From SI.com (hat tip to YankeesRedSox.com):
NEW YORK (AP) -- Athletes who take human growth hormone may not be getting the boost they expected.
While growth hormone adds some muscle, it doesn't appear to improve strength or exercise capacity, according to a review of studies that tested the hormone in mostly athletic young men.
"It doesn't look like it helps and there's a hint of evidence it may worsen athletic performance," said Dr. Hau Liu, of Santa Clara Valley Medical Center in San Jose, Calif., who was lead author of the review.
But the new research has some limitations and sheds no light on long-term use of HGH. The scientists note their analysis included few studies that measured performance. The tests also probably don't reflect the dose and frequency practiced by athletes illegally using the hormone. Experiments like that aren't likely to be conducted.
"It's dangerous, unethical and it's never going to be done," said Dr. Gary I. Wadler, a member of the World Anti-Doping Agency and a spokesman for the American College of Sports Medicine.
Liu and his colleagues at Stanford University sought to find out if growth hormone really could improve performance. They looked for the best published tests, those comparing participants who got the hormone to those who didn't get the treatment.
They analyzed 27 studies involving 440 participants. The results were released Monday by the Annals of Internal Medicine.
Researchers found that those who got the hormone put on about 5 pounds more of muscle, and lost about 2 pounds more of fat, although the fat loss wasn't statistically different. The researchers said some of the extra body mass could just be fluid buildup.
There was no difference found in strength or exercise stamina between the two groups, but there were only two strength studies and eight that measured exercise. Those who got the hormone had more side effects including swelling and fatigue.
I don't buy this. We've seen what the drug has done for players like Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds, who have had their careers extended because of it. People don't get stronger with age, and that's what we've seen in athletes who use HGH. I've also read reports that say HGH can even improve a user's eyesight, which would be very helpful for hitters.
5 Comments:
This a crap article chocked full of crap information, bad and junk science. There just is no real science here to support any comment made or the article - save one: "There are just tons of things we don't know," said Rogol. As such, why would a competent and honest author bother to write the article?
I have yet to see anyone bring up the true ethics of hGH situation. People have a wide range of natural levels of hGH by virtue of their genetics and age. Skilled athletes tend to have the highest levels naturally. They receive this higher hGH production level as a birthright, not by skill - but then don't want other people with lower natural levels to supplement their hGH to an equal level - thereby truly leveling the playing field on hGH levels and making performance difference more practiced skill based. This is ignorance and hypocrisy at its worst. Sooner or later sports ethics decision makers are going to have to recognize and deal with biological science. Note we are not talking about non-natural performance enhancing substances.
I agree with your first paragraph completely. This article is nonsense, which is why I said I don't buy it, and one of the reasons I brought it up in the first place.
I don't know enough about HGH to speak about the ethics behind using it. In the cases of Clemens and Bonds, though, it does seem like something of a miracle drug, which doesn't seem fair to those who don't use it. But like I said, I don't know enough about it.
This has been known for quite some time. I'm just surprised mainstream media is finally catching on.
I would suggest further reading on this subject:
here
here
here
here
here
Finally I'll leave you with a quote from the Mitchell report,
"A number of studies have shown that use of human growth hormone does not increase muscle strength in healthy subjects or well-trained athletes. Athletes who have tried human growth hormone as a training aid have reached the same conclusion. The author of one book targeted at steroid abusers observed that “[t]he most curious aspect of the whole situation is that I’ve never encountered any athlete using HGH to benefit from it, and all the athletes who admit to having used it will usually agree: it didn’t/doesn’t work for them.”
I fear you may be confusing HGH with steroids, Greg. Bonds and Clemens are on the block for using both substances, not just human growth hormone, so I do kinda buy that HGH doesnt promote longevity.
This is kinda like an AIDS/HIV thing... very similar in seriousness, but the particulars are very different.
Derek,
I find it hard to believe that HGH doesn't help these players. Like dug said, the science seems flawed, and like the article says "There are just tons of things we don't know."
It may be years before we have a definitive answer one way or another.
Post a Comment