The use of anabolic steroids by athletes is controversial. On the one hand, many athletes believe that steroids improve athletic performance and thus provide an advantage to those who use them. On the other hand, the medical and scientific communities believe that inadequate scientific data exist to support the claim that anabolic steroids can improve athletic performance while overwhelming scientific data demonstrate their deleterious effects. Therefore, a large information and credibility gap concerning anabolic steroids exists between the athletes and the medical and scientific communities. We believe that this gap can be closed if both groups are better informed about anabolic steroids. We provide a detailed review of the literature on anabolic steroids that provides to the reader the information needed to make an informed decision on the relative risks and benefits of anabolic steroids to the athlete.

The effectiveness of taping and the effectiveness of wearing a laced stabilizer in preventing ankle injuries and reinjuries over six seasons of collegiate football practices and games were assessed retrospectively. For 1 1/2 years the players all had taped ankles, and for the remaining 4 1/2 years the players chose their type of ankle support. Over the entire period, the players chose high-top or low-top shoes as preferred. During 51,931 exposures to injury (46,789 practice-exposures and 5,142 game-exposures), the 297 players sustained 224 ankle injuries and 24 reinjuries. Tape was worn during 38,658 exposures to injury (233 players), stabilizers during 13,273 exposures (127 players). Tape had been worn when 159 of the injuries and 23 of the reinjuries occurred; a stabilizer had been worn when 37 of the injuries (P = 0.003) and one of the reinjuries occurred. The combination allowing the fewest injuries overall was low-top shoes and laced ankle stabilizers.

We report on the number of knee injuries sustained by a major college football team during 2 full years when all players were required to wear laterally placed prophylactic knee braces during all practice sessions and all games. We found that the incidence rates of knee injuries were higher when the braces were worn compared to a similar period when the braces were not worn. There was also an increased number of ACL injuries during the brace period. Several indices characterizing the nature of the injuries were analyzed and were found not to be altered significantly when the prophylactic braces were used. These facts lead us to question the efficacy of prophylactic knee braces in preventing knee injuries in college football. The use of the braces was associated with increased episodes of muscle cramping in the triceps surae muscle group, required the constant attention of coaches and trainers to remind the players to wear the braces and to apply them correctly, and was costly. These findings indicate the need for other carefully controlled clinical and biomechanical studies of these devices before their routine use can be advocated.