Why do AAS get such a bad rap comparatively

[DAAS]

OK I know this one belongs in a different section but this one get the most traffic and I am really interested so mods please let this one pass.

Im really really curious as to why AAS get such a bad sigma by the public. and what you think about this.

Honestly I feel much much much more comfortable telling some one I have done "****" street drug then I am to tell them I do steroids. I mean even me being a AAS user feel more comfortable saying the word "insert common frowned upon drug or activity" than I do saying the word steroids out load.

Im just curious as to why?? I mean if you tell some one you've done m**h (which btw I have not done) then they will most likely be sympathetic and try and be like "are you staying strong", or etc etc. But its like they are understanding. And I dont feel steroids hold that same affect.

Please answer as detailed as possible as I am really curious about this. Or if your answer is simple thats fine too.

[austinite]

No rec drug talk brother.

I don't tell anyone about AAS use because it's nobody's business. Nothing good can come from announcing it.

It's not wise to advertise.

[DAAS]

No rec drug talk brother.

I don't tell anyone about AAS use because it's nobody's business. Nothing good can come from announcing it.

It's not wise to advertise.

im i not allowed to suggest rec drugs at all or im I just not allowed to use names?

[Honkey_Kong]

The reason why AAS get a bad stigma from the public is because they work. It's not the negative effects that give the stigma. Like Austinite says, it's best to not tell anyone you do it. It's not their business anyways.

[MajorPectorial]

Hard to.hide when youve suddenly put over two stone of muscle on n my best mate hasnt. The fact i eat well n loads. Train 3-4+hours a day in their books didnt come into it. Personally i dont give a #$%& what ppl think. Its a part of what i do. Ive had ppl ask me outright n adter having a calm n leveled conversation mist 'misinformed' thank me for actually explaining it to them.

People hate most 'drugs' personally i treat as a sup
People hate it when others do better or look better
People hate what they dont understand


Thats my three ;-) good thread mind. Very true. Thought the same as these ppl at one point.But then i researched n researched till my brain hurt n thought

Oh right. Thats it???? ;-)

[Honkey_Kong]

Hard to.hide when youve suddenly put over two stone of muscle on n my best mate hasnt. The fact i eat well n loads. Train 3-4+hours a day in their books didnt come into it. Personally i dont give a #$%& what ppl think. Its a part of what i do. Ive had ppl ask me outright n adter having a calm n leveled conversation mist 'misinformed' thank me for actually explaining it to them.

People hate most 'drugs' personally i treat as a sup
People hate it when others do better or look better
People hate what they dont understand


Thats my three ;-) good thread mind. Very true. Thought the same as these ppl at one point.But then i researched n researched till my brain hurt n thought

Oh right. Thats it???? ;-)

It's one thing for everybody to think you're on gear, it's another to outright tell them. I see it as it's none of their business what I do. And if you tell people you're use AAS, instantly it doesn't matter that you get up before the sun comes up 5 days a week to hit the gym. It doesn't matter how hard you train, how hard you diet or what you sacrificed to get the body/strength/performance you got. In their mind it's all fake, because that's how they're conditioned.

The average person honestly believes that if they shoot some gear, they can look like Jay Cutler without doing any work. Neither you nor I or anyone on here for that matter can convince the public different.

Now along with that, there are legal problems that can arise with admitting you do AAS. You can even lose your job over it. Not that these outcomes are likely or anything, but what's the payoff for admitting it? What do you get out of it?

To me, it's better to just not say anything and let them think you're on gear rather than admit it and confirm it.

[DAAS]

It's one thing for everybody to think you're on gear, it's another to outright tell them. I see it as it's none of their business what I do. And if you tell people you're use AAS, instantly it doesn't matter that you get up before the sun comes up 5 days a week to hit the gym. It doesn't matter how hard you train, how hard you diet or what you sacrificed to get the body/strength/performance you got. In their mind it's all fake, because that's how they're conditioned.

The average person honestly believes that if they shoot some gear, they can look like Jay Cutler without doing any work. Neither you nor I or anyone on here for that matter can convince the public different.

Now along with that, there are legal problems that can arise with admitting you do AAS. You can even lose your job over it. Not that these outcomes are likely or anything, but what's the payoff for admitting it? What do you get out of it?

To me, it's better to just not say anything and let them think you're on gear rather than admit it and confirm it.

the only side effect that bothers me is hiding stuff from people. Im a really open honest person. In my mind steroids really only allow me to work out more, they hardly make it easier, and they dont drive me to the gym every day. I just hate living with a secret. but you're right if i tell them all of a sudden I am a loser and a cheat and they could instantly look just like me if they did it.. it just sucks. a co worker admitted to PPK addiction and its been nothing but a crutch for him ever since. he basically still has his job because they feel sorry, never mind the fact that he doesnt do his job, he has terrible mood swings, and even steals from a near by store wearing our work uniforms and doesnt hide it from the boss at all. its a joke.

[vladan]

Maybe this article provides some explanation.

The Early “Truth” about Steroids: The Social Construction of Perception

From the time that testosterone was first synthesized in 1935, anabolic - androgenic steroids have provoked “fantasies of hormonal rejuvenation, Introduction sexual excitement, and supernormal human performance” (Hoberman, 2005). Although the reaction to its potential was mixed, testosterone certainly had its early supporters and influential advocates. The highly successful, popular science author Paul de Kruif (1945a) wrote in The Male Hormone that steroids could “extend the prime life of men”; the phrase was even emblazoned on the book’s dust jacket. Among testosterone’s many virtues, Kruif emphasized its performance-enhancing capacity. Commenting on how the St. Louis Cardinals and St. Louis Browns had won championships “super-charged by vitamins,” Kruif (1945) postulated that it would be interesting to see “the productive power of an industry or a professional group” that “would try a systematic supercharge with testosterone”.
Kruif’s enthusiasm received considerable positive press. Newsweek published a full page review that emphasized the benefits of testosterone and its future potential (Hormones for he-men, 1945). His position gained further support and wider coverage when an excerpt appeared in one of the most highly successful, widely read, mass market magazines in the United States: Reader’s Digest.
Kruif’s optimism was not restricted to journalists and the masses in the United States. Members of the medical community emphasized the positive benefits of the sense of well-being that testosterone produced. By the
early 1940s, John Hoberman (2005) has substantiated that “testosterone was hailed as a mood-altering drug whose primary purpose was the sexual restoration and reenergizing of aging males”. Even a decade after
Kruif’s book appeared, a gerontologist wrote that the results of steroid therapy were “astonishing.” “Their future possibilities,” he continued, “stagger the imagination” (Hormones in geriatrics, 1954). When one began to consider the potential market, it quickly became clear that there were lots of reasons to promote synthesized testosterone.
Nevertheless, what many saw as the beauty and benefits of synthetic testosterone, its detractors viewed as testosterone’s and steroids’ most sinister qualities. In a period of social conservatism and sexual repression, testosterone and steroids posed a serious threat to several bedrock values in the United States. By the mid-1940s, sensationalist commentary on testosterone’s impact on sex drive and performance had resulted in “a quasi pornographic image” for testosterone therapy (Hoberman, 2005). In response to its growing “unsavoury reputation,” Dr. Albert Hemming (1946), writing in Science Digest, felt compelled to emphasize that even though “the uninformed continue to believe that the sole use of this Introduction innocent chemical is to turn sexual weaklings into wolves, and octogenarians into sexual athletes,” testosterone had a legitimate and positive place in hormone therapy. But the image of hypersexed octogenarians and hormone-driven sexual predators did not reside solely among the “uninformed.” The ultraconservative U.S. medical establishment was reluctant to support a drug that might extend the sexual activity of aging males when it could also jeopardize the predominant sexual mores of Americans in the 1940s.
Although the pharmaceutical companies tried to counter the negative publicity and fear within the medical profession, they were limited in what they could do. It was illegal for the companies to advertise directly to the
public and create a demand for synthetic testosterone. Moreover, as Hoberman (2005) has documented, even when aging men in the 1940s requested prescriptions for steroids, the preponderantly male medical profession
had little interest in “salvaging the sex lives of middle-aged or older people”. From the outset then, steroids have been recognized for their therapeutic benefits as well as their potential to enhance physical performance. They have had their ardent supporters and advocates. At the same time, the properties that appeal to their supporters are the same ones that their detractors fear and stigmatize. From the time of their first synthesis and use to right up to the present, steroids have been involved in a struggle over vastly differing perceptions of what they are, what they represent, and their legitimate practical use. The current concern over steroid use in sports exists because some individuals and groups have successfully defined their use as problematic, unethical, and even dangerous. In other words, people’s perceptions of steroids have been “socially constructed” in a very particular manner.

Rob Beamish, 2011 “STEROIDS A New Look at Performance-Enhancing Drugs”

[evander87]

I hate the "cheat" stigma of aas. I don't play a sport where PED's are banned. Who am I cheating? Are fake breasts cheating? What about lipo? I bust my ass in the gym and eat right all the damn time but I'm a cheater if I take aas.

[DAAS]

I hate the "cheat" stigma of aas. I don't play a sport where PED's are banned. Who am I cheating? Are fake breasts cheating? What about lipo? I bust my ass in the gym and eat right all the damn time but I'm a cheater if I take aas.

I'd say breast implants are about 50,000% more fake then muscles from AAS. But hey, even one loves boobs. MMMMM boobs. Plus a friend of mine took a cycle and gained 2 pounds cause he didnt eat and didnt work out. Obviously its not as simple as taking steroids.

[AlinSR]

I use bc I want to and couldn't care less what others think.