Jump to content

Bwahahahaha - Comrades Winner Tests Positive


TNT1

Recommended Posts

On the flip side you get this quote in that article

 

Random testing of off-the-shelf dietary supplement products on sale in the UK have shown that one in 10 are contaminated with banned substances that could lead to positive drugs tests in professional sportsmen. Similar random testing in the US has shown that one in four supplements are contaminated, Dr Hall tells me.

 

Now this bring me to say that out of all the drugs that they have on the list 95% have minimal to know effect on actual athelete performance, I beleive that its actually getting ridiculous on how that list gets extended every year, and people's lifes can be destroyed becuase you bought a top of the range product in good faith.

 

I still think if its available over a counter at a pharmacy it should get off the list, leave your hardcore stuff there that has a known effect on perfromance, EPO, steroids etc.

 

Nasal spray sure as **** aint going to make you better athelete except if you have sinusitus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 154
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

 

Yeah I've read that, alongside other brands that have also had issues.

Comparing one brand to another though is meaningless as the chance of contamination is there for all of them regardless.

 

It's a very young industry still, clearly as it's growing there a lot of factors that need to be challenged and sorted.

Having said that, we also can't have a situation that a supplement in way shape of form becomes a scapegoat.

 

If there's one universal truth here, it's that people need to question what goes into the products we ingest, generally.

 

I still think if its available over a counter at a pharmacy it should get off the list, leave your hardcore stuff there that has a known effect on perfromance, EPO, steroids etc.

 

Agree completely, pretty much what Prof Kayser states in the article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the racism angle...what BS...who would benifet if the 1st place guy is DQ'd? The first 4 runners were black if i recall... So if the 1st 4 all tested positive and the whitey (Russian?) in 5th was declared the winner then ja you could understand expect a racist angle....

Bit of tribalism in the mix as well, his uncle has said its because he's from Limpopo province.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know of many USN products that either they say cannot be used by professional atheletes or gets pulled due to illegal substances.

 

We must make a distinction between banned substances for sport and illegal drugs. A lot of supplements, although banned for sport, are legal to manufacture and use.

 

Apparently pot is illegal. Steroids are legal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a link besides a Tweet where one can get the full story? Which substance? Was the B sample tested yet? Is the athlete contesting the ruling?

Hopefully not a repeat of the Caster Semenya debacle...

 

Caster? I thought that issue was all about nuts, not banned substances?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going back more than 100 years, one can find evidence of athletes being provided with drugs – including opium, strychnine, nitro-glycerine and amphetamines – to give them a winning edge.

Perhaps the most talked-about arena where drugs have been rife has been the Tour de France – a three-week cycling epic that traverses much of western Europe.

As far back as 1924, reporter Albert Londres described the competitors as the “Convicts of the Road” in his column as he covered the event for the Parisien newspaper.

The race is, to this day, dogged by allegations of drug-taking, as can be seen by the latest scandals involving the likes of Lance Armstrong, Floyd Landis, the Astana and Fiesta teams, to name just a few. The race has also seen several drug-related deaths.

 

At this stage, the answer is strictly: Don’t take anything on the Wada banned list if you wish to compete at a high level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way the stories are banded about it leaves one with no option but to believe the athlete is a fault period, he is avoiding certain questions been asked. You do yourself no favours by been vague. The B sample can only prove what the A sample has done already so the best would be to prove his innocence once that result is known.

 

Nobody but the athlete and his management team must carry the blame for this mess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Settings My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Help Logout