A few questions regarding steroids?
1) It SEEMS that athletes who has tested positive for the banned substance claims they're innocent. The one's administering the tests claim there's no mistake in their methods. Therefore, I ask, Is steroid testing a proven science?
2) Do you think Mark McGuire, Jose Canseco, Rafael Palmeiro and POSSIBLY Barry Bonds be shunned from getting into the hall of fame because of their use of the banned substance?
(Remember, Palmeiro was caught, Canseco admitted it in his book and ratted out McGuire--who refrained from talking about his past--in a congressional hearing. Barry Bonds, I guess we'll never know, but let's just assume he did use it. I'm sure there are many others, but let's just look at these four.)
3) Do you think the MLB, NFL, NBA and NHL are doing a good job in preventing, testing and exacting just punishment to players for using the banned substance?
You can give me a succint answer or even a long one with your reasoning. I'm just curious.
- L96vetteLv 51 decade agoFavorite Answer
1. Steroid testing is a proven science. I used to work in a medical lab and there is a test that involves an immunoassay to the drug in question. In plain English, this is the ultimate lock and key. Either the antibody in the test reacts with the drug in question, and is therefore detected, or it does not. It is physically and chemically virtually IMPOSSIBLE to get a false positive.
On the exceptionally rare instance of a false positive, there are other tests that will verify the results. If two tests using completely independent methods both reveal a positive, be assured that it is legit.
2. No. Granted they broke the rules, but should we go back and strip every Super Bowl team from the mid 70s (maybe earlier) of their rings? HOF Pitcher Gaylord Perry "doctored" the baseball, the majority of Olympic champions are juicing, Pete Rose threw games and bet against his own team as a manager, HOF Giants LB Lawrence Taylor was a cocaine addict while he played, and the list goes on. Not to say that "anything goes", but where do we draw the line? If you want a HOF ban, then let's get it stated clearly in the rules that steroid use will exclude anyone caught on 'roids rather than try to decide retroactively.
3. The testing done by MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL, and the IOC is a joke. Urinalysis is one of the easiest tests to defeat. Why don't Olympic athletes have to submit hair samples, which store drug residue for months? Because the IOC doesn't REALLY want to bust everyone on 'roids. There wouldn't be an Olymics as we know it, and almost no more records would fall. Like most political window dressing, the testing is about perception and the "feel good" notion that "something" is being done.
The "B" sample that is collected, often days later, isn't so much as a back up as a chance for the drug to cycle out of the system. Look at how the Tour de France has been tarnished. Do you actually think that the Tour wants to strip another champion? The next question that the Tour has to defend is: why couldn't you catch him sooner? Watch their ratings and revenue drop next year.
These sports are multi-billion $$$ industries, and those who run them are not about to let someone kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
you know, I might be way off in this, but isn't there steroids in our food?
what about the little girls (5 years old) that are developing breasts and pubic hair bcoz of the chicken they eat that is stuffed full of growth hormone (steroids)?
- 1 decade ago
fu#k bond'sSource(s): he does not pay my rent