Authorities seized from his Plano home 146 vials of steroids, a plastic jar containing suspected steroids and three jars of clear liquid believed to contain steroids, according to court records obtained Friday by The Dallas Morning News.
This evidence (especially if accompanied by a toxicology report confirming recent steroid use by Jacobs) will set the stage for the media to sensationalize anabolic steroids as the drugs that “caused” the homicide and subsequent suicide much like they did in the Chris Benoit murder-suicide. Jacobs supposedly was mandated to submit to 5-6 drug tests every month; certainly federal agents would test for steroids.
Ghastly acts such as the Benoit case are rare and, as science would predict, their association with AAS use is virtually non-existent. Many other characteristics are far more predictive of such events. It cannot be said with certainty whether AAS contributed to this tragedy or not. If they were involved, AAS were not a sole contributor but part of a larger set of characteristics and circumstances. There is no scientific evidence to suggest that AAS alone caused this behavior and they are obviously not necessary for such events to occur. The evidence does suggest that most AAS users do not become aggressive. Nonetheless, science will, at best, play a small part in society’s verdict on Benoit and AAS in this tale and it will be another instance where a drug is linked to a heinous act by association and, therefore, the untested popular notions that dominate the headlines today will be reinforced.
During my meeting with Don Hooton and Steve Smith of the Taylor Hooton Foundation yesterday, Mr. Hooton told me the breaking Jacobs/Savell case in his hometown of Plano kept him busy fielding calls seeking his reaction to the tragedy; it was particularly troubling for Hooton that one of the largest steroid dealers in the country lived only minutes from his house. (For the record, Mr. Hooton graciously ignored these calls during our 90-minute meeting which focused on finding common ground in efforts to minimize and prevent steroid use in adolescents.)
As far as the connection between steroids and the David Jacobs murder-suicide, I hope the media is sufficiently resourceful to also seek reaction from researchers like Dr. Jack Darkes at the University of South Florida who have a specialized academic interest in anabolic steroids and aggression to provide additional voices to the discussion.
Former steroid dealer David Jacobs and IFBB fitness pro Amanda Savell were discovered dead early this morning. It was first reported on Anthony Roberts blog and also reported by John Romano on Muscular Development and Hardbody. I have confirmed it with a close friend of Amanda Jo’s who has spoken with her family and police on the matter. While it was most likely a murder-suicide with Jacobs first shooting his former girlfriend and then turning the gun on himself, police have not ruled out a double homicide.
The murder-suicide is a terrible tragedy. It is probably only a matter of time before the media starts to suggest steroid use and roid rage as the culprit behind the tragedy much as they did with Chris Benoit. But I hope the media spends some time to appreciate the “richness of these lives” lost and seek ways to avert future such tragedies. This was best said by Jack Darkes in his review of the Chris Benoit tragedy:
If AAS are blamed and the richness of these lives ignored, then the opportunity to prevent such rare events goes unrealized. Singling out a drug to blame leads to fiery rhetoric, congressional hearings, prohibition and scare tactics; none of these have succeeded in curbing drug use, especially among those at greatest risk for harm. Most AAS users do not experience negative effects and hence distrust the message and the messengers, perhaps most notably among those who should listen. Research has shown this many times. Blaming AAS diverts focus from potential indicators of risk and predictors of harmful outcomes. This is where science might be most helpful in dispelling simplistic notions and in working toward more effective risk identification, targeting of limited resources and reducing associated harms.
House, M.D., the medical television drama, discussed “roid rage” as a side effect of steroids last night in an episode entitled “No More Mr. Nice Guy.” The House medical team attributed the “roid rage” to the catabolic steroid prednisone. “Roid rage” is not a medical term, but a term arising from popular culture.
Even though aggression in anabolic steroids users is rare, the producers of House decided to promote an even less plausible case of “roid rage” (arising from prednisone use). Then again, the whole point of the television show is to explore rare medical cases and consequently rare side effects. So, perhaps the reference to roid rage was consistent with the goals of the show rather than a capitulation to the current pop culture fascination with anabolic steroids and roid rage and related undocumented or overstated side effects of steroids?
Because of the brutality of the crime and the fact that Sepe’s company sells supplements such as Advanced Steroidal Complex, and Anabolic Muscle, observers have wondered whether steroid abuse was a factor.
The media is trying too hard to demonize anabolic steroids nowadays. Even in the absence of evidence of steroid use, the desire for a “roid rage” explanation has begun. The suggestion that the brutality of a crime likely resulted from steroid use is a reflection of the level of steroid hysteria in our society.
Arizona could soon be the first state in the country to forbid the use of illegal anabolic steroids in their police officers.
The introduction to the article caught me by surprise. After all, the illegal use of anabolic steroids is already a felony under federal law therefore illegal in ALL states (police officers included). The non-medical use of anabolic steroids is already prohibited by federal law and most state laws; most police departments around the country have explicit policies forbidding illegal steroid use by its officers as well. So, how could Arizona be the first state to ban illegal steroid use by police officers?
After reading the article carefully, it appears the new rules really don’t do anything to further enforce existing rules banning the illegal use of anabolic steroids. Instead, they seek to restrict the “medical use” of anabolic steroids by the officers under its authority.
The new rules give the State the authority to intervene in the doctor-patient relationships of police officers and define the acceptable medical treatment should an officer’s physician prescribe anabolic steroids.
Any officer using injectable anabolic steroids must notify their commander within 72 hours.
They must supply a doctor’s prescription within a week.
The prescription can’t be any stronger than the FDA approved dose of 300 mg per two weeks.
The rules are allegedly needed because some physicians illegally prescribe steroids to police officers. If the steroids are illegally prescribed, why aren’t the physicians targeted? Why are the medical records of officers invaded instead? Why are local police departments given authority to dictate acceptable medical treatment for its officers?
Why does the State of Arizona feel an invasion of medical privacy is justified? Apparently, anabolic steroids become unacceptable the moment an officer starts lifting weights or bodybuilding or getting bigger!
“If somebody needs steroids where they have a disease or they can’t produce testosterone, they’re OK but if someone’s using it to bodybuild or get bigger, they’re not under the protection of the law,” Gutman said.
If the primary concern is hyper-muscular officers or bodybuilding, then perhaps a more effective policy would be to enforce maximum body mass index (BMI) as a condition of employment? Or ban officers from working out?! Of course, that is silly.
“Arizona will be the first state in the nation to protect its police officers from the ill effects of long-term steroids use and protect the public from somebody who has a steroids rage,” Gutman said.
It seems a little hypocritical for state officials to point to protecting the “health” of officers when they send officers out on the street to face violent offenders where they put their life at risk everyday. It seems to me that the best way to protect the short-term and long-term “health” of officers would be to provide them with every possible advantage over their opponents (i.e. dangerous criminals).
Two of my favorite steroid writers are John Hoberman, PhD and Charles Yesalis, PhD. I read their books. I read their articles. I have “Google Alerts” set to notify me when they are quoted by the media. I have even invited them to write for my website (and I’ve been fortunate to have Dr. Hoberman write a few feature articles for me).
Several of my friends and colleagues wonder why I enjoy works from these “anti-steroid guys.” While I may have a different perspective regarding the use of performance-enhancing drugs in sports, Dr. Yesalis and Dr. Hoberman represent the few prominent “steroid experts” that generally stay above the histrionics and scaremongering. Dr. Yesalis recently discussed the topic of steroids in an interview published on Testosterone Nation website:
[S]teroids pose primarily an ethical, rather than a public health problem. The
biggest issue is that using steroids is against the law, and against the rules
of sport. These rules are what define sports, and using drugs to gain an advantage
is tantamount to cheating.
On dangers of steroids:
As I mentioned in my book, the health risks
have been greatly overstated. Hypertension, for example, is widely claimed to
be a side effect of taking androgens. This is one of the most exaggerated claims.
And as for users becoming sterile, there has never been a single reliably documented
case of irreversible infertility as a result of androgen administration.
Think about it: medical science has been using
steroids safely in a clinical setting for the last 70 years. Anabolic steroids
can be used relatively safely, but at even low doses they can have side effects.
No drug, supplement, or substance is totally “safe.” Heck, you can even overdose
on water.
My personal opinion is that if one uses these
drugs at high dosages, over a long period of time, then yes, they’re too powerful
to fool Mother Nature. And it’s the oral (hepatoxic) steroids that can potentially
be the most harmful. But should they be placed in the category of “killer drugs”?
Absolutely not. Not even close.
On steroid “roid rage”:
But let me put this whole “rage” thing into
perspective for you, Chris. You’ve been to Penn State home games. If you told
me you’ve never seen outbursts of “rage” at a football game, then I would have
to call “bullshit.” They happen all the time. And that’s not steroids, that’s alcohol. It’s not even in the same ballpark.
But what about the children?!
One of
the biggest issues with young people in sports concerns their often fanatical
coaches and parents. If a kid is constantly being told that he has to do “whatever
it takes” to win that game, or to win that scholarship, or to get that start
on the team, well, guess what? That kid is going to do
whatever it takes.
From a moral and ethical standpoint, how you
raise a child will determine that child’s behavior. If you instill certain standards
in them, then they won’t cross certain lines. If parents want to make sure that
their kids are not crossing lines, they need to be paying attention to who coaches
their children, and what’s being told to them, and then they need to step back
and re-examine their own relationship with their kids as well.
Whether you identify yourself as “anti-steroid”
or “pro-steroid”, there is a lot to be learned from Dr. Yesalis in his
books, recent
interviews and older interviews on the internet.
