|
Post by JohnM on Feb 23, 2013 19:51:46 GMT -5
FEB 23 A-Rod tested negative for banned substances in recent screening By Mike Axisa Via Steven Marcus: Alex Rodriguez tested negative for performance-enhancing drugs in a recent MLB-mandated screening. MLB tested Gio Gonzalez — both blood and urine — two days after he was connected to the South Florida clinic Biogenesis, and I assume A-Rod went through the same thing. They probably ordered everyone in the report to be tested as soon as possible. MLB is still investigating Biogenesis, Anthony Bosch, the players, all of that stuff.
|
|
|
Post by tarheelbomberfan on Mar 5, 2013 20:58:09 GMT -5
Unfortunately, in this day and age all it means is he found something that doesn't show up yet.
|
|
|
Post by DavidL on Mar 13, 2013 7:04:36 GMT -5
Could be that, or could be that he's got a good screening drug, or that he's not using while the surgery is healing (would seem counter-intuitive, but his doctor may have told him he'd heal better, if slower, if he stayed clean).
|
|
|
Post by JohnM on Mar 13, 2013 12:17:23 GMT -5
Rumors out there that MLB investigation thinks the so called lab evidence is questionable.
|
|
|
Post by BernzAMatic on Mar 26, 2013 11:42:52 GMT -5
Could be that, or could be that he's got a good screening drug, or that he's not using while the surgery is healing (would seem counter-intuitive, but his doctor may have told him he'd heal better, if slower, if he stayed clean). ...OR, it could actually be that the medications he's on post surgery (which I'm certain) MLB has an entire list and samples of renders his test not applicable because of the "pre-existing conditions" and thus negative in the eyes of the law, Union & MLB.
|
|
|
Post by DavidL on Mar 26, 2013 18:50:12 GMT -5
Could be that, or could be that he's got a good screening drug, or that he's not using while the surgery is healing (would seem counter-intuitive, but his doctor may have told him he'd heal better, if slower, if he stayed clean). ...OR, it could actually be that the medications he's on post surgery (which I'm certain) MLB has an entire list and samples of renders his test not applicable because of the "pre-existing conditions" and thus negative in the eyes of the law, Union & MLB. Not likely. MLB is quite explicit on what meds are acceptable and what are not. Anything that shows up that's not on the approved list puts him in danger. But there is the possibility that approved meds might also turn out to mask PEDs.
|
|
|
Post by BernzAMatic on Mar 26, 2013 20:21:20 GMT -5
For a lawyer you sure have trouble with this stuff....having peed many times for an audience while on other meds, when you pee hot you are given the benefit of the doubt when your disclosed and legal medical records support the finding. For an example, Prednisone, a legal steroid quite often disbursed post surgery in hospitals (and most likely approved by MLB) would always produce a hot test...You also missed my point that MLB has a list of his meds...but I digress....It's close enough for government work I suppose
|
|
|
Post by DavidL on Mar 27, 2013 10:12:23 GMT -5
For a lawyer you sure have trouble with this stuff....having peed many times for an audience while on other meds, when you pee hot you are given the benefit of the doubt when your disclosed and legal medical records support the finding. For an example, Prednisone, a legal steroid quite often disbursed post surgery in hospitals (and most likely approved by MLB) would always produce a hot test...You also missed my point that MLB has a list of his meds...but I digress....It's close enough for government work I suppose Good enough for a government contractor, perhaps. For a non-lawyer, you sure seem to think you know the law. Word of advice - never represent yourself in court. And your certainty that MLB has a list of #13's prescriptions is not evidence of anything, except what you are assuming. Anabolic steroids are not completely illegal. They are controlled substances, and can be disbursed and taken only pursuant to a doctor's prescription. IF you are prescribed a controlled substance, a positive drug test for that drug (whether urine or blood) is not evidence of a crime, obviously. MLB, OTOH, flat-out forbids the use of ANY steroid. There is no list of approved drugs for medical use. Exceptions are allowed only pursuant to a "Therapeutic Use Exemption" for which the player must apply and provide the prescription, as well as supporting documentation from the prescribing doctor. Perhaps #13 has a TUE for prednisone or another steroid, perhaps not. IF he has one, then a positive test would not be a violation of the drug policy. If he doesn't have one, however, a positive test is a violation. And Anthony Bosch is NOT a doctor, so if #13 got anything from him, he's toast. THAT'S close enough for government work.
|
|
|
Post by BernzAMatic on Mar 27, 2013 11:26:08 GMT -5
Yawn....You dig to much into this stuff.
|
|
|
Post by DavidL on Mar 27, 2013 11:53:03 GMT -5
Yawn....You dig to much into this stuff. That's what being a lawyer is about.
|
|
|
Post by BernzAMatic on Mar 27, 2013 15:23:33 GMT -5
You mean looking for meaning not said trying to justify your position in the grand scheme of things?
|
|
|
Post by DavidL on Mar 27, 2013 21:45:20 GMT -5
See, bernz, you keep demonstrating that you don't understand the law. Being a lawyer is determining what the meaning of the words used is.
|
|
|
Post by BernzAMatic on Mar 28, 2013 9:22:33 GMT -5
It depends on what the meaning of IS is.
Got it.
|
|
|
Post by DavidL on Mar 29, 2013 6:47:44 GMT -5
What's the meaning of "unreasonable search and seizure"? What's the meaning of "probable cause"? What's the meaning of "A well-regulated militia"? What's the meaning of "due process of law"?
Don't bother trying to answer, judges (i.e. lawyers) have been working on them, and others, for over 200 years. And reasonable and smart (some brilliant) lawyers have come to a wide range of answers over that time.
|
|
|
Post by BernzAMatic on Mar 29, 2013 12:35:13 GMT -5
Dave, Forget your mini rant above...bottom line...you put meaning into words I TYPED that was not there...how do I know this? I Typed them. I KNOW my intent and what I meant.
And that my friend has nothing what so ever to do with the law...or the manipulation of it.
|
|
|
Post by DavidL on Mar 29, 2013 14:48:38 GMT -5
What did you write that I misinterpreted? You assumed that MLB has a list of #13's meds. I stated that's an assumption (a fact not in evidence) and that neither of us knows whether they do or not. You claimed that MLB has a list of approved medications. That's another assumption that is in fact incorrect. I pointed out that MLB's drug program has a process for granting waivers based on medical need, but that we don't know whether #13 has a waiver.
So, what was your intent?
|
|
|
Post by GoodFriar on Apr 3, 2013 10:00:13 GMT -5
Bernz...
...if your pee is coming out cold and not hot, then you've got bigger problems! Lol!
|
|