IPB  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> OSDT, urine vs blood
mgrover
post Dec 30 2012, 10:35 AM
Post #1


Super Middleweight


Group: Moderators
Posts: 3,047
Joined: 23-May 11
Member No.: 12,366



I understand that both can be used in-conjunction with each other but has blood testing detected more than urine has? Since when the blood tested positive for Berto, Tarver, Peterson and Morales all there piss came back positive too. Blood been proven to be more effective?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bnoles4life
post Dec 31 2012, 05:41 PM
Post #2


Welterweight


Group: Members
Posts: 1,546
Joined: 5-October 11
From: Dayton, OH
Member No.: 13,299



QUOTE (mgrover @ Dec 30 2012, 10:35 AM) *
I understand that both can be used in-conjunction with each other but has blood testing detected more than urine has? Since when the blood tested positive for Berto, Tarver, Peterson and Morales all there piss came back positive too. Blood been proven to be more effective?


Well, that depends. There are different things, both blood and urine, can be directed to detect. I'm curious to know exactly what they were testing for and for what those guys popped positive. Moreover, did the blood pop positive first? If so, they could have specifically tested for those drugs w/n the urine sample. In short, it's very possible the urine could've caught them, but I'm thinking the blood came back positive first.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
daprofessor
post Jan 1 2013, 03:54 AM
Post #3


Cruiserweight


Group: Members
Posts: 5,773
Joined: 20-May 11
From: killa kali
Member No.: 12,336



i've had these conversations way more than i would like to admit...

basically...urine doesn't catch everything. the blood test detects way more. there is also the matter of the cell blood count to consider. more stringent testing is necessary because it is possible to benefit from p.e.d's outside of the 8 week window of a training camp..so year round testing is actually the best thing. cost should be considered because the state athletic commission doesn't have the funding necessary to keep it going year round. the promoters are too stingy to test at all...much less year round. i'm not sold on the benefits of usage to be honest. with all that is wrong with boxing....based on the times that i know boxers have tested positive...i don't really see amazing benefits. there are much more serious matters such as dehydration that have lead to death and serious injuries in boxing. correct me if i'm wrong...but i've not seen one single instance where a boxer knowingly tested positive and put someone in the hospital.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cshel86
post Jan 1 2013, 07:26 PM
Post #4


"The Meanest Nice Guy"


Group: Moderators
Posts: 12,223
Joined: 11-May 11
From: Wherever Greatness is Bred
Member No.: 12,050



QUOTE (daprofessor @ Jan 1 2013, 03:54 AM) *
i've had these conversations way more than i would like to admit...

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

I literally laughed out loud when I read this line! Haven't we ALL had waaay too many PED conversations? They get more and more interesting every time though!

Honestly, when I hear that a fighter's blood comes bad positive for PEDs, I could give a shit about urine. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bnoles4life
post Jan 1 2013, 09:57 PM
Post #5


Welterweight


Group: Members
Posts: 1,546
Joined: 5-October 11
From: Dayton, OH
Member No.: 13,299



QUOTE (daprofessor @ Jan 1 2013, 03:54 AM) *
i've had these conversations way more than i would like to admit...

basically...urine doesn't catch everything. the blood test detects way more. there is also the matter of the cell blood count to consider. more stringent testing is necessary because it is possible to benefit from p.e.d's outside of the 8 week window of a training camp..so year round testing is actually the best thing. cost should be considered because the state athletic commission doesn't have the funding necessary to keep it going year round. the promoters are too stingy to test at all...much less year round. i'm not sold on the benefits of usage to be honest. with all that is wrong with boxing....based on the times that i know boxers have tested positive...i don't really see amazing benefits. there are much more serious matters such as dehydration that have lead to death and serious injuries in boxing. correct me if i'm wrong...but i've not seen one single instance where a boxer knowingly tested positive and put someone in the hospital.


There in lies the "rub", profess. B/c testing in boxing is so archaic, we don't know who was doing what, when fighters were seriously injured or killed. Moreover, it's not just those causing injuries for which stringent testing is essential. Imagine if those who are injured in the ring were more vulnerable due to certain PEDs?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
daprofessor
post Jan 1 2013, 10:22 PM
Post #6


Cruiserweight


Group: Members
Posts: 5,773
Joined: 20-May 11
From: killa kali
Member No.: 12,336



QUOTE (bnoles4life @ Jan 1 2013, 10:57 PM) *
There in lies the "rub", profess. B/c testing in boxing is so archaic, we don't know who was doing what, when fighters were seriously injured or killed. Moreover, it's not just those causing injuries for which stringent testing is essential. Imagine if those who are injured in the ring were more vulnerable due to certain PEDs?


glad u made this point. let's take a look at another guy suspected of p.e.d's....pacquiao. his most astonishing wins imo were against hatton and cotto. i don't believe he was on anything for either fight...but what i do believe is that the weight drain game was in full effect. dehydration...or lack of hydration is what led to that devastating ko that hatton experienced. that was something that could have been avoided, no testing necessary. there are those who will say...well hatton agreed to the terms and signed the contract. to that i say...sometimes fighters need to be protected from themselves. when greedy managers and promoters let something like that slide..they are all to blame imo. but something as simple as that should be caught by the commission and not allowed. boxing is plagued with several problems. i'm not convinced that p.e.d's is the biggest problem.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mgrover
post Jan 2 2013, 12:14 PM
Post #7


Super Middleweight


Group: Moderators
Posts: 3,047
Joined: 23-May 11
Member No.: 12,366



I just like to be better informed so when I do make an argument I like it to be atleast factually correct. Just a bit of homework (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Franchize
post Jan 2 2013, 01:02 PM
Post #8


Junior Middleweight


Group: Members
Posts: 2,075
Joined: 28-December 11
Member No.: 13,419



From what I've been told and researched, not all forms of HGH can be detected through urine. HCG as well. From what I hear, one of the reasons the "14 days before the fight" demand was fishy from Manny's camp is because that is about how long it takes for it to clear your system. I've heard this from multiple sources including an ESPN discussion with BJ Flores. I am NOT, I repeat, NOT an expert on this. When the May/Pac drama first began, I just wanted to do a little research myself so I don't get biased news in the entire saga so I could formulate an opinion on my own. That's just what I gathered.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
daprofessor
post Jan 2 2013, 03:46 PM
Post #9


Cruiserweight


Group: Members
Posts: 5,773
Joined: 20-May 11
From: killa kali
Member No.: 12,336



QUOTE (Franchize @ Jan 2 2013, 02:02 PM) *
From what I've been told and researched, not all forms of HGH can be detected through urine. HCG as well. From what I hear, one of the reasons the "14 days before the fight" demand was fishy from Manny's camp is because that is about how long it takes for it to clear your system. I've heard this from multiple sources including an ESPN discussion with BJ Flores. I am NOT, I repeat, NOT an expert on this. When the May/Pac drama first began, I just wanted to do a little research myself so I don't get biased news in the entire saga so I could formulate an opinion on my own. That's just what I gathered.


what i know i learned some from my pops who used to be a body builder. he's pointed out the signs to me and gave me understanding. since then...i've learned from reading the articles and other sources online. most of the articles on the boxing websites come from writers close to conte who he has taken it upon himself to school. i recall one writer claiming to be an educated chemist who supposedly got kicked out of the wildcard for asking freddie roach the wrong questions concerning p.e.d's. funny how that didn't spur that educated chemist to explore that deeper. he's since disappeared off the face of the earth...but other writers have made it their mission to expose the problems with testing...or lack thereof and have even gone as far as suggesting that mayweathers' stand on testing is to cover his own usage. one thing is definitely for certain...testing does need to improve...but so long as it does there will always be ppl out there profiting from beating the tests.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cheesey1
post Jan 6 2013, 08:55 PM
Post #10


Super Middleweight


Group: Members
Posts: 3,334
Joined: 28-January 11
From: Mars
Member No.: 11,505



QUOTE (daprofessor @ Jan 2 2013, 03:46 PM) *
what i know i learned some from my pops who used to be a body builder. he's pointed out the signs to me and gave me understanding. since then...i've learned from reading the articles and other sources online. most of the articles on the boxing websites come from writers close to conte who he has taken it upon himself to school. i recall one writer claiming to be an educated chemist who supposedly got kicked out of the wildcard for asking freddie roach the wrong questions concerning p.e.d's. funny how that didn't spur that educated chemist to explore that deeper. he's since disappeared off the face of the earth...but other writers have made it their mission to expose the problems with testing...or lack thereof and have even gone as far as suggesting that mayweathers' stand on testing is to cover his own usage. one thing is definitely for certain...testing does need to improve...but so long as it does there will always be ppl out there profiting from beating the tests.

The writer (Gabriel something or other) who made those claims about Mayweather, as far as I'm aware, has been a long time critic of Mayweather in general. Years ago I used to make the mistake of reading Boxing Scene and MaxBoxing and scarred myself by reading some of his stuff.
Nowadays he tries to paint himself as some sort of anti-P.E.D crusader, but as far as I'm aware he wasn't saying a word about 'roids back in the day.
Anyway, the lawyers called his bluff on the supposed information he had and all he's been reduced to now are little snide comments. What was very funny to me was that he said the U.S.A.D.A was part of the Mayweather/GBP conspiracy.

This post has been edited by Cheesey1: Jan 7 2013, 09:41 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th April 2014 - 09:36 AM