I want to meet these high school kids who thought Extreme Tren was a protein supplement…
At least they hit on the end of the show about the dangers of PH’s. Nobody does know what the sides are of these drugs. So what do you do when you encounter them?
Personally I think they are more dangerous then AAS everyone uses because nobody really knows.
I think the 500,000 number they throw out is bogus. I just saw an article on Yahoo a few days ago about how high school steroid testing was losing steam because out of the hundreds of thousands tested nationwide only 30 cases have been documented. In addition it’s costly for just highschool level.
[quote]fireflyz wrote:
I think the 500,000 number they throw out is bogus. I just saw an article on Yahoo a few days ago about how high school steroid testing was losing steam because out of the hundreds of thousands tested nationwide only 30 cases have been documented. In addition it’s costly for just highschool level. [/quote]
I didnt watch the video yet. Did they say if all kids in a particular HS are getting tested or just the athletes? Because if it’s a public school and they are only testing athletes I think that is rediculously illegal. I say this because I will pretty much guarentee that they are not testing for other drugs. If I had a child who played sports I wouldn’t want him/her singled out solely for being an athlete when there are plenty of non-athletes using the same drugs.
^ I hear you, but as distasteful as it may be, I don’t think that there is any illegality to that sort of testing.
Student athletes wouldn’t be considered a “suspect” or “quasi-suspect” classification under Equal Protection analysis (unlike race and alienage for example), so there only needs to be a “rational relationship” for testing (ie. reduce “dangerous drug use” amongst teenage athletes) that particular group.
Sigh.
I didnt watch the video yet. Did they say if all kids in a particular HS are getting tested or just the athletes? Because if it’s a public school and they are only testing athletes I think that is rediculously illegal. I say this because I will pretty much guarentee that they are not testing for other drugs. If I had a child who played sports I wouldn’t want him/her singled out solely for being an athlete when there are plenty of non-athletes using the same drugs. [/quote]
They just stated that 500,000 high school students have admitted to using steroids, they didn’t mention testing. If I recall correctly, the AP article on Yahoo only mentioned athletes, but like I said they only found 30 positives out of several hundred thousand tests. Which makes me doubt the 500k statement.
I do agree that testing only athletes is bs. In my high school of 800 (small) there were perhaps a dozen of athletes that had indications of use,though they never outright said they were using. I know on the varsity team none of my buddies used and I didn’t either. But if you looked at how many kids were drug users (marijuana, coke, heroin) there were at least two dozen that I know of for sure and probably twice as many that had “tried” that stuff.
I’m not gonna even get into underage smoking and underage drinking as that would bump the numbers up even further. But the media would rather focus on the dozen.
[quote]whotookmyname wrote:
^ I hear you, but as distasteful as it may be, I don’t think that there is any illegality to that sort of testing.
Student athletes wouldn’t be considered a “suspect” or “quasi-suspect” classification under Equal Protection analysis (unlike race and alienage for example), so there only needs to be a “rational relationship” for testing (ie. reduce “dangerous drug use” amongst teenage athletes) that particular group.
Sigh.[/quote]
I get the feeling that a good enough lawyer could have a fun time with a case involving repercussions for a public high school athlete that gets tested and gets caught when other students aren’t getting tested just because they aren’t on a voluntary sports team. All about the benjamins, I think.
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
whotookmyname wrote:
^ I hear you, but as distasteful as it may be, I don’t think that there is any illegality to that sort of testing.
Student athletes wouldn’t be considered a “suspect” or “quasi-suspect” classification under Equal Protection analysis (unlike race and alienage for example), so there only needs to be a “rational relationship” for testing (ie. reduce “dangerous drug use” amongst teenage athletes) that particular group.
Sigh.
I get the feeling that a good enough lawyer could have a fun time with a case involving repercussions for a public high school athlete that gets tested and gets caught when other students aren’t getting tested just because they aren’t on a voluntary sports team. All about the benjamins, I think. [/quote]
Well, conlaw isn’t my specialty, but I went to a somewhat decent law school. Anything is possible, but almost certainly there would need to be other facts present. Trust me, there are plenty of legal grounds for differential (ie. seemingly discriminatory) treatment by fed and state govts/actors under the Constitution against many classes. “Age” is a perfect example of this; the onus is on the injured class to show that the govt action wasn’t rationally related to its action, and that is a very difficult burden to meet. Same goes for student athletes. Now with race, it’d be the complete opposite… the govt has the burden of showing that their action met a compelling need and used the least burdensome means available etc…
Simply treating student athletes differently doesn’t present a clear violation of equal protection clause, due process, privileges & immunities, first amendment… not much left really, though I’m the first to admit I could be wrong if anyone has any other suggestions 
If I was involved I’d look at the wording of the specific regulations, as local / state regs are often poorly drafted (eg. too vague or too broad in some respect) and can hence be tossed out in their entirety. Then they’d have to be re-written & re-drafted, and couldn’t be applied retroactively against people caught under the first set of regs.
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
whotookmyname wrote:
^ I hear you, but as distasteful as it may be, I don’t think that there is any illegality to that sort of testing.
Student athletes wouldn’t be considered a “suspect” or “quasi-suspect” classification under Equal Protection analysis (unlike race and alienage for example), so there only needs to be a “rational relationship” for testing (ie. reduce “dangerous drug use” amongst teenage athletes) that particular group.
Sigh.
I get the feeling that a good enough lawyer could have a fun time with a case involving repercussions for a public high school athlete that gets tested and gets caught when other students aren’t getting tested just because they aren’t on a voluntary sports team. All about the benjamins, I think. [/quote]
Acually you are right but wrong about benjamins. It costs school part of their money to test and they have to cut bugdget from the sports. Also they do not test the girls. Now that is the lawsuit.
Yo ho ho and a bottle of rum!
That piece was much worse than part one. I’m surprised it has taken this long for people to notice prohormones/designer steroids. At least now extreme tren has been lab tested so we know it isn’t total garbage.
This is actually kind of dangerous. Cause now you have free advertising and the shit will just fly off the shelves. And you will get people using the stuff and when bad sides start to occur they will moan about how steroids are bad and they will kill you blah blah blah blah …When taken like a moron with no research or planning, yah they are bad for you.
Exactly. If I were a retard looking for steroids, and didn’t have a clue where to find them, I’d be thrilled by this “report.” I’d be running straight to google to buy myself some Extreme Tren. So it contributed to more people screwing themselves up by using shitty substances that they don’t even know how to use, and it screwed the people who actually know how to use AAS responsibly by showing the public how supposedly horrible they are for you.
Why don’t they try doing a report on people abusing substances that actually have widespread abuse. Like a story about all the people who drink alcohol until they pass out and puke, week after week?
well, the Xtreme Tren really looked like it worked for that kid…
[quote]gbock wrote:
well, the Xtreme Tren really looked like it worked for that kid…[/quote]
But he only took it for a short time if I took it for a long time I would get hyyyooooge. Just in time for the big game. Coach will put me in the game cause I am so big. I can win it coach!! Then I will get the cheerleader to suck on my cawk after I put some roofies in her drink.
yup, thats high school in a nutshell right there…
If I was a dumb HS kid watching that report im pretty sure that I would go out and get some Xtreme Tren, I mean c’mon it was lab tested so now I know its legit, thanks CBS for running that wonderful commercial!
[quote]whotookmyname wrote:
BONEZ217 wrote:
whotookmyname wrote:
^ I hear you, but as distasteful as it may be, I don’t think that there is any illegality to that sort of testing.
Student athletes wouldn’t be considered a “suspect” or “quasi-suspect” classification under Equal Protection analysis (unlike race and alienage for example), so there only needs to be a “rational relationship” for testing (ie. reduce “dangerous drug use” amongst teenage athletes) that particular group.
Sigh.
I get the feeling that a good enough lawyer could have a fun time with a case involving repercussions for a public high school athlete that gets tested and gets caught when other students aren’t getting tested just because they aren’t on a voluntary sports team. All about the benjamins, I think.
Well, conlaw isn’t my specialty, but I went to a somewhat decent law school. Anything is possible, but almost certainly there would need to be other facts present.
Trust me, there are plenty of legal grounds for differential (ie. seemingly discriminatory) treatment by fed and state govts/actors under the Constitution against many classes.
“Age” is a perfect example of this; the onus is on the injured class to show that the govt action wasn’t rationally related to its action, and that is a very difficult burden to meet. Same goes for student athletes. Now with race, it’d be the complete opposite… the govt has the burden of showing that their action met a compelling need and used the least burdensome means available etc…
Simply treating student athletes differently doesn’t present a clear violation of equal protection clause, due process, privileges & immunities, first amendment… not much left really, though I’m the first to admit I could be wrong if anyone has any other suggestions
If I was involved I’d look at the wording of the specific regulations, as local / state regs are often poorly drafted (eg. too vague or too broad in some respect) and can hence be tossed out in their entirety.
Then they’d have to be re-written & re-drafted, and couldn’t be applied retroactively against people caught under the first set of regs.
[/quote]
Interesting. Cool
Very interesting take on the legal aspects, whotookmyname.
I couldn’t stand watching it. It sucks they busted those sources. I hate the media talking heads. I hate the shit they spew out into the public. They make shit harder for all of us. No matter if we prove that they improve the quality of life in some individuals and are almost harmless if used responsibly they will always go back to those “studies” and all those morons that had previous mental issues that killed themselves. Its the flavor of the year.
[quote]Growing_Boy wrote:
I couldn’t stand watching it. It sucks they busted those sources. I hate the media talking heads. I hate the shit they spew out into the public. They make shit harder for all of us. No matter if we prove that they improve the quality of life in some individuals and are almost harmless if used responsibly they will always go back to those “studies” and all those morons that had previous mental issues that killed themselves. Its the flavor of the year. [/quote]
I share your sentiments 110%. Morons.