate, and keep their mouth from drying out. Therefore, gum is a performance enhancer. If you criticize players for using HGH or roids while there are guys chewing gum and you give them a pass, you are a hypocrite! There is no black and white (like, oh, I don't know, maybe the criminal law,) it's just light gray and dark gray!

Edit: I really hope I didn't need to use teal here.

Just as the FDA has rules in place for taking controller substances out of context, I'm sure they have a rule for taking gum to relax. Especially sugar-less, imagine relieving stress WITHOUT added calories. Oh my.

South Side Irish
09-08-2007, 01:27 AM
You just don't get it West. Ballplayers chew gum to relax, help them concentrate, and keep their mouth from drying out. Therefore, gum is a performance enhancer. If you criticize players for using HGH or roids while there are guys chewing gum and you give them a pass, you are a hypocrite! There is no black and white (like, oh, I don't know, maybe the criminal law,) it's just light gray and dark gray!

Edit: I really hope I didn't need to use teal here.

Why be condesending? Some posters in this thread have argued that players should be clean of any performance enhancers. I'm not justifying cheating with batting gloves, eye black, resin bags, or chewing gum. Why be so rude? I'm simply defending the idea that ballplayers can look for ways to get an edge and succeed, and having medical treatment that helps them heal faster is one of them.

Palmerio, Canseco, Bonds and others didn't have any medical reason for taking it. Ankiel may have. I personally don't see how it's so "stupid" to think that a doctor may have thought that HGH could help somebody heal quickly from reconstructive surgery. Then again, I'm no doctor and don't know a damn think about medicine. :redneck

FarWestChicago
09-08-2007, 01:27 AM
Seriously? Is that cool? Disagree with him if you want, but why do you have to call names. I've seen posters with far less posts get banned for that.There are limits. How stupid does one have to be before they can be called an idiot? How many times can you be completely ethically bankrupt and declare 1+1=7? You know what, you are an idiot too for defending him. Get a clue.

And I don't mean that in an insulting way. You just deserve it. :smile:

South Side Irish
09-08-2007, 01:29 AM
This is the best apologist burn I've seen on this site in, well, I don't know how long. FedEX, you rock!

Sure, because we know all of the story. Internet posters have solved the problem.

Who needs government? Next up: the War in Iraq!!!

voodoochile
09-08-2007, 01:29 AM
I'm not an idiot. I realize the difference between those things and HGH. But those smaller things give you an advantage over whatever your idea of "normal" human healing or whatever is. I have no idea what HGH is used for. Lots of players may use it to heal or recover from major, high risk surgeries, but will any willingly admit that? Hell no! They'd be lambasted by posters, fans, and pundits who assume that every perscription was paid for, false, or who just plain assert that they cheat.

And this where the whole discussion about "cheating" ends. If you look beyond "black and white" and into the shades of gray, you're in denial, defeding a cheat, or just stupid, as one of our own moderators claims. Isn't that wonderful? I wish life was so clear and easy as to fit into black and white categories and make it easy to solve every problem.

I'm not saying you're wrong at all. I'm just stating what I believe. I deny nothing, and fully realize that Ankiel could be just another cheating athlete lieing to us. In the mean time, that's just speculation, and refuting such unfair speculation is not denial.

Sorry, should have said cough drops, not Tylenol or Ibuprofen...:rolleyes:

People don't want ridiculous analogies used against them, they shouldn't bring them up.

The vast majority of doctors working would never prescribe HGH for that particular use. There are plenty of them who will, but everyone who does risks their medical license to do so.

FedEx said it perfectly. Playing baseball is a privilege not a right. Ankiel doesn't want his name dragged through the mud well, he simply shouldn't have bent the rules to gain an unfair competitive advantage and like it or not, for whatever reason he took the HGH, that is what he did. If it was to recover faster than other players are allowed to, it's wrong. If it was to build muscle mass and become more than he was before it's worse. There's your shades of gray and both of them are pretty dark.

Nellie_Fox
09-08-2007, 01:30 AM
I'm not justifying cheating with batting gloves, eye black, resin bags, or chewing gum. Why be so rude? I'm simply defending the idea that ballplayers can look for ways to get an edge and succeed, and having medical treatment that helps them heal faster is one of them.You are the one who made a comparison to taking a throat lozenge so you could teach longer, not me.

FarWestChicago
09-08-2007, 01:30 AM
Sure, because we know all of the story. Internet posters have solved the problem.

Who needs government? Next up: the War in Iraq!!!Bad move. See you in a bit for your political comment.

rowand33
09-08-2007, 01:42 AM
FedEx said it perfectly. Playing baseball is a privilege not a right. Ankiel doesn't want his name dragged through the mud well, he simply shouldn't have bent the rules to gain an unfair competitive advantage and like it or not, for whatever reason he took the HGH, that is what he did. If it was to recover faster than other players are allowed to, it's wrong. If it was to build muscle mass and become more than he was before it's worse. There's your shades of gray and both of them are pretty dark.

What rule did he bend?

If he obtained HGH legally, not the rules of the US government.

And since it wasn't a banned substance, he didn't bend any of MLBs rules.

I've stretched myself so far past my original intent... and that's my own fault.

Bottom line:

Rick Ankiel took HGH. He says he did it legally. You and I don't know if that's true or not as of right now.

If it isn't true, **** him.

If it is true and he did take it legally, what did he do wrong? He didn't break any laws and he didn't break any MLB rules. Who are you to judge?

That's my point. Plain and simple.

Call me an idiot for not seeing this "higher code of ethics" that some of you see. Fine. Whatever. Agree to disagree I guess.

edit:

And y'know what West? You can say whatever you want about my ethics and my moral code...

Personally

I think it's pretty unethical to ban somebody on a technicality just because they've disagreed with you all night.

That's just me though.

Nellie_Fox
09-08-2007, 02:10 AM
And since it wasn't a banned substance, he didn't bend any of MLBs rules....If it is true and he did take it legally, what did he do wrong? He didn't break any laws and he didn't break any MLB rules. Who are you to judge?I'm doing some further digging since I don't trust Wikipedia as a final authority, but I'm pretty certain that HGH is on the MLB banned list, they just don't have a test for it.

Edit: Well, yes it is on the banned list, but not until after the 2004 season.

getonbckthr
09-08-2007, 04:16 PM
No dude, you are the only one who wants all criminal behavior accepted. Nothing should be banned in your world. Players should be out in the field hooked up to IV lines and only disconnect them when they need to move to field a ball. I have never, ever seen anybody with less of a moral compass than you. Indeed, the Earth has no need of a magnetic field in your world.

No dude, he wants everything legalized. Read the whole body of his work. Nothing should be banned in his world. It's the only way to be "happenin'".
Please refer to Post #52 I believe it is. If you haven't noticed I take the opposite side of the majority on alot of issues here. This next statement might be a bannable offense as its so insulting (:D:) WSI = Woody Paige therefor I take the Skip Bayless approach. Discussions take place due to a Devil's Advocate being involved. How much of a discussion would there be if every post agreed with the previous?
I see you're still incapable of explaining to me how exactly legally taking an unbanned substance is morally wrong.

C'mon, explain your viewpoint instead of taking pot shots at me. I'm not doing that to the people on here that have a different opinion than me.
Well technically sleeping with your 3rd cousin is not incest but don't you think its morally wrong?

FarWestChicago
09-08-2007, 05:13 PM
This next statement might be a bannable offense as its so insulting (:D:) WSI = Woody Paige therefor I take the Skip Bayless approach. Discussions take place due to a Devil's Advocate being involved. How much of a discussion would there be if every post agreed with the previous?That actually makes some sense. You are the Skip Clueless of the criminal set.

:clueless

I would have put a cap in his ass, too!!

getonbckthr
09-08-2007, 05:22 PM
That actually makes some sense. You are the Skip Clueless of the criminal set.

:clueless

I would have put a cap in his ass, too!!
**** Off, Michelle control your husband:D: kidding kidding

FarWestChicago
09-08-2007, 05:31 PM
**** Off, Michelle control your husband:D: kidding kidding:roflmao:

jabrch
09-08-2007, 05:36 PM
This Signature Pharmacy business seems to be huge. They supplied to MLB, NFL, and WWE. Makes you wonder how many other companies like this exist with more famous athletes using HGH without the public's knowledge. Thanks to MLB and it's PA, we really have no idea if Ankiel is using or not.

I've actually purchased drugs from Signature Pharmacy. (legally) They run a nice business in speciality drugs. It appears they also run a nice business in dealing steroids illegally.

jabrch
09-08-2007, 05:40 PM
Could this be any less of a story?

Seriously. Don't get swayed by this people, this is just the media trying to take something beautfiul and turn it ugly. I'm shocked mariotti didn't break this story.

This is how I understand it:

He took a non-banned substance to try to salvage his career from the scrap heap; all known information leads us to logically conclude he stopped taking it when it became a banned substance.

Any speculation he may still be taking it is just that, speculation.

I truly feel sorry for anyone that feels the Rick Ankiel story is tainted by this non-issue.


You can get a perscription for Marijuana or Cocaine also - in some circumstances. But that doesn't make it legal just because you have a perscription. If a doctor writes you the perscription for any reason other than need, it is still illegal. By all accounts, that's what this is.

There's nothing "beautiful" about this. It is a doctor who has been a suspect for a long time at a pharmacy that is known to illegally distribute drugs selling to a person using them who has no real need, and an illegally obtained perscription.

jabrch
09-08-2007, 07:00 PM
Every doctor doesn't do everything the same. I have diabetes my doctor chose Glucophage opposed to Insulin.

But he wouldn't perscribe Vicodin for your diabetes...that's the problem here.

jabrch
09-08-2007, 07:01 PM
HGH is a long term enhancer, RedBull is a short term enhancer. Bottom line they both enhance performance and should be treated the same.

I'd nominate this for dumbest post EVER. No offense getonobckthr - but this is preposterous.

hsnterprize
09-08-2007, 07:51 PM
Here is my thing. Its not known if it was illegal or not. HGH is legal with a prescription for a real cause. It is entirely possible he had a legit prescription for it. Odds are no, but its still possible. This is one of those Im reserving judgement until all the facts come out.I'm not trying to sound naive about this, but I'm going to do the same thing. If he took the stuff back a couple of years ago, and then stopped taking it when MLB banned it, then why is this a story now? It would be one thing if he were caught taking a banned substance NOW, but as far as I'm concerned, if anyone wanted to try to catch Ankiel with his "hands in the cookie jar", they waited way too late. No one would've cared about this if he were the same pitcher who couldn't hit the side of a barn if he were 5 feet in front of it. But now that he's almost single-handedly put the Cardinals back into the playoff race, it's a story. Please...when you catch him doing something illegal now, then let me know. Otherwise, it's a crap story.

The sad point is that an otherwise good story gets tainted because Ankiel's name is associated with this stuff.

jabrch
09-08-2007, 08:30 PM
The sad point is that an otherwise good story gets tainted because Ankiel's name is associated with this stuff.

No - the story is tainted because Ankiel associates with this particular doctor who is known to be involved in illegally perscribing drugs to pro athletes and because Ankiel used HGH for something other than its intent. It really is that simple.

ilsox7
09-08-2007, 09:18 PM
I'd nominate this for dumbest post EVER. No offense getonobckthr - but this is preposterous.

It really says something when someone comes up with what may be the worst post ever on WSI, but I think I'd agree with you on this one. Simply :?:.

It's akin to someone saying, "Eating steak will make me stronger b/c of the protein, so there is no difference between that steak and injecting artificial hormones into my body." It just boggles the mind that people think these thoughts.

getonbckthr
09-08-2007, 09:29 PM
But he wouldn't perscribe Vicodin for your diabetes...that's the problem here.

I'd nominate this for dumbest post EVER. No offense getonobckthr - but this is preposterous.
I believe its post #52. Thank you.

getonbckthr
09-08-2007, 09:30 PM
It really says something when someone comes up with what may be the worst post ever on WSI, but I think I'd agree with you on this one. Simply :?:.

It's akin to someone saying, "Eating steak will make me stronger b/c of the protein, so there is no difference between that steak and injecting artificial hormones into my body." It just boggles the mind that people think these thoughts.
Let me direct you to post #52.

South Side Irish
09-08-2007, 10:59 PM
No - the story is tainted because Ankiel associates with this particular doctor who is known to be involved in illegally perscribing drugs to pro athletes

Is that true? Was that doctor under investigation or suspision 3 years ago? And if so, was that public knowledge? Once again, just pure speculation. It might be a very strong link, but it's only speculation. If jabrch is telling the truth, then maybe its possible that people in Florida consider that pharmacy a legitimate business - or did 3-4 years ago.

jabrch
09-08-2007, 11:55 PM
Is that true? Was that doctor under investigation or suspision 3 years ago? And if so, was that public knowledge? Once again, just pure speculation. It might be a very strong link, but it's only speculation. If jabrch is telling the truth, then maybe its possible that people in Florida consider that pharmacy a legitimate business - or did 3-4 years ago.

Wrong - it is not "just pure speculation".

From NY Daily News

According to the FDA, prescriptions of HGH are limited to adults with serious hormone deficiencies caused by pituitary tumors and conditions such as AIDS "wasting" disease. Doctors have latitude with how they prescribe some drugs, but not with HGH, said Gary Wadler, an associate professor of medicine at NYU and a committee member with the World Anti-Doping Agency.


Look up William Gogan - He leads Palm Beach County in Malpractice claims paid out.

Look up THARC, Woodward and Ankiel - See if you can find a connection.

IlliniSox4Life
09-09-2007, 04:59 AM
For all those that don't quite understand what is wrong with this:

HGH is not a drug that has many uses. There is a very limited number of uses that it should be legally prescribed for, and none of those are anything close to something that a baseball player would be recovering from. It is something that should be used only under EXTREME conditions, and a normally healthy athlete trying to recover from an awful injury would not qualify as extreme.

It is a drug that should be used for people who are trying to cope with things like birth defects and trying to lead a normal life - not for people who are leading normal lives and trying to lead super-human lives.

Regardless of the fact that somebody obtains a prescription from whatever source, it is a last-ditch effort that shouldn't be used unless absolutely necessary. And in the world of sports when somebody is recovering from an injury, it is never necessary.

TornLabrum
09-09-2007, 08:16 AM
As I recall, Judy Garland, Marilyn Monroe, Elvis Presley, and countless other celebrities who eventually ODed on drugs for which they had prescriptions.

Just because it's prescribed by some doctor who is willing to compromise his/her ethics for a few bucks doesn't make it legal or ethical. After reading some of the posts by the Ankiel apologists here, one wonders whatever happened to the moral compass that used to guide most non-criminals.

DumpJerry
09-09-2007, 10:06 AM
I believe its post #52. Thank you.

Let me direct you to post #52.
How big of you. You nominate your own post as the most preposterous/worst in the history of WSI.:thumbsup: Very selfless.

jabrch
09-09-2007, 10:51 AM
For all those that don't quite understand what is wrong with this:

HGH is not a drug that has many uses. There is a very limited number of uses that it should be legally prescribed for, and none of those are anything close to something that a baseball player would be recovering from. It is something that should be used only under EXTREME conditions, and a normally healthy athlete trying to recover from an awful injury would not qualify as extreme.

It is a drug that should be used for people who are trying to cope with things like birth defects and trying to lead a normal life - not for people who are leading normal lives and trying to lead super-human lives.

Regardless of the fact that somebody obtains a prescription from whatever source, it is a last-ditch effort that shouldn't be used unless absolutely necessary. And in the world of sports when somebody is recovering from an injury, it is never necessary.

That's much better explained than I could have done it.

getonbckthr
09-09-2007, 11:37 AM
How big of you. You nominate your own post as the most preposterous/worst in the history of WSI.:thumbsup: Very selfless.
Do people read threads anymore or just post based on someone else's response to it?

South Side Irish
09-09-2007, 02:21 PM
As I recall, Judy Garland, Marilyn Monroe, Elvis Presley, and countless other celebrities who eventually ODed on drugs for which they had prescriptions.

Just because it's prescribed by some doctor who is willing to compromise his/her ethics for a few bucks doesn't make it legal or ethical. After reading some of the posts by the Ankiel apologists here, one wonders whatever happened to the moral compass that used to guide most non-criminals.

I don't lack a moral compass, TL. You may disagree with my openmindedness on this controversy, but maybe that's just the idealist in me. Being accused of being too considerate or curious about the actions of the accused is nothing new to me. I understand if it frustrates you, but I've never absolved Ankiel of anything. I've only questioned the reasons why he could have done HGH, and have tried to find some amount of balance in all of the accusations and support. If that desire to just know more is showing a "broken moral compass," then I'm sorry to disappoint. I'm just not ready to convict anyone of wrong-doing so quickly into a situation.

And once again, for the record: I know nothing about HGH. I have no idea why its prescribed, or why somebody would take it after surgery. And I don't purport to know after reading a couple of articles or medical websites, either. Once again, my apologies for not jumping onto the moral highground just because everyone else does, or says I should.

TornLabrum
09-09-2007, 02:31 PM
I don't lack a moral compass, TL. You may disagree with my openmindedness on this controversy, but maybe that's just the idealist in me. Being accused of being too considerate or curious about the actions of the accused is nothing new to me. I understand if it frustrates you, but I've never absolved Ankiel of anything. I've only questioned the reasons why he could have done HGH, and have tried to find some amount of balance in all of the accusations and support. If that desire to just know more is showing a "broken moral compass," then I'm sorry to disappoint. I'm just not ready to convict anyone of wrong-doing so quickly into a situation.

And once again, for the record: I know nothing about HGH. I have no idea why its prescribed, or why somebody would take it after surgery. And I don't purport to know after reading a couple of articles or medical websites, either. Once again, my apologies for not jumping onto the moral highground just because everyone else does, or says I should.

Maybe before you comment then, you (a) learn the history of the pharmacy involved, and (b) learn about what conditions warrant use of HGH (none of which fit Ankiel's situation.

I won't pre-convict anybody here, and I didn't name you in particular since I was talking about those here who have excused the use of steroids and HGH (and they know who they are), Ankiel's situation being only the latest in a series of examples going back several years. I'm commenting on those who would have no problem with Ankiel even if he is guilty as hell.

beckett21
09-09-2007, 02:32 PM
Sorry, should have said cough drops, not Tylenol or Ibuprofen...:rolleyes:

People don't want ridiculous analogies used against them, they shouldn't bring them up.

The vast majority of doctors working would never prescribe HGH for that particular use. There are plenty of them who will, but everyone who does risks their medical license to do so.

FedEx said it perfectly. Playing baseball is a privilege not a right. Ankiel doesn't want his name dragged through the mud well, he simply shouldn't have bent the rules to gain an unfair competitive advantage and like it or not, for whatever reason he took the HGH, that is what he did. If it was to recover faster than other players are allowed to, it's wrong. If it was to build muscle mass and become more than he was before it's worse. There's your shades of gray and both of them are pretty dark.

I bolded the above for emphasis. This is correct.

Just because Ankiel had a prescription does not make it legitimate. There are some crooked doctors out there (shocking, I know) who will apparently provide a prescription for some type of kickback. I'm not going to look it up now, but there was a scandal a few years back with the Carolina Panthers and some of their players getting "prescription meds" supposedly "under a doctor's care". I believe it was HGH but I could be wrong.

If this is the 'new' way to rehab injuries, i.e. taking HGH to speed up the healing process, it's certainly news to me. Ankiel can say whatever he wants; I don't buy it. This whole thing stinks.

jabrch
09-09-2007, 10:57 PM
You may disagree with my openmindedness on this controversy, but maybe that's just the idealist in me.

You can not wrap yourself in a blanket of openmindedness when you are talking about this case. There is nothing openminded about not having all of the facts and defending this situation.

1) There is no reason HGH would be perscribed for what we know to be Ankiel's surgery (Tommy John)

2) This particular pharmacy has a longstanding connection to illegal distribution of PEDs to professional athletes.

3) His doctor has a long history of malpractice settlements

It is not openminded nor idealistic to condone this sort of behaviour.

TomC727
09-09-2007, 11:38 PM
You can not wrap yourself in a blanket of openmindedness when you are talking about this case. There is nothing openminded about not having all of the facts and defending this situation.

1) There is no reason HGH would be perscribed for what we know to be Ankiel's surgery (Tommy John)

2) This particular pharmacy has a longstanding connection to illegal distribution of PEDs to professional athletes.

3) His doctor has a long history of malpractice settlements

It is not openminded nor idealistic to condone this sort of behaviour.


It has been a long time since I have last posted but I gotta chime in.

There are perfectly good reasons to prescribe HGH for things other than short stature problems.

Currently, HGH has research trials being conducted, included use on Trauma Patients and the benefits it may hold. HGH has also been found to speed up injury healing in injured patients. A doctor having a history of malpractice settlements has absolutely nothing to do with writing a prescription for HGH. Some of the finest doctors in the United States have a lot of malpractice settlements. Malpractice is not a good marker of quality of care. If he has criminal charges against him, that is another story.

For Ankiel, this will probably all go away. If he had a prescription from a licensed physician and took it while rehabing from an injury, this is a perfectly good reason.

voodoochile
09-09-2007, 11:49 PM
It has been a long time since I have last posted but I gotta chime in.

There are perfectly good reasons to prescribe HGH for things other than short stature problems.

Currently, HGH has research trials being conducted, included use on Trauma Patients and the benefits it may hold. HGH has also been found to speed up injury healing in injured patients. A doctor having a history of malpractice settlements has absolutely nothing to do with writing a prescription for HGH. Some of the finest doctors in the United States have a lot of malpractice settlements. Malpractice is not a good marker of quality of care. If he has criminal charges against him, that is another story.

For Ankiel, this will probably all go away. If he had a prescription from a licensed physician and took it while rehabing from an injury, this is a perfectly good reason.

Just curious if you are a doctor and/or where you get your information from. Beckett21 is a podiatrist and said the exact opposite. Doesn't necessarily mean one thing or another, different folks have different specialties or may be more in tune with research that is on going if it is in line with their specialty.

Honestly not ripping on you, I do like to read about new medical breakthroughs and I know HGH has a cult following as the fountain of youth, so I am interested in knowing exactly what is what when it comes to this stuff - especially since I am 44 years old...:tongue:

Is HGH truly the wonder drug many are claiming? Can it not only heal people from devastating injuries faster and more effectively but also potentially reverse or hold off the aging process? What are the negative effects noticed in the injury recovery testing you are referring to?

beckett21
09-09-2007, 11:55 PM
It has been a long time since I have last posted but I gotta chime in.

There are perfectly good reasons to prescribe HGH for things other than short stature problems.

Currently, HGH has research trials being conducted, included use on Trauma Patients and the benefits it may hold. HGH has also been found to speed up injury healing in injured patients. A doctor having a history of malpractice settlements has absolutely nothing to do with writing a prescription for HGH. Some of the finest doctors in the United States have a lot of malpractice settlements. Malpractice is not a good marker of quality of care. If he has criminal charges against him, that is another story.

For Ankiel, this will probably all go away. If he had a prescription from a licensed physician and took it while rehabing from an injury, this is a perfectly good reason.

While you may be correct, just because there are 'trials' being conducted this does not solely justify the use of HGH in this case. I am not aware of these trials, since this is out of my realm of practice, so I am not going to dispute them. You seem to be pretty well versed on the topic, probably moreso than I.

However, even if there are trials I highly doubt there is FDA approval for use to rehab a routine injury in an otherwise healthy adult, making it an off-label indication. As such, this makes it open to scrutiny.

Again, I'm not questioning the fact that there are trials in progress. Was Ankiel or his doctor enrolled in one of these trials? If so, fine. If not, to me it is an off-label usage which makes it questionable.

chaerulez
09-10-2007, 04:43 AM
Again, anyone saying this is an non story is ignorant. Signature Pharmacy is known to have distributed steroids and HGH illegally. They are also associated with a doctor that had done some unethical things. Ankiel can try and spin that it was all legit. It may have been. But there is a chance (a good one at that) that it wasn't. As long as that window exists that Ankiel was doing something shady, this remains a story.

Fenway
09-10-2007, 12:29 PM
Bob Ryan had a good column on this

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/articles/2007/09/09/feel_good_story_feels_a_lot_worse/?page=full

We all laughed at Jose Canseco's allegations, but it now looks as if he exaggerated only slightly. We scoffed when BALCO man Victor Conte sneered that half the players at this year's All-Star Game had done something or other, but what if Mr. Conte is simply stating a fact? We are in no position to dismiss him as a kook, nutcase, or blowhard. He knows a lot more than we do.

The problem with baseball now is that everyone is suspect. Everyone who throws 95 m.p.h. is suspect. Everyone who hits a bunch of homers is suspect. Every aging player who puts up great numbers is suspect. That's what this steroid and HGH business has done to baseball.

I thought I was prepared for anything. But Rick Ankiel? This one really hurts

South Side Irish
09-10-2007, 01:14 PM
2) This particular pharmacy has a longstanding connection to illegal distribution of PEDs to professional athletes.

3) His doctor has a long history of malpractice settlements


I've asked this question 3 times: did we all know about the shadiness of SP 4 years agao? It's pretty obvious now, and you'd be foolish to deal with them now, but do we have credible evidence that it was shady back in '03 or '04?

South Side Irish
09-10-2007, 01:21 PM
It has been a long time since I have last posted but I gotta chime in.

There are perfectly good reasons to prescribe HGH for things other than short stature problems.

Currently, HGH has research trials being conducted, included use on Trauma Patients and the benefits it may hold. HGH has also been found to speed up injury healing in injured patients. A doctor having a history of malpractice settlements has absolutely nothing to do with writing a prescription for HGH. Some of the finest doctors in the United States have a lot of malpractice settlements. Malpractice is not a good marker of quality of care. If he has criminal charges against him, that is another story.

For Ankiel, this will probably all go away. If he had a prescription from a licensed physician and took it while rehabing from an injury, this is a perfectly good reason.

And this is why I'm not jumping onto the "HGH is for cheaters only" bandwagon. Did he use it to get an unfair edge in training? Maybe, I'm not ruling that out. Becket21's given an "expert" opinion of the opposite stance, too. At the least, the conflicting opinions demonstrate that the book is not closed on HGH. I just don't personally think that you can jump all over Ankiel if that's the only piece of evidence against him.

Foulke You
09-10-2007, 01:24 PM
I thought I was prepared for anything. But Rick Ankiel? This one really hurts
Yes, this Ankiel business was disappointing but I think my faith was really shaken when Raffy Palmiero tested positive for steroids. He would have been one of the last people I thought to have done the juice. Until Palmiero, I only suspected the obvious roid abusers like Sosa, McGwire, Bonds, Brady Anderson, Brad Fullmer, etc. After Palmiero, it really opened the door for a lot of other guys to be looked at with suspicion.

jabrch
09-10-2007, 01:44 PM
I've asked this question 3 times: did we all know about the shadiness of SP 4 years agao? It's pretty obvious now, and you'd be foolish to deal with them now, but do we have credible evidence that it was shady back in '03 or '04?

This is not a court of law where one needs evidence to connect every single thread. But the Loomis family has been involved with "comopouding" for a long time. They have a history with illegally distributing steroids and hormones, and working with unliscensed or retired medical people. WE may not have known about it - but that's not the standard a professional athlete should be held to. It is up to Rick Ankiel to know what he is putting in his body, and who he is doing business with.

voodoochile
09-10-2007, 01:46 PM
And this is why I'm not jumping onto the "HGH is for cheaters only" bandwagon. Did he use it to get an unfair edge in training? Maybe, I'm not ruling that out. Becket21's given an "expert" opinion of the opposite stance, too. At the least, the conflicting opinions demonstrate that the book is not closed on HGH. I just don't personally think that you can jump all over Ankiel if that's the only piece of evidence against him.

Well the flip side of that is that drug testing doesn't normally take 3 years to go from "potentially effective" to "yes or no". HGH is a known commodity. It doesn't have to go through safety testing to be tested for other uses, only efficacy testing is necessary. So, if there was a hypothesis that it was good for helping with trauma or muscle rebuilding after major surgery then, it would be more than a hypothesis by now. It would probably have been proven or not or at least be very close to acceptance. The flip side is that if this is a newer hypothesis than it wasn't widely accepted 3 years ago which means at best it was a shot in the dark and at worst was much more sinister.

The Racehorse
09-10-2007, 04:07 PM
It has been a long time since I have last posted but I gotta chime in.

There are perfectly good reasons to prescribe HGH for things other than short stature problems.

Currently, HGH has research trials being conducted, included use on Trauma Patients and the benefits it may hold. HGH has also been found to speed up injury healing in injured patients. A doctor having a history of malpractice settlements has absolutely nothing to do with writing a prescription for HGH. Some of the finest doctors in the United States have a lot of malpractice settlements. Malpractice is not a good marker of quality of care. If he has criminal charges against him, that is another story.

For Ankiel, this will probably all go away. If he had a prescription from a licensed physician and took it while rehabing from an injury, this is a perfectly good reason.

All this could be settled very easily by asking the pioneer of the original UCL reconstruction surgery, Dr Frank Jobe, if prescribing HGH is part the standard protocol for the rehab process.

Tommy John had the original surgery done in 1974. Were steroids part of his rehab process? [I would guess no]

If these powerful drugs weren't ethical to prescribe, why is Ankiel [or any high profile athelete] going to doctors/pharmacies off the beaten path for the HGH?

I don't see this going away anytime soon.

IlliniSox4Life
09-10-2007, 04:11 PM
For those of you who are saying that HGH might have other legitimate uses, one of which could be rehabbing after Ankiel's surgery, I would have to say that yes, it is POSSIBLE they do, and there are probably trials going on right now to test that. However, any benefits and side effects are not certain and the use of these drugs certainly is not commonplace.

Professional athletes should not be using their bodies as guinea pigs for cutting edge medical science.

While I don't know much specifics about Ankiel's injury, I can tell you there is probably a pretty standard course of treatment that the majority of people with his injury go through. Then there are probably a few other courses of treatments or variations that people go through depending on circumstances specific to their situations and their medical histories. For example an athlete might take a different course of treatment than if this was an office worker with the injury. My point is though, of all the possible treatments that would be prescribed for his injury, 99.9999999% of them do not involve HGH, the exception might be some medical study at some hospital or university. Rick Ankiel is not part of that 0.0000001% that might take HGH for this.

The Racehorse
09-10-2007, 04:14 PM
Clearly I wasn't serious with a touch of "devil's advocate." I'm tired of the phrase, "Performance Enhancers." When in truth "performance enhancers" come in all shapes and sizes, all strengths and effects.

If you don't like "performance enhancers", you can always use drugs or dope.

voodoochile
09-10-2007, 05:10 PM
For those of you who are saying that HGH might have other legitimate uses, one of which could be rehabbing after Ankiel's surgery, I would have to say that yes, it is POSSIBLE they do, and there are probably trials going on right now to test that. However, any benefits and side effects are not certain and the use of these drugs certainly is not commonplace.

Professional athletes should not be using their bodies as guinea pigs for cutting edge medical science.

While I don't know much specifics about Ankiel's injury, I can tell you there is probably a pretty standard course of treatment that the majority of people with his injury go through. Then there are probably a few other courses of treatments or variations that people go through depending on circumstances specific to their situations and their medical histories. For example an athlete might take a different course of treatment than if this was an office worker with the injury. My point is though, of all the possible treatments that would be prescribed for his injury, 99.9999999% of them do not involve HGH, the exception might be some medical study at some hospital or university. Rick Ankiel is not part of that 0.0000001% that might take HGH for this.

I remember years ago when Chelios tore his ACL while playing for the Hawks. He didn't need to have surgery right away because the muscles in his leg were so strong they held the leg together even though the ACL was snapped (at least that is the way it was explained at the time).

Now HGH may indeed help recovery times after major surgeries, but at the least it would make it easier to strengthen ALL of the muscles in you arm and thus lower the amount of strain produced on the repaired elbow. Now if the person taking the HGH wasn't reliant on their physical strength to make a living, no one would give a crap, BUT (and like mine, it's a big one) Ankiel is an athlete. Specifically one who relies on his arm strength to a great degree either as a pitcher or a hitter. That's why this is a big issue.

The Racehorse
09-10-2007, 06:59 PM
http://www.mankatofreepress.com/sportscolumnists/local_story_253152053.html?start:int=0


There has been no explanation of why Ankiel got HGH from a mail-order pharmacy, why he got the prescription out of the chain of his surgery and rehab, why he got the prescription from a physician with a history of malpractice payouts.

There has been no explanation, for that matter, of why anybody would use HGH for Tommy John rehab. It is not standard practice.


If Rick Ankiel’s use of HGH was legitimate, he would have used it in an open and legitimate manner. He didn’t. And it wasn’t.


The above quotes are the heart of the matter, imo.

soxwon
09-10-2007, 07:26 PM
Big deal 2004 -3 years ago.
It didnt help him then.
it doesnt take 3 years to work.
Leave him alone, he's doing something unique.
Let him have his great year.

ma-gaga
09-10-2007, 07:54 PM
This is a toughie. It sounds like he took performance enhancers while rehabbing from an injury. The question is, when did he stop taking them?

Is 3 years long enough to be "clean"?? Or is he forever tainted??? I don't know the answer here. I'm sure it's going to depend on each individual viewpoint.

Personally, assuming he's been HGH free since 2005, I'm ok with him and what he's done. If they test him now, and find the crap still in his system, (I don't know if this is possible, maybe Beckett or IS4L can answer) then he's the dirtiest of the dirty, and should be punished harshly.

This all comes down to the lack of leadership. It's rediculous that they didn't have a steroid/performance enhancer ban in place before 2005. It's clearly Bud Selig's fault. :angry:

Hendu
09-10-2007, 08:34 PM
Big deal 2004 -3 years ago.
It didnt help him then.
it doesnt take 3 years to work.
Leave him alone, he's doing something unique.
Let him have his great year.

How do we know he hasn't been taking anything else since? The fact is that once you open up that can of worms, your entire career is suspect.

Barry didn't use for his entire career (supposedly) yet most people don't want him in the hall of fame. Same with Raffy. Ankiel made his bed and now he should lie in it by having a shadow over all his accomplishments.

IlliniSox4Life
09-10-2007, 08:50 PM
This is a toughie. It sounds like he took performance enhancers while rehabbing from an injury. The question is, when did he stop taking them?

Is 3 years long enough to be "clean"?? Or is he forever tainted??? I don't know the answer here. I'm sure it's going to depend on each individual viewpoint.

Personally, assuming he's been HGH free since 2005, I'm ok with him and what he's done. If they test him now, and find the crap still in his system, (I don't know if this is possible, maybe Beckett or IS4L can answer) then he's the dirtiest of the dirty, and should be punished harshly.

This all comes down to the lack of leadership. It's rediculous that they didn't have a steroid/performance enhancer ban in place before 2005. It's clearly Bud Selig's fault. :angry:

I am far from an expert on the subject, but as far as I know, there is currently no test to detect HGH.


My thoughts are along the same lines as yours. I am willing to forgive, I don't think he should be banned from the sport because of this, especially with what Barroids has gotten away with, but I think that it definitely taints his story.

Part of the glory of the "comeback story", is that a guy is able to persevere through adversity and come out on top. To me, cutting corners with drugs cheapens that perseverance, and thus cheapens the story and accomplishment.

The Racehorse
09-10-2007, 08:52 PM
This is a toughie. It sounds like he took performance enhancers while rehabbing from an injury. The question is, when did he stop taking them?

Is 3 years long enough to be "clean"?? Or is he forever tainted??? I don't know the answer here. I'm sure it's going to depend on each individual viewpoint.

Personally, assuming he's been HGH free since 2005, I'm ok with him and what he's done. If they test him now, and find the crap still in his system, (I don't know if this is possible, maybe Beckett or IS4L can answer) then he's the dirtiest of the dirty, and should be punished harshly.

This all comes down to the lack of leadership. It's rediculous that they didn't have a steroid/performance enhancer ban in place before 2005. It's clearly Bud Selig's fault. :angry:

Tommy John surgery is basically replacing the damaged ulnar collateral ligament in your elbow and replacing it with a tendon taken from another part of the body, such as the forearm. You can't take a syringe filled with HGH/'roids and inject it into the elbow to strengthen just that one body part when rehabbing. If your going to strengthen artificially via drugs, your whole body will respond... think of the myth that situps solely reduces your waistline. It doesn't. Losing overall body weight while exercising your abdomen reduces your waistline.

I totally agree about the lack of leadership on the drug issue. They're just to splitting the baby on testing/players rights, etc... I blame both MLB & MLBPA.

As for testing, they should look at the military. Everyone in the armed forces know the rules from day 1. If you come up positive, your busted. Doesn't matter that you used hemp products from a Jamaican mail order catalog but never smoked a joint or that maybe you jammed your piehole with 2 dozen organically grown poppy seed bagels in one sitting... if you come up positive on the piss test, your busted. So therefore, you make personal decisions accordingly. If Selig & Fehr would take this approach & test for all drugs, players would motivated to not look for loop holes in the policy [ or at least less inclined to do so].

Ankiel is dirty, like most players. He knew exactly what he was doing.

*shrugs*

soxwon
09-10-2007, 08:53 PM
How do we know he hasn't been taking anything else since? The fact is that once you open up that can of worms, your entire career is suspect.

Barry didn't use for his entire career (supposedly) yet most people don't want him in the hall of fame. Same with Raffy. Ankiel made his bed and now he should lie in it by having a shadow over all his accomplishments.

Has Bonds ever been caught with, prosecuted for, and banned because of steroids?
I think we are all positive he used them.
But Arent you Innocent until PROVEN guilty?

I can say i used to get high, i can have friends say theyve seen me get high.
But until its proven i did, Im not guilty right?

ilsox7
09-10-2007, 08:54 PM
Has Bonds ever been caught with, prosecuted for, and banned because of steroids?
I think we are all positive he used them.
But Arent you Innocent until PROVEN guilty?

I can say i used to get high, i can have friends say theyve seen me get high.
But until its proven i did, Im not guilty right?

Bonds has admitted to using steroids, what else do you want?

soxwon
09-10-2007, 08:58 PM
Bonds has admitted to using steroids, what else do you want?

ok but people have claimed to a crime and didnt do it, and were prosecuted.

i can say yes i did get high, but does that prove i did, i could be lying.
just cause someone says something doesnt allways mean they did it.
Am i right?

ilsox7
09-10-2007, 09:05 PM
ok but people have claimed to a crime and didnt do it, and were prosecuted.

i can say yes i did get high, but does that prove i did, i could be lying.
just cause someone says something doesnt allways mean they did it.
Am i right?

If you believe Bonds admitted to his steroid use just for kicks, I've got this great bridge in Brooklyn I'd be willing to part with for just $50.

And to answer your question, you are wrong. If you were prosecuted for smoking marijuana and admitted you did, in fact, smoke it, you would be found guilty. Hell, there would not be a trial b/c you do not dispute the allegations against you. You would simply enter a guilty plea.

Hendu
09-10-2007, 09:07 PM
ok but people have claimed to a crime and didnt do it, and were prosecuted.

i can say yes i did get high, but does that prove i did, i could be lying.
just cause someone says something doesnt allways mean they did it.
Am i right?

This is baseball, not a court of law. I know that Bonds has admitted to unknowingly using steroids, that there is a lot of evidence that he did so, and that Rick Ankiel had a prescription for HGH for an entire year. I am also pretty sure that Jason Grimsley isn't the only guy in MLB dealing under-the-table HGH if Ankiel wanted any without the prescription.

TomC727
09-10-2007, 09:36 PM
Just curious if you are a doctor and/or where you get your information from. Beckett21 is a podiatrist and said the exact opposite. Doesn't necessarily mean one thing or another, different folks have different specialties or may be more in tune with research that is on going if it is in line with their specialty.

Honestly not ripping on you, I do like to read about new medical breakthroughs and I know HGH has a cult following as the fountain of youth, so I am interested in knowing exactly what is what when it comes to this stuff - especially since I am 44 years old...:tongue:

Is HGH truly the wonder drug many are claiming? Can it not only heal people from devastating injuries faster and more effectively but also potentially reverse or hold off the aging process? What are the negative effects noticed in the injury recovery testing you are referring to?


I am a 4th year medical student.

The information provided is from 3 of the most widely read surgical textbooks in medicine. HGH has been found to shorten recovery time for injury, and it has been found to be beneficial in burn patients.

The trials being conducted are for trauma patients to expand the role of HGH, if it is beneficial or is it the same as placebo.

This is relatively new information so not every doctor is going to prescribe HGH for every injury out there. More trials still need to be conducted to see what the long term effects of the hormone is.

TomC727
09-10-2007, 09:41 PM
While you may be correct, just because there are 'trials' being conducted this does not solely justify the use of HGH in this case. I am not aware of these trials, since this is out of my realm of practice, so I am not going to dispute them. You seem to be pretty well versed on the topic, probably moreso than I.

However, even if there are trials I highly doubt there is FDA approval for use to rehab a routine injury in an otherwise healthy adult, making it an off-label indication. As such, this makes it open to scrutiny.

Again, I'm not questioning the fact that there are trials in progress. Was Ankiel or his doctor enrolled in one of these trials? If so, fine. If not, to me it is an off-label usage which makes it questionable.

Just a little tid-bit of being "FDA approved."

For an example, there is currently only 1, yes, 1, drug that is FDA approved for the stoppage of contractions for prevention of premature labor in pregnancy, that drug is Terbutaline.

Terbutaline is barely used anymore, other drugs in its class (Beta-Agonists) are used much more frequently. All of the other drugs in the class of Beta-Agonists are not FDA approved for tocolysis (the fancy medical term for the stoppage of contractions)

Being FDA approved means absolutely nothing is a large amount of drug usages. There are a large amount of drugs that are off label used.

FedEx227
09-10-2007, 09:53 PM
ok but people have claimed to a crime and didnt do it, and were prosecuted.

i can say yes i did get high, but does that prove i did, i could be lying.
just cause someone says something doesnt allways mean they did it.
Am i right?

What is your logic?

What sane individual is going to admit to a crime they didn't commit?

Bonds admitted flat out that he took a "Steroid"-like substance not knowing it was steroids. Just as I'm chewing a "gum"-like substance now that I'm convinced is mac n cheese and not gum.

Big deal 2004 -3 years ago.
It didnt help him then.
it doesnt take 3 years to work.
Leave him alone, he's doing something unique.
Let him have his great year. Awesome. You really are in touch with reality.

It didn't help him? Really? You might want to check that. If he took it to recover from surgery, guess what... that helped him.

Why can people not grasp this? Because he's a nice guy and is the feel-good story of this month (thank you ESPN) he's immune to criticism or wrong-doing?

God this topic keeps going farther and farther down the toilet.

If I kill a mother of 6 children in 2001.
But then from 2002-2005, donated to a Children's Hospital am I a good person?

beckett21
09-10-2007, 09:57 PM
Just a little tid-bit of being "FDA approved."

For an example, there is currently only 1, yes, 1, drug that is FDA approved for the stoppage of contractions for prevention of premature labor in pregnancy, that drug is Terbutaline.

Terbutaline is barely used anymore, other drugs in its class (Beta-Agonists) are used much more frequently. All of the other drugs in the class of Beta-Agonists are not FDA approved for tocolysis (the fancy medical term for the stoppage of contractions)

Being FDA approved means absolutely nothing is a large amount of drug usages. There are a large amount of drugs that are off label used.

I'm well aware that many drugs are used off-label. Typically, the benefits far outweigh the risks or potential side effects.

I don't see where using HGH under otherwise "normal" circumstances outweighs the risks and side effects associated with the HGH. Again, this is out of my scope because I would never even think of prescribing HGH in my practice--I wouldn't even know how. It still seems a bit extreme to me, especially like I said before--in an otherwise healthy, non-compromised patient.

JMO. I appreciate your informed counterpoint. Congratulations on your pending degree. :cool:

jabrch
09-10-2007, 10:18 PM
Has Bonds ever been caught with, prosecuted for, and banned because of steroids?
I think we are all positive he used them.
But Arent you Innocent until PROVEN guilty?

I can say i used to get high, i can have friends say theyve seen me get high.
But until its proven i did, Im not guilty right?

Absolutely not. This is NOT a court of law. You are not innocent until proven guilty. You are innocent until you make yourself guilty. The only question then is what happens to you.

TomC727
09-10-2007, 10:27 PM
I'm well aware that many drugs are used off-label. Typically, the benefits far outweigh the risks or potential side effects.

I don't see where using HGH under otherwise "normal" circumstances outweighs the risks and side effects associated with the HGH. Again, this is out of my scope because I would never even think of prescribing HGH in my practice--I wouldn't even know how. It still seems a bit extreme to me, especially like I said before--in an otherwise healthy, non-compromised patient.

JMO. I appreciate your informed counterpoint. Congratulations on your pending degree. :cool:

Thanks for the kind words.

Yeah, I am definately not condoning this thing. I plan on going into trauma/burn but I still believe the jury is still out. 1) More research still needs to be done on the long term affects and 2)It is crazy expensive.

I find the HGH thing with Ankiel slightly different compared to Bonds and Glaus. He was rehabbing from an injury, which HGH has been used for, and it was prescribed by a physician (good or bad, it still was prescribed by a physician). I have a feeling this will all be going away in a couple weeks.


Good discussion by all.

voodoochile
09-11-2007, 12:02 AM
Thanks for the kind words.

Yeah, I am definately not condoning this thing. I plan on going into trauma/burn but I still believe the jury is still out. 1) More research still needs to be done on the long term affects and 2)It is crazy expensive.

I find the HGH thing with Ankiel slightly different compared to Bonds and Glaus. He was rehabbing from an injury, which HGH has been used for, and it was prescribed by a physician (good or bad, it still was prescribed by a physician). I have a feeling this will all be going away in a couple weeks.


Good discussion by all.

Your statements seem to imply this is very recent work. Was that work on-going in 2004 when Ankiel took the HGH? Seems like a long testing period for a drug that has already been proven safe for human use in other manners. From my understanding of drug testing, the first several years are to see if it is safe in animals, then does it work in animals, then is it safe in humans and at what dosage can it be tolerated and finally you go into the efficacy testing.

Seems that a drug which only had to be tested for efficacy and had been in efficacy testing for 3+ years would have more than an inkling of knowledge about whether it works. That would also mean that Ankiel took it right as it entered efficacy testing which seems an odd time to prescribe it.

Am I missing something here?

Thanks for filling in the discussion educated opinions are always welcome.

ma-gaga
09-11-2007, 01:19 AM
I find the HGH thing with Ankiel slightly different compared to Bonds and Glaus. He was rehabbing from an injury, which HGH has been used for

yeah. I agree as well. There's a line here between what Ankiel did and what Barry did. Ankiel didn't play in 2005 when he was supposedly taking the drugs. It's a fuzzy, grey, wavy line, and if you squint hard it disappears. But there's a difference between the two.

Since both Bonds and Glaus were dirty, clearly the 2002 World Series should be canceled and the ALCS runner-up and the NLCS runner-up should face off in a "make-up" World Series.

:cool:

IlliniSox4Life
09-11-2007, 03:55 AM
Just a little tid-bit of being "FDA approved."

For an example, there is currently only 1, yes, 1, drug that is FDA approved for the stoppage of contractions for prevention of premature labor in pregnancy, that drug is Terbutaline.

Terbutaline is barely used anymore, other drugs in its class (Beta-Agonists) are used much more frequently. All of the other drugs in the class of Beta-Agonists are not FDA approved for tocolysis (the fancy medical term for the stoppage of contractions)

Being FDA approved means absolutely nothing is a large amount of drug usages. There are a large amount of drugs that are off label used.

Thanks for the kind words.

Yeah, I am definately not condoning this thing. I plan on going into trauma/burn but I still believe the jury is still out. 1) More research still needs to be done on the long term affects and 2)It is crazy expensive.

I find the HGH thing with Ankiel slightly different compared to Bonds and Glaus. He was rehabbing from an injury, which HGH has been used for, and it was prescribed by a physician (good or bad, it still was prescribed by a physician). I have a feeling this will all be going away in a couple weeks.


Good discussion by all.

I would like to congratulate you for making one of the best counterpoints in Ankiel's defense in this thread. Not that it really changes my opinion, but you actually said something that made me think for a minute.


As you said, Ankiel is not in the same water as Bonds. What he did, in my mind, while the complete wrong thing to do, a huge story, and will forever taint his image in my mind, it is a bit forgivable. He was recovering from an injury. He took the cheap route and cheated, but I can understand what he was doing. He also (to my knowledge), wasn't taking them while he was playing. I'm not suggesting that a guy like Mike Brown would do this, but if you look at the struggles he has gone through and the pain that he has gone through, you could understand the temptation that one might have to recover from an injury faster.

I also have a feeling that not much will actually come of this (unless anything new is revealed), but the "Great Rick Ankiel" story is no more. Now he's just Rick Ankiel.

The Racehorse
09-11-2007, 09:13 AM
Can someone please explain to me how HGH can only strengthen Ankiel’s reconstructed UCL in his elbow, and not give Ankiel any benefit to overall body strength?

Also, Orlando Hudson tore the ligament in his thumb last week. He had UCL reconstruction surgery on it yesterday.

Question: if MLB hadn’t banned HGH, would it be ethical for Hudson to obtain a prescription of HGH outside his chain of surgery & rehab “to help him rehab his thumb?”

ma-gaga
09-11-2007, 11:00 AM
Question: if MLB hadn’t banned HGH, would it be ethical for Hudson to obtain a prescription of HGH outside his chain of surgery & rehab “to help him rehab his thumb?”

Yes. That's the million dollar question. :cool:

The commish, MLBPA, the owners, the media, and the fans all ignored what was going on right in front of them for 12-15 years. Guys getting monsterously huge in a single off-season. Putting up rediculous numbers. Then getting sanctimonious once the "blinders" were off. It stinks all around. I don't know why one of those groups is any less to "blame" than any other.

MLB has a list of "allowable" supplements that players can take. Is that ethical?? Is drinking a home-made 'protein shake' ethical? How about taking "greenies", drinking coffee, stealing signs... The list isn't endless, but there's any number of edges that players will use. Is it ethical?

MLB dropped the ball here. They are slowly getting it right. But as you said, this "event" happened before MLB banned the substance. I don't think that what Ankiel did is wrong, and it would be a travesty if he were punished by MLB.

soxfan13
09-11-2007, 11:05 AM
.

If I kill a mother of 6 children in 2001.
But then from 2002-2005, donated to a Children's Hospital am I a good person?


Depends on how much you donate:tongue:

ma-gaga
09-11-2007, 11:05 AM
I don't think that what Ankiel did "is wrong",

It should read "was unethical". :cool:

Ankiel did what he did. He shouldn't be praised for it. But it bugs me that MLB's witch-hunt crew is posturing, and may go after Ankiel for MLB's own mistake.

rip away. :cool:

The Racehorse
09-11-2007, 12:25 PM
Yes. That's the million dollar question. :cool:

The commish, MLBPA, the owners, the media, and the fans all ignored what was going on right in front of them for 12-15 years. Guys getting monsterously huge in a single off-season. Putting up rediculous numbers. Then getting sanctimonious once the "blinders" were off. It stinks all around. I don't know why one of those groups is any less to "blame" than any other.

MLB has a list of "allowable" supplements that players can take. Is that ethical?? Is drinking a home-made 'protein shake' ethical? How about taking "greenies", drinking coffee, stealing signs... The list isn't endless, but there's any number of edges that players will use. Is it ethical?

MLB dropped the ball here. They are slowly getting it right. But as you said, this "event" happened before MLB banned the substance. I don't think that what Ankiel did is wrong, and it would be a travesty if he were punished by MLB.

It should read "was unethical". :cool:

Ankiel did what he did. He shouldn't be praised for it. But it bugs me that MLB's witch-hunt crew is posturing, and may go after Ankiel for MLB's own mistake.

rip away. :cool:

Ma... I can’t rip you, your the straw that stirs the drink in Roto-2! Besides, I’m just thrilled someone finally responded to one of my posts in this thread. :D:

In a sense, I don’t care if Ankiel is disciplined/suspended. However, I will always see what he did with the HGH as unethical, which is where we disagree.

I said earlier in this thread that cheating with corked bats & scuffed balls is one thing, taking drugs to improve your stats is much worse. To me, it’s that easy. If players are dumb enough to get caught with a corked bat or with sandpaper on the mound, for that almighty edge, then OK. Suspend them, ridicule them, move on. However, if they’re caught directly/indirectly using drugs that are obtained legally/illegally for that same edge, they’re drug users. And Ankiel is another ball player who is also a drug user. *shrugs*

I appreciate your statement about these guys getting sanctimonious once someone asks them pointed questions. Just once I’d like to hear someone in Ankiel's situation say, “look, I’m not proud of it, and yes, getting HGH in the manner I did was nothing more than finding a loophole in the rules”.

The day that happens is the day the universe ends.

FedEx227
09-11-2007, 01:58 PM
Depends on how much you donate:tongue:

Apparently.

You can obtain a controlled substance from a black-market provider with a "legal" prescription, but hit 9 dingers three years later and nobody will care, infact they will defend you.

And to an earlier poster, yes Hudson should take HGH for his thumb, makes perfect sense. Pods' abductor keeps acting up, HGH. Makes perfect sense. Wait, it doesn't make sense in those cases and it doesn't in Ankiel's either.

soxwon
09-12-2007, 09:21 PM
What is your logic?

What sane individual is going to admit to a crime they didn't commit?

Bonds admitted flat out that he took a "Steroid"-like substance not knowing it was steroids. Just as I'm chewing a "gum"-like substance now that I'm convinced is mac n cheese and not gum.

Awesome. You really are in touch with reality.

It didn't help him? Really? You might want to check that. If he took it to recover from surgery, guess what... that helped him.

Why can people not grasp this? Because he's a nice guy and is the feel-good story of this month (thank you ESPN) he's immune to criticism or wrong-doing?

God this topic keeps going farther and farther down the toilet.

If I kill a mother of 6 children in 2001.
But then from 2002-2005, donated to a Children's Hospital am I a good person?


many young black men have admitted a crime, because of pressure by police.
you should know that- its in our papers all the time.

ilsox7
09-12-2007, 10:18 PM
many young black men have admitted a crime, because of pressure by police.
you should know that- its in our papers all the time.

And this has absolutely nothing to do with anything brought up in this thread. You said that it could not be proved that Bonds did steroids. When I (and others) told you that he admitted to doing them, instead of admitting you were wrong, you went on some tangent about confessions not being proof. When you were again shown that a confession that is not redacted is proof of guilt in a court of law (which we are not even talking about here), you still could not admit you were wrong. Now you want us to believe that Bonds did not do steroids b/c his confession, which he has never taken back, was coerced? Just admit you are wrong.

soxwon
09-12-2007, 10:53 PM
And this has absolutely nothing to do with anything brought up in this thread. You said that it could not be proved that Bonds did steroids. When I (and others) told you that he admitted to doing them, instead of admitting you were wrong, you went on some tangent about confessions not being proof. When you were again shown that a confession that is not redacted is proof of guilt in a court of law (which we are not even talking about here), you still could not admit you were wrong. Now you want us to believe that Bonds did not do steroids b/c his confession, which he has never taken back, was coerced? Just admit you are wrong.

i was playing devils advocate.
im trying to show, how its possible to say something, and that doesnt make it proof.
i know he did steroids, we all do.
relax i was messing with everyone.
now theres talk thomas might have at one time.

TornLabrum
09-12-2007, 10:57 PM
People who have been watching the news have heard about a noted figure who took a plea on a crime he now claims not to have committed. He is now trying to get his conviction reversed.

soxwon
09-12-2007, 10:59 PM
People who have been watching the news have heard about a noted figure who took a plea on a crime he now claims not to have committed. He is now trying to get his conviction reversed.

a senator?

TomC727
09-12-2007, 11:20 PM
Apparently.

You can obtain a controlled substance from a black-market provider with a "legal" prescription, but hit 9 dingers three years later and nobody will care, infact they will defend you.

And to an earlier poster, yes Hudson should take HGH for his thumb, makes perfect sense. Pods' abductor keeps acting up, HGH. Makes perfect sense. Wait, it doesn't make sense in those cases and it doesn't in Ankiel's either.


I don't want to burst anyone's bubble but HGH is not considered a controlled substance.

According to the FDA, drugs which are considered a controlled substance fall into Schedule Classes. Requiring a prescription for a drug does not mean the drug is a controlled substance.

Schedule I - no medical benefit whatsoever (Example: Heroin)
Schedule II - high abuse potential, requires special prescriptions, no verbal orders allowed, no refills (Example: cocaine) - Yes, cocaine is still used for certain things
Schedule III - moderate abuse potential, special prescriptions, limited number of refills (Example: Vicodin)
Schedule IV and Schedile V - low abuse potential

HGH is not considered a controlled substance, hence, it is not a scheduled class drug. Some of you guys make HGH sound like it is like aquiring heroin or cocaine. This is not the case.

soxfan13
09-13-2007, 10:35 AM
i was playing devils advocate.
im trying to show, how its possible to say something, and that doesnt make it proof.
i know he did steroids, we all do.
relax i was messing with everyone.
now theres talk thomas might have at one time.

Now people here know I am not a Thomas fan but where have you seen this. He is one of the few guys I think havent done anything to that extent. Please dont tell me a friend told you.

jabrch
09-13-2007, 10:41 AM
now theres talk thomas might have at one time.

I'm leaving this one to Voodoo.

The Racehorse
09-13-2007, 02:07 PM
I don't want to burst anyone's bubble but HGH is not considered a controlled substance.

According to the FDA, drugs which are considered a controlled substance fall into Schedule Classes. Requiring a prescription for a drug does not mean the drug is a controlled substance.

Schedule I - no medical benefit whatsoever (Example: Heroin)
Schedule II - high abuse potential, requires special prescriptions, no verbal orders allowed, no refills (Example: cocaine) - Yes, cocaine is still used for certain things
Schedule III - moderate abuse potential, special prescriptions, limited number of refills (Example: Vicodin)
Schedule IV and Schedile V - low abuse potential

HGH is not considered a controlled substance, hence, it is not a scheduled class drug. Some of you guys make HGH sound like it is like aquiring heroin or cocaine. This is not the case.

Does it have to be a drug for it to be classified as a controlled substance? HGH isn't a drug, it's a hormone. I poked around the FDA website and while I couldn't find a classification for humatrope [an HGH trade name], I did find where the FDA specifically states "don't buy these drugs over the internet or from foreign sources" (http://www.fda.gov/cder/consumerinfo/dontBuyonNet.htm), and humatrope was one of those drugs listed. If HGH doesn't qualify to be controlled in some manner, why the FDA consumer safety alert?

IMO, an athlete acquiring HGH on a technicality is unethical. But it's not just me, because the American Journal of Managed Care is hashing out that very issue. (http://www.ajmc.com/files/articlefiles/A102_oct04IntroS416.pdf)

In fact, the AJMC specifically states there is no rational for HGH use for performance enhancement or faster wound healing. (http://www.ajmc.com/article.cfm?ID=2742)

TomC727
09-13-2007, 02:55 PM
Does it have to be a drug for it to be classified as a controlled substance? HGH isn't a drug, it's a hormone. I poked around the FDA website and while I couldn't find a classification for humatrope [an HGH trade name], I did find where the FDA specifically states "don't buy these drugs over the internet or from foreign sources" (http://www.fda.gov/cder/consumerinfo/dontBuyonNet.htm), and humatrope was one of those drugs listed. If HGH doesn't qualify to be controlled in some manner, why the FDA consumer safety alert?

IMO, an athlete acquiring HGH on a technicality is unethical. But it's not just me, because the American Journal of Managed Care is hashing out that very issue. (http://www.ajmc.com/files/articlefiles/A102_oct04IntroS416.pdf)

In fact, the AJMC specifically states there is no rational for HGH use for performance enhancement or faster wound healing. (http://www.ajmc.com/article.cfm?ID=2742)


Yes, HGH and all of its various brand names is a drug. The FDA puts consumer advisories out to not purchase HGH from shaddy pharmacies because of purity issues. AJMC is one group saying that HGH is not useful for faster healing but there are other studies stating there is. You also have to consider that the AJMC wants to protect its own interests. HGH is extremely expensive and any chance that the AJMC gets to save money, it will. This is how managed care saves money.

go to www.pubmed.com (http://www.pubmed.com) and type it in if you don't believe me. There are plenty of science articles giving the pro's and cons of HGH.

Aquring HGH is not an ethical question. HGH is a legal hormone which was obtained through legal channels with a Doctor's prescription.

I am only talking about Rick Ankiel. Anyone else (Glaus, Matthews, Bonds) is totally different.

TomC727
09-13-2007, 02:57 PM
I also forgot to add. To be listed as a controlled substance is based off of abuse potential. There is no abuse potential for HGH. It does not matter if a drug is a hormone, analgesic, or whatever. HGH is not considered a controlled substance.

FarWestChicago
09-13-2007, 09:45 PM
I don't want to burst anyone's bubble but HGH is not considered a controlled substance.Are saying it's an over the counter drug? Does it not require a prescription? Does getting said prescription from a criminal hack not compromise the prescription? What is your point?

FarWestChicago
09-13-2007, 09:47 PM
Aquring HGH is not an ethical question. HGH is a legal hormone which was obtained through legal channels with a Doctor's prescription. :bs:

You are embarrassing yourself. Seriously. Think about it.

TomC727
09-13-2007, 11:50 PM
:bs:

You are embarrassing yourself. Seriously. Think about it.


A prescription from a licensed physician through an Online Pharmacy in Rick Ankiel's name. What Ankiel did was completely legal. If more info comes out stating that the physician was not licensed, etc., then we have another story.

I will simplify it even for you to understand:

Needing a Prescription for a Drug does not equal Controlled Substance.

Example: Plavix - a blood thinner, NOT A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, requires a prescription.

Did you not read my post about the different Schedule Classes.

I think you are the one embarassing yourself.

IlliniSox4Life
09-14-2007, 02:38 AM
A prescription from a licensed physician through an Online Pharmacy in Rick Ankiel's name. What Ankiel did was completely legal. If more info comes out stating that the physician was not licensed, etc., then we have another story.

I will simplify it even for you to understand:

Needing a Prescription for a Drug does not equal Controlled Substance.

Example: Plavix - a blood thinner, NOT A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, requires a prescription.

Did you not read my post about the different Schedule Classes.

I think you are the one embarassing yourself.

Having a prescription does not make it legal if you have no reason to have the prescription. You said that cocaine is still used for certain things. If I could find some scumbag doctor to write me a prescription for 100 kilos of coke, does that make it legal?

The Racehorse
09-14-2007, 06:50 AM
Yes, HGH and all of its various brand names is a drug. The FDA puts consumer advisories out to not purchase HGH from shaddy pharmacies because of purity issues. AJMC is one group saying that HGH is not useful for faster healing but there are other studies stating there is. You also have to consider that the AJMC wants to protect its own interests. HGH is extremely expensive and any chance that the AJMC gets to save money, it will. This is how managed care saves money.

go to www.pubmed.com (http://www.pubmed.com/) and type it in if you don't believe me. There are plenty of science articles giving the pro's and cons of HGH.

Aquring HGH is not an ethical question. HGH is a legal hormone which was obtained through legal channels with a Doctor's prescription.

I am only talking about Rick Ankiel. Anyone else (Glaus, Matthews, Bonds) is totally different.

I also forgot to add. To be listed as a controlled substance is based off of abuse potential. There is no abuse potential for HGH. It does not matter if a drug is a hormone, analgesic, or whatever. HGH is not considered a controlled substance.

Why should HGH not fitting neatly into the FDA's classification of controlled substances mean anything? Relying on a bureaucratic chart from the FDA is something Bud Selig would do.

The FDA's list needs updating because when when going to www.pubmed.com (http://www.pubmed.com/) and typing in "HGH abuse" in the search box, I get numerous articles talking about "HGH-abuse in athletes", "human growth hormone doping in sport", etc...

Which brings me back to the beginning of this thread. Ankiel found a physician to prescribe him HGH, but the ethics behind that prescription doesn't pass the stink test.

voodoochile
09-14-2007, 08:34 AM
Having a prescription does not make it legal if you have no reason to have the prescription. You said that cocaine is still used for certain things. If I could find some scumbag doctor to write me a prescription for 100 kilos of coke, does that make it legal?

No one would ever prescribe that much of any drug for individual use. The doctor would go to jail immediately if they did. I am fairly certain that cocaine is strictly used in hospital also. I don't think it is an out patient drug. It's used primarily as a numbing agent from my understanding and those types of drugs don't get prescribed for in home use.

voodoochile
09-14-2007, 08:37 AM
Why should HGH not fitting neatly into the FDA's classification of controlled substances mean anything? Relying on a bureaucratic chart from the FDA is something Bud Selig would do.

The FDA's list needs updating because when when going to www.pubmed.com (http://www.pubmed.com/) and typing in "HGH abuse" in the search box, I get numerous articles talking about "HGH-abuse in athletes", "human growth hormone doping in sport", etc...

Which brings me back to the beginning of this thread. Ankiel found a physician to prescribe him HGH, but the ethics behind that prescription doesn't pass the stink test.

In addition, isn't the DEA becoming more involved in steroid trafficking as a whole? The discussion about whether HGH is a "controlled substance" is an argument about the definition of words. If HGH doesn't qualify as a "controlled substance" it's still not something you can simply walk up and buy. The rest it is for ****s and giggles. Of course that still depends on what the meaning of "is" is...:rolleyes:

jabrch
09-14-2007, 10:13 AM
Who gives a crap if it is a controlled substance or not?

He used performance enhancing drugs in a manner that it is not universally accepted to do so, and he got them from a "doctor" with a bad history involving performance enhancing drugs and a pharmacy with a storied involvement with MANY athletes looking for PEDs.

This is not a court of law - we aren't trying to convict him of any criminal act. We are discussing a baseball player and if he is or is not a cheater. I can't imagine anyone actually defending him unless their stance is that we should allow players to use PEDs.

The bottom line - it has always been unethical to use drugs to get an advantage, regardless of what the rules of the game said, what the game tested for, or even what the law says. Ankiel rehabbed for an injury using HGH - which is absolutely not a drug that is approved for that use. If you are defending him, you probably are ok with Bonds' flax seed oil because he didn't know what it was. And you are probably OK with the Cream and the Clear, since Sheffield just used it as massage oil. And you may be the guy who stretches the rules at work and at home, because it is "not as black and white as everyone thinks". It's your individual choice as to what you feel is right and what you feel is wrong. I'm surprised so many people are coming out defending Ankiel on this.

jabrch
09-14-2007, 10:15 AM
No one would ever prescribe that much of any drug for individual use. The doctor would go to jail immediately if they did. I am fairly certain that cocaine is strictly used in hospital also. I don't think it is an out patient drug. It's used primarily as a numbing agent from my understanding and those types of drugs don't get prescribed for in home use.

Not only that - but there is no pharmacy out there that has any significant quantity of this. And the ones that do have it very strictly controlled (by law) and have to account for it.

But that said, the point was valid. Just having a perscription only means that a pharmacist can give you the drug. If a doctor and a patient conspire to break the law, having a perscription written will provide them very little defense at their criminal trial.

TomC727
09-14-2007, 12:26 PM
Having a prescription does not make it legal if you have no reason to have the prescription. You said that cocaine is still used for certain things. If I could find some scumbag doctor to write me a prescription for 100 kilos of coke, does that make it legal?

The cocaine used today is topical, therefore you could not get a script for 100kilos of cocaine.

Ankiel had a perfectly good reason to use it. One of the off label uses is for faster healing.

Being listed as a controlled substance has nothing to do with FDA crap. Controlled substances are listed based on abuse and addiction potential. There is no addiction potential for HGH, therefore it is not a controlled substance. HGH use in athletes is not grounds for making it a controlled substance, along with other drugs used (Insulin, fertility drugs, andro, creatine, etc). HGH is not a controlled substance so don't state that it is. I gave the pubmed link for searching the pro's and cons HGH. Type in HGH in pubmed and look at the papers researching it.

Nellie_Fox
09-14-2007, 12:47 PM
... Controlled substances are listed based on abuse and addiction potential. There is no addiction potential for HGH, therefore it is not a controlled substance. HGH use in athletes is not grounds for making it a controlled substance, along with other drugs used (Insulin, fertility drugs, andro, creatine, etc). You are partly correct, but not all controlled substances are addictive. Potential for abuse and accepted medical uses are the main qualifiers. No accepted medical use and high potential for abuse = Schedule I. Accepted medical use and low (but not non-existent) potential for abuse = IV or V.

For example, anabolic steroids are not addictive, but they became schedule III in 1990 due to the recognized "moderate" potential for abuse. The abuse of HGH is receiving public attention now, I would expect to see it added to the scheduled substance list in the near future.

ma-gaga
09-14-2007, 01:29 PM
The bottom line - it has always been unethical to use drugs to get an advantage...

ok, so I did a quick google search and found this cool Article from July. (http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/2007/06/03/2007-06-03_muscle_drug_finds_a_legal_loophole.html)

After reading it, I ask, is it ok to take DHEA? If some minor leaguer is taking this today, is working out hard, and busting ass and makes MLB in 2010 is he a cheater??

This is all I'm saying. There's a bit of baseball hypocricy going on and it bugs me. It's a witchhunt, and that bugs me.

jabrch
09-14-2007, 11:50 PM
ok, so I did a quick google search and found this cool Article from July. (http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/2007/06/03/2007-06-03_muscle_drug_finds_a_legal_loophole.html)

After reading it, I ask, is it ok to take DHEA? If some minor leaguer is taking this today, is working out hard, and busting ass and makes MLB in 2010 is he a cheater??

This is all I'm saying. There's a bit of baseball hypocricy going on and it bugs me. It's a witchhunt, and that bugs me.

I hear ya - but it doesn't bother me at all. If it runs out the dirtbags, then I think it is a good thing. I don't mind witchhunts I guess.

FarWestChicago
09-14-2007, 11:56 PM
I hear ya - but it doesn't bother me at all. If it runs out the dirtbags, then I think it is a good thing. I don't mind witchhunts I guess.We all need to join TomI'madrugpushingmedicalstudentC727. There should be IV stations at every base. After all, when you get to first, you might be winded and a good jolt of something might get you going. Hey, you can get a prescription so it isn't illegal. There has to be a doctor somewhere willing to script it!!

TommyJohn
09-15-2007, 08:59 AM
You are are truly embarrassing the profession you seek to join. You have no conception of logic or ethics. You are a complete sham. You should find some other field to go into. Something were ethical integrity isn't required.


:moron

I resemble those remarks!

The Racehorse
09-15-2007, 12:20 PM
HGH use in athletes is not grounds for making it a controlled substance, along with other drugs used (Insulin, fertility drugs, andro, creatine, etc). HGH is not a controlled substance so don't state that it is. I gave the pubmed link for searching the pro's and cons HGH. Type in HGH in pubmed and look at the papers researching it.

Why can't you go to the pubmed link, research it, and then explain to us as to why it's ethical for Ankiel or any athlete to use HGH?

All you've done is say that HGH isn't a controlled substance & imply that there was nothing wrong with Ankiel's behavior during the time in question.

TomC727
09-15-2007, 02:13 PM
Why can't you go to the pubmed link, research it, and then explain to us as to why it's ethical for Ankiel or any athlete to use HGH?

All you've done is say that HGH isn't a controlled substance & imply that there was nothing wrong with Ankiel's behavior during the time in question.

I have never supported Ankiel or said it was right. I have stated that what he did was completely legal, and at the time HGH was not banned by MLB. An off label use of the drug is for faster healing.

Everyone in this board loves to throw around things as "unethical, ethics, and the such." Please everyone, define what unethical is to you. Using HGH LEGALLY, with a Doctor's script, for an off label use of faster healing, when it was not banned by MLB is not UNETHICAL. Is it right or wrong, that is for everyone to decide. Is it Unethical, well, that depends on who you talk to. I do not think it is Unethical.

I find this story very different than Glaus, bonds, etc.

Farwestchicago, you need to read a little more careful. It was stated in another post of mine that I do not condone Ankiel's actions. You sir need to pay attention better. I don't know what your deal is but I have never supported drug use by athletes and will never support it.

Where is the Podiatrist, he actually can have educated conversations on here. Farwest, you should learn from him.

ilsox7
09-15-2007, 02:18 PM
Please everyone, define what unethical is to you. Is it right or wrong, that is for everyone to decide. Is it Unethical, well, that depends on who you talk to. I do not think it is Unethical.



eth·i·cal http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/premium.gif http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pnghttp://cache.lexico.com/g/d/speaker.gif (https://secure.reference.com/premium/login.html?rd=2&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.reference.com%2Fbrowse%2 Fethical) /ˈɛθhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngɪhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngkəl/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[eth-i-kuhhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –adjective 1.pertaining to or dealing with morals or the principles of morality; pertaining to right and wrong in conduct.

Oblong
09-15-2007, 03:09 PM
Serious questions:

If an athlete is feeling sluggish one morning and there's a day game but can't stand coffee/espresso but still decides to go out and get the highest content of caffeine available at Starbucks because he wants the boost, does that make it unethical? He doesn't like coffee and only wants it for it's effects.

What if a player is running late for the game and is driving over the speed limit on the interstate so that he'll get there in time to warmup, stretch, and attend any pregame meetings? He's breaking the law in order to help his team when if he'd follow the law he'd be hurting his team by not being properly prepared. Speeding is illegal but baseball has no explicit punishment for it. Should he be called a cheater?

I'm not saying it's the same thing as using HGH as Ankiel probably did but where exactly is this line between legal/illegal, intended/unintended use?

voodoochile
09-15-2007, 05:18 PM
I have never supported Ankiel or said it was right. I have stated that what he did was completely legal, and at the time HGH was not banned by MLB. An off label use of the drug is for faster healing.

Everyone in this board loves to throw around things as "unethical, ethics, and the such." Please everyone, define what unethical is to you. Using HGH LEGALLY, with a Doctor's script, for an off label use of faster healing, when it was not banned by MLB is not UNETHICAL. Is it right or wrong, that is for everyone to decide. Is it Unethical, well, that depends on who you talk to. I do not think it is Unethical.

I find this story very different than Glaus, bonds, etc.

Farwestchicago, you need to read a little more careful. It was stated in another post of mine that I do not condone Ankiel's actions. You sir need to pay attention better. I don't know what your deal is but I have never supported drug use by athletes and will never support it.

Where is the Podiatrist, he actually can have educated conversations on here. Farwest, you should learn from him.

Legal and ethical are two entirely different concepts. In theory the law is there to encourage people to act ethically, but there are lots of ways to act unethically and still be on the right side of the law. Legally, I am in no way bound to help someone who is lying in the street bleeding to death. I can walk right by and never be punished for it. Ethically, I am obviously on horrible ground if I make that same decision.

You haven't answered my questions about how long these off-label studies on using HGH to increase healing speed have been going on, so the best I can gather is that the use is strictly based on annecdotal evidence at this point in time and that makes it even more questionable, IMO. If not when did these studies start and at what stage are they in (roughly)?

Using a substance which has performance enhancing abilities because it also helps heal faster is still on the wrong side of the ethical line, IMO, especially when the drug in question has not been actually approved for that use. Add in the fact that ALL we have to go on is Ankiel's word for why and how he used the drug and it's an issue that has big ethical red flags all over it, again IMO.

TornLabrum
09-15-2007, 05:54 PM
Legal and ethical are two entirely different concepts. In theory the law is there to encourage people to act ethically, but there are lots of ways to act unethically and still be on the right side of the law. Legally, I am in no way bound to help someone who is lying in the street bleeding to death. I can walk right by and never be punished for it. Ethically, I am obviously on horrible ground if I make that same decision.

You haven't answered my questions about how long these off-label studies on using HGH to increase healing speed have been going on, so the best I can gather is that the use is strictly based on annecdotal evidence at this point in time and that makes it even more questionable, IMO. If not when did these studies start and at what stage are they in (roughly)?

Using a substance which has performance enhancing abilities because it also helps heal faster is still on the wrong side of the ethical line, IMO, especially when the drug in question has not been actually approved for that use. Add in the fact that ALL we have to go on is Ankiel's word for why and how he used the drug and it's an issue that has big ethical red flags all over it, again IMO.

Let me put it another way: If HGH is in the testing stages for this use, and the doctor is not one of those participating in those studies, and Ankiel was not a voluntary participant in those studies, then the prescription of HGH for that use was completely, totally, and indisputably unethical.

voodoochile
09-15-2007, 08:05 PM
Let me put it another way: If HGH is in the testing stages for this use, and the doctor is not one of those participating in those studies, and Ankiel was not a voluntary participant in those studies, then the prescription of HGH for that use was completely, totally, and indisputably unethical.

If Ankiel had a life threatening condition which HGH was showing a tendency to cure in on-going studies then the doctor might have a solid reason for prescribing it even if neither he nor Ankiel were involved in said studies. That does happen and is not unethical but normally it is a last ditch effort to save someone who is otherwise dying. Last I checked Tommy John surgery and being in a hurry to get back to your multi-million dollar job playing a children's game doesn't fit that description...

jabrch
09-15-2007, 09:08 PM
Serious questions:


Serious Answer

Sheffield - USER
Pudge - USER

and don't forget

Neifi - USER

A Tigers fan talking about steroids - what's next? Some Cards and As fans showing up here?

jabrch
09-15-2007, 09:16 PM
Everyone in this board loves to throw around things as "unethical, ethics, and the such." Please everyone, define what unethical is to you. Using HGH LEGALLY, with a Doctor's script, for an off label use of faster healing, when it was not banned by MLB is not UNETHICAL. Is it right or wrong, that is for everyone to decide. Is it Unethical, well, that depends on who you talk to. I do not think it is Unethical.

They obviously don't teach logic and reasoning in Med School. Your arguement is so circular it is ridiculous. Let me explain

You said
1) Using HGH (under specific circumstances) is not unethical
2) It is up to everyone to decide if it is right or wrong.
3) It is unethical, depending on who you talk to
4) You don't think it is unethical

Well - all you have shown us is that you have very low standards of ethics. I'd suggest calling THARC and Dr, Gogan - I'm sure they'd love to hire someone like you. They make a mint getting pro atletes to pay big money for bad medical advice.


I find this story very different than Glaus, bonds, etc.

Not really - the story is, in fact, exactly the same. An athlete took a performance enhancing drug that he didn't need - to perform better. The only difference is that you are defending him.

It was stated in another post of mine that I do not condone Ankiel's actions.

I have never supported drug use by athletes and will never support it.



Then in addition to having low ethical standards, you are engaging in a mad game of doubletalk. Because you can't say that you do not condone it, and then say that it is not unethical and that it was a legitimate use of HGH. If you don't condone it - there must be a good reason for it - right?

Oblong
09-15-2007, 09:24 PM
Serious Answer

Sheffield - USER
Pudge - USER

and don't forget

Neifi - USER

A Tigers fan talking about steroids - what's next? Some Cards and As fans showing up here?

What does that have to do with the discussion? They must not teach logic and reasoning where you went to school either.

TornLabrum
09-15-2007, 11:02 PM
Nice going guys. You closed the thread. Ad hominem.