As J.C. Bradbury, the Baseball Economist, noted on his Sabernomics blog - http://www.sabernomics.com/sabernomics/index.php/2007/04/i-dont-worry-about-hgh-in-baseball-and-neither-should-you - exercise physiologist professors discredits the idea that HGH helps athletes in any way for performance, it's main effect is muscle definition, which is important to weight lifters and wrestling stars, I suppose, but not so much to professional sports players, like baseball players.

So yeah, it appears to be a snake oil added onto the bill to get more money out of the cheaters.

Come on guys. Just because someone takes it and isn't that good, doesn't mean it's useless.

Gabe Kapler was the most ripped guy in the majors, but was a mediocre hitter with marginal power his whole career. Are you going to say this whole "lifting weights" thing doesn't help hitters either? Neifi Perez practiced hitting every day growing up, and yet he's a sucky major league hitter. Is "practicing" just snake oil as well?

Wade Boggs ate chicken before every game. If I ate chicken, could I turn into the greatest hitter an entire decade's ever seen?

Looks like "I was using HGH to recuperate from an injury. I never used steroids," is going to be the standard excuse.

How many times have we heard that since Friday, now?

Mike, it's a body of evidence thing. As in, there isn't any to support that HGH helps performance. You are right that just because someone takes it and isn't any good doesn't mean it's useless. However, the implication there, that it is useful, just doesn't pan out. It simply has not been shown to help performance. See obsessivegiantscompulsive's link above. And we're seeing now that the anecdotal evidence says it doesn't help.

And as for 'Is "practicing" just snake oil as well?': Cherry picking counter examples, rather than looking at the body of evidence has led to the silliest comment I've ever seen here.

My point exactly. People cherry pick examples about HGH and claim its useless. It's confirmation bias - the hypothesis is that it's not performance-enhancing. Someone cites a couple studies that say it doesn't increase raw strength, and therefore concludes it doesn't enhance performance. See the issue here?

Even if HGH never helped Pettitte throw a baseball harder, or with more break, or whatever... if it allowed him to get back to game shape faster than he otherwise would have, that's enhancing performance. That's extra IP, Ks, Ws, etc, that he otherwise wouldn't have gotten.

Fine - you guys have made your point that there's some studies out there that show HGH doesn't have the magical muscle-building properties that the average fan seems to believe it has. Now let's see if you can show me studies demonstrating that HGH doesn't help muscle/tendon/ligament recovery.

Mike- by that logic we should ban cortisone shots, TJ surgery, penicillin, etc.

Sleepy,

I think you're at the heart of it: Where do we draw the line? Chemicals that help you increase the results of workouts are cheating, but having surgery to strengthen your arm isn't? Sounds like a medical enhancement to me...