Assuming PEDs actually improve performance, when you were functionally allowed to use them, you'd have to be stupid not to.

Only if you think caring about your long term health is stupid

There are plenty out there who believe the long-term health impacts of PED use to be overstated. Sure, if you're using multiple grams a week for years at a time like a professional bodybuilder or professional wrestler, there are some pretty serious effects.

If you're running 12-week cycles with reasonable doses, good post-cycle therapy, and lengthy periods off, however (i.e., the typical protocol for responsible use), the long-term effects are almost certainly minimal.

Given that Manny popped for a post-cycle therapy drug and that Gagne is specifically saying the team doctor gave him a protocol, I'd assume that the common use case in MLB is more likely the latter than the former.

If you think baseball doctors have issues, imagine a boxing doctor or a football doctor, particularly during the football steroid era. If a boxing doctor were actually doing their job, the only advice they would give is "don't box anymore".

I think #48 hits the nail on the head.

I have no doubt that there are good team doctors and bad team doctors. I expect there are team doctors who will do whatever the team wants, and there are team doctors who take the health of the players very seriously and won't jeopardize that even if it threatens there job, and then there are a bunch of team doctors in the grey area between those two positions.

Most doctors I've met take the Hippocratic oath pretty seriously. However, most human beings I've met are subject to pressures, biases and influences, often without even being aware of it. And I don't think we're in any position to even guess what any given team doctor would do in any given situation.

Having said all of that, #47 is how I would expect a "typical" doctor (not necessarily "team doctor") to react: "Don't do it. It's very bad for you. But if you're determined to do it, then at LEAST do it this way..."

imagine a boxing doctor or a football doctor, particularly during the football steroid era

Isn't the football steroid era also known as Now?

A good doctor would both tell you "Don't" (and explain why) but also be willing to offer harm-reduction advice if you insisted on ignoring his recommendation and planned on using.

The most obvious example here is advising the use of clean needles to heroin addicts. A doctor who doesn't give that advice, even though it is advice in a sense on how to use heroin, is doing wrong by her patients.

The problem with the HGH analogy is that I don't know if there's any evidence about more and less healthful ways of using HGH. The "protocol" thing sounds more like a doctor advising a more effective way of using HGH.

I dunno; I have the vague feeling that it used to be a lot worse. I mean, every now and then I see players suspended for something or other; that didn't happen when I was a kid (or at least, I can't recall it happening). I mean, Jim Miller got suspended several years ago for some crap he got at GNC, IIRC.

Shouldn't it be "I, ‘80 percent’ of Dodgers used HGH"

I mean, it wouldn't be "Me used HGH".

Isn't the football steroid era also known as Now?

I suppose you could make that arguement. The NFL started testing in 1987 and has suspended a number of players. Pre 1987 it certainly was open bar; how effectively the testing rules have "cleaned up" the NFL is open to interpretation.

Gagne's drug use has ruined "Welcome to the Jungle" for me.

Nice.
But Mr. Brownstone doesn't really have that closer vibe.

The best team doctor story comes from rugby in England. I don't know much about rugby but evidently there is a rule against substitutions at some point except in the case of injury. In one game, a particular team wanted to sub a guy when they had no subs left so the player feigned an injury and when the team doctor went out to check on him, the team doctor cut the player open so they could sub the player off. Unfortunately for all involved it was caught on tape and the doctor ended up losing his license to practice.

If you are referring to Bloodgate the details are slightly different. The player bit a blood capsule to feign injury, then demanded the team doctor cut his lip in the locker room because he was afraid he would be examined after the game. The doctor was suspended from her practice, but was cleared to work again, although not in the sports work any more probably.

Walt Davis
1. Unless recent studies have found otherwise, the evidence is that HGH doesn't enhance performance.

So you ignore anecdotal evidence from Andy Pettitte, who said it helped his recovery with the Astros.
I know body builders that testify it gives them more energy and focus with their training.

I know body builders that testify it gives them more energy and focus with their training.

I know athletes who swear they get a real energy boost from wearing a copper bracelet.

I'd be curious to hear the negative health impacts he's attributing to HGH.

He's now 9 feet tall. Bumps his head on stuff all the time.

So you ignore anecdotal evidence from Andy Pettitte, who said it helped his recovery with the Astros.

Yes.

I know body builders that testify it gives them more energy and focus with their training.

It was probably this belief that led to them to start using in the first place.

By the way, my understanding of the literature (based on reading reviews of the literature) is that HGH does improve lean body mass (you will look better) but doesn't build strength. From the Wiki page:

"Claims that growth hormone enhances physical performance are not supported by the scientific literature. Although the limited available evidence suggests that growth hormone increases lean body mass, it may not improve strength; in addition, it may worsen exercise capacity and increase adverse events. More research is needed to conclusively determine the effects of growth hormone on athletic performance."[4]
Here's your wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_hormone_in_sports

In short, you will look better but there's no evidence you will perform better. Looking better would be reason enough for its supposed popularity among actors, rappers, and "non-serious" bodybuilders.

It may help injury recovery and/or resistance ... wouldn't that be a good thing? Also from Wiki:

HGH may build up connective tissue within muscles, at least in the short term.[6] If these effects are real they “may promote resistance to injury or faster repair [but] would make the muscle no more capable of force generation”.[6] With the release of the Mitchell Report on December 13, 2007, 86 players were revealed to have taken steroids while playing in the Major Leagues. The report stated: "Players who use Human Growth Hormone apparently believe that it assists their ability to recover from injuries and fatigue".[9]

At the very least, such usage meets Andy's silly "restorative" criterion and therefore should be OK in Andy's universe. That statement is consistent with Pettitte's anecdote and your claim about bodybuilders but, y'know, has some actual scientific evidence behind it.

how effectively the testing rules have "cleaned up" the NFL is open to interpretation.

Only if you are cosmically naive and believe that we are living in a golden age of 320+ pound linemen running 4.5 40's.

So you ignore anecdotal evidence from Andy Pettitte, who said it helped his recovery with the Astros.

Helping with recovery is not the same thing as enhancing performance, unless you also want to classify antibiotics, corticosteroids and physical therapy as "enhancing performance". I would also note that Andy is anything but a rocket scientist, and that it is impossible to determine how he would have recovered from that injury, at that time, if he did not use it.

So you ignore anecdotal evidence from Andy Pettitte, who said it helped his recovery with the Astros.

Of course, if they were taking hGH they were almost certainly taking a lot of other things, making cause and effect more than a little difficult to parse.

Didn't Sheffield say steroids did nothing for him? I guess that means steroids are not performance enhancing. I'm glad we cleared that up.

cfb, why does that seem high to you? As other shave pointed put, amps, hgh and aas were all prevalent and these guys are looking at 7 or 8 figure salaries if they stay in the bigs or very possibly coaching for a fraction of that, or having no marketable skills whatsoever, if they don't. HUGE incentive to get any edge you can.

Also, your assertion people don't hang out in groups of 8 or more is sort of N/A fr a group of 25 guys who spend several hours a day together for about 6 months. Flights, pre game, dugout, bullpen, post game, spring training. They spend lots of time together in groups much larger than 8.

Gagne's drug use has ruined "Welcome to the Jungle" for me.

I appreciate your ability to not let the '90s or the 2000's ruin that for you...

I know body builders that testify it gives them more energy and focus with their training.

I played rugby for years with a guy in his 30's who had an issue with his knee. He had the knee surgically repaired and it didn't bring the knee back 100%. Approx two years later, rather than have the knee done again, he used steroids to strengthen it/rehabilitate it. It brought the knee back closer to 100% and he played another 3 years or so before it was a issue again. I would never do it, but that guy felt it was a better option than surgery again, and the results did seem to work in his favor.