CASPER the Unfriendly Ghost

[Rick Collins]

It's always interesting to watch disinformation as a work in progress. The sports anti-doping lobby was largely responsible for the Anabolic Steroid Control Act. Now they're at it again, foisting a bill called HR 207 on the masses. USADA (the US Anti-Doping Agency) has created CASPER: the Coalition for Anabolic Steroid Precursor and Ephedra Regulation. They say "regulation," but they seek CRIMINALIZATION of prohormones. Their brand new web site at www.casper207.com has a "Myth or Fact" section. The "truths" are somewhat superficially appealing, but are clearly misleading, illogical and even contradictory in some regards. You'll see what I mean. Whatever your personal feelings on the value of prohormones, you should be aware that there are forces working day and night to further restrict adult liberties ... and save you from those damned steroids.

 

[Zyglamail]

What I simply CAN NOT understand is how our government, the ones we pay out of our pockets daily, can sit there and waste all this money, all these resources and all these man hours trying to control steroids which they cant even prove had dramatic long terms effects.

Meanwhile, tabacco and alcohol which have been directly and unquestioningly linked to hundreds of thousands of deaths each year dont get a second look by the feds. It has got to be one of the biggest hipocracies I have ever witnessed.

 

[ClenAche]

and what? can you suggest a protocol to thwart the inevitable--that being the inane regulation/criminalization of prohormones/prosteroids, or is it simply out of our hands? just playing devil's advocate, and i hope you take this opportunity to educate your audience on the various avenues to impact the legislative process.

 

[Zyglamail]

and what? can you suggest a protocol to thwart the inevitable--that being the inane regulation/criminalization of prohormones/prosteroids, or is it simply out of our hands? just playing devil's advocate, and i hope you take this opportunity to educate your audience on the various avenues to impact the legislative process.

The problem is our government doesnt care and neither does its employees. Lets face it, the government was originally formed to protect us against outside invaders. It has grown like a cancer and is filled with a bunch of self serving individuals who want nothing more than to feed at the public trough.

Our government has switched from a "by the people, for the people" mentality to one of "How can we keep our jobs, without pissing off our voters". In other words, a democaracy is based on majority rules, but lets face it when the government acts on things like steroids, prohormoes etc, they are not working in the best interest of the majority because the majoriy of people dont give a shit. Our government officials simply are looking to make the majority THINK they they are doing something constructive. This is done NOT by doing whats best for the people, its done simply by doing ANYTHING that doesnt piss off tha majority. Tabacco/alcohol have way too large a following for either of those items to be touched even though they are responsible for more deaths yearly than ALL other drugs combined.

Lets face it, our government isnt looking to keep us safe, they arent looking to save money, they are simply looking to justify thier existance and in turn grow like a cancer. They would just as soon drag you through the allready overcrowded legal system for possessing prohormones than see that prohormones are manufactured in a healthy environment. We have way more important things in our society to worry about than banning prohormones, we have homeless on the streets, AIDS, and a multitude of other problems which should be getting our governments attention, but alas, in the end you can bet your pleas will fall on deaf ears.

 

[Rick Collins]

Inevitable?

Common sense is the first victim of politics. The USFA (www.usfa.biz) has been created to counter the efforts of the HR 207 folks. While I do believe that the current state of the prohormone market cannot realistically be expected to continue, there are alternatives to the sledehammer approach of 207, and the USFA is pursuing various avenues. One of these avenues is working the Hill. The Dutko Group, a Washington advocacy agency, is working hard to build a core group of sensible legislators to oppose the bill and offer a responsible alternative. The specifics of that alternative are in the final stages of development and I do not want to disclose them at this time. However, the proposed alternative will be science-based, will address the publicly expressed concerns behind 207, and will properly balance those concerns with the spirit of DSHEA and nutritional freedom. In the weeks ahead, the USFA site will be expanded to flesh out these issues in more detail.

 

[ClenAche]

zyg, for the most part, i can agree w/ what youre saying, but we got u thinking. whether u agree w/ me or not, i dont care, as long as you're thinking about it yourself--and come up w/ your own conclusions. i would like to offer you this, take it or leave it, i believe our government is fraught w/ problems, its probably piss poor, but its the best one out there--that is what we should all remember. does that mean we should be complacent and not strive to be better? no! of course we should, but we should also respect what we have. Rick, i know youre intelligent enough to recognize my adversarial approach, so i wont make nice. its through the adversarial process that we really explore the issue. i appreciate your insight, and i challenge you to further educate. we know about lobbying, but thats for the rich. what can the reg folk do--contact our reps, send emails, VOTE, etc., or is it useless w/o lobbying and political power. give us an opinion--i know i'm putting u on the spot and being unfair, but i want to see your response and how u handle it. maybe i can learn something from u!

 

[Zyglamail]

zyg, for the most part, i can agree w/ what youre saying, but we got u thinking. whether u agree w/ me or not, i dont care, as long as you're thinking about it yourself--and come up w/ your own conclusions. i would like to offer you this, take it or leave it, i believe our government is fraught w/ problems, its probably piss poor, but its the best one out there--that is what we should all remember.

Of course everyone can look at our current state of governmental affairs and look at the glass as "half full" or "half empty" but thats of virtually no consolation to me. You can just as easily sit and state that if I dont like it I should change it, however the gov has grown in such a way as to make changes by the "average" citizen nearly impossible due to time constraints placed on most of us. We all have to work to keep a roof over our heads and put food on the table, that coupled with the fact the Gov has made things increasingly complicated and time consuming means that making changes is beyond us. Our government is the best by default and nothing more, shit still smells like shit no matter what name you call it.

Perhaps our government can get rid off 80% of all its employees and we can go to a pure democracy. Instead of adding worthless stuff to bills and so forth where it all has to pass or none of it, we can set up voting booths where people vote for the individual issues at hand. Put the power back into the hands of the people where it belongs and take it away from the greedy, self righteous legislatures

 

[ClenAche]

haah, zyg, that's funny, everything u just said i'm inclined to agree with. of course, its best only by default--good point, one i think i made. and what u said about individual issues, thats how i vote, but as u mention, it doesnt help unless u tow the company line (in line w/ your party who has a sig following). i think your idea of individual issue voting given back to the people is excellent--i'm just not sure how it is do-able given our constitutional constraints. its one thing to criticize, and another to come up w/ a plan that works. zyg, i think i'll stop this now, u can pm me if u wish, as i could talk about this all day, and im sure others are'nt interested. u may find we're very much the same, not that its important. what's that saying: never talk about religion and politics. not one i remember well, b/c i choose not to.

 

[Citruscide]

Rick, if there is anything I can do to help the situation... let me know.

C-ditty

 

[Rick Collins]

Multi-faceted Approach

To accomplish political change, a multi-faceted approach is the way to go. Lobbying is a crucial component, not just because money talks but because Washington advocacy specialists have already forged relationships with legislators. People, including the folks on Capitol Hill, tend to be predisposed toward familiar faces. Lobbyists are savvy to the realities of how best to frame issues in a politically persuasive way.

Another crucial component is recruiting media allies. Health publications have been very supportive (Life Extension magazine, for example, ran a big USFA promo piece), but the mainstream media are not our friends. Oversimplification allows even the least educated/intelligent to grasp a story, and negativity and fear-mongering sells advertising. This is a barrier faced by all progressive spirits, and the members of the USFA are working hard to overcome it.

Another essential component is grassroots support. Consumers (constituents) must be rallied, and they have to make themselves heard in Washington (emails, letters, etc. -- see the USFA web site for a form letter). Grassroots support for the DSHEA was the key to its success back in '94. Realistically, it will be hard to drum up that kind of support now because even with DHEA and pregnenolone on the chopping block, HR 207 is still a much more limited issue. But we need to develop as much grassroots support as possible, particularly from natural allies outside the bodybuilding community (such as among the anti-aging and AIDS communities). The USFA is working hard in this area, too.

Lastly, the industry itself needs to clean up its act. If the present standards of prohormone advertising continue, the congressional attention on the issue will only heat up further. Also, some products now exist which quite frankly appear to fall outside the protections of DSHEA.

In sum, it would be naive to think that there will be no imposition of regulations on prohormones. There will be. But the question is, will it be the overbroad and draconian approach of HR 207? Or will there be a politically viable alternative that provides adequate public protection while preserving healthful nutritional supplements AND personal liberties? Stay tuned.