Enel Health®Atlas
Sign in
Enel Health®Atlas
Browse libraries

Not medical advice. The Atlas is not a substitute for a clinician who can examine you.

The Anabolic Steroid Control Acts

1990, 2004, and the Designer Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2014

Evidence grade 5 of 5, Settled. Read how the Atlas grades evidence.

The written rationale for this grade is still being prepared.

FDA
Defines DEA scheduling of anabolic steroids

Reference only. Not medical advice.

What can go wrong

These statutes carry criminal penalties for manufacture, distribution, and possession. The labeling provisions mean a supplement that secretly contains an anabolic steroid exposes its makers to both controlled-substance and false-labeling liability. For consumers, 'natural' muscle-building supplements spiked with designer steroids are both illegal and medically hazardous.

This is something to take to a clinician. The Atlas can tell you what is known about the anabolic steroid control acts in general. It cannot tell you what is happening in your body, and the difference matters most for exactly the symptoms that bring people to this page.

Congress has passed three major laws controlling anabolic steroids. The Anabolic Steroids Control Act of 1990 first placed steroids in Schedule III. The Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2004 (Pub. L. 108-358) added prohormones and roughly two dozen more substances after andro-style supplements proliferated. The Designer Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2014 (DASCA, Pub. L. 113-260) added 22 more named substances, created a faster administrative path to schedule new 'designer' steroids, and made false labeling of steroid products a federal crime.

Three laws across 24 years, each chasing chemists who kept one molecule ahead.

What people take it for

What it is taken for. Approval, where it exists, covers only some of these.

  • Defines what counts as an 'anabolic steroid' federally
  • Closes loopholes exploited by supplement makers
  • Creates labeling-fraud enforcement tools

How it works

Each act amended the Controlled Substances Act's definition of 'anabolic steroid', 'any drug or hormonal substance, chemically and pharmacologically related to testosterone (other than estrogens, progestins, and corticosteroids) that promotes muscle growth.' The 2004 act folded in prohormones (precursors that convert to active steroids in the body). DASCA went further by expanding the definition so substances substantially similar to listed steroids and marketed for muscle growth could be controlled, and by giving DEA an expedited temporary-scheduling mechanism.

The cat-and-mouse the laws were written to stop

After the 2004 ban, supplement companies simply swapped banned prohormones for structurally tweaked analogues not yet on the list, the 'designer steroid' game. DASCA's drafters explicitly targeted this by controlling substances by similarity and intended effect, not just by exact chemical identity, and by criminalizing products whose labels hide or misname an anabolic steroid (requiring accepted IUPAC nomenclature). DEA codified the DASCA additions into its regulations in 2023, nearly a decade after the law passed.

What people get wrong

  • Often saidThe bans ended designer steroids

    ActuallyThey constrained but did not end them; chemists continue to produce analogues, which is precisely why DASCA used a similarity-based definition and an expedited scheduling path.

  • Often saidSteroid law only affects athletes

    ActuallyThe labeling and scheduling provisions reach the entire supplement and gray-market supply chain that ordinary consumers buy from.

Who profits, and who pushes back

Nobody is named here yet, because we have not done that work on this entry. Read that as unfinished. Somebody almost certainly sells this, and somebody almost certainly disputes it. Assume both until we have checked.

At a glance

1990 Act
Pub. L. 101-647, placed steroids in Schedule III
2004 Act
Pub. L. 108-358, added prohormones; ~26 substances
2014 Act (DASCA)
Pub. L. 113-260, added 22 substances; labeling crimes
DASCA signed
Dec 18, 2014
Labeling civil penalty
up to $500,000 (manufacturer/distributor); up to $1,000 retail

What this entry does not yet cover

What follows is unfinished work on our side, not a finding about The Anabolic Steroid Control Acts. A short entry is not a safe entry.

  • Cost and market. We have not documented what it sells for or who sells it.
  • Supply chain. We have not mapped where it is made.
  • Who uses it. We have not documented the user groups.
  • What could change. No forward-looking summary yet.
  • How it compares. We have not set it against the alternatives.
  • Children and teenagers. We have not checked what is known about younger people.

Sources

The studies below are named and described, but not linked. You cannot open them from here and check our reading against them, which means this page is our summary of the literature rather than a document you can verify. Weigh it accordingly until the links exist.

The studies that matter

  • Anabolic Steroids Control Act of 19901990

    Established Schedule III status for testosterone and related steroids

  • Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 20042004

    Added prohormones/andro compounds after their supplement-aisle proliferation

  • Designer Anabolic Steroid Control Act2014

    Added 22 substances, expanded definition, criminalized false labeling