Prevalence and profile of users and non-users of anabolic steroids among resistance training practitioners.

BACKGROUND: To verify the prevalence and profile of users and non-users of anabolic steroid (AS) among resistance training practitioners. METHODS: An observational, cross-sectional survey was performed in 100 gyms in Curitiba city, involving 5773 individuals and self-administered questionnaires. The chi-square and z-tests of proportions were used for comparison between the groups (p < 0.05). RESULTS: 83.2% did not use, 9.1% formerly used, 3.4% currently used, and 4.3% intended used AS. The prevalence of former or current AS users was 16.9 and 6.5% among men and women, respectively. The prevalence ratios were as follows: 1) 2.6 male users for each woman; 2) 3.3 individuals aged 30-44 years and 2.8 individuals aged 18-29 years for each individual aged over 45 years. Beginners were not interested in using AS, but individuals who had trained longer had higher prevalence of AS use. CONCLUSIONS: The gym environment encouraged the use of AS owing to aesthetic appeal. Thus, suggesting the need for actions to prevent abusive use of AS considering the practitioners profile (practitioners were young, university and single).

Correction: Anabolic steroids among resistance training practitioners.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223384.].

Anabolic steroids among resistance training practitioners.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the use of anabolic steroids (AS), the motivation to use them, their side effects, the source of information and the form in which AS were obtained, the medical follow-up, and the periodic examinations in resistance training practitioners who are either current or former users of AS. METHODS: A prevalence survey was performed in the gyms of the city of Curitiba, including 719 current and former AS users who self-administered a questionnaire. The chi-square and z of proportions (p <0.05) statistical tests were conducted. RESULTS: Esthetics was the main motivation associated with AS intake, leading to satisfactory results. The information about the form in which to use AS was provided by doctors and AS were either purchased at the pharmacy with a prescription or illegally. Current users reported a higher number of cycles and doses, a longer duration of use, as well as larger economical investments into AS. This shows a higher consumption of such drugs, regardless of the medical follow-up and post-cycle therapy. CONCLUSION: Given that a change in the usage pattern was observed when increasing the AS consumption, this should be considered in the elaboration of public policies to inhibit such a trend.