According to researchers at the Stanford University School of Medicine, new analysis show that athletes who take risks in taking illegal growth hormones as performance enhancers may not be getting the benefits they want; the studies show that there is no evidence that growth hormones can boost athletic performance.

Data from previous studies were pooled, summarizing what was known about the effects of growth hormone on athletic performance. Hau Liu, M.D., lead author of the study, said that the analysis may not reflect how athletes actually take the drug but because of the recent controversy surrounding growth hormone use among athletes, it was a good time to scrutinize previous studies about the drug.

Growth hormone is in the list of banned substances set by the World Anti-Doping Agency. Athletes competing in the Olympics, as well as the National Football League and Major League Baseball will be disqualified from competing should they be found using growth hormone. In the United States, it is illegal to distribute growth hormone for athletic purposes. Despite the ban, many athletes have been accused in taking growth hormone to boost their performance and strength in recent months. Many athletes also use growth hormone because it is difficult to detect in drug testing laboratories.

However, Dr. Liu, a clinical scholar in endocrinology, said that while they saw a change in body composition in the intake of growth hormone, this did not translate to any improvement in strength and performance.

The researchers searched through medical literature as early as 1966, looking for studies that tested the physical effects of excess growth hormone compared with a placebo in healthy people. They only included studies that were double-blinded, meaning the participants and the researchers did not know which of the participants received growth hormone and which of them received placebo. Studies involving the use of growth hormone for growth hormone deficiencies caused by pituitary tumors and other conditions were not included in the analysis. It was found that growth hormone does improve strength for people who had a deficiency and took growth hormone to bring back their hormones to normal levels.

The group found a total of 27 studies that fit the criteria, totaling 303 participants in all. The combined data from the 27 independent studies that looked at the effects of growth hormone in healthy people showed that growth hormone did not increase performance or strength. Those who took growth hormone did see a leaner body mass, which was associated with having more muscle. However, during exercise, those who received growth hormone produced more lactate, which can cause muscle fatigue. In one study in particular, two cyclists who took growth hormone were not able to finish a workout because of muscle fatigue.

Despite having leaner body mass, those who took growth hormone did not appear to be any stronger. Studies that involved measurements of how much work the muscles can do also showed no improvement among those taking growth hormone. Senior author Andrew Hoffman, MD, said that there isn’t any substantial scientific evidence to show that growth hormone improves athletic performance.

Urinary analysis is the primary method most drug testing laboratories employ to detect the illegal use of anabolic steroids among athletes. This method has been quite successful in detecting most of the steroids that are illicitly used in sports, especially the synthetic varieties because they have easily identified structures. However, this method is not fail-safe especially when it comes to the detection of the illicit use of testosterone (also known as T), which is a naturally occurring hormone.

To detect the intake of exogenous testosterone, the person’s normal hormone profile has to be distorted to some degree and optimal markers need to be identified. The cut-off ratio of androgen glucuronides to epitestosterone is usually 6. The expected urinary ratio of T/E among healthy males not using anabolic steroids is ~1.

However, a lot of athletes who use anabolic steroids switch from the use of synthetic compound to T (testosterone) pharmaceuticals so as to evade detection. Thus detection has been increasingly difficult. Not to mention, a lot of drug companies develop new classes of steroids all the time, which evade traditional drug testing. Drug testing laboratories and sports organizations continue to look for better methods to detect the illicit use of steroids across all sports.

Reactive Desorption Electrospray Ionization

Recently, researchers in China and Indiana reported that they are developing a faster and more efficient method for detecting anabolic steroids in urine. This new method, they claimed, takes only a few seconds and does not require a lot of sample preparation. Their new method was described in the journal Analytical Chemistry, entitled, “Rapid Screening of Anabolic Steroids in Urine by Reactive Desorption Electrospray Ionization.” In the report, they acknowledged that the current existing urinalysis method is effective but involves cumbersome and time-consuming preparation steps, making it quite costly in the long run.

One of the main reasons that steroid detection cannot be implemented fully in schools and in the police force is the relatively expensive cost of steroid testing. Led by Zheng Ouyang and R. Graham Cooks, the research team developed a combination of testing techniques: desorption electrospray ionization (DESI) and tandem mass spectrometry. The researchers analyzed fresh urine samples containing trace elements of seven different types of anabolic steroids using the new method. With only using a single drop of urine, they accurately identified the steroids in a few seconds.

Enzyme-linked immune sorbent assay

Australian scientists from the University of Sydney, New South Wales are using a technique called ELISA (enzyme-linked immune sorbent assay) to counter designer steroids that are being used to cheat in horse racing and other sports. The Australian Racing Forensic Laboratory employs this method as a preliminary screen during race-day for detecting metabolites that are produced by steroids. The research team developed this method further for targeting new designer steroids such as tetrahydrogestrinone.

Instead of detecting the steroids itself, the method detects the D-ring of metabolites which are produced by these types of designer steroids and are broken down in the body. While the researchers are working in the field of drug detection among horses, McLeod says that the issues are very similar to drug testing in human sports.

Researchers at the University of Massachusetts found that the controversial performance enhancing drug “Andro,” short for androstenedione, may affect moods as well as muscles. The study was done by then doctoral students Catherine Auger and Constanza Villalba under the supervision of professor Geert De Vries. Auger is currently a post doctoral researcher at the John Hopkins University. It should be noted that the study was conducted on rats. However, according to the scientists, the implications for humans are important and cannot be ignored.

Androstenedione is a hormone that is naturally produced in the male and female body. It is a steroid precursor produced in the gonads and adrenal glands as an intermediate step in the biochemical pathway producing the estrogens estradiol and estrone and the androgen testosterone. Some androstenedione is secreted into the plasma, which may be converted into peripheral tissues and subsequently into male and female sex hormones, specifically testosterone and estrogens.

Andro is synthetically produced as an anabolic steroid and sometimes sold over-the-counter as a nutritional supplement. Andro gained a lot of attention and produced controversy when professional baseball player Mark McGwire, star hitter for the St. Louis Cardinals, admitted to using the drug to help him train. Sold as a muscle enhancement product and popular among bodybuilders, McGwire was also rumored to have used Andro to throw off detection of the steroids he was allegedly using. At that time, Andro was legal under the U.S. law for use in Major League Baseball. However, it was banned by the National Football League, International Olympic Committee, and the World Anti-Doping Agency.

Since then, doctors, scientists, and ethicists have been studying Andro and its effects on and implications to the body. While researchers focused their studies on how Andro affects the muscles and athletic performance, the group from University of Massachusetts focused on how Andro affects the brain. The study was conducted through the University’s Neuroscience and Behavior Program, to Center for Neuroendocrine Studies, and the department of psychology.

Villalba notes that steroids like Andro and other more potent counterparts such as testosterone affect more than just a person’s muscle mass and athletic performance, it also affects the brain. Andro and other steroids change the levels of neurotransmitters in the brain, and in effect, stimulate aggression and libido.

She explains that steroids are critically important hormones and are naturally produced in both the male and female body. Steroids are responsible for puberty and also play a major role in growth, brain development, mood regulation, and behavior. She says that those who are taking Andro could be susceptible to increase aggression or steroid-induced rage as a result of the extra hormones.

The researchers specifically studied the effect of Andro on a neurotransmitter called vasopressin which performs several functions in the brain. Vasopressin governs wake-sleep cycles, thirst, and aggression. The researchers determined that andro, like testosterone, enables the maintenance of high levels of vasopressin in males. This was true for the rats that did not have the ability to make their own male hormones.

No one wants to be a loser in this battle. NFL previously handed down suspensions for 4 NFL players for taking a banned diuretic which serves as a masking agent for steroid.The NFL Players Association get into the scene by asking a federal judge to hold the suspension. The players lawyers also filed similar suit against the NFL. Now its time for the NFL to defend and insist its power over the issue. They contend the legality of the injunction issued by JUdge Magnuson.

The NFL asks an appeals court to reconsider federal judge Magnuson’s order blocking the suspension of four NFL players for violating the league’s anti-doping policy. The league filed it last Monday in a U.S. District Court in Minnesota. According to court records, the attorneys for the NFL were asking the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals to take up the issue on the decision of District Judge Paul Magnuson earlier this month. Judge magnuson cleared the way for Kevin Williams and Pat Williams of the Minnesota Vikings, and Charles Grant, Deuce McAllister and Will Smith of the New Orleans Saints to continue playing. He issued an injunction that prevents the league to enforce their sanctions. These would leave the players to play until the end of the season.

One of the reason why Judge Magnuson issued the decision was the time given to him in judging the case. He said in previous interviews that he need more time to consider the dispute between the NFL and the NFL Players Association. Last week was the deadline for the parties to propose a schedule for further proceedings in the case.

Other issues tackled by Magnuson is the partiality of arbitrator Jeffrey Pash, the league’s chief legal counsel, who suspended the players under the Policy for Steroids and Related Substances.

Another issue is whether the NFL violated public policy by not informing the players since the league already learned in November 2006 that StarCaps contain bumetanide, the banned substance for which the five players tested positive. StarCaps is the dietary supplement they were taking. The union was successful in securing an injunction blocking the suspensions. The league’s failure to disclose that information jeopardized players’ health and made the suspensions unlawful according to NFLPA.

However, the league seems not conceding with the decision of Judge Magnuson. They asked the Appeals Court that discovery proceedings before Magnuson be put off until the 8th Circuit Court makes a decision on the league’s appeal. According to some reports, the league might prevail with the appellate court ultimately finding it acted properly under the Collective Bargaining Agreement and federal labor laws.

The NFLPA claims that the league failed to inform the players about the possible suspension of players in taking the dietary supplement StarCaps because it contains Bumetanide, a banned substance in NFL. This claim was strongly argued by the NFL laywers saying that what they did was part of the leagues’s collective bargaining agreement.

On the other hand, the NFL Players Association will not easily give up on this case. The union also proposed a schedule for proceedings in the case that would delay a decision on the suspensions for more than three months. That would mean that the players can still play even after the Feb. 1 Super Bowl.

Excitement over sports is a worldwide phenomenon. In oppose to that when they hear steroid for the athletes, many are feeling disgrace over sport’s steroid controversy. Russian doctors in late 1950’s started using steroid to help the muscles along with body mass to build up more rapidly. They articulated that supplying athletes mega doses of the male hormone testosterone would enhance the performance of their athletes. Their goal was to empower them to run faster, jump higher, throw the discus and javelin farther, lift heavier weights, and excel in all power events. As a result, Russian athletes went into the world arena of international sports competition with a marked edge, dominating most of the sports events at the time.

Anabolic steroids are influential artificial side of the male hormone testosterone. Many years now, steroids have been used clinically, and under cautious regulation, as a relief in getting on puberty that is delayed, in construction of muscles withered by ailment or surgical treatment, and for the fortification of blood cells during radiation or chemotherapy. Intended for these and other physiological harms obvious to doctors, steroids have been a strong tool in the hands of the medical line of work.

Steroids! The very word cast a long disreputable outline over the 1988 Olympic Games held in Seoul, Republic of Korea. A number of hope-filled athletes were suspended by the International Olympic Committee for the alleged use of the drug. The earth’s fastest sprinter in the 100-meter final basks in the magnificence of his gold medal — but not for long. Tests taken after the race revealed steroid use. He lost his medal, and his world record.

This, however, should not have taken the sports world by surprise. In the 1988 Winter Olympics at Calgary, Canada, an athlete was banned from the games after testing positive for steroid use. It is reported that at the prestigious World Class track-and-field meet in Zurich, Switzerland, in 1987, half of the 28 athletes scheduled to participate in the “power” events—shot put, hammer, javelin, and discus—did not show up after learning of steroid tests.

First, it is done to protect the spirit of fair play in the Olympics. Then there is the matter of protecting the athletes. Drugs in sports became a matter of serious concern when a Danish cyclist died of drug abuse in the 1960 Rome Games. In 1987, Birgit Dressel, West Germany’s heptathlon medal hopeful, died from using some one hundred different drugs in her struggle to win the gold medal in her seven-event competition. Anabolic steroid, the “wonder drug” to develop muscles, can also develop problems in a user’s system—liver cancer, sterility, kidney damage, and heart trouble, just to name a few.

Aside from football players, weightlifters and sprinters, steroids use is also prevalent in White and blue collar employees, females and, most frighteningly, adolescents get steroids. These are all linked by the craving to confidently appear, carry out and feel improved, not considering of the dangers of using these drugs. Controversy over anabolic steroid should not be claimed as the non-medical use of this is named as against the law and barred by the major sports organizations. And still some athletes are continuously using this steroid with faith of getting benefits from it. In spite of the effort, according to Dr. Gary Wadler, of educating the public regarding this drug hazard the number of user is gradually increasing.

When people talk about performance enhancing drugs it already connotes a negative implications. It would already give a bad impression on whoever is the user. What more if it is being used by athletes in the high school, college and specially by athletes in professional sports. When an athlete takes performance enhancing drugs or steroids it is always associated with cheating. Some experts believes that when a person is taking any performance enhancing drugs it is already cheating since these drugs gives more power, stamina and endurance to the players.

How about brain boosting drugs? Can we consider these as taking advantage or to be more specific cheating? Although brain boosting drugs are common in the colleges to help students in taking exams and for treating a medical condition, it is also being used by some professional athletes. According to experts, cognitive enhancing drugs should not be feared and should be welcomed by the public. They suggested that the society should be more open to the use of drugs that boost brain power rather than staying away from them. “This isn”t like steroids and sports… enhancement is not a dirty word,” as qouted from one of the scientists commenting on this issue.

Stanford law Professor Henry Greely and neuropsychology Professor Barbara Sahakian at the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom said that “We call for a presumption that mentally competent adults should be able to engage in cognitive enhancement using drugs. From assembly line workers to surgeons, many different kinds of employee may benefit from enhancement and want access to it, yet they may also need protection from the pressure to enhance.”

According to Greeley, no new wave of high-efficacy cognitive enhancement drugs has yet emerged for healthy individuals. But society needs to prepare itself for the intricate ethical issues that would accompany such advances. Greely also said that the moral repugnance that is often focused on steroid use in sports should not be grafted onto cognitive enhancement drugs. “Better-working brains produce things of more lasting value than longer home runs,” he said. Doctors, educators, labor experts, employers and legislators should be thinking about it, he and his co-authors said.

The researchers also claimed that a safe pill shouldn’t be perceived differently to other strategies already in use to improve the minds, like a good night’’s sleep or a strong cup of coffee. Although they call on more research on the effects and safety of these drugs.

Another neuroethicist, Julian Savulescu of the University of Oxford, recommended that brain pills could give that extra edge to nations whose citizens are willing to raise their intelligence.

Survey results also shows that almost 25 percent of students at US universities bought Ritalin or Adderall - prescription drugs to treat attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. Students routinely buy these drugs on black markets to boost memory and concentration. Another stimulant, Modafinil, has also been considered as a mind enhancer.