Following on my post on the Mitchell Report, the following are a few interesting observations from the past several days:

Art DeVany agrees with me that MLB didn’t get it’s money’s worth and provides a rather interesting and simple test to evaluate whether a player was likely to have used steroids;
Malcolm Gladwell asks “So what, exactly, is wrong with an athlete–someone who makes a living with their body–taking medication to speed their recovery from injury?”
The New York Times Murray Chass picks up on one of the observations from my post — that is, there is not much original work product in the Mitchell Report.
Former Florida Marlins and Cincinnati Reds trainer Larry Starr, who was a trainer in the big leagues for 30 years, describes how MLB management and the MLB Players’ Association soft-pedaled the PED problem even after being advised in 1988 that use of PED’s was becoming commonplace among players.

Finally, Richard Landau and Louis H. Philipson, who are both Professors of Medicine at the University of Chicago Medical School, wrote the following letter to the Wall Street Journal explaining why the risks of taking human growth hormone in an effort to improve athletic performance and endurance, or recover from a non-live threatening injury, is a quintessential example of taking a flyer with too much downside risk:

While some stories noted the many negative effects of androgenic steroids, we have not seen any explanation as to why taking “natural” human growth hormone is also a really bad idea. While growth hormone is necessary for children in particular, athletes are tempted to take growth hormone without a demonstrated positive result on performance. They should note what happens in the disease called acromegaly, a condition of too much growth hormone. In this disease, excess growth hormone causes growth of hands, lips, tongue, feet, nose, chin, forehead and liver. In short, most tissues and organs in the body will enlarge, including the heart, sometimes to the point of heart failure. Diabetes, decreased interest and ability in sex, fatigue, excessive sweating, and disordered sleep are also part of this syndrome.
The only important FDA-approved indications for giving growth hormone are failure to grow due to lack of growth hormone and the HIV-associated wasting syndrome. Despite the relative rarity of these problems, there are nine formulations of growth hormone on the market today, and all list diabetes, leukemia, muscle aches and pain, headache, weakness, stiffness and swelling of male breasts as potential side effects, as well as insomnia, nausea, hypothyroidism and increased blood fats. Also mentioned are pancreatitis and fatigue. Every manufacturer recommends periodic safety monitoring of blood sugar, thyroid blood tests, skin and heart exams. We could easily name quite a few drugs that have been withdrawn from the market with less potential for harm than growth hormone.
Not a single clinical trial has effectively demonstrated that the metabolic effects of growth hormone, even including a temporary increase in lean body mass, have resulted in improved performance. The view of some athletes that a few injections of the hormone might have beneficial effects on sore arms has never been rigorously tested, but is very unlikely to be effective. The risks clearly outweigh the benefits. Our young athletes need to be warned that large muscles are not good muscles, and that these problems are not rare “side effects” but the natural consequence of excess growth hormone, a hormone that affects almost every tissue, not just muscles — and usually not for the better. Taking any form of growth hormone in the hope of improved athletic performance is misinformed at best, and any mention of this practice should explain why.