Performance Enhancing Drugs | Can they Compensate for Subpar Genetics?
Performance Enhancing Drugs
Can They Compensate for Subpar Genetics?
Shawn Ray
This age-old question has been theorized over the decades, and we still have not reached a point where we can scientifically quantify an answer. It is true that athletes with a predisposition to gain a lot of muscle mass or lean bodyweight easily have the “potential” to fare better than slow gainers. However, it is the drugs that can make a slight and immeasurable difference. In the competitive world of bodybuilding, there is no measure for intangibles like desire, hunger and effort. These are essential ingredients to the athlete who has dreams of success and advancement in this sport. There have been a ton of guys who have shown up for a contest or two that looked incredible, then as quickly as they arrived on the scene they disappeared. These flash in the pan, fly-by-night bodybuilders loaded up on gear, then crashed and burned when they hit diminishing returns from abusing pharmaceuticals.
The bodybuilder who spends time in the gym building a base, that has natural talents to fill out evenly and build his body slowly over a period of time, stands the best chance for longevity in this business. As of late, we rarely see the bodybuilder with the classic V-taper, naturally small joints and round muscle bellies— which sadly, I attribute to the influx of drugs into the sport. Too many athletes are second-guessing their own ability to compete and grow to see how they fare naturally, so they skip the “basic building blocks” of going as far as they can by using only their God-given abilities, and they jump straight into the deep end of drugs to help them get bigger, faster and stronger! It waters down what they are naturally born with, and cancels out their abilities to gauge the length of their careers.
While it is known that certain drugs work, it is also a fact that not all drugs work the same on everyone who takes them. The fine line of “use versus abuse” is constantly crossed in search of the winning formula by many a bodybuilder— but the chosen few who are able to use their genetic gifts and educated minds have the ability to get in and get out with a measure of success reserved typically for the genetically gifted. The law of diminishing returns should apply to any bodybuilder who thinks their success in this sport will be found in the bottom of a pill bottle or at the end of a syringe, and that’s the cold truth! If you have bad arms and a wide waist, no amount of drugs will change that for the better once you commit to taking them to improve your overall appearance, and that’s the bottom line!
Kevin Levrone
This question reminds me a little of the debate on “nature versus nurture” or “structure versus agency,” as invariably the two topics in a debate are intertwined to a degree. When one tries to divide them to identify something that is determinant or governing, an interesting debate can ensue. I think of genetics as an outline or promise as to what the future can hold. Certainly good genetics without an application of force, work, will or a structured plan will not necessarily reveal anything astounding. However, if good genetics are in place and the individual nurtures the possibilities these genetics hold, then a marvelous result can be achieved. I credit a lot of my progress in the sport of bodybuilding to the fact that I was equipped through a genetic makeup or predisposition to hold muscle on my frame in a way that would be appealing to IFBB judges. However, if I had never applied an inordinate amount of dedicated work, I would not have brought out these elevated traits.
If someone has genetics that do not lend them to building muscle, can performance-enhancing drugs compensate? Again, without the common ingredient of work, discipline and action I have yet to hear of a drug that will allow a devotee of this sport to miraculously pack on muscle. So, in both the case of genetics and performance-enhancing drugs, one thing we know for certain is the athlete is still going to have to do a lot of work in the gym to get the types of results we are talking about. To get the best possible outcome from a bodybuilding standpoint, one probably needs to use a combination of both good genetics and performance-enhancing drugs, again married to the common denominator of concerted and dedicated work effort.
If we take a person with bad genetics who chooses to use performance-enhancing drugs, they will most likely get a result that is better than they would if they did not use the drugs, but not as good as a person with superior genetics who uses the drugs. If we take a person with good genetics who chooses not to use performance-enhancing drugs, they probably won’t get the same elevated result they would if they layered the drugs into the total equation. Would bad genetics with drugs beat good genetics and no drugs? That depends on a multitude of factors such as how long each person has been training, which one of them works harder in the gym and their nutrition, etc.
Where does this leave us?
1. Genetics definitely play a role.
2. Performance-enhancing drugs play a role.
3. A combination of both gives the athlete the best chance of a superior result.
4. Without a lot of work and discipline the discussion becomes academic, as the work is a primary and essential ingredient for any success.
I therefore look at both genetics and performance-enhancing drugs as things that promote an outcome. One can be controlled and one is determined at birth. What an athlete chooses to do is a personal matter, but these choices along with his genetic makeup will ultimately determine a large part of the results that are obtained.
I hope this sheds some light on a question that has long been debated, and will undoubtedly be further explored until such time as scientists can find a way to reprogram DNA and genetic makeup. Peace Out.
DISCUSS THIS ARTICLE ON THE MD FORUM