supplements???

TheJones

After reading the article regarding the alleged use of creatine within Irish rugby and in particular the Leinster and Ulster team sponsorship, not to mention the anger that generated within the subsequent thread here on 'boards' towards the Colin Coyle article, I felt why not take this opportunity to start a reasoned debate among those who have actually tried the products here in the forum.

I doubt any one within the fitness forum will doubt the importance of supplements such as creatine in a sports nutrition context but neither will many doubt the dangerous saturation of such products in todays market place and their prevalence in junior/minors sport. The Irish Times article was undeniably designed for shock value but we've all seen school going lads lining up in supermarkets with tubs of various powders believing them to be the ultimate body builders etc.

So what do ye all think? should there be more information available on such products or even increased regulation? Should their use amongst minors be actively discouraged by sports bodies other than the IRFU or do you take the opposite view?

EileenG

I honestly think that people get way over-excited when the word "Supplement" comes up.

Why is it if you tell someone to eat more egg whites, that's great advice, but if you suggest creatine, you are practically a drug pusher? What's the dividing line between a multi-vit and fish oil, and unethical supplements?

brianthebard

Is that you colm? are you looking for a follow up piece? There's been plenty of reasoned debate on this forum about supplements before, and anyone reading itor seriously training for more than a month or two will or should have armed themselves with the necessary information about the most popular products out there and made up their own minds about whether they want to supplement their diets or not. There's really nothing else to it, its a complete non-issue imo which is what makes sensationalist drivel like the Times piece so annoying.

TheJones

More of a reason to start a debate then. I agree using the term 'supplement' in sport will almost cetainly cause anxiety amongst the masses but is that anxiety well founded and why? Do people see them as a more un-ethical form of nutrition in a sports context and does this as a result need to be addressed?

COH

Eh.. no

TheJones

brianthebard wrote: »

Is that you colm? are you looking for a follow up piece? There's been plenty of reasoned debate on this forum about supplements before, and anyone reading itor seriously training for more than a month or two will or should have armed themselves with the necessary information about the most popular products out there and made up their own minds about whether they want to supplement their diets or not. There's really nothing else to it, its a complete non-issue imo which is what makes sensationalist drivel like the Times piece so annoying.

Aint Colm I'm afraid but as this issue will be in the headlines for some time to come now as more parents start to question what their children are using before training for a schools rugby match or a GAA tournament, I felt it was valid to get reasoned opinion. The fact is, supplements such as but in no way limited to creatine are being used extensively as they have become more widely available, they can be purchased by anyone of any age and their use amongst various groups is largely unmonitored.

I fully realise there's plenty of information on various products here as the members of this forum form the minority of users who educate themselves on these supplements for specific purposes and then publish that information here on 'boards' for all, but I'm trying to start a debate on their use, dangers and regulation in junior sports.

brianthebard

There is no danger. You're introducing sensationalism and a fearful tone to your 'reasoned debate' that makes no sense. How can a food source be considered 'unethical nutrition'? Why don't we start this 'reasoned debate' by you outlining what supplements you consider to be a danger and why, and what one's you think are ok, and we'll go from there?

d'Oracle

Oh the baby Jesus....

OP I suggest you go to the Supplements sticky.
Then you read the first paragraph of first post that g'em wrote.
Then read it again.

Then start a debate on something that is worth debating.
No debate can ensue on a cut and dried issue.
Only truth vs BS. Which is not debate.

COH

OMG.... 'supplements' are being 'used'.

Seriously, if parents care that much they should make it their business to see what little Johnny is spending his pocket money on

xgtdec

Eh...ill spend ma pocket money on whateva i wan thank ya very much...now...a bucket of your finest creatine please!!

TheJones

Its not about me and my use of the word 'dangers' was a question not an opinion and please read the original thread to find out the questions I've actually asked before presuming I have a ulterior motive.

If you think there is no danger and their current usage and subsequent regulation is fine then great, that's called having a debate and I respect your opinion, as for me introducing a 'fearful tone' or 'sansationalism' dont be rediculous, the last thing I want to start is another online rant about a newspaper article which ironically generates more revenue for the said newspaper!

brianthebard

TheJones wrote: »

Its not about me and my use of the word 'dangers' was a question not an opinion and please read the original thread to find out the questions I've actually asked before presuming I have a ulterior motive.

If you think there is no danger and their current usage and subsequent regulation is fine then great, that's called having a debate and I respect your opinion, as for me introducing a 'fearful tone' or 'sansationalism' dont be rediculous, the last thing I want to start is another online rant about a newspaper article which ironically generates more revenue for the said newspaper!

Maybe you haven't been privy to many debates before but if you don't provide a concrete argument to begin with in which you outline which supplements are dangerous and why in your opinion, then there can be no debate, reasoned or otherwise. What you've posted so far is just sensationalist and factless, when you start posting real arguments based on real facts you'll have begun a debate, until then this thread is as bad as the article you're talking about.

Additionally, there was no question related to, or even in the vicinity of the word 'danger' in your post. It was most definitely not a question but an opinion based on precisely nothing.

d'Oracle

You don't understand OP.
Its just not an issue.

"Wellness professionals" recommend supplementation all the time.
Gillian McKeith never gets accused of pushing drugs, but she would have everyone mainlining wheatgrass. Udo Erasmus designs his own oils as a supplement. Udos Oil and Wheatgrass are never referred to as steroids.

But some kid wants to get big and all of a sudden everything has to take on some bull**** sinister air. Hell my folks take multivits every day. Are they on the ROIDS? Sounds silly doesn't it?
Its the same thing. Need more protein? take a shake. Need more Vit C? pop a cap.

TheJones

brianthebard wrote: »

Additionally, there was no question related to, or even in the vicinity of the word 'danger' in your post. It was most definitely not a question but an opinion based on precisely nothing.

For a moderator your certainly not impartial regarding your views if anyone should dare suggest a debate based on the use of sports supplements in minors sport.
Be under no illusions, thats all this was, not an attack on your personal beliefs and supplement use, but a request for the educated opinions of this forums members who have used products such as the article outlined.
The Irish Times article will be the first in many as this becomes an even greater issue in weeks/months to come. The post was designed to offer more than just abuse thrown at the journalist for an article that was designed to sell newspapers and therefore gather attention. Can I take it then you feel there is no problem with the use of creatine in schools rugby or similiar sports and that the current regulation governing its sale and distribution is fine?

EileenG

I'm a mother of three young children, all of whom take part in sports, two competitively.

I'm the one who uses supplements, not them. The idea of wasting their pocket or chore money on creatine would crack them up. They do see the value of whey, for instance, but have absolutely no intention of buying it themselves. They're quite prepared to steal mine though.

Even though I know better, I'm still hoping that there is some magic pixie dust out there which will make me slim and gorgeous without me having to sweat. So I buy a lot of supps, most of which are useless. My children have no interest in those at all. They can't see benefit in anything beyond fish oil and vitamin C.

Or is giving kids fish oil and vit C cheating?

There is a huge emotive effect of talking about children and supplements, but in real life, I have never seen it. Any child/teen I know would much rather spend the money on pizza than creatine.

I did see a big fuss being made about an American study which showed that high school children were using steroids. Scary stuff - until you read the way it was worded: any child who had ever taken prescription steroids like prednisolone was also included in the steroid users group, and were not differenciated out.

d'Oracle

TheJones wrote: »

For a moderator your certainly not impartial regarding your views if anyone should dare suggest a debate based on the use of sports supplements in minors sport.
Be under no illusions, thats all this was, not an attack on your personal beliefs and supplement use, but a request for the educated opinions of this forums members who have used products such as the article outlined.
The Irish Times article will be the first in many as this becomes an even greater issue in weeks/months to come. The post was designed to offer more than just abuse thrown at the journalist for an article that was designed to sell newspapers and therefore gather attention. Can I take it then you feel there is no problem with the use of creatine in schools rugby or similiar sports and that the current regulation governing its sale and distribution is fine?

Hang on.
It wasn't the Irish Times and it was not a front page headliner.

brianthebard

TheJones wrote: »

For a moderator your certainly not impartial regarding your views if anyone should dare suggest a debate based on the use of sports supplements in minors sport.
Be under no illusions, thats all this was, not an attack on your personal beliefs and supplement use, but a request for the educated opinions of this forums members who have used products such as the article outlined.
The Irish Times article will be the first in many as this becomes an even greater issue in weeks/months to come. The post was designed to offer more than just abuse thrown at the journalist for an article that was designed to sell newspapers and therefore gather attention. Can I take it then you feel there is no problem with the use of creatine in schools rugby or similiar sports and that the current regulation governing its sale and distribution is fine?

I'm not a mod of this forum, but glad to see you plan to hide behind non-issues like that badge rather than answer the questions and you know, debate. Just as an FYI you should know there's no onus on mods to be impartial, in the fora they mod or outside.

I don't think this is an attack on my personal beliefs, if I did I would report the thread. All I want is a debate, but you're not giving it to me. In fact you seem woefully misinformed. The Times article is not the first of many, its the latest in a long line of silly misinformed articles on supplements.

Now can you answer my request for a list of supplements you have a problem with or think might be dangerous and how they are dangerous? I certainly do not think it fair that you ask me questions and expect an answer in this debate if you do not first comply with this request which I've made several times now.

columok

A much bigger societal issue is the supplementation of peoples diets with excessive amounts of refined carbohydrates. 13 year old rugby players experimenting with snickers bars though isn't a story that will sell.

Besides the fact that many supplements are placebo, alcohol, sugar, nicotine and caffeine are much greater and more immediate health threats.

TheJones

d'Oracle wrote: »

Hang on.
It wasn't the Irish Times and it was not a front page headliner.

Sorry your right, 'The Sunday Times' my mistake

COH

Lets have a debate on the use of food.

Do you 'use' food?

What are your thoughts on the use and reglaution of these foodements. Should foodementation be allowed in schools?

xgtdec

aww man...food is bad for me now aswell....i give up

TheJones

brianthebard wrote: »

I'm not a mod of this forum, but glad to see you plan to hide behind non-issues like that badge rather than answer the questions and you know, debate. Just as an FYI you should know there's no onus on mods to be impartial, in the fora they mod or outside.

I don't think this is an attack on my personal beliefs, if I did I would report the thread. All I want is a debate, but you're not giving it to me. In fact you seem woefully misinformed. The Times article is not the first of many, its the latest in a long line of silly misinformed articles on supplements.

Now can you answer my request for a list of supplements you have a problem with or think might be dangerous and how they are dangerous? I certainly do not think it fair that you ask me questions and expect an answer in this debate if you do not first comply with this request which I've made several times now.

badge?

Have you not read the initial post? For the record I personally have little to no problem with supplements as a part of sports nutrition and use many myself in particular post race recovery. Have you read the article in question regarding the apparent 'black market' in schools rugby and can you express an moderate opinion on this? And finally why in the name of God should I list supplements I may not feel work as advertised only to have you 'wiki' their details and post back their benefits verbatim?

Again my questions were simple and not designed to target you or your personal use of sports supplements, feel free to answer them or ignore them and other ''silly misinformed articles'' as you put it.

brianthebard

TheJones wrote: »

badge?

Have you not read the initial post? For the record I personally have little to no problem with supplements as a part of sports nutrition and use many myself in particular post race recovery. Have you read the article in question regarding the apparent 'black market' in schools rugby and can you express an moderate opinion on this? And finally why in the name of God should I list supplements I may not feel work as advertised only to have you 'wiki' their details and post back their benefits verbatim?

Again my questions were simple and not designed to target you or your personal use of sports supplements, feel free to answer them or ignore them and other ''silly misinformed articles'' as you put it.

mod badge.

Yes I read your post. You asked for a debate about dangerous supplements but won't say what dangers these supps are supposed to have. I don't intend to wiki benefits but if you don't provide a post outlining your argument how can you expect a debate? I won't comment any further on the black market or the rest of the bull**** in the article because it was just that and no more. Little to no problems with these supplements suggests you do have some problems, so perhaps you should start by airing those.

Just so we're clear I've never ingested a creatine supplement, so I have no bias towards them, I simply want a reasoned debate but you're not providing it. Now for the fourth or fifth time, what are the dangers of supplements that you refer to and what supplements are dangerous?

g'em

TheJones and brianthebard neither of you is addressing the others' points. I suggest you take a break from adressing each other directly and try to actually discuss some of the points raised thus far.

d'Oracle

columok wrote: »

caffeine are much greater and more immediate health threats.

EN GARDE!:mad:

TheJones

Your right brianthebard, thanks for your input, much appreciated. Mods please feel free to close down the thread as there's apparently no problem regarding the use of whey protein, glutamine, vitamin C, mars bars, snake oil and creatine in schools rugby, GAA, football or any other minor sport. It's sale and distribution regulation is sufficient and the steps taken by the IRFU to advise against the use of supplements such as creatine is apparently unecessary as everythings A-OK.

Thanks again brianthebard, no need for a debate, what was I thinking, brgds

columok

d'Oracle wrote:

EN GARDE!

No need to get all muskateers on me- I'm drinking a cup of black gold right now. Though this is brilliant




I just think supplements are so off the radar in terms of the dietary things that are a concern right now. They make for a great news story but the impact they have on health is tiny compared to the impact of a lifetime of awful food, smoking and drinking.

TheJones

Thanks EileenG, I agree that most kids would glady spend their money on pizza and by the sounds of it that US study was unfairly biased to represent a negative view, however after playing schools rugby myself I've seen the use of everything from fairly straitforward isotonic sports drinks to creatine supplements as mentioned in that now infamous article.

Of course those lads who used the latter achieved the desired results only after putting in sufficient effort but the intake of such products has become so common place it has led to advisory information from the IRFU against their use amongst young players. I don't doubt for an instant how good they are amongst educated adults but with the long term effects of such muscle development in the young so unknown do you feel their sale should be regulated?

EileenG wrote: »

I'm a mother of three young children, all of whom take part in sports, two competitively.

I'm the one who uses supplements, not them. The idea of wasting their pocket or chore money on creatine would crack them up. They do see the value of whey, for instance, but have absolutely no intention of buying it themselves. They're quite prepared to steal mine though.

Even though I know better, I'm still hoping that there is some magic pixie dust out there which will make me slim and gorgeous without me having to sweat. So I buy a lot of supps, most of which are useless. My children have no interest in those at all. They can't see benefit in anything beyond fish oil and vitamin C.

Or is giving kids fish oil and vit C cheating?

There is a huge emotive effect of talking about children and supplements, but in real life, I have never seen it. Any child/teen I know would much rather spend the money on pizza than creatine.

I did see a big fuss being made about an American study which showed that high school children were using steroids. Scary stuff - until you read the way it was worded: any child who had ever taken prescription steroids like prednisolone was also included in the steroid users group, and were not differenciated out.

d'Oracle

TheJones wrote: »

I don't doubt for an instant how good they are amongst educated adults but with the long term effects of such muscle development in the young so unknown do you feel their sale should be regulated?

Everything I read would suggest that we know a great deal about the long term effects of Creatine.

g'em

I rarely use this emotion because I find it so reprehensibly patronising but in this case I can't think of anything more suitable: :rolleyes:

TheJones wrote: »

Mods please feel free to close down the thread as there's apparently no problem regarding the use of whey protein...

Any child that drinks milk or eats dairy is getting whey in their diet already. Whey protein is simply a powdered form of this foodstuff. Whey from reliable and tested companies like ON, Nutrition X and Maximuscle is absolutely safe for any child to use (bar those with lactose intolerances).

TheJones wrote:

glutamine

Every time you eat protein you eat glutamine. It's an amino acid, used on its own as a supplement it's said to have a variety of effects including, but not limited to, muscle preservation. This has yet to be proven conclusively.

TheJones wrote:

vitamin C

the benefits of Vitamin C for the population as a whole are widely documented. From a Fitness pov it's been linked to faster recovery but the jury is still out. I really don't see how this could be of any major concern for school-age athletes.

TheJones wrote:

mars bars

I'd give a child of mine whey over mars bars any day

TheJones wrote:

snake oil

Saw this for sale in Hawai'i once, very expensive stuff altogether. Glucosamine and flax oils will do the same job better and cheaper

TheJones wrote:

and creatine in schools rugby, GAA, football or any other minor sport

This is potentially the only really contentious supplement that I can see. There's been well over 10 years of study into creatine and it has been shown time and time again to be utterly safe and straightforward to use. Admittedly teh studies done in teens are far and few between, but hte scaremongering that's done about its use in school rugby is ludicrous. These so-called reports of increased aggression and moddiness are hilarious - SHOCK HORROR - a 16 year old boy who plays a tough contact sport is starting to talk back to his mother and gets spots on his back???

IRFU to advise against the use of supplements such as creatine is apparently unecessary as everythings A-OK.

My only issue with this is that the IRFU seem to be taking the tried-and(not-very)trusted Irish-wide stance of "we don't really know much about it but so-and-so said it's bad so lets just blanket ban it". There is no proof that creatine is anything other than effective for athletes. However, the misinformation that surrounds it has let it to be shrouded in a cloud of lies and urban myths. Creatine does not give you superpowers, super-strength, increase or[/i[ decrease your penis size. It will - very, very simply - let you train a little longer and a little harder. That's it, honestly. And if you don't put in the hard work yourself, well you're just going to end up with very expensive pee.

TheJones

d'Oracle wrote: »

Everything I read would suggest that we know a great deal about the long term effects of Creatine.

I've read quite a few articles on it myself, some good and some bad but should it be encouraged amongst young players looking to increase performance or discoruaged in favour of a weight training and nutrition program for example.

TheJones

g'em wrote: »

I rarely use this emotion because I find it so reprehensibly patronising but in this case I can't think of anything more suitable: :rolleyes:

Fair enough ge'm, but my post that was based on was purely sarcastic as that felt that argument was becoming overly personal and as a result going nowhere!

d'Oracle

TheJones wrote: »

I've read quite a few articles on it myself, some good and some bad but should it be encouraged amongst young players looking to increase performance or discoruaged in favour of a weight training and nutrition program for example.

Discouraged in favour of Weight training?

Do you understand what its used for?

TheJones

d'Oracle wrote: »

Discouraged in favour of Weight training?

Do you understand what its used for?

Yes, I should have been clearer, discouraged in favour of weight training based on a set nutrition program that supersedes the need for a creatine supplement.

g'em

TheJones wrote: »

Fair enough ge'm, but my post that was based on was purely sarcastic as that felt that argument was becoming overly personal and as a result going nowhere!

I'd also posted a request asking you both to stop addressing each other which you chose to ignore.

Are there any points I've made you'd like to refute or discuss?

Khannie

This thread is ruining my coffee and biscuits!

Sorry, sorry, I mean...this thread is ruining my post workout glycogen replacement therapy.

Oh, I see it's been locked. Commencing biscuits. I mean glycogen replacement therapy.