Page 23 of 39 FirstFirst ... 31319202122232425262733 ... LastLast
Results 331 to 345 of 575
  1. #331
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    777
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Oh, geez, here it comes (dread)...



    And one other thing: this "Lance Armstrong also passed drug tests" line of argument is a complete crock. So a negative drug test is now proof of guilt? This Lance Armstrong argument is weak and is guilt by association.

    You know who else didn't fail drug tests? ADOLPH HITLER. Ergo Ray is like Hitler. Great logic there, haters.

    On the other side, I could tell you Mother Theresa never failed a drug test, nor did Gandhi, nor did Jesus, nor did Buddha, nor did Muhammad, nor did Moses, etc., etc. This argument by association proves absolutely nothing.

    The Ravens organization should do everything to win on Sunday. Then, after Sunday, take SI to the woodshed for such a sloppy job.




  2. #332
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    777
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Oh, geez, here it comes (dread)...

    Quote Originally Posted by bt12483 View Post
    From what I've read milk and salmon either contain their own IGF-1 or can stimulate it's production in the body.

    Are milk and salmon banned? What if players ate a shit ton of salmon and milk? Would that be considered using a banned substance?

    What is the extent of something being banned? You can't ingest/inject it at all? Like 0%? That seems impossible for something like IGF-1, if normal foods like milk and salmon contain it.

    Our drinking water has all sorts of contaminants, but they are below the levels set by government, and not deemed hazardous.

    I understand taking a concentrated form of IGF-1 being banned, but you can't completely ban something that occurs naturally. It seems to me you have to have some % levels of what would likely lead to performance enhancement. If something has 0.01% IGF-1, how much impact would it really have? Just like alcohol %'s and DUI. A certain % and you are in trouble, below that you are not.

    And the NFL set themselves up for failure by not requiring blood testing. If you ban certain things that can only be detected via blood, but then don't test blood, you are inviting suspicion and usage. I have little doubt PEDs are as rampant in the NFL as in the MLB, yet the MLB is held to a different standard.
    Exactly. IF Ray used the spray, and IF it did contain IGF-1, you can't show that there are more than trace amounts of IGF-1 in the spray -- certainly not enough to have an effect or make a difference. There are too many IFs in this story to hang anything on Ray. And all on the word of this shady Ross character. Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy.




  3. #333
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,542
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Oh, geez, here it comes (dread)...

    Quote Originally Posted by Hammerhead View Post
    Exactly. IF Ray used the spray, and IF it did contain IGF-1, you can't show that there are more than trace amounts of IGF-1 in the spray -- certainly not enough to have an effect or make a difference. There are too many IFs in this story to hang anything on Ray. And all on the word of this shady Ross character. Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy.
    Add to the fact that the NFL didn't even bother to commission a test on the spray.




  4. #334
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,734

    Re: Oh, geez, here it comes (dread)...

    Quote Originally Posted by alienrace View Post
    Add to the fact that the NFL didn't even bother to commission a test on the spray.
    Sorry, but we can't add that. It makes it a non-story...
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  5. #335
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    6,145
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Oh, geez, here it comes (dread)...

    The NFL doesn't want to address it because they don't want a controversy like MLB has.

    It opens up a big can of worms IMO.

    Why are hyperbaric chambers allowed? Those enhance healing. Matt Forte used one this year to help his ankle heal faster. Did he cheat?

    What about Tylenol? That is performance enhancing too - if you have a headache and take Tylenol you just improved your ability to focus. Less pain too.

    Vitamins are performance enhancing too.

    Why are cortisone shots allowed? Ellerbe just had one. Did he cheat? The Saints had that prescription painkiller issue a few years back. Players probably pop those like candy. Is that cheating?

    Where is the line drawn? Substances that directly contribute to muscle mass?

    The NFL wants athletes to heal - they want Ray Lewis on the field. People pay to see the players on the field, not on the sideline injured.

    Is there a distinction between taking a substance to heal faster as opposed to enhance muscle? The ADHD medicine does nothing to enhance muscle but supposedly gives a mental advantage. So clearly it is not just limited to muscle enhancement being the central focus.

    The more you dig the messier it gets.




  6. #336
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,469
    Quote Originally Posted by alienrace View Post
    Add to the fact that the NFL didn't even bother to commission a test on the spray.
    Thanks to the CBA, they couldn't up until this recent negotiation. And even now, they don't have a test.

    The league has been waiting a test for years now.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  7. #337
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    6,145
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Oh, geez, here it comes (dread)...

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    Thanks to the CBA, they couldn't up until this recent negotiation. And even now, they don't have a test.

    The league has been waiting a test for years now.
    The NFL is way behind MLB, Yet MLB gets way more flack.

    MLB is seen as being complicit in the HR steroid era (it revived the game from the negativity of the strike). And maybe they were. No doubt many a blind eye was turned.

    But because the NFL is dominant and #1, they don't want to do anything to rock the boat IMO.

    The inherent differences between the sports also plays a factor. A team can double/triple team Calvin Johnson and limit his effectiveness even if he is juiced up. You can't double team ARod at the plate. He has more chance to reap the rewards of PEDs by virtue of the 1 on 1 matchup.




  8. #338
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    A Black Hole
    Posts
    361

    Re: Oh, geez, here it comes (dread)...

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    Because they don't think it's banned probably.

    The list is so long and convoluted I can see mistakes being made.
    This is a possibility. I work for MLB and our employee handbook has 5 full pages of banned substances. That said, this deer antler shit isn't the same as dosing IGF-1.

    "A bottle contains around 180 sprays, and a typical dose is three sprays. Thus, a single dose of deer antler velvet contains between 50 and 84 nanograms of IGF-1. In order to mimic the research study that found IGF-1 to have similar benefits to growth hormone you would need to consume between 1,500,000 to 906,000 sprays PER DAY: thatís between 8,333 to 5,033 bottles per day."




  9. #339

    Re: Oh, geez, here it comes (dread)...

    My first thought was Manti Te'o. If they didn't line up all their ducks in a row before printing this story, right on the heels of the embarrassment from the ass kissing of Manti Te'o, it's a disgrace on top of a disgrace. I'm skeptical just because we're all now once bitten by SI; it's time to be twice shy.

    FWIW, I don't care if it works or not. That's not the story, as far as I'm concerned. And I use "story" in the most generic sense of the word.
    Festivus

    His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.




  10. #340
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    6,145
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Oh, geez, here it comes (dread)...

    Quote Originally Posted by NJRaven View Post
    This is a possibility. I work for MLB and our employee handbook has 5 full pages of banned substances. That said, this deer antler shit isn't the same as dosing IGF-1.

    "A bottle contains around 180 sprays, and a typical dose is three sprays. Thus, a single dose of deer antler velvet contains between 50 and 84 nanograms of IGF-1. In order to mimic the research study that found IGF-1 to have similar benefits to growth hormone you would need to consume between 1,500,000 to 906,000 sprays PER DAY: that’s between 8,333 to 5,033 bottles per day."
    This is like our drinking water having trace amounts of aspirin, birth control, etc. that gets pissed out when not absorbed into the body.




  11. #341
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,542
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Oh, geez, here it comes (dread)...

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    Thanks to the CBA, they couldn't up until this recent negotiation. And even now, they don't have a test.

    The league has been waiting a test for years now.
    Talking about the spray itself, not blood tests.




  12. #342
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,469
    Quote Originally Posted by alienrace View Post
    Talking about the spray itself, not blood tests.
    Don't they simply use USADA's findings?

    I don't recall the NFL ever doing their own commission. Could be wrong though.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  13. #343
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,542
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Oh, geez, here it comes (dread)...

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    Don't they simply use USADA's findings?

    I don't recall the NFL ever doing their own commission. Could be wrong though.
    This - from the Hopkins guy:
    Nieves, who studied nutrition, food and exercise science at Florida State, is the first to extol the virtues of deer velvet, a supplement that has been used in China for thousands of years. His company mentions IGF-1 prominently in its marketing material but only because it is integral to the yearly re-growth of antlers, he said. By the time the harvested antlers are broken down and processed to be sold the substance is essentially an uncomplicated, “super-concentrated” and natural protein.

    “We registered our product with the FDA as a food product, it's that natural,” Nieves said. “It is just packed with nutrients.”
    http://www.baltimoresun.com/business...,7725655.story

    I'd suggest reading the article. This is why SI should have been more thorough.




  14. #344
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    In a van down by the rivah
    Posts
    863

    Re: Oh, geez, here it comes (dread)...

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    That's the legal standard, not the standard in the media. So are you on record now that Ben is not a rapist? Because he was never proven guilty.
    That is a poor analogy. The difference is not in the judgement but in the evidential quality of the allegations.

    In Ben's case, there was a reasonably credible accuser who contacted authorities and presented evidence. One can debate whether that evidence was substantial enough to proceed with a case, and IIRC the prosecutor decided it was not. That's fine, but it was clearly substantial enough to merit investigation and consideration.

    You're correct that in the judgement of the law, Ben is not a rapist. That doesn't mean the allegations were without merit. It means they were deemed not provable to a legal standard.

    In Ray's case there is a single accuser, not credible in the slightest, who, beyond saying "he did it", has presented no corroboration or other evidence whatsoever, not even circumstantial. It has not even been verified that the substance in question contains a banned substance in the first place. In short, the allegations are not merely short of legal standards, they are a sham.

    There are three distinct categories to consider, and you have mistakenly conflated the latter two:

    • Guilty: Proven guilty by due process.
    • Not guilty/not charged: A case existed but was deemed short of proof (e.g. Pig Ben).
    • No case at all: Deer Antler Juice Sold by an Ex-Stripper




  15. #345
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,469
    Quote Originally Posted by alienrace View Post
    This - from the Hopkins guy:


    http://www.baltimoresun.com/business...,7725655.story

    I'd suggest reading the article. This is why SI should have been more thorough.
    Ok.

    What does that have to do with your point and my question?

    You claimed the NFL should / does commission drug studies. The NFL doesn't commission studies that I'm aware of. They use data from USADA.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland