|
Title: A rash of positive drug tests Post by: Phishfan on October 24, 2008, 04:52:42 pm Only two players are named so far.
http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/27362917/ Title: Re: A rash of positive drug tests Post by: YoFuggedaboutit on October 24, 2008, 04:56:42 pm Why those two and not anyone else??
Also, why would weight loss diuretics be considered "performance enhancers"? Title: Re: A rash of positive drug tests Post by: fyo on October 24, 2008, 07:43:52 pm The problem isn't that they're "performance enhancers", they're not.
The problem is that they MASK real performance enhancers in testing. Title: Re: A rash of positive drug tests Post by: bsmooth on October 24, 2008, 08:40:30 pm Why those two and not anyone else?? Also, why would weight loss diuretics be considered "performance enhancers"? Did you actually read the article, or did you just glance at it looking for names? It clearly spells out what these type of diuretics do and why they are used. Title: Re: A rash of positive drug tests Post by: YoFuggedaboutit on October 24, 2008, 09:17:16 pm Did you actually read the article, or did you just glance at it looking for names? It clearly spells out what these type of diuretics do and why they are used. The problem isn't that they're "performance enhancers", they're not. The problem is that they MASK real performance enhancers in testing. OK, but were the players using them for medical purposes, or were they using them to mask steroids? We don't know for sure. However, the banned list is the banned list. Title: Re: A rash of positive drug tests Post by: TonyB0D on October 24, 2008, 10:06:19 pm these player's names should not have been leaked in the first place...
Title: Re: A rash of positive drug tests Post by: fyo on October 25, 2008, 08:48:06 am OK, but were the players using them for medical purposes, or were they using them to mask steroids? We don't know for sure. And that's what the appeals process is for. Players are never suspended before they have a chance to appeal. Like Tony said, these players' names should never have been leaked. Incredibly destructive to the process and very unethical of media to bring that information, IMHO. Title: Re: A rash of positive drug tests Post by: YoFuggedaboutit on October 25, 2008, 10:20:54 am And that's what the appeals process is for. Players are never suspended before they have a chance to appeal. Like Tony said, these players' names should never have been leaked. Incredibly destructive to the process and very unethical of media to bring that information, IMHO. That's what might've played a factor in Ricky Williams's appeal. Title: Re: A rash of positive drug tests Post by: Phishfan on December 02, 2008, 08:15:08 pm Here is an update on the suspended players.
http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/28021579/ Title: Re: A rash of positive drug tests Post by: run_to_win on December 03, 2008, 05:49:15 am I don't believe that Bryan Pittman of Houston would knowingly break the rules. He's such a humble and low-key guy.
I can't understand him needing to take a diuretic for any weight clause in his contract as he was really cut. Of course, that was 6 years ago and he's 31 now. (http://nwfootball.net/jets/images/BryanPittman02PAT.gif) Title: Re: A rash of positive drug tests Post by: fyo on December 03, 2008, 06:40:49 am This case has some strange twists... like the NFL knowing about the banned substance being in the pills, but 1) failing to tell players about it and 2) repeatedly informing players that it appeared to be OK.
|