Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bonds Case: THG May Have Been Legal?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bonds Case: THG May Have Been Legal?

    see full story on front page

    <<.....Taking the Clear – the star drug of the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative – was not a crime, according to expert testimony included in grand jury documents.

    Not only was the performance-enhancing drug tetrahydrogestrinone (THG) not specifically banned when athletes squirted “The Clear” under their tongues to gain an edge, the testimony also indicates that the drug wasn’t categorized by the Justice Department as a steroid until January 2005, long after the drug laboratory had been shuttered....>>

  • #2
    Re: Bonds Case: THG May Have Been Legal?

    Originally posted by gh
    the drug wasn’t categorized by the Justice Department as a steroid until January 2005
    Right, but it was still a steroid. :roll:

    Comment


    • #3
      We're not talking WADA's concept of legality and illegality here; this is a real court of law; two vastly different things.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by gh
        We're not talking WADA's concept of legality and illegality here; this is a real court of law; two vastly different things.
        I understand. The glove does not fit.

        Comment


        • #5
          from later in the story (bold mine):

          <<..Two months later – after most of the 30 some athletes had testified – Novitzky addressed the grand jury. Nedrow asked him about Catlin’s response when asked whether the Clear, beyond being a substance banned by most sports, was “actually an anabolic steroid?”

          Novitzky: “He said it was another matter when looking at federal criminal law and the problem that you run into there is there’s a certain amount of steroids that are listed under criminal law that say: Hey, these substances are definitely steroids. And then there’s a catchall phrase that says if it’s not one of these substances, then if you can say pharmacologically or chemically related to testosterone, which in this case THG is, and you also have to show that it enhances muscle growth in human beings..

          “And that’s the problem that we’ve run into with THG and which Dr. Catlin testified to the grand jury, is that there’s never been any studies to show whether or not THG does, in fact, enhance muscle growth.”..>>

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by gh
            “And that’s the problem that we’ve run into with THG and which Dr. Catlin testified to the grand jury, is that there’s never been any studies to show whether or not THG does, in fact, enhance muscle growth.”..>>
            So why is it banned? I thought there was a similar structure grab-all clause and so do not need clinical trials for every variant.

            Are Catlin's answers to the grand jury's questions? His answers sound like ones to questions from a lawyer who has designed them to avoid the answers that explain why THG is on the banned list. Such a charade. Or are there other more damning quotes from Catlin that are not being reported?

            So Bond's defense is obviously going to be "I didn't knowingly take a 'steroid' even if I had known I was taking THG". What ever happened to the "I was only taking flaxseed oil" defense, have they decided that is too ridiculous?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Daisy
              Originally posted by gh
              “And that’s the problem that we’ve run into with THG and which Dr. Catlin testified to the grand jury, is that there’s never been any studies to show whether or not THG does, in fact, enhance muscle growth.”..>>
              So why is it banned? I thought there was a similar structure grab-all clause and so do not need clinical trials for every variant. ....
              The "variant" thing is a WADA ruling. Don't think that kind of inexact science flies in a court of law, although I'm no law dude.

              Comment


              • #8
                i'm not really interested in the 'legal' categorization of it as a steroid if WADA say it's prohibited it's good enough for me but how could it concievably be categorized as a steroid or anything else when no-one had heard of it which was the whole point !!
                i deserve extra credit

                Comment


                • #9
                  Even if WADA declared it the worst steroid ever invented, it is irrelevant. MLB did not abide by the guidelines of WADA at that time. The issue involving Bonds was tied to use of controlled substances, which THG was not,

                  This does not mean I am defending him, just pointing out that even with a program, it is difficult to know what game we are watching.

                  Cheers

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Daisy
                    Originally posted by gh
                    “And that’s the problem that we’ve run into with THG and which Dr. Catlin testified to the grand jury, is that there’s never been any studies to show whether or not THG does, in fact, enhance muscle growth.”..>>
                    So why is it banned? I thought there was a similar structure grab-all clause and so do not need clinical trials for every variant.
                    But, as I've said many times, in the medical world, we do need clinical trials for every variant", to be certain of the evidence and not just have it be anecdotal evidence. We need Level I studies to be more certain. But WADA does not require this. And in a court of law, you need proof, not simply WADA saying "A lot of athletes are taking it, so we better ban it because it may help them" with no proof.

                    You can say whatever you want and quote me all the anecdotes you want - there is a saying in medicine - "A million anecdotes constitutes anecdotal evidence.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      As i understand it, the concept of "we're finding it in their urine, we better ban it," is how both caffeine and mild cold meds--now both back off the list--came to be on the banned list to begin with. Good witch-hunting, bad science.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        So that puts Bonds in a better position? - in the 'grander' scheme of things, relative to PEDs and legal, MLB, etc. He have a better chance to be 'formally' innocent? Expedite things? I'm thinkin this means little to nothing in regards to him finding a team to sign him

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by bambam
                          We need Level I studies to be more certain. But WADA does not require this. And in a court of law, you need proof, not simply WADA saying "A lot of athletes are taking it, so we better ban it because it may help them" with no proof.
                          As you know, no one is going to pay for trials on whether a chemical is a PED. If that is the line in the sand i'd say it is better to ignore PED's and dissolve WADA, seriously.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Daisy
                            So Bond's defense is obviously going to be "I didn't knowingly take a 'steroid' even if I had known I was taking THG".

                            Oops. BB might need to take a new tack.

                            http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3867536

                            Citing a person who has reviewed the evidence in the case, the New York Times reported on Wednesday that authorities detected anabolic steroids in urine samples linked to Bonds that they gathered in their investigation.
                            There are no strings on me

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Screws being turned on Greg Anderson big time.

                              http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball ... htm?csp=34
                              There are no strings on me

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X