lol. wow just wow. You are having a lot of trouble with this. I imagine you didn't do very well on your SAT verbals, did you? So what? they are still using it to treat that symptom/injury/disease which would mean that some people use that drug to treat that symptom/injury/disease And guess what, if a baseball player was a steroid user then by your point he would have a problem and it would be reasonable for him to bargain and justify his drug use by using the drug to treat an injury. some injury like, i don't know, a shoulder injury like arthritis (BUT wait some arthritis is medically classified as a disease? So how can it be an injury as well??? Oh boy how do we solve this?)
I thought you had your final word in the thread? Why are you a liar? If you want to compare we can do so at any time. I can provide a scan of my scores. So in your mind Injury and disease are the same? Not distintly different? Well if people out there are doing crack to treat a cold I guess you could say the same thing. FACT: car wax is used to treat vomiting I guess by your standards this is backed up if people actually do it regardless of the science or the real reasont hey are using car wax.
YES!!!! Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I'm just a caveman. I fell on some ice and later got thawed out by some of your scientists. Your world frightens and confuses me! Sometimes the honking horns of your traffic make me want to get out of my BMW.. and run off into the hills, or wherever.. Sometimes when I get a message on my fax machine, I wonder: "Did little demons get inside and type it?" I don't know! My primitive mind can't grasp these concepts. But there is one thing I do know - when a man like my client slips and falls on a sidewalk in front of a public library, then he is entitled to no less than two million in compensatory damages, and two million in punitive damages. Thank you.
Aside from your hypertechnical defintion of injury - we ahve the testimony of hundreds, or indeed thousands, of athletes (see. e.g. Andy Pettite) that they used PED's including anabolic steroids to promote a more rapid recovery from injuries and to facilitate rapid tissue repair - reflected in this statement from Wikipedia This statement is not sourced - with good reason insofar it's pretty muc common knowledge IMO. Are you disputing this? Because there is a lot of evidence which proves you wrong.
My dispute is this crap you are saying So you started by saying they have a postive effect on his shoulder and when he quit his should went to crap. You have been shown this is false because roids do not help. Correct?
No. Let me explain this from definitions 101. Two words: Mammals and Humans. They each have two different definitions so they do not mean exactly the same thing. but omg, a Human fits under the definition of "Mammal" even though they do not mean the same thing. Mind blowing, huh? A disease that has negative symptoms and an injury. Both have different definitions. For today's homework you can read a dictionary and figure out which one fit under the other's definition. If people in our society used crack to treat a cold, then the statement, "some people in our society use crack to treat a cold," would be true I don't know I've never been to West Virginia YES. it's pretty simple actually. if people actually do something, then it means that there are people out there that actually do that something. Revolutionary, huh?
You are talking about subgroups which is similar to saying Trama is a type of injury as human is a type of mammal. Here is your favorite webpage Wiki Why does it say outside force specifically. Is HIV outside or inside? I think inside. Spilling acid on yourself is outside though. agreed but the statement FACT: Crack is frequently used to treat the common cold is and would be just wrong.
Incorrect. That's not your dispute, you are totally moving the goalposts, you specifically identified a statement and said it was false. It's now obvious that you are just flat wrong - anabolic steroids have frequently been used and abused in order to facilitate recovery from injury for decades now, this is shown by decades worth of emprical and anectdotal evidence. As to the specifics as to how they may have helped Bagwell's injuries, I don't know them, only him and his doctors may know that.
No. As the last few pages have proven to you, tissue wasting and other injuries is treated with anabolic steroid use. A cessation in the previously existing use of anabolic steroids, which promote tissue repair, to somebody with degenerative condition would logically, to me at least, be likely to accelerate such degeneration. See, e.g., muscle wasting in HIV patients. If an advanced-stage HIV patient goes off steroids, it's likely muscle wasting would accelerate in many cases. What do you not understand? YOu're trying to run around and "burn" somebody but you're looking silly. Quit while you're ahead.
i used cocaine to help me be alert, then with overuse I ended up not being alert, how hard is that to understand
you were to scared to say anything till someone started making stupid claims that getting AIDS is an injury. yes they are used to prevent tissue loss, but it has nothing to do with treating injuries. What is logical to someone with no scientific training is worth nothing. If HGH or Roids could treat arthritis then they would be. The current drugs are dangerous and do a poor job. obvious since I am now arguing about what is an injury I am not ahead. I am very far behind by biting on these stupid arguments. AIDS is not an injury.
Words individually may have more than one definition. The definition you just cited (which favorite webpage and all aside, didn't come from a dictionary) is narrow and doesn't incorporate other accepted definitions of "injury" (which would at least include emotion injury). But i just hope we are not going to argue about the definition of "outside" now. But to answer your question, HIV would be an outside force as it did not originate from your own body rather came from an outside agent (blood transfusion, bodily fluid from another person, sitting on a public whataburger restroom toilet, etc) Yes it would be wrong, but it would be wrong because by adding the word frequently you changed to meaning of the statement. You were arguing against the statement that "steroids are used to treat injuries" (and the statement that "steroids are used to treat joint injuries by steroid users") not that steroids are frequently used treat injuries or that steroids are frequently used to treat joint injuries.
Oh crap. Not touching outside. Next thing we will be arguing of what the definition of "is" is. Well your friend has severe stomach problems he ate something and has fluid coming out of every hole. Is he sick or injured? Your other friend broke his leg. Sick or injured? Uh oh I think I can end this right now. This was his second statement of BS I quoted his third. Do you now agree that SamFisher is full or crap on this statement and this one?
Maybe i'm completely missing something, so i'll give you one more chance to explain your point. You originally objected to my statement that symptoms from AIDS are not injuries. so lets look at that. Is bleeding from your skin an injury? physical pain in hands and feet? bruising? these are common symptoms of AIDS. the wikipedia page you just cited all these symptoms as subcategories of an injuryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Injury Why exactly are these symptoms not "injuries"?
Both injured unless he is sick is some way that caused the broken leg. in which case he would be both.
you often call in to work with a flu and say "I am calling in injured"? LOL. you agree that the common use of injury is as I define it? You agree Sam was wrong?
Because an injury is caused by an outside event like if you cut your eye. The bleeding (just like for instance if you had ebola) is caused by an internal problem of virus infection.
Do you ever call in to work and say "i am calling in injured" even if you are injured? If you have cancer and because of the disease's symptoms you can't make it into work, you don't call and say "i'm calling in diseased". Doesn't mean you don't have a disease I don't agree that your definition of injury is a common one. It's, imo, an exceptional narrow definition as defined by societal usage and dictionaries. As I stated earlier, considering the better explanations out there I don't agree with Sam that Bagwell's weight loss in 04 indicates steroid use. I agree with him that steroids have been used to treat injuries (i would also say joint injuries) and considering that, it is not unreasonable to think that once injured Bagwell may have used some banned PED to treat his shoulder injury. I don't however think that there is any evidence of this actually happening only that it is not unreasonable. I would also take it further to say that among underground steroid users, which baseball players who use ped belong to, steroids are "frequently" used to treat injuries such as shoulder injuries (there are a variety of recent baseball players/athletes who have come out when caught and admitted their use for just this reason)
