PED Suspensions Coming

[Beef Supreme]

From bloodhorse.com, a reader comments about horseracing, lasix and masking...

Quote

Profsdottir togahombre • 2 hours ago

Dextran is the drug of choice for masking on a blood test. It is a "plasma expander," so it essentially works on the blood serum the way lasix works on urine. Then there is epitestosterone, administration of which pre-blood test masks the use of artificial testosterone by correcting the out of balance ratio of testosterone/epitestosterone which juicing will create. So juicing creates very elevated levels of T, but testers don't look for the concentration of T per se, but for the ratio of T/EpiT. The cheaters just have to boost the EpiT levels pre-test to correct the ratio, and they are home free

I also read that when taking Lasix, horses will lose up to thirty pounds of water weight after being administered it. Seems an effective way to flush any administered drugs from a body.

[Il BuonO]

13 hours ago, Rich Mac said:

I don't doubt for a minute that many of those legends in the HOF were using PEDs or were at the very least trying to use PEDs. They may not be PEDs like we know them today, but they were injecting and taking pills that they hoped would enhance their performance beyond natural levels. 

I'm not trying to judge those guys, but I find it slightly hypocritical that many modern players are labeled as cheaters or amoral when they are just continuing the tradition. The biggest difference though is that there is now a rule that does not allow the use of PEDs when there was no rule prior to the '60s? - I'm not certain when the rule was enacted by MLB, so feel free to correct me if that's wrong.

https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12037385

 

So, based on the Sheep’s Testicle Extract story Ruth was a PED abuser? Seems logical.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Il BuonO said:

So, based on the Sheep’s Testicle Extract story Ruth was a PED abuser? Seems logical.

He certainly had the intent.  Should he be exonerated because he chose poorly?

[Il BuonO]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

He certainly had the intent.  Should he be exonerated because he chose poorly?

Was there a rule against it? How do you know his intent? Maybe he really thought it would help him go all night.

Snutchy was right, this thread is comical.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Il BuonO said:

Was there a rule against it? How do you know his intent? Maybe he really thought it would help him go all night.

Snutchy was right, this thread is comical.

I didn't expect to see the rule against it argument from you.

Interesting.

[Il BuonO]

3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I didn't expect to see the rule against it argument from you.

Interesting.

I didn’t expect you to make an argument based on a single story from almost 100 years ago. C’est la vie.

[DJHJR86]

19 hours ago, Dark Helmet said:

Very good information. That's where I'm at. I believe Jackson knew about it, but wanted no part of it and played to win. His numbers prove that.

Except for the games that they lost with runners in scoring position.  1 for 8.  That 1 hit was in a game they lost 10 to 1.  The scandal was not set up to throw every game, but specific games.  I think Jackson was in on it.  Plus he admits to it on page 4 here:

http://www.blackbetsy.com/jjtestimony1920.pdf

 

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, RZNJ said:

MLB would like everyone to think the drug testing system works. It doesn't. It only gets lucky sometimes.  Cano, most likely has been beating the system for years. He loses 12M and his fans will applaud him when he returns. 12M only reflects how much he's already made by beating the system for so long. I can hardly blame him.

Arod never failed a test. Nelson Cruz has never failed a test. Almost all of the Biogenesis guys never failed a test.  The rewards are great and the risk is minimal.  And the punishment for getting unlucky or being stupid is well worth the risk.

And that is even more true when it comes to the NFL, NBA and NHL.

[Sessh]

2 hours ago, Il BuonO said:

I didn’t expect you to make an argument based on a single story from almost 100 years ago. C’est la vie.

Back then, this stuff wasn't that big a deal. You wouldn't expect to see a ton of stories on it. Pud Galvin was the first to use testosterone as a performance enhancer in 1889 and actually saw a brief resurgence in his career. Whether or not the elixir actually did anything is debatable, but it proves that athletes have been willing to risk it all for a longer or more productive career for over 100 years. Ruth using sheep testosterone after this happened is by no means unreasonable to believe nor is it a significant revelation really.

To add to the general discussion, Cocaine was legal into the early 1900's and methamphetamine was synthesized in 1887, so that has also been around for a long time. Anabolic steroids were synthesized in the mid 1930's and won a Nobel prize. Steroids were being used by olympic athletes in the 1940's and were rampant in MLB in the 60's according to Tom House. Amphetamines were available in every clubhouse as well. The whole idea of a "steroid era" is ridiculous. PED's are as old as sports themselves and aren't going anywhere. People will just do a better job of not getting caught. There's plenty of undetectable PED's that have been around for years. Why any players still use the detectable stuff is a mystery to me. Drug prohibition doesn't work, it never has and never will. It only creates a thriving black market to meet the demands.

Clemens also never failed a test and neither did Bonds. The testing program only catches the ones with the bad chemists. Keeping players out of the HOF now for using PED's is also ridiculous. Mays, Aaron, Mantle and probably just about everyone back then used some form of PED's especially greenies. Both amphetamines and steroids were rampant in baseball for a long time. The HOF is overflowing with "cheaters" and it is hypocritical to decide now to start keeping guys out while considering all the accomplishments of the PED users of the past to be completely legitimate despite having the help of PEDs that players today can't have and whose numbers would immediately be discarded as "tainted" or some word like that. Yeah, that seems fair and logical.

I don't care who uses what, it's their bodies. Whether people like it or not, performance enhancing drugs are part of the fabric of sports and have been for a long, long time. People will just get around the testing program, it's easy with the drug technologies today and the smart players can do it and I'm sure they're doing it right now. It's not a winnable fight as the drug wars in general have proven over and over again.

[ORIOLE33]

2 hours ago, DJHJR86 said:

Except for the games that they lost with runners in scoring position.  1 for 8.  That 1 hit was in a game they lost 10 to 1.  The scandal was not set up to throw every game, but specific games.  I think Jackson was in on it.  Plus he admits to it on page 4 here:

http://www.blackbetsy.com/jjtestimony1920.pdf

 

That’s what I was thinking too.

[Il BuonO]

59 minutes ago, Sessh said:

Back then, this stuff wasn't that big a deal. You wouldn't expect to see a ton of stories on it. Pud Galvin was the first to use testosterone as a performance enhancer in 1889 and actually saw a brief resurgence in his career. Whether or not the elixir actually did anything is debatable, but it proves that athletes have been willing to risk it all for a longer or more productive career for over 100 years. Ruth using sheep testosterone after this happened is by no means unreasonable to believe nor is it a significant revelation really.

To add to the general discussion, Cocaine was legal into the early 1900's and methamphetamine was synthesized in 1887, so that has also been around for a long time. Anabolic steroids were synthesized in the mid 1930's and won a Nobel prize. Steroids were being used by olympic athletes in the 1940's and were rampant in MLB in the 60's according to Tom House. Amphetamines were available in every clubhouse as well. The whole idea of a "steroid era" is ridiculous. PED's are as old as sports themselves and aren't going anywhere. People will just do a better job of not getting caught. There's plenty of undetectable PED's that have been around for years. Why any players still use the detectable stuff is a mystery to me. Drug prohibition doesn't work, it never has and never will. It only creates a thriving black market to meet the demands.

Clemens also never failed a test and neither did Bonds. The testing program only catches the ones with the bad chemists. Keeping players out of the HOF now for using PED's is also ridiculous. Mays, Aaron, Mantle and probably just about everyone back then used some form of PED's especially greenies. Both amphetamines and steroids were rampant in baseball for a long time. The HOF is overflowing with "cheaters" and it is hypocritical to decide now to start keeping guys out while considering all the accomplishments of the PED users of the past to be completely legitimate despite having the help of PEDs that players today can't have and whose numbers would immediately be discarded as "tainted" or some word like that. Yeah, that seems fair and logical.

I don't care who uses what, it's their bodies. Whether people like it or not, performance enhancing drugs are part of the fabric of sports and have been for a long, long time. People will just get around the testing program, it's easy with the drug technologies today and the smart players can do it and I'm sure they're doing it right now. It's not a winnable fight as the drug wars in general have proven over and over again.

Good stuff, very informative. I’m still not convinced what Ruth tried was significant. Maybe he wasn’t smart enough to get the good stuff back then. Don’t know and don’t hold him up as some bastion of baseball honor.

I don’t disagree whether general tenor of your post.

[Dark Helmet]

4 hours ago, DJHJR86 said:

Except for the games that they lost with runners in scoring position.  1 for 8.  That 1 hit was in a game they lost 10 to 1.  The scandal was not set up to throw every game, but specific games.  I think Jackson was in on it.  Plus he admits to it on page 4 here:

http://www.blackbetsy.com/jjtestimony1920.pdf

 

There has been alot of evidence to suggest the court papers released were inaccurate.  And much information was withheld from the public that questioned Jackson's involvement. His own teammates years later said Jackson never attended one meeting.

 

[weams]

 

[eddie83]

10 minutes ago, weams said:

 

That can’t sit well with Tex’s old teammates.  

[jjnono]

The interesting aspect of the suspension is in the phrasing of Cano's response, which contradicts the actual truth.  I don't have it handy, but Cano's official response goes to great lengths to note that furosemide IS NOT a performance enhancing drug, and then he reverts to that hoary old adage of having never failed a drug test because he's never taken performance enhancing drugs.  But he's accepting the ban because it IS true that he took furosemide.

Well, yes, factually, furosemide is not a performance enhancing drug but, rather, a pretty effective masking agent.  And MLB can't actually suspend someone for use of a masking agent unless they can prove its use was intended to conceal the use of other substances.  When notified of his positive test for furosemide, Cano appealed.  MLB then presented him with the evidence they had to uphold a ban for furosemide.

At this point Cano more or less HAS to drop his appeal, or run the risk of the legal situation - i.e., the MLB evidence - winding up in the public realm.  That's what the ban is about - not having the truth become public.  And the truth gets wrapped up in deliberate and misleading statements that attempt to make the story about furosemide, which it's not.  Cano is a cheater AND a liar.  Or maybe it's more accurate to say that Cano is a cheater and his public relations firm is a liar...  Anyway....