View Single Post
Old 11-20-2012, 03:22 PM   #11
Tannhauser
Senior Member
Max Brawn
Points: 138,239, Level: 100 Points: 138,239, Level: 100 Points: 138,239, Level: 100
Activity: 28% Activity: 28% Activity: 28%
 
Tannhauser's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 2,977
Training Exp: 30+
Training Type: Powerlifting
Fav Exercise: Front squat
Fav Supp: Creatine. C'est tout.
Reputation: 340141
Tannhauser is an elite memberTannhauser is an elite memberTannhauser is an elite memberTannhauser is an elite memberTannhauser is an elite memberTannhauser is an elite memberTannhauser is an elite memberTannhauser is an elite memberTannhauser is an elite memberTannhauser is an elite memberTannhauser is an elite member
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bamazav View Post
Let me get my head around this statement. Is Marla implying that weight training in the teens years is akin to a gateway drug? Try to build muscle at 13 and you will be hooked on AS by 18? Give me a break. No offense to the scientists in our audience, but sometimes scientist should be slapped up side the head for their stupid statements.
Here's a link to the paper:

http://www.medpagetoday.com/upload/2....2012-0095.pdf

What Eisenberg seems to be saying in the paper is that pediatricians need to be on the lookout for those kids in which health-promoting behaviours turn into health-destroying obsessions. And I guess a proportion of kids hooked on weight-training at 13 will be hooked on steroids at 18.

Quote:
Conceptualization of these behaviors should include frequent use
of seemingly healthy behaviors (eg, changing eating and exercising) done
with the goal of increasing musclemass or tone. Although these may be beneficial, compulsive or excessive use is cause for concern,37 because they maybe a precursor to the development of more severe and unhealthy behaviors over time.
She advocates education on the subject:

Quote:
Health care providers should counsel adolescent patients about appropriate exercise, general nutrition, and the lack of efficacy andpotential dangers of muscle-enhancement products.
Fine. But this is a somewhat clumsily phrased sentence, as it seems to be implying that muscle-enhancement products as a category are ineffective (blatantly untrue for steroids, but fair comment on HMB etc) or dangerous. Protein gets lumped in the same category too [/can of worms]
__________________
Lifetime best: 500/363/573 @ 220 belt only

"The proper study of mankind is books" - Aldous Huxley
Tannhauser is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links