UFC Thread

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
55,860
Likes
27,593
You won't find anything immediately, later on tonight, or tomorrow about another sport saying it, cause they haven't. I knew this when I posted that. That's them saying it's happening in Jones, not that it's happening in other sports. I've also yet to hear an explanation as to why Jones picograms were higher in every proceeding test. Is it because training was releasing them from fat cells?

BTW, this is all based off one dudes research Right? The guy from Icarus injected himself, then tested his own pee and found this out. Not saying that makes his findings invalid, but it seems like they need to do a sh*t ton more research in this before they just claim it's gospel. I don't really understand how they can say with 100% certainty that this is left over from before, based on one dude. Seems like he would have need to run his research, then a few months after he tests himself dose again, wait a month or so after he stopped the second time, then test himself and compare the 2 samples. If the second test has higher levels it makes this a lot more valid, but if they are the same you have an issue.
They likely won't ever be able to say that with 100% certainty and that's not what they're saying. They're saying this is not proof of new ingestion.
 

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
55,860
Likes
27,593
This an article from 2016 when 3 MLB players got popped. This is not "proof" of pulsing, but it's proof they have no idea how long the detection window is, which is sufficient for Jones defense.

Before exploring potential sources of DHCMT, we wanted to comment on the DHCMT test itself, and the chemistry involved. Oral turinabol is an old drug that became infamous when it was the primary drug fueling the East German state-sponsored doping from 1968-88. The testing for the drug initially had a short window of detection of a few days. As research expanded on the drug and additional metabolites were identified, the retrospectivity of the testing improved to about 20 days. In the last several years, a new long-term metabolite, referred to as the M4 metabolite, was identified that increases the window of detection to at least 40-50 days, perhaps longer.

Finally, there is the theory that a common genetic anomaly, or another substance related to DHCMT that is present in the environment, could produce the same long-term DHCMT metabolite used for detection in trace amounts in some athletes—remote possibilities that have yet to be demonstrated.
Colabello, Oral Turinabol and the MLB Positive Drug Tests
 

BadJerry20

Internet Super Hero
Joined
Mar 29, 2012
Messages
57,859
Likes
4,830
They likely won't ever be able to say that with 100% certainty and that's not what they're saying. They're saying this is not proof of new ingestion.
They are saying it's from before and you said it is as well. And I know you are going to say, "nobody said 100%" but they wouldn't give him a license if they were telling the commission, "eh, well we are like 85% sure" No Proof of new injestion means it's left over from before, yes?
 

BadJerry20

Internet Super Hero
Joined
Mar 29, 2012
Messages
57,859
Likes
4,830
This an article from 2016 when 3 MLB players got popped. This is not "proof" of pulsing, but it's proof they have no idea how long the detection window is, which is sufficient for Jones defense.



Colabello, Oral Turinabol and the MLB Positive Drug Tests
He had M3 not M4, 40-50 days perhaps longer. It's been 18 months, this proves nothing. Just more maybes. I've asked 100 questions, you've given me zero proof of anything, aside from chasing your tail in circles. Since you have no proof of anything I'm out of this convo. Hit me up if you ever find facts, not maybes and perhaps, and the look at the silly monkey defense.
 

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
55,860
Likes
27,593
They are saying it's from before and you said it is as well. And I know you are going to say, "nobody said 100%" but they wouldn't give him a license if they were telling the commission, "eh, well we are like 85% sure" No Proof of new injestion means it's left over from before, yes?
You got any quotes? I don't recall saying/reading that.

Saying it's not proof of new ingestion means it can't be determined whether it's left over from before or not.
 

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
55,860
Likes
27,593
He had M3 not M4, 40-50 days perhaps longer. It's been 18 months, this proves nothing. Just more maybes. I've asked 100 questions, you've given me zero proof of anything, aside from chasing your tail in circles. Since you have no proof of anything I'm out of this convo. Hit me up if you ever find facts, not maybes and perhaps, and the look at the silly monkey defense.
The burden of proof is on the accuser. You have to prove new ingestion.
 
Last edited:

BadJerry20

Internet Super Hero
Joined
Mar 29, 2012
Messages
57,859
Likes
4,830
The burden of proof is on the accuser. You have to prove new ingestion.
I actually don't have to prove anything, I've only been questioning the science behind it in recent posts. You decided to play Jon Jones champion and give me proof and argue my questions, well the ones you thought you could answer, and failed miserably at it. Like I said find me some facts and we can talk about it, no maybes or perhaps.
 

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
55,860
Likes
27,593
I actually don't have to prove anything, I've only been questioning the science behind it in recent posts. You decided to play Jon Jones champion and give me proof and argue my questions, well the ones you thought you could answer, and failed miserably at it. Like I said find me some facts and we can talk about it, no maybes or perhaps.
It's fine to question the science. That's kind of the whole point. The science is uncertain, which is why they can't suspend him again. You want proof of pulsing. There is no proof. There doesn't need to be proof. The fact that we don't know how long these matabolites are in your body presents the same problem as proof of pulsing does. I tried to make this point, but I guess I failed to spell it out. I think maybe where I went wrong is not including the info about the 20-40 picogram margin of error that Novitsky mentioned. Something that appears to be pulsing would just be explained by margin of error. If you have an average of 0.2 picograms per sample, most samples aren't going to show any trace, then suddenly you have a test with one picogram.
 

BadJerry20

Internet Super Hero
Joined
Mar 29, 2012
Messages
57,859
Likes
4,830
No, it's cool, because I appreciate you saying "my bad", regardless of how much we disagree.
I can't really argue that you said it if you didn't, I'm not a savage. Lol And as a gift, I just watched Train to Busan, if you haven't seen it, it's excellent. Basically what World War Z should have been mixed with SnowPiercer. Korean film so subtitles.
 

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
55,860
Likes
27,593
One thing is certain, USADA testing is a circus. They lost/had a clerical error with Lesnar's sample? WTF. Even if they dotted every i and crossed every t, there are still huge problems. Like somebodies pointed out, Bones going forward has a better chance of getting away with oral turinabol. But what do you do about that? You can't ban him forever, because that wasn't the rule when initially broke it. So what do you do? Forget about Jones altogether, and just think about the sport as a whole. Jones is a guy getting in trouble...how many guys are completely beating the system? Also, at this point, there has to be someone in sports that has gone down for accidental doping/false positives, and that's a travesty too.

It's not an ideal solution, but legalizing PED's is the best solution. It's the only way to make things fair (and actually levels the playing field for guys with less natural ability).
 

BadJerry20

Internet Super Hero
Joined
Mar 29, 2012
Messages
57,859
Likes
4,830
Problem is, you can't legalize something that is illegal by law. And it doesn't make it fair, because then you have guys that don't want to **** up their bodies for the rest of their lives by taking PEDs getting screwed. You can't say, oh you don't want heart and liver problems or to go crazy and murder your family later in life? Too bad, do it or get ****ed up by somebody juiced out of their minds.

It doesn't level the playing field, clean Jones vs Chuck, who wins? Roided up Jones vs roided up Chuck, who wins? It's the same result either way, a mid level juiced fighter vs a high level juiced fighter or mid level non juiced vs a high level juiced is going to yield the same outcome. And just for arguments sake, let's say it makes Chuck suddenly beat Jones, how is that remotely fair to Jones who is obviously the more skilled fighter? Meh to bad, roids should have had the same effects on your body as it did Chucks. Lol
 

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
55,860
Likes
27,593
(1) Problem is, you can't legalize something that is illegal by law. And it doesn't make it fair, because then (2) you have guys that don't want to **** up their bodies for the rest of their lives by taking PEDs getting screwed. You can't say, oh you don't want heart and liver problems or to go crazy and murder your family later in life? Too bad, do it or get ****ed up by somebody juiced out of their minds.

(3) It doesn't level the playing field, clean Jones vs Chuck, who wins? Roided up Jones vs roided up Chuck, who wins? It's the same result either way, a mid level juiced fighter vs a high level juiced fighter or mid level non juiced vs a high level juiced is going to yield the same outcome. And just for arguments sake, let's say it makes Chuck suddenly beat Jones, how is that remotely fair to Jones who is obviously the more skilled fighter? Meh to bad, roids should have had the same effects on your body as it did Chucks. Lol
(1) I don't see that as the UFC's problem. The UFC hasn't ban pasteurized milk, but that's illegal by law. They can just lift a ban and let the fighters and Feds worry about it. Not all PED's are illegal, either.

(2) If we're talking bodybuilders, pro wrestlers, and people who use irresponsibly, sure, but I don't think the way fighters should use steroids would **** up their bodies. It's an endurance sport and you can't just blow yourself up on roids and be your best self. Moderation and effectiveness would be easier to achieve if this is out in the open. Under a doctor's guidance, PED's might even make fighters healthier. HGH makes your organs grow and improves your skin, for hell's sake. You're talking about people who go to the extreme, and that was much more of a thing when we had less knowledge...and they have to make weight...juicing to the max means you have to go up a weight class (except HW's) and now your strength advantage is a bit diminished and your cardio is worse than ever. If a fighter doesn't want to do what it takes to be the best, then that's on him.

(3) I don't see any of that as convincing that it doesn't level the playing field. Bones will still be stronger, but Chuck turns his fat into muscle, and Bones is all muscle, so who gets more benefit? Also, IDC if it's "unfair" to Bones. Natural ability is more "unfair" than steroids.
 
Last edited:

VN Store



Sponsors
 

Top