|
|
#81
07-22-2007, 03:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Early UFC 74/75 Lines
[ QUOTE ]
Mikey, You do realize the supplement crap is likely BS. Like Mark and the andro? You also realize that testing includes ratios of normal hormones? It doesn't just test for "banned" substances. Athletes should know 100% what they put in their bodies. Not knowing is not an excuse. He's likely a cheater and got popped for it. Sucks but how life is. [/ QUOTE ] I'm not defending him if he took a banned substance, and I wouldn't bet on him being clean either. I was just rebuttling DannyO's post that he's still guilty even if it was just a combination of supplements that raised his nando levels. Edit: Also, when you say the supplement stuff is likely crap, do you mean you think he doesn't take 22 supplements or that the excuse that that's the cause of his levels is BS? 
|
|
#82
07-22-2007, 02:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Early UFC 74/75 Lines
[ QUOTE ]
Mikey, You do realize the supplement crap is likely BS. Like Mark and the andro? You also realize that testing includes ratios of normal hormones? It doesn't just test for "banned" substances. Athletes should know 100% what they put in their bodies. Not knowing is not an excuse. He's likely a cheater and got popped for it. Sucks but how life is. [/ QUOTE ] Thremp, did you actually read the papers I posted? The claim isn't that Sherk accidentally took nandrolone, but that he never took it at all. The test for nandrolone does not actually test for nandrolone directly; it tests for a derivative of it. There are many papers which indicate that an athlete can test positive for the derivative of nandrolone from taking 100% legal supplements that contain absolutely no nandrolone. Don't be so quick to assume that some arbitrary number decided on by bureaucrats without a solid scientific basis definitely proves that someone took nandrolone.
|
|
#83
07-22-2007, 07:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Early UFC 74/75 Lines
mikey, a couple points.
I never said he 'was still guilty'. I just said that I have zero sympathy for him. He controls what he ingests, and he HAS to realize that pumping his body full of chemicals is likely to trigger something he didn't intend it to, especially when he is taking said chemicals at comical levels. I never said he's still 'guilty', i just said i don't want to hear him boohoo about it. He made a choice with risk involved, and the risk hit. Re: Strength. I don't believe that all that seperates the top level of these guys is strentgh. Not true at all imo. BJ Penn could whoop a lot of roiders because of natural skill and technique. Matt Serra is not as finely tuned an athlete as GSP, yet easily beat him last time because GSP's technique got sloppy. Technique is still far more important than strength. also, [ QUOTE ] The athletic commissions aren't testing for high levels, they're testing for banned substances. And if Sherk didn't take any banned substance, he didn't break any rules. [/ QUOTE ] This is incorrect. Everyone has nandro, in about 2-6mg i think. His level was 12. They absolutely ARE testing for high levels, and not a banned substance. It would be hard to find a fighter without nandro in his system, because it's naturally there.
|
|
#84
07-22-2007, 08:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Early UFC 74/75 Lines
[ QUOTE ]
mikey, a couple points. I never said he 'was still guilty'. I just said that I have zero sympathy for him. He controls what he ingests, and he HAS to realize that pumping his body full of chemicals is likely to trigger something he didn't intend it to, especially when he is taking said chemicals at comical levels. I never said he's still 'guilty', i just said i don't want to hear him boohoo about it. He made a choice with risk involved, and the risk hit. [/ QUOTE ] That makes no sense at all. Prior to this incident, Sherk likely had no idea that taking legal supplements could result in a false positive test. Why would anybody "have to know" that taking supplements that do not contain nandrolone could result in a false positive test for nandrolone? Do you expect him to do a chemical analysis of every supplement that he takes and determine whether it can result in a false positive test for nandrolone? And why does the number of supplements that he was taking matter if they were all legal? I think it's a pretty reasonable to assume that over the counter supplements do not contain anabolic steroids. This is not a case of someone looking the other as his trainer is sticking a needle in his ass. Moreover, even if Sherk did have reason to believe that his supplements might cause a false positive, why should he be held liable for a false positive? The burden should be on the government agency (CSAC) to ensure that their tests are reliable. Given the number of articles that have demonstrated the possibility of someone registering nandrolone levels way over the legal limit without taking nandrolone, I'm not so unsympathetic about depriving someone of their livelihood for a year based on those tests.
|
|
#85
07-22-2007, 09:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Early UFC 74/75 Lines
to dannyocean and thremp...I already anticipated your replies LONG LONG AGO. Read my previous post where I openly state "If you don't know exactly whats going on with tests, you don't have a clue".
The whole point about science is that these tests were created in the past such that some 99% or high % of people testing positive were on the drugs, unfortunately it is not a great test anymore because of how far Nutritional technology has come. If sherk used a banned substance, I beleive he should be penalized. If sherk did not, I beleive he should not. Here's hte problem... They don't test you if you used or not, they test you if you show up positive or not. There is a difference. Dannyocean feels no sympathy for Sherk because he doesn't understand what supplements are...I had a huge thread going on sherdog explaining supplementation and was getting a ton of PMs asking for advice and let me just break it down like this...Hemp bread is a supplement, Orange juice is a supplement, Dextrose is a supplement...Sherk should NOT be penalized if the positive test came up without him taking the banned substance...END OF STORY. If you want to do that, why not penalize people who's genetics naturally make them have more testosterone than everyone else? Do you think that's fair? Because perhaps that is EXACTLY WHAT IS HAPPENING. If the whole point of banning steroids is to even the playing field, do we want to exclude those who are genetically gifted? IMO, as the law is now. If you use BANNED substances you are guilty, if you do not, you are fine. Companies that put banned substances in their supplements and do not indicate so on their label(IE Nitro-tech in the past) should pay the fine...if an athelete is suspended do to this, I beleive the suspension SHOULD stand, but the athlete will then sue the supplement company for extreme damages (millions of dollars). In baseball if hte coaches are giving their team BANNED SUBSTANCES without their knowledge, I beleive the same thing should occur. Not knowing a substance is BANNED and using it on your own however is a different story. That is what "ignorance is not an excuse" is about. Finally, I beleive they should simply create better testing methods for banned substances, sometimes the reason such tests don't exist is because of lack of research, other times it is because it is impossible. There is a reason you can snort coke and never be caught if you are tested a week later. Anyway this is totally off topic but I really hate when people are judgemental without being properly informed. But I guess that's what we make our living off of...fools who beleive their judgement is right and put their money on it. LoL
|
|
#86
07-23-2007, 01:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Early UFC 74/75 Lines
After reading some of the responses, I don't know what is more asinine: 1) To pump your body full of steroid precursors that obviously violate the spirit of the law instead of the letter of it to get a leg up on the opposition 2) To argue that pumping yourself full of steroid precursors is a acceptable and standard process.
Aside from the obvious fact that many of the pro-hormones that were made were much stronger than some steroids at moderate dosages. (Talk to a baseball player on a normal dosage of Winny-V about the effects he sees and someone who took the older pro-hormones.) igetbadbeat, You're an idiot. I mean that in the truest sense of the word. "Orange juice is a supplement." GTFO. That is food. Danny, Yes, I read it. I don't understand why you are anti-testing? I see the reasons are clear for the purity of the sport. Doping already occurs at the Olympic level among almost all athletes. Baseball is rampant with steroid usage. It happens in all sports. MMA doesn't currently have the money involved or there would be fewer positive tests. The reason for tests being structured like they are is due to the fact you can pump yourself full of precursors and get the same effects of juice. All, This is getting off topic, but basically Sherk got popped. It sucks. Whoops. Make sure not to juice next time big guy.
|
|
#88
07-23-2007, 02:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Early UFC 74/75 Lines
[ QUOTE ]
After reading some of the responses, I don't know what is more asinine: 1) To pump your body full of steroid precursors that obviously violate the spirit of the law instead of the letter of it to get a leg up on the opposition 2) To argue that pumping yourself full of steroid precursors is a acceptable and standard process. [/ QUOTE ] You're the one being asinine: "Urine analysis as a method of detecting nandrolone abuse has recently become somewhat controversial, following studies by the University of Aberdeen showing that the metabolite product can also show up in urine in quantities above the upper limit from a combination of high-protein diets utilising the legal nutritional supplement creatine and hard cardiovascular exercise."
|
|
#89
07-23-2007, 02:32 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Early UFC 74/75 Lines
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] After reading some of the responses, I don't know what is more asinine: 1) To pump your body full of steroid precursors that obviously violate the spirit of the law instead of the letter of it to get a leg up on the opposition 2) To argue that pumping yourself full of steroid precursors is a acceptable and standard process. [/ QUOTE ] You're the one being asinine: "Urine analysis as a method of detecting nandrolone abuse has recently become somewhat controversial, following studies by the University of Aberdeen showing that the metabolite product can also show up in urine in quantities above the upper limit from a combination of high-protein diets utilising the legal nutritional supplement creatine and hard cardiovascular exercise." [/ QUOTE ] Link to study and peer reviews.
|
|
#90
07-23-2007, 02:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Early UFC 74/75 Lines
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] After reading some of the responses, I don't know what is more asinine: 1) To pump your body full of steroid precursors that obviously violate the spirit of the law instead of the letter of it to get a leg up on the opposition 2) To argue that pumping yourself full of steroid precursors is a acceptable and standard process. [/ QUOTE ] You're the one being asinine: "Urine analysis as a method of detecting nandrolone abuse has recently become somewhat controversial, following studies by the University of Aberdeen showing that the metabolite product can also show up in urine in quantities above the upper limit from a combination of high-protein diets utilising the legal nutritional supplement creatine and hard cardiovascular exercise." [/ QUOTE ] Link to study and peer reviews. [/ QUOTE ] Lol, I've already posted links to several studies while you've been making baseless accusations, and now you're the one making demands for peer reviews? Gimme a break. The paper that I just mentioned does not appear to be available for free on the web. But you obviously didn't read the other ones I posted, so I'm not going to waste my time with you anymore.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
