0 |
Subject: Antwan Odom blows 1.2 millions on weight loss pill
Posted by: Electroman
- [10833614] Fri, Oct 15, 2010, 17:54
Well, his wife accidentally gave him her weight loss pill instead of him prescription pill, and it will cost him 4 games. |
1 | holt Donor
ID: 308491916 Fri, Oct 15, 2010, 19:08
|
lame. change the damn rule already.
|
2 | Great One
ID: 367493122 Fri, Oct 15, 2010, 22:11
|
what exactly in the pill is illegal?
|
3 | Ref Donor
ID: 539581218 Fri, Oct 15, 2010, 22:32
|
There is always an excuse as to why they failed. I knew he had been appealing this for quite some time.
|
4 | Ref Donor
ID: 539581218 Fri, Oct 15, 2010, 22:35
|
Btw, I agree the rules need to be changed. No competitive advantage--let him play.
|
5 | Mötley Crüe
ID: 108312919 Sat, Oct 16, 2010, 09:50
|
Determining whether something provides a competitive advantage is a pretty inexact science. I've read that diuretics (commonly found in weight loss pills) are often used to mask steroid use. The reason these kinds of drugs are on the banned list is that they are associated with PED's pretty integrally. So if they catch you using one, there's a pretty safe assumption that you might have been using PED's.
The real problem? From PFT : "[T]he NFL, due to the current language of the drug policies, can say nothing in response to the explanation. The player or his lawyer can say whatever the player or the lawyer want to say, and the NFL and the NFLPA can provide no contrary evidence."
This is the rule change that they really need to make: get rid of the confidentiality of the process.
|
6 | Seattle Zen Leader
ID: 055343019 Sat, Oct 16, 2010, 12:33
|
The reason these kinds of drugs are on the banned list is that they are associated with PED's pretty integrally. So if they catch you using one, there's a pretty safe assumption that you might have been using PED's.
That's not even close to the truth. For every time someone used a diuretic diet pill to "mask" steroid use, 99 other times it was used for it's intended use or the user had no idea the product contained a diuretic. There is nothing "safe" in the assumption that someone is up to no good when they test positive for a diuretic.
|
7 | dpr
ID: 1990714 Sat, Oct 16, 2010, 12:47
|
Assuming that this drug can be used as a masking agent, you guys want to have the drug allowed even though that would be allowing whatever steroid it masks also?
In terms of strict liability, these guys get paid millions of dollars and their body is their work. They can proofread it.
The point about NFL rules only allowing one side of the story is an interesting one.
|
8 | Mötley Crüe
ID: 108312919 Sat, Oct 16, 2010, 13:13
|
SZ, your comments indicate to me that the point I made about only one side of the story ever getting told is the real issue. You think everyone who gets caught is just trying to lose weight and took something over the counter because that's what the players all claim when they get caught.
It seems to me many more players are using PED's than the public believes. Try not taking the players and their agents at their word--there is no inherent reason to believe what they say. What else would they say?
|
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. |
|
|
Post a reply to this message:
|