Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[GlyphGryph]

I have absolutely no idea what you mean by that.

[Neonivek]

I have absolutely no idea what you mean by that.

Drugs is to Sports like Knife and Hand is to Thumb Wrestling.

Mind you I am just musing. Sometimes you can't get anywhere inside your own thinking without throwing out ideas.

[DJ]

If you could break your thumb in Thumb Wrestling.

[Neonivek]

If you could break your thumb in Thumb Wrestling.

Can't you?

Though fine. Arm Wrestling

Though I wonder.

If we legalize all drugs, should we legalize Steroids in sports? The idea that it isn't legal because it isn't fair is considered to be somewhat of a myth.

[GlyphGryph]

I'm still not seeing the connection. No one I know who uses drugs uses them because they are risky. Do you have any evidence for that?

Meanwhile, I'd argue that the appeal of a lot of the sports I mentioned IS because of the risk (and the resulting adrenaline rush). So I'm double confused about your analogy - if anything, it seems the other direction is more common.

[Neonivek]

I will retract the Steroids thing. It isn't related.

Even if people accepted steroid use as part of the "It is your risk to take" deal. They wouldn't put it in sports because it would put the current players into pressure to take them or be kicked off the team (Thus they would be forced to take steroids).

Do you have any evidence for that?

When drugs become legalized their use will suddenly spike and then lower to a point below the average before legalization.

THOUGH that may have to do more with the fact that they are illegal and risky that way. THOUGH the laws on some drugs do say otherwise.

[MonkeyHead]

Drug and GM sports would be pretty cool to watch though. Half human half horse beasts doing the 100m in 3 seconds. 18 ft tall basketball players jumping downwards to dunk. Rugby players with gorilla dimensions anhilliating each other in 30 mph collisions. Frankie Boyle (very challenging comedian - you have been warned) did a good rant on this which you can youtube at your own risk.

[Criptfeind]

So no then.

[GlyphGryph]

Cript, I provided you with two. What's your problem, exactly?

[G-Flex]

There's a study mentioned here as well.

[Criptfeind]

Cript, I provided you with two. What's your problem, exactly?

I don't actually read your posts when I am not interested in them.

[kaijyuu]

Um, this is a debate and discussion thread, not a "spew your own opinion and ignore everyone else's" one.

[GlyphGryph]

G-Flex:
Mind you, that article doesn't actually even contain a link to an actual study (nor do any of the likely links I followed in it), so its not really the best source. ONe can probably identify the study with enough effort, though. Still, mot of the articles I've found are pretty sparse on details, and it took my a bit to find those two studies I linked. That leads me to believe things on this front might not be quite so clear cut. Its still more evidence for addictiveness than LSD has, though.

I don't actually read your posts when I am not interested in them.

I'm surprised you read the last one, then. Any actual response to the content? Or is a jab that you don't read my posts going to be your last word on the matter?

[G-Flex]

Cript, I provided you with two. What's your problem, exactly?

I don't actually read your posts when I am not interested in them.

Speaking as someone who at least tries to be sort of civil, this thread doesn't need people acting like you are here, or people getting reported for it. So come on, try to raise the bar a little? Please?

G-Flex:
Mind you, that article doesn't actually even contain a link to an actual study (nor do any of the likely links I followed in it), so its not really the best source. ONe can probably identify the study with enough effort, though. Still, mot of the articles I've found are pretty sparse on details, and it took my a bit to find those two studies I linked. That leads me to believe things on this front might not be quite so clear cut. Its still more evidence for addictiveness than LSD has, though.

The problem is that the study was published in a scholarly journal, and those typically don't allow access to full text anyway. The study appears to be this one, though.

[Criptfeind]

What issues do you guys have with it? I was answering his question of why I was not appeased by his post, and the answer was I did not see it.

I simply do not read ever post on this forum, I only pay close attention to the ones that interest me.