Stallone at 62

dlofnep

Old boy keeps himself in shape.

ronbyrne2005

updated 4:02 p.m. ET May 15, 2007
SYDNEY, Australia - Sylvester Stallone pleaded guilty Tuesday to two charges of importing banned substances into Australia, saying he takes the muscle-building drugs for a medical condition and didn’t know he was breaking the law.

Stallone, star of the “Rocky” and “Rambo” films, didn’t appear in court. He left Australia in February after authorities confiscated the substances.

“I made a terrible mistake, not because I was attempting to deceive anyone, but I was simply ignorant to your official rules,” the 60-year-old actor said in a letter to Sydney Local Court

Hanley

ronbyrne2005 wrote: »

updated 4:02 p.m. ET May 15, 2007
SYDNEY, Australia - Sylvester Stallone pleaded guilty Tuesday to two charges of importing banned substances into Australia, saying he takes the muscle-building drugs for a medical condition and didn’t know he was breaking the law.

Stallone, star of the “Rocky” and “Rambo” films, didn’t appear in court. He left Australia in February after authorities confiscated the substances.

“I made a terrible mistake, not because I was attempting to deceive anyone, but I was simply ignorant to your official rules,” the 60-year-old actor said in a letter to Sydney Local Court

Clearly a fraud so :rolleyes:

ronbyrne2005

Hanley wrote: »

Clearly a fraud so :rolleyes:

Not saying that, just making clear a man in his 60s can't have that body naturally. Im sure he works out intensely but hard to get into such shape at 30 never mind 60.

dlofnep

IIRC, it was HGH Stallone had, which is perfectly legal in the US. I'd say a strong work ethic was the primary reason for Stallone still being in shape at 62. Always a naysayer out there.

who007

Are those tatts for real? When did he get them?!

Lookin greatfor any age tho!

dlofnep

No, I think they are only for the movie. Fake I think. That's a screencap from his newest film.

the drifter

dlofnep wrote: »

IIRC, it was HGH Stallone had, which is perfectly legal in the US. I'd say a strong work ethic was the primary reason for Stallone still being in shape at 62. Always a naysayer out there.

agreed even if he is taking something...you cant just sit at home pop a few pills stand in fornt of the mirror and watch the six pack grow..fecking hell if i could figure out how to do that i wouldnt be here id have made my millions and retiered!!!

madmik

thats actually the wrong pic if the thing i saw was correct,

hes much larger now

http://estb.msn.com/i/F3/A75AFB2313E599CC9A2D5AAA73E056.jpg

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/05_01/slystalloneBIG1505_468x550.jpg

although hes admitted using hgh and testosterone to get that way its still damn impressive

steroids make it easier but they dont do the work for you

dlofnep

Those pics you have posted are from Rocky, which are 2 years old. This one is from his newest movie I beleive.

madmik

aha ,sorry,i thought that was an older pic

well hes in damn good shape in both pictures

hes re-defining old age !

AARRRGH

I think what he's doing is great. So many people let nature "take its course" and end up overweight, unhealthy and unfit. Older people like him who use HGH and steroids are paving the way for the (assuming no complications) eventual time when we are all on that stuff.

I don't see anything wrong with giving your body what it's missing, and being youthful at an old age.

Roper

I intend to take HGH when I'm 62. Just FYI.

dlofnep

I don't think he's actually roiding, but definately HGH. It seems to be doing wonders for older guys, even pro-athletes like Randy Couture.. I'm willing to hazard a guess that Hopkins and Holyfield are also using HGH.

madmik

sly has admitted to using testosterone in interviews before

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2008/01/26/122425.php

also randy couture is on hormone therapy according to joe rogan who
says it was couture who got him wise to the procedure

its legal if its prescribed by a doctor and is not the same thing as self prescribed steroid abuse which is also rampant in sports and bodybuilding

Hanley

madmik wrote: »

sly has admitted to using testosterone in interviews before

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2008/01/26/122425.php

also randy couture is on hormone therapy according to joe rogan who
says it was couture who got him wise to the procedure

its legal if its prescribed by a doctor and is not the same thing as self prescribed steroid abuse which is also rampant in sports and bodybuilding

Waaaaaaaaaaait.....

2 guys, both taking the exact same stuff, in the same quantities. One of them is ok cos a doctor prescribed it to him, the other's a steroid abuser???

madmik

theres a differnce in a doctor prescribing a small dose of test to someone to bring them up to normal levels

and a guy who decides to use insane levels to alter his genetic potential

i didnt compare rogan to couture

couture is an athlete who competes in steroid tested events

rogan doesnt compete in test events

it may nnot be fair but coutures hormone levels are monitored by a doctor

other ufc fighters like sherk,leben,sylvia were all caught with excessively high levels of test or nandrolone in their blood and were banned by the athletic commission and had their respective titles stripped from them

couture has never been over the threshhold and hence has never been banned from fighting or lost his title

is it fair?

probably not since hard training lowers your free test levels and any extra test administered will help with recovery and muscle mass

gabgab

@Hanley- Why does the guy that has not been prescribed it go and see a doctor and get it prescribed then?

I dont mean go to a doctor that will just rubber stamp it,

crotalus667

gabgab wrote: »

@Hanley- Why does the guy that has not been prescribed it go and see a doctor and get it prescribed then?

I dont mean go to a doctor that will just rubber stamp it,

Because it costs a couple of hundred to get a cycle with out a doc to get it from the doc would cost a couple of grand (plus all the hassle of making sure you your test and gh levels show up low on the doc’s test )

Hanley

madmik wrote: »

theres a differnce in a doctor prescribing a small dose of test to someone to bring them up to normal levels

That wasn't the situation I suggested. Please don't try and twist it to fit your argument.

Simple question, if two guys are taking the same doses of the same stuff, why is the one who had it prescribed to them ok, but the other is an abuser?

gabgab wrote: »

@Hanley- Why does the guy that has not been prescribed it go and see a doctor and get it prescribed then?

I don't understand the relevance of the question? Why should he?

Does the act of having it prescribed suddenly make him "legit" and not an abuser any more?

madmik

Hanley wrote: »

That wasn't the situation I suggested. Please don't try and twist it to fit your argument.

Simple question, if two guys are taking the same doses of the same stuff, why is the one who had it prescribed to them ok, but the other is an abuser?




normal levels are classed at 1200mg of free test per volume of blood or something like that
abuse is classified as the overuse of something

if youre not monitoring your blood levels and just injecting yourself you could have 5 times or even more than the normal guidelines

in which case u will be tested and u will be found guilty,lose your title,banned for a year or whatever

multi-millionaires like randy couture can afford state of the art doctors and weekly bloodtests to keep them topped up without going far enough over the limits that would cause a positive steroid test

this is different than just shooting up with steroids from an underground lab as you have no idea of the true strength of each injection because its not pharmaceutical grade test youre injecting

couture is playing a smart game and is using the rules to his advantage at the moment

the likes of sherk,sylvia,leben and bonner all tested red for above -human levels of test which indicates cheating

whether couture is as guilty as the rest is open for debate but at least hes not breaking the rules "as they stand at this moment in time"

crotalus667

madmik wrote: »

normal levels are classed at 1200mg of free test per volume of blood or something like that"

The average male produces 50 to 80 mg of test per week

madmik wrote: »

this is different than just shooting up with steroids from an underground lab as you have no idea of the true strength of each injection because its not pharmaceutical grade test youre injecting"

The majority of black market test originates from legitimate sources ,

Hanley

madmik wrote: »

Please don't try and twist it to fit your argument.

Simple question, if two guys are taking the same doses of the same stuff, why is the one who had it prescribed to them ok, but the other is an abuser?

madmik wrote: »

normal levels are classed at 1200mg of free test per volume of blood or something like that
abuse is classified as the overuse of something

if youre not monitoring your blood levels and just injecting yourself you could have 5 times or even more than the normal guidelines

in which case u will be tested and u will be found guilty,lose your title,banned for a year or whatever

multi-millionaires like randy couture can afford state of the art doctors and weekly bloodtests to keep them topped up without going far enough over the limits that would cause a positive steroid test

this is different than just shooting up with steroids from an underground lab as you have no idea of the true strength of each injection because its not pharmaceutical grade test youre injecting

couture is playing a smart game and is using the rules to his advantage at the moment

the likes of sherk,sylvia,leben and bonner all tested red for above -human levels of test which indicates cheating

whether couture is as guilty as the rest is open for debate but at least hes not breaking the rules "as they stand at this moment in time"

OMFG it's a simple question. Stop dodging it. Once again, I ask;

Given two guys, the exact same, taking the exact same stuff, in the exact same quantities. The ONLY difference between these two guys is that one has a prescription, and the other doesn't. Is the only reason one of them is a steroid abuser because he doesn't have a prescription for it?? Even tho EVERYTHING else is the same?

Roper

I'll say again, the main gripe I have with test and PEDs in sport is the fact that they're against the rules in most sports and the first thing you require when you walk onto a pitch, into a ring, or on court is that you have a level playing field. The usual counter argument here is "oh but it's never a level playing field, someone is always quicker, has natural higher endurance etc." That doesn't hold water for me. The fact is that if you agree to compete in something, your level playing field is going to be that you agree to abide by the rules of that sport, meaning that in your preperation you will abide by them and have access to only what's allowed in the rules. Once that breaks down it's battle of the chemists. I dn't want that for sports.

My problem with the man on the street and steroids is that
A) they're ridiculous. I just think you're the worst kind of saddo if you take steroids just to look good. Go get the frickin calf implants at least they're permanent. Or maybe you're doing it just to lift more in the gym. For what to impress your mates? Idiotic, go get some willpower.
Information and the fact that there's not a team of doctors looking after the average man, meaning that the inevitable consequences of injecting something into your body that you only think you know about give an even worse reputation to something which actually has a pretty bad rep already.

As I've said before, ask a large animal vet about steroids and they won't tell you about their evilness and how nasty they are. They'll tell you how great they are. I have a friend who calls them miracle drugs- getting old family pets walking again, horses back working and bulls doing what bulls do.

In sport, for me it's as simple as this- against the rules. But that's not because the athlete's willies will drop off in 5 years time it's that we just have no way of controlling expenditure, of telling people when to stop as, like everything, too much can kill.

gabgab

Interesting debate and I am definitely not as knowledgable as you other guys but I would ask the following questions in retort,

Why should he go and get it prescribed and the recommended dose with regular checks, as opposed to doing it himself?

Does the suggestion that to do it with the proper testing costs a couple of hundred grand indicate that it is extremely powerful stuff and monitoring it is not as simple as a blood prick put through a machine, and getting it done right would be best practice

Because he is not a medical professional, and it is medication. Because like alot of things, it can be marvelous and provide amazing results but it does need to be observed and monitored, because the rules of his sport or governing body say so,

To answer your question Hanley, the difference with getting it prescribed and not is very simple. Getting it prescribed by a professional doctor will show that they are approaching the whole process with their health and or more than likely performance or output in mind, whilst staying within or at the time of tests within the accepted levels for their sport

Does the money spent make them legit, in the rules YES.

Is it fair that Lewis Hamilton has a superior F1 car, is it fair that Valentino Rossi has or in the past has had a superior bike to get around the track, in the rules as governed by the sport they participate in then yes. This is a fact of sport and in alot of cases life, individuals that can push and find ways around rules may not sit well with some, but that is life and at an elite level in anything every area is scrutinised and all advantage sought, and at that level cash is king,

This presuming once again that it is not just a doctor that will rubber stamp the prescription,

I take your point that EVERYTHING else is the same, but without testing how do you know that EVERYTHING else is the same?

Just because the quantities are the same does not mean that the test results will be the same, the genetics argument etc etc

madmik

Hanley wrote: »

OMFG it's a simple question. Stop dodging it. Once again, I ask;

Given two guys, the exact same, taking the exact same stuff, in the exact same quantities. The ONLY difference between these two guys is that one has a prescription, and the other doesn't. Is the only reason one of them is a steroid abuser because he doesn't have a prescription for it?? Even tho EVERYTHING else is the same?

u should go back and read the read the thread,its obviously a bit compllicated for your little mind to understand

one of thems breaking tha law/rules and one of them isnt

simple as.

amazingemmet

madmik wrote: »

u should go back and read the read the thread,its obviously a bit compllicated for your little mind to understand

one of thems breaking tha law/rules and one of them isnt

simple as.

If the person was not competing in a sport that banned the u drugs they use of such drugs then they wouldn't be breaking the law or rules, well where i am any way.

Simple as

My only gripe against peds in sports is they are against the rules same as putting horse shoes in boxing gloves. If you compete in a sport you should stick to the rules.

That said I'd love if they got rid of all the rules against peds in sports and just let them take whatever they want, then strangely enough while the results would get better the but in the end it would come down to genetics and hard work for the winners

pwd

Here's a clip from rocky 2, which was released when Stallone was 33, for you to compare his build in the two. Sorry for the silly music over it.

arybvtcw0eolkf

dlofnep wrote: »

I don't think he's actually roiding, but definately HGH. It seems to be doing wonders for older guys, even pro-athletes like Randy Couture.. I'm willing to hazard a guess that Hopkins and Holyfield are also using HGH.

GH won't do alot for a bodybuilder/athlete without stacking it with insulin & testosterone.

Hanley

madmik wrote: »

u should go back and read the read the thread,its obviously a bit compllicated for your little mind to understand

BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA irony's a bitch.

one of thems breaking tha law/rules and one of them isnt

simple as.

Can you honestly not see the problem with what you're saying??

Given the EXACT same circumstances, a person is a drug abuser if the ONLY thing he doesn't do is go to a doctor and self medicates instead??

Anyway, my simple little mind always thought "abuse" meant the improver or overuse of something. Obviously you've come up with your own defintion. Might wanna inform the nice people at Oxford about it.

Hanley

gabgab wrote: »

Does the suggestion that to do it with the proper testing costs a couple of hundred grand indicate that it is extremely powerful stuff and monitoring it is not as simple as a blood prick put through a machine, and getting it done right would be best practice

I dunno...I think you're paying for a doctors knowledge as much as you're paying for the testing/product. And lets not forget medicine is a business. The price you pay for any prescription is for the most part a direct cost which relates to the research and development that has gone into getting it to the market. So, to that end, if someone is knowledgeable enough that a doctor's input won't tell him something he already knows, and he can source a product the same as one that you could buy "legitimately", then I don't see the need.

Lots of assumptions there tho.

Because he is not a medical professional, and it is medication. Because like alot of things, it can be marvelous and provide amazing results but it does need to be observed and monitored, because the rules of his sport or governing body say so,

I'm not too au fait with the rules regarding HRT, but it's my understanding that HRT is acceptable for people with lower than normal hormonal indicator levels, and once they don't cross the upper limit, they're seen to gain no advantage over their competitors.

So if Stephen's limits are well below normal, for whatever reason, and he uses HGH, test etc to bump back up to normal levels, is that cheating?? Would it ok if he had a doctors note?? Assuming in both cases he gets tested regularly and never fails a test.

To answer your question Hanley, the difference with getting it prescribed and not is very simple. Getting it prescribed by a professional doctor will show that they are approaching the whole process with their health and or more than likely performance or output in mind, whilst staying within or at the time of tests within the accepted levels for their sport

I don't think people get HRT to improve their health for the most part, I'd say it's to improve quality of life. So if two people approach it with this in mind, and the only difference is one doesn't do it thru a doctor, I don't see the difference. Presumably the latter will still being going for medical checks etc, and if the indicators stay within normal/safe parameters, what's the problem?

People seem to arguing parallel cases here. HRT -vs- Pro-bodybuilder levels of use.

Is it fair that Lewis Hamilton has a superior F1 car, is it fair that Valentino Rossi has or in the past has had a superior bike to get around the track, in the rules as governed by the sport they participate in then yes. This is a fact of sport and in alot of cases life, individuals that can push and find ways around rules may not sit well with some, but that is life and at an elite level in anything every area is scrutinised and all advantage sought, and at that level cash is king,

So, if someone performs within the rules, regardless of the methods them employ to stay within the rules, it's ok???

I take your point that EVERYTHING else is the same, but without testing how do you know that EVERYTHING else is the same?

Just because the quantities are the same does not mean that the test results will be the same, the genetics argument etc etc

Just a hypothectical situation that I was trying to use to see whether people thought the difference between use and abuse was a doctors note.

davyjose

His right pec seems a lot smaller than his left one. Did he tear it or something? Still, in AMAZING shape for any age never mind 62.

Edit: Oh right, I see this is another Steroids thread. I think there might be a couple of hundred of these already, so I'm not getting involved. FWIW, the guy doesn't compete i professional sport, so I really don't care what he takes. He's in savage condition.

WolfForager

Any chance we can just agree that he looks bloody awesome and stop all the steroid ranting? It's getting old and i've seen many a topic locked over it.

celestial

It all started when someone brought up sly being caught with banned substances or whatever - and saying that you can't have that body at his age - which isn't true.

It's never very long before someone comes on with the Irish begrudgery, generally speaking.

gabgab

Hanley wrote: »

So, to that end, if someone is knowledgeable enough that a doctor's input won't tell him something he already knows, and he can source a product the same as one that you could buy "legitimately", then I don't see the need

The need is that the tests that are done by a doctor give you information that the non prescribed user cannot possibly know without these tests. Test results which can only be obtained through lengthy and expensive procedures,

He looks in great shape but much there is no arguing that and no begrudgery on my behalf at all,

AARRRGH

celestial wrote: »

It all started when someone brought up sly being caught with banned substances or whatever - and saying that you can't have that body at his age - which isn't true.

You reckon it is possible for a 62 year old man to have his body without steroids or HGH?

Not a chance!