DISQUS

Dr. Barry Leshowitz · 7 months ago

I find your commentary on the mock jury trial involving steroids accurate and on point. What is not entirely clear is the basis of your conclusion that there is no medical evidence linking steroid use to death or other serious adverse events. I would be interested in knowing how you reached your conclusions about the effects of steroids.

Millard Baker · 7 months ago

Dr. Leshowitz,

Thank you very much for your feedback and comments.

I can not deny that there is a relationship between anabolic steroids and some serious adverse events. I take exception to statements asserting that the relationship is direct and causal. Specifically, I am appalled that the assertion that an acute anabolic steroid "overdose" can lead to death.

For example, an isolated cycle is unlikely to cause heart disease and/or fatal cardiovascular event. However, anabolic steroids, especially medically unsupervised steroid use, are known to have an adverse effect on cardiovascular indicators in many individuals. These are practically always transient and return to normal upon cessation.

Unfortunately, there are some individuals who are on extreme supraphysiological dosages of various synthetic steroids in addition to testosterone. A lifetime of extreme steroid abuse could have serious consequences even though there is no direct evidence. I think that is a reasonable conclusion.

More importantly, I think a distinction needs to be made between use and abuse of anabolic steroids, even when indicated for improvement of muscle and body composition. It is my opinion that anabolic steroids can be used safely in moderate, periodic dosages when under knowledgeable medical supervision for the body composition enhancement.

Just like any other drug, anabolic steroids can be used to cause harm if abused and used irresponsibly. But judicious use of androgens hold potential for many therapeutic indications beyond what has been formally approved by the FDA, including therapeutic effects arising from improvements in body composition.

Please stay in touch. I think it is critical to have knowledgeable and open-minded involvement from the medical community in the anabolic steroid debate. Otherwise, the therapeutic potential of androgens in medicine could be lost for another decade.

anonymousgrantstudent · 2 months ago

Wow.

I'm actually on the Grant Mock Trials team, and we spent all our time laughing about how silly the case was because of this very point. NOT, however, writing hate articles that effectively demonize the entire Mock Trials system. No one took anything about steroids away from the case. What we learned was limited to basic arguing tactics, rather than that steroids can kill folk.

No one of any intelligence thought that EPO was an anabolic steroid, and Mock Trials teams are composed mainly of intelligent people. The ones that attempt to participate and are below average intelligence are weeded out early on. As such, no one CARED what the case said about EPO.

Millard Baker · 2 months ago

The mock trial competitions are awesome for students. The criticism is not of the competition and the skills and tactics imparted to participants. It is aimed at disappointing lack of fact-checking of case materials by the organizers of the mock trials.

I would expect more from the prestigious legal firms sponsoring such competitions.

anonymousgrantstudent · 2 months ago

The point of the competition isn't to learn the ins and outs of medicine, the point is to learn how to debate. As such, the accuracy of any statements inside a case doesn't have to be perfect, just as the laws themselves don't have to be perfect.

Millard Baker · 2 months ago

Point well-taken. It just seems odd that the veracity of statements within this context are not subject to debate as well.

I hope my point about the perpetuation of steroid hysteria and misinformation is not lost.