T Nation

Untested Federations Should be 21+

Thoughts? I was seeing some highlights of Juniors at the Showdown meet and was like wait, what?

I am all for people making their own decisions but at the same time we try to limit the amount of drugs and drinking kids do before certain ages and despite my enthusiasm for Steroids you shouldnt take them at all and even less if you are young.

I feel like giving kids a place to compete untested only encourages them to take the steroids. I understand kids will do what they want and that tested feds (IPF, NCAA etc) arent actually drug free but at least it encourages drug free.


Hmm, would it be 18 or 21 in the US? It seems that it should be 18 for everything IMO. Why can you join the military, vote, be tried as an adult, but not but booze, cigarettes (in many states, some are still 18)?

Seems we are inconsistent in our thinking of what an adult is.

I don’t disagree, but there are more than a few younger kids taking steroids too so there is a demand for untested junior divisions. When I was in high school there were a couple guys who must have started using steroids around 15-16 years old, and powerlifting wasn’t really a thing back then either. Pretty much all the arguments in favor of having divisions or feds that allow drug use apply to this as well, it’s just that the risks are much higher.

You can be old enough to die by bullets or bombs or spend the rest of your life in prison, but the risks from smoking and drinking are a step too far.


25+ would be my suggestion

1 Like

It is a pretty small sport. I could see a situation where a federation doesn’t make any announcement if it is drug tested or not, just a lifting competition. Kinda like the old days of strongman. Just a competition of who can lift the most.

I guess the whole announcing it is untested seems silly. Just call it a meet and don’t test.

Wouldn’t work for getting into the Olympics, but it’s probably not happening anyways.

I think my line of thought on this is to not provide for that demand. Obv somebody will always step in to make a buck.

I was thinking 21 is what could be acceptable but if we are talking health wise 25 would be better.

As per military and smoking both should be much older. Smoking should just be banned, easy enough just make nicotine illegal and problem solved. I would make the same argument for the US military. Not having a military has done wonders for Japan and Germany.

Alcohol should probably be 25 too

1 Like

Could you imagine the caliber of college kids if they weren’t allowed to drink until after college??? :joy:

My schoolin would have gone different that’s for sure.


With good fortune I’ll have kids to call my own someday and when they’re around 15-16 which might be too late, I mean I had my first drink before then, I’ll want to communicate to them that whatever they get into if they feel they’ve lost control they should call me and I’ll be there for them but that it’d be my preference for them to abstain until after 25. I’ve always wondered what I would’ve become without alcohol during those years. And, a friend of mine did abstain and he just works mentally in fundamentally different ways from everyone that didn’t.

1 Like

My experiences at uni showed me that those who abstained until they were legally allowed to do so (ie. didn’t learn how to drink before going to uni), tended to cope with the new “discovery” very badly. A disproportionate amount of “new drinkers” went completely off the rails and fucked their degree up because they’d never developed the ability to fit drinking into a productive life.

I fully intend to make sure my kids learn how to fit drinking into a productive life, if they choose to do so (Although fuck knows how, because neither me nor my better half drink any more).


I’ve seen people do that, and people not do that. Therefore, I don’t believe it to be an inherent trait to abstaining. But imagine that there is some nuance to how to release the brakes as it were that might set one up for fucking up bad.

But abstaining to uni does not equate to abstaining til 25…? At least not here.

Agreed on both counts, just sharing my observations.

1 Like

We can maybe discuss this further elsewhere as to not derail the thread from testing to alcohol too much. However, I’m going to unplug for the remainder of the day. Glad to run across you as always. Take care!

1 Like

Drug-tested meets cost a lot more to run than an untested meet.

You all know I’m natty elitist af, but the way I look at it, I agree with this:

The added cost of drug testing results in higher costs to meet directors, which may be a barrier of entry for newer meet directors, and that cost is passed down to competitors in registration fees, resulting in another barrier of entry for athletes. Doesn’t make sense when the majority of junior athletes don’t use PEDs.

1 Like

The last thing this sport needs is MORE rules.


Is that not what they do? I have never heard any meet being advertised as untested, only some having a tested (usually called “amateur”) division or just no mention of testing at all.

Like I said, I don’t disagree, just there are arguments in favor of allowing drug use for any age as well. I’m well past being a junior and I don’t take anything.

I don’t think there is a lot of money in it though, and nobody is forcing these kid to take steroids. Not only that, but you there are also going to be some kids who are taking whatever drug for real medical reasons that WADA rules don’t allow a therapeutic use exemption for. Or recreational drugs too.

Looks like things are going the opposite direction with weed being legalized in many places, I don’t see tobacco being banned anytime soon.

But we can always just start our own fed instead

Yes, this a thousand times. My parents were fairly liberal about drinking and let me drink occasionally in the house as a teenager. By the time I got to college, having a drink was just a part of life, not some “forbidden fruit,” so I could have a beer or two and be fine. People who had never been allowed to drink went crazy and drank to the point of throwing up. And they seemed to develop a problematic relationship with alcohol that lasted through their college years and in some cases beyond.


So the answer to this question is that teenage kids should do a few cycles so that when (and if) they grow up they will be able to use steroids responsibly.


On the other hand, I know many kids who binged through high school, in college/University and still do well into adulthood.

The introduction to alcohol is only part of the puzzle.

1 Like