3 ms·
It’s interesting to me how much of the hostility to this drug has a moral dimension. I am quite fit for my middle age. It’s a relative superpower which confers
by jshaqaw 3y ago
It’s interesting to me how much of the hostility to this drug has a moral dimension. I am quite fit for my middle age. It’s a relative superpower which confers a degree of status in this world. It’s not why I originally became fit 5 or so years ago but it’s something I increasingly notice or to be clear others notice and comment on.
I think the “fit” of the world get inherently uncomfortable that our relative social currency is being “devalued” if everyone can be like us with an “unearned” pill. And it comes out as hostility and skepticism.
I admit haven’t done much research on this particular topic. History should caution us that serious medication like this often has serious side effects which are not apparent early on. I get that. But unlike many others I don’t “hope” that happens like some kind of moral balancing. I get that reaction. In my gut I have that “I did it with willpower and lifestyle and sweat and these people shouldn’t just get it at CVS.” But that’s just the primate status brain talking.
Not that it impacts the outcome but I sincerely hope these drugs can improve people’s lives without significant negative problems. I can find my relative status elsewhere or better yet try to grow up past such impulses.
- joedevon 3y agoWell said. I believe you are right. That and ignorance of how Leptin works, setpoint or lipostat theory of bodyweight regulation...once you've gotten fat, your setpoint goes up and the hunger signals are far greater than folks who have never gotten fat. You can have 2 athletes with identical weight height and BF%, but if one had been fat once, their hunger signals from the brain will be far greater than the athlete who was always slim.
- briHass 3y agoThose of us that work out, however, have been dealing with 'cheating with drugs' for a while: steroids. When you get close with enough gym rats, it's utterly shocking how many people with a muscular build use steroids. It's to the point where I essentially don't believe anyone claiming 'natty' (natural) status if they have more than a 1 sigma increase in musculature. It's also downright laughable how the media/Youtube influencers/etc. treat everyone like idiots. Men's Health will run an article on Mr. Moviestar who was 5'11' and 150 pounds before his role as Superhero Character got to 200 pounds and veiny biceps in 6 months by eating eggs, oatmeal, and chicken breast and doing some situps.
- reaperman 3y ago> downright laughable *criminal Not literally, but it's really, really awful for society to have no idea what physiques/transformations required AAS and which didn't. That type of misinformation should not be allowed, and it would be amazing if there were a reasonable way to ban mass media lying / misrepresentation. Unfortunately, any law like that would instantly get weaponized to obliterate any remaining first amendment protections. It's crazy how many athletes I tried to keep up with at D2/D3 schools which I now realize were on heavy steroid cycles but at the time I just thought I wasn't eating enough / had bad genetics / whatever. It's also interesting how the negative effects of light/moderate steroid use are really blown out of proportion, and how many men on "TRT" are getting their testosterone to twice the highest "normal" levels (e.g. reaching testosterone levels of 1500-2000) under a doctor's recommendation. And men just blame themselves their whole life for simply not trying hard enough. When I finally started TRT at the relatively very low dose of 120mg/week I laughed/cried for months at how insanely easy it was to build real muscle for the first time in my life. Training at 15-25% of the intensity that I used to over the past 20 years yielded 400% better results.