HGH should be taken off the banned list. It does nothing for players and there's no way to detect it. Why waste money looking for it?

I'd prefer they better educate the players against using something that clearly has NO benefits to outwiegh the risks. It's illegal, so I have no problem leaving it on the banned list. It's banned in every other sport...

My thoughts on Ankiel here

I don't understand why everyone is so quick to assume that he stopped using this just because he stopped getting shipments from this one company. And why do we assume this is the only thing he was/is using?

Seems like he is getting the benefit of the doubt, which many others have not gotten, because his comeback has been such a great story.

Cory, you're right, and I tried to write that statement so it didn't seem like I was assuming that. Obviously, if MLB finds this to be true, Rick should be under greater scrutiny. But, in his defense, he hasn't failed a minor league drug test, where they don't have the same protections they have at the major league level.

Seems like he is getting the benefit of the doubt, which many others have not gotten, because his comeback has been such a great story.

Fair enough, but this also smacks of the Daiily News hanging onto this story until it could maximize impact (the day after a 7 RBI night), and there is nothing to indicate either way whether he did anything else, or beyond that period when it was still within the rules.

Clearly the feel-good nature of his story is causing some to stick by him, where others would be tossed aside, but at the same time, the only reason this has traction at all is becasue of that same thing. I think the two cancel each other out.

Trying desperately to make it back to the majors after having a career-derailing mental issue, then rehabbing from serious surgery makes Ankiel a slghtly more sympathetic character than an egomaniac in his late 30s with a HOF career already under is belt

I suppose the good news is that the drug testing agreement scared him off using these. So at least in this case, testing appeared to have the desired effect.

How so? You said in your above comment that you tried to word it so that you were not assuming that he stopped, but this statement from the post clearly assumes that he stopped using these.

Not only do we know if he used anything else, we also don't know that he stopped using HGH at the end of 2004. All we know is that he stopped buying HGH from this company at the end of 2004.

If this was Bonds or Sheffield there would be an up-roar. But Ankiel makes people feel good, so every one will write it off.

But Ankiel makes people feel good, so every one will write it off.

Wrong. The bloom is already off the rose. There will always be a question/cloud over what Ankiel just accomplished. There's no other way around it.

The difference is Sheffield and Bonds have a track record of usage (or questions surrounding them), they are established HOF-caliber players--and were at the time of their usage, and are boths jerks on top of that.

There is no evidence that HGH on its own builds muscle mass and strength in the long term, but apparently it is believed that it does when taken in combination with insulin. The effects of this combination for an otherwise healthy young adult are considerable.

The reason baseball should try to regulate these kinds of drugs is simple. Many (perhaps most) fans have no interest in watching a competition based on which athlete is willing to assume the greatest health risk in order to succeed.

HGH should be taken off the banned list. It does nothing for players and there's no way to detect it. Why waste money looking for it?

Has JC, or anyone else for that matter, ever posted a legit study that verifies this? I've seen him say it before, but have never seen a study that proves it.

I thought one of the links to JC's site had links to a study. Independently, a professor of biology at BU told me the same thing very early this year. HGH does nothing for athletes.

@ Mike Green

"Many (perhaps most) fans have no interest in watching a competition based on which athlete is willing to assume the greatest health risk in order to succeed."

I would suggest you check out a sport called football where simple walking out on the field is a health risk far worse then any steroid before you make such a vapid claim.

The vast majority of clinical trials with HGH (including the two cited in the article) involve senior citizens, not 25-year old professional athletes.

The vast majority of clinical trials with HGH (including the two cited in the article) involve senior citizens, not 25-year old professional athletes.