NFL wants blood testing for HGH

[Dpantherman]

Posted by Mike Florio on February 23, 2010 9:19 PM ET

Amid news that a British rugby player has become the first athlete to test positive for HGH, the league has reiterated its position that it favors the same blood test that caught the guy whose fish and chips were spiked with something other than vinegar.

"Our position is that HGH blood testing has advanced to the point where we are taking steps to incorporate it into our program," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello told Mark Maske of the Washington Post.

The union, however, continues to resist such an invasive protocol -- echoing the position of the late Gene Upshaw, former Executive Director of the NFLPA.

"At this point, there's no reason to believe that blood-testing for NFL players will or should be implemented," NFLPA assistant executive director for external affairs George Atallah told Maske. "We should instead focus on preserve the drug-testing policy that we have in place."

(To which Aiello surely would reply, "You mean the drug-testing policy the union sued in the StarCaps case?")

Buccaneers fullback Earnest Graham estimated last year that 30 percent of all NFL players use HGH. As a reader opined in response, "Graham is only 70 percent off."

So if the league and the union are serious about eradicating cheating, they should be committed to negotiating effective measures without regard to leverage or any other niceties of collective bargaining. Both sides need to implement proper measures -- and the union should not resist merely in the hopes of securing a concession from the league in some other area.

Few issues can be distilled to black and white clarity. This is one of them. Either the union is serious about catching cheaters, or the union isn't. There's no middle ground.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/02/23/nfl-wants-blood-testing-for-hgh/

[ihateforumnames]

I don't know why they would go to that much trouble to prevent use of a substance that really has no scientific backing for increasing performance. The big advantage that is agreed upon is recovery and "general wellness." If anything, HGH should be an open option(with professional opinion) for athletes undergoing a recovery program. That's the most likely reason it's used to begin with.

HGH is a hormone that affects general growth. No research reports using human or animal subjects have shown it to be related to specific performance improvements. The most common hGH, somatropin, acts on bones and muscles non-differentially. It does not selectively respond to only those parts of the body that are stimulated (fatigued) by the specific training effects of swimming. At best hGH might facilitate quicker overall recovery from general fatigue. It is understood that in triathlons and swimming hGH is used in conjunction with anabolic steroids. The steroids provide specific adaptation effects and hGH possibly assists recovery. HGH affects growth rate, has very beneficial medical uses, and in sports is generally used to "grow" larger but not better-functioning athletes. There is some suspicion that in sports where size is important (e.g., basketball, football) hGH users suffer a higher rate of injuries. Long term effects of use in sports are not known.

- http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/csa/vol56/fourdrug.htm

One of the most beneficial effects of Human growth hormone HGH to players is the aid recovery ability and the quickness of recovery. Since it is a long baseball season many players need HGH growth hormones to still compete after an injury or if the age is catching up to the player.

So there is a clear difference between steroids which gets you stronger and human growth hormone HGH which heals you. MLB needs to think about what there banning and take in consideration the health of there players.

This can go out to all of the leagues in the professional sports business, especially high paid contact sports like football and hockey. HGH growth hormones can increase your recovery overall and the recovery speed.

- http://www.ispr.org/Why_is_HGH_illegal_in_sports.html

[Ricky Spanish]

I don't know why they would go to that much trouble to prevent use of a substance that really has no scientific backing for increasing performance. The big advantage that is agreed upon is recovery and "general wellness." If anything, HGH should be an open option(with professional opinion) for athletes undergoing a recovery program. That's the most likely reason it's used to begin with.

- http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/csa/vol56/fourdrug.htm

- http://www.ispr.org/Why_is_HGH_illegal_in_sports.html

you read my mind. HGH isn't dangerous like steroids, and I am not sure why it is considered such a bad thing. It's health benefits are amazing.