Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

Mandatory steroid drug test in texas

Mandatory High School Steroid Test Passed In Texas Good or Bad

  • Good, the only juice those kids need is Kool Aid

    Votes: 23 54.8%
  • Bad, its their bodies let em do what they want

    Votes: 11 26.2%
  • I don't care either way

    Votes: 8 19.0%

  • Total voters
    42
errn247 said:
So people dont wanna see bone drushing hits at canadas fav past time and national religon? Not flaming just asking. People are always america this an america that. america is not that bad people. We are not perfect just like the rest of the world is not perfect.

I think kids should be tested. sure they will find ways around it but it will be much much harder to use than it is now.

I wasn't america bashing. As a matter of fact I love you yanks. If it wasn't for the U.S and Britain having us under their wing, we could be steamrolled by invading Japanese samurai and ninjas with swords+arrows.

Of course hockey is serious business to alot of people in Canada; however, we don't have many highschools with ice rinks or full athletic scholarships for people playing on post-secondary sports teams. In the US there is a sort of natural progression playing ball for school teams and eventually becoming an NFL pro. In Canada, you don't see QueensVSUofT as a big event. Canadians do not watch "college hockey" and only diehard fans keep up with the OHL and other leagues. In a country of like 30 million people, probably about 10 million actually give a shit about hockey and that is a very generous estimate.

Of course competition is fierce in hockey. It's the same as any other sport. I'm just saying that Americans place more value on football than Canadians do Hockey.

And I agree that kids should be tested. Although they'll find ways to fuck around with it, that doesn't mean it should be made easy on them.
 
You think this is to raise the price of tickets sales? You don't think they might be doin this for the health and safety of teenagers that live in texas which is right next to mexico, or the kid that has a lil internet savvy and can manuever around the internet and find himself a muscle cocktail. Texas is a big football state and for some kids thats all they got, a good high school athlete in Texas, and most other states, are like celebrities for their little town. So the motivation for a little juice and a lot of advantage is all too tempting for some
.


I think you misunderstood my statement. First of all I live in Texas so I have a vested interest in this. This testing they are doing is going to cost over 4 Milliion dollars. The Senate version of the bill has the State paying for the 4 Million which means us taxpayers foot the bill. The House version has it being paid for by the Interscholastic League, which is the States governing body on school sports. They would pay for it through a surcharge on tickets for sporting events. I can assure you that the majority of us that live in the Lone Star State would prefer the latter. As far as pressure to perform in Texas being more than other states therefore greater temptation to use gear thats bunk and Hollywood crap from Friday Nite Lights. I played football thru college in both Texas and Missouri. There was no difference in the demands to excel in either state.
 
bikercoz said:
.

I think you misunderstood my statement. First of all I live in Texas so I have a vested interest in this. This testing they are doing is going to cost over 4 Milliion dollars. The Senate version of the bill has the State paying for the 4 Million which means us taxpayers foot the bill. The House version has it being paid for by the Interscholastic League, which is the States governing body on school sports. They would pay for it through a surcharge on tickets for sporting events. I can assure you that the majority of us that live in the Lone Star State would prefer the latter. As far as pressure to perform in Texas being more than other states therefore greater temptation to use gear thats bunk and Hollywood crap from Friday Nite Lights. I played football thru college in both Texas and Missouri. There was no difference in the demands to excel in either state.
kool i got it, you just don't want the testing to come out of your pocket, understandable. but you do agree kids should be tested? I know the difference in demand on high school players isn't any greater in Texas alone, but it is greater in small towns. A kid living in a big town gets easier recognition and has more available options to choose from. In smaller rural towns Friday night high school football is the only entertainment for many, and the career options are Walmart, The Army, or college for any high school athlete thats big and fast enough to bring the big college recruiter to the school. I lived in a small town, Muskegon MI, really small, and i also lived in Los Angeles, I currently live in San Diego, and I've definately seen the difference.
 
Well, I don't like the idea of high school athletes using gear, but I don't want to pay for it either. I live in texas so I'm just waiting for the tax increase. I'm sure they'll just switch to shorter esters in hopes they can beat the system, but some people will always use.
 
SpyWizard said:
what will the government do next???

since it's illegal for minors to buy cigarette's, and we have scientific evidence that proves that will cause death in 100,000''s per year..

why isn't the gov testing for that with these kids??

hmm???

tell me that??

it's not illegal for minors to buy cigs, it's illegal for the store to sell to them. Kids don't get put in jail for having them in their possesion. Since cigs aren't illegal, hard to enforce who smokes, not hard to enforce who buy's them.

I think that because of the ages of the kids and the scientific data for closing growth plates in the bones, etc. it's a good thing. If they can get to college, they will find gear there, but they will be at leats 18, which is STILL young IMO.
 
bikercoz said:
.

I think you misunderstood my statement. First of all I live in Texas so I have a vested interest in this. This testing they are doing is going to cost over 4 Milliion dollars. The Senate version of the bill has the State paying for the 4 Million which means us taxpayers foot the bill. The House version has it being paid for by the Interscholastic League, which is the States governing body on school sports. They would pay for it through a surcharge on tickets for sporting events. I can assure you that the majority of us that live in the Lone Star State would prefer the latter. As far as pressure to perform in Texas being more than other states therefore greater temptation to use gear thats bunk and Hollywood crap from Friday Nite Lights. I played football thru college in both Texas and Missouri. There was no difference in the demands to excel in either state.

I really could care less if high school athletes are using gear or not. if you want to test kids ofr something test them for rec drugs or booze. we are sending a bad message to kids about juice and telling them that rec drugs are less harmful than trying to imrove physical performance. and it does upset me that we the people have to flip the bill

the use of gear by young men, playing football is justified. there is a window of opportunity (age wise) that should be siezed by any athlete of a young age. at any cost. we all use it recreationally now and it is OK I guesspoint being if any age is justified it is at a yonger age when it could mean pursueing a dream or free schooling.
 
jochensa said:
I really could care less if high school athletes are using gear or not. if you want to test kids ofr something test them for rec drugs or booze. we are sending a bad message to kids about juice and telling them that rec drugs are less harmful than trying to imrove physical performance. and it does upset me that we the people have to flip the bill

the use of gear by young men, playing football is justified. there is a window of opportunity (age wise) that should be siezed by any athlete of a young age. at any cost. we all use it recreationally now and it is OK I guesspoint being if any age is justified it is at a yonger age when it could mean pursueing a dream or free schooling.
the use of gear is justified in a kid thats 14-17 or even younger? hmmmm? yeah sieze the opportunity and lose your health. You know that their bodies natty hormone levels are already crazy, and AAS will just make it worst. Roid rage to the fullest then depression for most. Not to mention not being mature and disciplined enough to the proper research for proper dosage and PCT. The only way a kid could handle that would be if some one was helping them, I guess maybe someone like you huh, meet you in the gym or the parking lot after practice to hook them up because they have a small window at 16, yeah you're right on point.
 
the use of gear by young men, playing football is justified. there is a window of opportunity (age wise) that should be siezed by any athlete of a young age. at any cost. we all use it recreationally now and it is OK I guesspoint being if any age is justified it is at a yonger age when it could mean pursueing a dream or free schooling.

So you would pump your child full of gear at 16 if they played football???
 
jochensa said:
I really could care less if high school athletes are using gear or not. if you want to test kids ofr something test them for rec drugs or booze. we are sending a bad message to kids about juice and telling them that rec drugs are less harmful than trying to imrove physical performance. and it does upset me that we the people have to flip the bill

the use of gear by young men, playing football is justified. there is a window of opportunity (age wise) that should be siezed by any athlete of a young age. at any cost. we all use it recreationally now and it is OK I guesspoint being if any age is justified it is at a yonger age when it could mean pursueing a dream or free schooling.

"the use of gear by young men, playing football is justified. there is a window of opportunity (age wise) that should be siezed by any athlete of a young age. at any cost."

that is one of the most ludacris statements that I have read on the site, "the window of opportunity" as you call it, is the time spent on the field with his father or coaches learning the basics and fundamentals that make good players stand apart from others. Not useing gear to cover flaws that he may have, slowing the natural testosterone production he has at it's peak, possible bone problems, cholesterol, other problems ad neauseum.

I'll go out on a limb here and say that you'ld never hear it's OK for someone 14-18 to get on gear from any vet or mod on this site. That's a shit load of knowledge and experience to draw from...
 
Top Bottom