How does this affect his Hall of Fame chances? What does this have to do with Frank Tanana? Should he have is children taken away? Does this maybe give Frenchy another company to endorse, besides Delta?

And Mike Crudale.

AO

Players are likely on steroids/HGH/other drugs for "theraputic use" as well. Manny's suspension appeared to arise from a failure to include a drug on his theraputic use waiver because Manny didn't realize that drug had been added to the list.

Any surprise he's with the Red Sox?

Too bad they don't make Nick Green a good player.

Any surprise he's with the Red Sox?

Has Boston become the national amphetamine capital while I wasn't paying attention?

Hey, he can chew tobacco, too.

Many college students use amphetamines as an illegal performance enhancing drug. The most common is aderol since most people have a friend with an aderol prescription. It helps concentration and memory. For the record, I have never used any prescription/illegal amphetamines or other PEDs.

dewitty

like so what? it doesn't build any muscles does it?

besides we all know that amphetamines don't do anything more than keep a person awake

As I've pointed out before, the year of Floyd Landis' problems somewhere close to 60% of the field of the Tor de France had some kind of medical exemption. No longer the case though. In this case the driving force was individual team sponsors.

[Y]ou end up zoning out too much, and if you zone out too much while you're playing, you're done.

Sounds like he's stoned.

Frankly, the guy plays like such a hyperactive spaz I wonder if he doesn't need to change his dosage.

What I love about this article: the prescription MUST be written by the team doctor. There's no room for "oh, I got some tainted so and so from my mystery doctor, that's why I failed the test".

The teams pay these doctors for a reason. The team doctor should be actively involved or at least aware of every drug being prescribed to the players.

How does this affect his Hall of Fame chances?

I'd say it cuts them in half. Or doubles them. Both actually.

Has Boston become the national amphetamine capital while I wasn't paying attention?

Hmmm, having trouble paying attention???

Sounds like you need Adderall...

Symptom...none except sucked playing baseball
Prescription..PED (performance enhancing drug)
Outcome...no longer sucked playing baseball.

fine I guess so long as not taking the PED (performance enhancing drug) in order to go from sucking playing baseball to no longer sucking playing baseball

[14] That deserves a Primey. That was awesome.

My dog loves Greenies.

I'd say it cuts them in half. Or doubles them. Both actually.

So you're saying there's a chance...

14 and 18 are both Primey-worthy. Excellent job, guys...

Having actually taken amphetamines as a PED, I guess I should chime in here.

To start out as "clear" as possible: What I took were time-released dexedrine, about 150 milligrams per dose. This is the diet pill referred to in Hairspray. Actually, it's half of the diet pill; I split them because I didn't need the whole dose. This is also, if my sources are correct, the drug given to ADHD users. Actual MLB "greenies" may not have the time-release effect, in which case the PED effect will be greater, but the duration will be shorter (yes, I've taken some of the non-time released versions and can verify all of this). Crystal meth, according to report (I've never taken that stuff; I saw speed freaks in the 1960s and wanted no part of that) works like that, except that recreational abusers take very large doses, which is what messes them up so much. "Dosage is everything" as doctors have told me.

The effect of the dexedrine on me was BOUNDLESS physical energy (the PED effect), complete with completely clear mental focus, and NO appetite for anything other than water, for 8 hours (without the time release, it's about 4 hours). Now, THAT's a PED, IMO, not to mention the best diet pill I've ever had, because it induced me to exercise as well as not eat. The crash was minimal, probably due to the time-release effect. The reason that this energy-enhancing stuff is given to ADHD people, who have too much energy, if anything, is that the effect on them is just about the exact opposite of what it is on me. They lose nervous energy, gain ability to concentrate long-term. It apparently is a neurological thing; amphetamines affect most people like they do me, but ADHD types have a different neurology, so they get a different effect.

I would assume that baseball players who have a waiver to take amphetamines have at least some ADHD, which makes sense, since this is a physical sport and ADHD types work their bodies a lot right from birth, so there ought to be some ADHD types in baseball. For ADHD people, amphetamines are a life-saver, not a PED. I would never criticize a player who had that condition and was taking greenies. For the rest of us, though, amphetamines are a much more documented PED than steroids have ever been. So is cocaine, which has similar effects, but a duration of about 20 minutes or so, which is why Tim Raines (he's the one who admitted it, if I remember right) had to snort up every inning or two.

My personal opinion is that unless and until the HoF removes all the amphetamine and cocaine users, which pretty much means everyone dating back to the 1880s (not a typo, EIGHTEEN 80s), when cocaine was publicly touted as a PED for baseball, there is no reason for any flap over steroids. Greenies and coke are much better-documented PEDs than steroids. To be honest, there is still a LOT of medical doubt as to whether steroids actually enhance physical performance (as opposed to physical appearance, which you can see on any bodybuilding stage or professional wrestling show), because no one has ever been allowed to do a legal, regulated, double-blind study over time. Pretty much all the evidence is anecdotal, just like this post is.

Now, it's obvious that the HoF is not going to remove everyone dating back to the 1880s, because that's, well, the whole HoF. So I see no reason for this flap over steroids except that this particular collection of drugs, plus the 1998 homer season of McGwire and Sosa, caused a lot of unthinking emotional outrage, most of which has now cooled down except for those people who live altogether on emotional outrage (Dick Young is a famous old example; we have one in St. Louis named Bryan Burwell). My guess is that it's probably the homers. It's one thing to beat Babe Ruth's single season record by one homer in a longer season, and the emotional outrage types forced an asterisk on that one for a few years. But this was breaking Maris' mark by nine taters. That's what set people off so much; the size of the margin. That's why McGwire took so much heat and Sosa so comparatively little: Sosa didn't get the record.

And what's worse, this got caught up in the debate/argument/fight over sabermetrics. Any decent sabermetrician can start with McGwire's rookie season in 1987 (which is specifically EXEMPTED from steroids by Jose Canseco on page 7 of his book), run out a career projector like Bill James' old BROCK2 system, adjust for the homer rates of 1998 and 1987, adjust for the Oakland ballpark (worst homer park in the AL) to Busch in 98 (neutral), and predict that McGwire was good for something very close to 70 home runs. I did that myself after the 1997 season, because just 2 months of McGwire in STL was enough to make me suspicious. He simply is/was the greatest pure home run hitter of all time, a fact which was masked by his ballpark. But every time a sabermetrician did that, it made the sabermetrics-haters, especially those sportswriters who can't do algebra, go ballistic and become more and ever more unyielding about steroids.

It was, to swipe a phrase, a perfect storm. And that's my opinion on that, the most convincing part of which is probably that I actually took amphetamines and can personally verify that they do, indeed, enhance physical sports performance for non-ADHD neurologies.

- Brock Hanke

Excellent post, Brock. I'm bumping this thread so our midday readers will see it.

Excellent post.