SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member 453752 <div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>As we all know anabolic steroids are a big no-no in the military. Use can lead to UCMJ, Discharge, etc. I understand that there are health risks associated with use of steroids, but if it can be monitored and help build a stronger more effective military, then why isn't it allowed? Thoughts? 2015-02-04T06:04:22-05:00 SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member 453752

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>As we all know anabolic steroids are a big no-no in the military. Use can lead to UCMJ, Discharge, etc. I understand that there are health risks associated with use of steroids, but if it can be monitored and help build a stronger more effective military, then why isn't it allowed? Thoughts?

2015-02-04T06:04:22-05:00 2015-02-04T06:04:22-05:00 SGT Steven Eugene Kuhn MBA 453773

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>oh well, this is an interesting topic. To be more PC, some call it &quot;Hormone Treatment&quot;. The reasons why are due to the health risks that are associated with steroid use. I think anything besides Testosterone would be out of the question. The Testosterone replacement/enhancement is pretty standard for those over 40 these days, at least in the USA.

2015-02-04T06:38:31-05:00 2015-02-04T06:38:31-05:00 Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS 453800

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Specifically because the "uncontrolled" use and associated health risks outweigh the benefits.<br /><br />The amount of policy it would take to make it "controlled" would not be worth the effort invested.<br /><br />What level of administrative burden would you place to deviate from current policy, and for what gains?

2015-02-04T07:17:53-05:00 2015-02-04T07:17:53-05:00 2015-02-04T06:04:22-05:00