Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> OSDT, urine vs blood
post Dec 30 2012, 10:35 AM
Post #1

Super Middleweight

Group: Moderators
Posts: 3,442
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
Start new topic
post Jan 1 2013, 03:54 AM
Post #2


Group: Members
Posts: 5,823
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

Posts in this topic

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: 31st August 2014 - 12:24 AM