Robinson Cano gets 80 games for banned substance
http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/23512723/robinson-cano-seattle-marin…
Seattle Mariner 2nd baseman former NY Yankee
Dee Gordon's mistakes.
Please tell me again how the NFL & NBA players have basically put on 30-50 pounds of pure muscle mass on average per player over the past 20 years or so. I believe a huge part of the concussion issue in football has to due with the change in energy being generated when you have two 225 pound players running about 5.0 40 time colliding vs two 260 pound players running a 4.5 40 colliding. One hell of a difference in the amont of force being generated.
And take a look at the NBA then versus now. Just better eating habits and weight training? Righhhhhht.....sure it is.
1992 Dream Team vs 2016 Olympic team. The team back then look like little kids compared to the muscle mass of the guys today.
You might have a point if nutrition and exercise science didn't improve literally every year, kids weren't starting to train younger and younger, and humans weren't getting larger and larger with each passing generation.
However, all of the above is, in fact, true, and your tinfoil hat suggestion that literally everyone is on steroids because LBs now are bigger than LBs in the 1970s is a little ridiculous.
I'm not at all arguing that doping doesn't exist - it certainly does. However, it does not adequately explain athletes being much larger and more athletic in 2018 than they were in 1968. Humans get taller over generations - an extra inch and a half can add 20 pounds to a person naturally, before any extra muscle mass is added. Better traits (i.e. athleticism) are passed on - certainly we can agree on this as it is basic science. Exercise science and nutritional science improves exponentially from year to year - again, I think this is something that is pretty much understood to be true by all. Doping serves as a very small portion of the explanation as to why a 6'2 male football player in 2018 weighs 230 and runs a 4.6, whereas a 6'2 male football players in 1968 weighed 200 and ran a 5.0.
This phenomenon is true throughout time btw, and occurred well before steroids were common or good. Athletes in 1968 were also bigger and faster than the same athletes in their sport were in 1928. It's just how evolution and science goes. Imagine Willie Heston (5'8 185) playing alongside Butch Woolfolk (6'1 210) in the 70s. Heston, considered by many to be a great of his time, would likely be seriously injured playing with the best players in the country in the 70s, not because they were doping, but simply because people get bigger and stronger and exercise better as time goes on.
All I am saying is that there are so many reasons as to why people are bigger, stronger, and faster today, that believing doping explains even a significant portion of that change is ridiculous. Doping might explain 15% of the size and athleticism change in 10% of the modern athletic population.
and knowledge of nutrition has also added to athletes being bigger and faster. I agree with you that there is a lot more drug use, but that isn't the only reason athletes have gotten bigger, faster and stronger over the last 30-40 years. Everything has improved in that time.
Better traits (i.e. athleticism) are passed on - certainly we can agree on this as it is basic science.
Jimmy the Greek got fired for sharing this opinion.
My favorite player (and it's not even close) is Lebron James. Here is Lebron as a rookie and here is Lebron today.
You think this was due to his strict weight training Mantis? Because the NBA does basically ZERO drug testing FWIW. I mean almost nothing at all. And my man looks to be about 40-50 pounds heavier and it's pure 100% muscle.
And then today
If he's your favorite player, you should probably know that his workout and nutritional regimine is insane. He's about 20lbs heavier now than he was his rookie year. He was also a teenager in his rookie year. His current physical composition isn't out of line with rigorous training and nutrition without doping over that timespan at all. Lebron is the goat because he trains, diets, and recovers harder than everyone else. It's insanely cynical (checks out here I guess...Shea is eligible btw) to think that Lebron couldn't achieve his current body without steroids. The man is 33, not 73, he's young and works harder than 99% of the population.
Almost everybody in the NBA works insanely hard. The "I work harder than everyone else" line sounds heroic, which is part of why it worked so well for Lance Armstrong for so many years. Mark McGwire used it, too.
We know how that turned out.
Let's leave Lebron out of this. Let's take a hypothetical NBA guard. He's good enough to get into the league. His shooting is ok but not spectacular. To make a team, or to become a high-paid star, he needs to work on his shooting, but that's tricky. But he can also get strong and fast to play better defense, move better off the ball, drive the lane with more authority, leap higher, and generally become a great athlete. If he increases his endurance, he can exert more energy and maintain a higher level of intensity, bringing to bear all of these other physical characteristics.
There is no PED for better shooting that I am aware of. But there are PEDs that affect literally every one of the other characteristics described.
Our hypothetical guard is hard-working--that's how he got here!--so he'll keep working on his short. He's also going to work out big-time. He's going to try to improve and sustain improvement in all of these areas.
And there are chemicals which can maximise his performance in many of these categories. He won't get caught. He will improve his competitive position AND make extra millions every year.
He's looking for every edge. Why wouldn't he use?
Why would a millionaire athlete who has worked insanely hard to get to where he is, cherishes his body, and has literally every exercise and nutrition resource man has come up with at his disposal not use illegal substances that come with potentially devastating side effects? Hmmm.
I don't know, but I'm told that a majority of the players in the NBA smoke weed. Doesn't that merit the same question? There are hundreds of NFL players who put their bodies at a far more urgent risk every time they step on the field, what's their explanation?
(BTW, we're way past anabolic steroids now, the effects are not necessarily what they used to be)
Weed, while not without it's negatives, does not carry nearly the same level of negative side effects that steroids do, and in many locales it is more decriminalized than illegal steroids are. There are some hemp/cannabis products that many crossfit athletes use. I think Marijuana is a substance that is far more conducive to long-term health than steroids. I don't think the two warrant the same level of caution for athletes considering their future health.
And I'm Jacked
For what it's worth, and it's not much, I posted a diary about this topic some years ago here.
I've never loved LeBron, but those photos show nothing. Guys can fill out a TON between about 19-20 and 24. He was still a kid when he started playing in the NBA.
It's when they fill out a ton between 31 and 33 that I get suspicious. Or when their head grows several sizes.
isn't rookie Lebron an 18 year old kid?
I don't generally disagree with the premise that monitoring is behind doping, and that it may be rampant throughout all professional sports, but comparing 1990 skinny dudes to 2018 buff dudes and 18 year old boy Lebron to 35 year old (I'm a man!) Lebron are not particularly strong arguments.
35 year old me is 6'2" 210 lbs, and 18 year old me was 5'11" 140 lbs. If I had been lifting weights and playing hoops for that entire 17 years, I'd probably be a "good" 6'2" 210, instead of a "bad" 6'2" 210.
compare caris levert when he arrived vs when he left. is camp sanderson all about steroids?
So you're saying it's impossible for an 18 year old to gain 25-30 (based on his listed playing weights) pounds of muscle over the course of over a decade without steroids? LOL
Lebron was the subtlest implication I made in my "PED Principle" diary from a few years back. I try not to pick on him, because he is unequivocally a great player, and because if he is using, he is one of a multitude and is still the best (FWIW so was Lance, but Lance was a much bigger jerk).
I watch sports with my eyes wide open but my level of anger set to zero. It's impossible to know with certainty which players are clean and which are dirty, but it's safe to assume that a lot are dirty, and just enjoy the show. The guy who hit a homer off of my favorite pitcher? He might be doping! But my favorite pitcher might be doping, too, and also the right fielder who's coming up in the bottom half with a man on whom I'm counting on to hit a double to the gap to even the score.
How in the actual hell would you propose I make a "strong arguement" on speculation? It is my OPINION that having watched Lebron very closely, dare I say closer than anyone else here on the board at least, over the past 18 years (remember, he went to high school just a few miles from where I live) he has been taking something. What that "something" is I have no idea but here's what I do know.
1. He has put on tremendous weight and muscle mass over the years. Not a small amount (Mantis made me laugh when he said 20 pounds) but more like 50 pounds.
2. He has significantly receeding hairline
3. He is performing at an advanced age (by NBA standards) better than he EVER has in his career. Something 99.99% of the players in league havent been able to do.
4. He lost a lot of weight before the 2015 seaon after leaving Miami for reasons unknown, struggled to get lift when jumping and midway through that season needed to take a mid-season "break" whereby he returned to Miami for about 10 days, again for reasons unknown. Upon his return healthy and strong Lebron also returned and he propelled the Cavs to the NBA finals.
I'm not his Doctor and I have no access to his medical record so my opinion is just that - an opinion. And given that the NBA doesnt test for squat it's all I'll ever have.
I hate talking about specific players for reasons that I have mostly already stated. I don't think it's fair to them if they're playing on the same playing field as dozens or hundreds of others (Lance Armstrong uniquely deserves his scorn because, while everyone else was also doping, he actively attempted to destroy people to protect himself. I know of no NBA players who have done any such thing).
That said, some of your arguments are stronger than others. Increased mass can certainly be an argument, though it's not definitive. It's a data point, though.
For various reasons I don't find the receding hairline point to be relevant at all.
His weight loss / time off is interesting. There is certainly a subtle pattern of players changing body types and / or taking trips for "medical consultation" that result in them getting better. And I don't think it was coincidence that a guy like Roger Clemens would flirt with retirement and sit out for large portions of seasons and then show up in improbably great shape.
The issue with Lebron is pretty simple for me. He is a brilliant player and he is very gifted; he also benefits from tools that require him to be strong and fast and athletic. No doubt he'd be good at this stuff anyway, but PEDs allow for greater athleticism and allow for said athleticism to be retained for longer. Why wouldn't he want that? It's not like other guys in his division aren't doing the same thing.
He also, as the fulcrum of every team he plays on, needs to be on the floor as much as possible. Managing his energy level is crucial, so much so that an article was just written about this last week. There are PEDs what allow people to have greater cardiovascular endurance. He's a hard worker, so of course he's going to work on his cardio, but why not maximise it? Why not use 40% of time he would devote to cardio to work on his three-pointer or his post-up footwork? He is the face of the league, he's exhausted from a 7-game series, he needs a bit of a boost going into the next series, why not help regain some strength? Why wouldn't he do this? it's not like other guys in his division aren't doing the same thing.
And, as he ages, his body breaks down. Small dings when he was 20 become more worrisome at 33. There are substances that can significantly help him recover. Why wouldn't he take them? It's not like other guys in his division aren't doing the same thing.
I think this is unfair to Lebron, of course. He's a wonderful player. There's no way guys he is competing with aren't doing the same level of things (whatever that level is) that he is doing.
People died all the time in the early years of football before any real weight training was ever employed. The concussion issues and CTE are being traced back to kids starting to play football when they are like 5 feet tall and 80 pounds. Football is dangerous because people running full speed into each other on purpose is dangerous.
Also steroids existed and were used and abused in sports in 1992. You really think steroids have only been used in the last 20 years?
People fail to realize that steroids were MORE widely abused in the 80's and 90's than they are today, largely because there was literally no realible testing then. The doping will always be ahead of the testing, but the gap his narrowed considerably. Additionally, the fact that samples are now stored for years after the fact has allowed for an incredible level of certainty of past dopers. You may say it doesn't matter if you get "caught" 4 years later, but the simple fact that we can go back and test for a substance we couldn't 4 years ago helps at least clarify who was and wasn't clean, and may become a good deterrent.
"Steroids" are one of many categories of performance enhancing drugs. The science has developed considerably since the days of Ben Johnson.
Sample storage is not consistent across sports, and it doesn't help at all when substances are masked or manipulated. Isolated circumstances like blatant EPO doping (e.g. Lance Armstrong) can get caught once tests are developed for them, but today's sophisticated micro-dosing and masking regimens use testable substances that the tests can't and won't be able to detect in the future.
I disagree strongly with your last point. My research works in profiling circulating miRNAs that are impacted be administration of many foreign substances, including synthetic HGH and depo-testosterone. You can mask chemicals easily, but not your body's reaction to them, which is why miRNAs are a promising avenue for anti-doping research. I used "steroids" broadly because it's a term most people understand, obviously the larger challenge is developing testing for the massive variety of PEDs that do (and will) exist. But don't give up hope! Maybe I'm just passionate about this because it's what I do. Here's some (fairly) basic background if you're interested in miRNAs and their potential anti-doping applications.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26663194
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27171140
Good stuff, and good luck in that avenue. Looks like you've got a lot of knowledge here.
I am still rather skeptical about retroactive tests. It's not L'Equippe's test of Lance's 1999 sample that caused his downfall, and it won't have a material effect on others either. Even if there is an avenue for retroactive testing (and that varies quite a bit depending upon sport) the immediate competitive and financial benefits far outweigh the consequences of having your methods revealed after you retire.
Lance, again, proves the rule by being the exception. He alone stands to lose a considerable amount of the wealth he has won (and even then, you don't see Nike suing for damages, just the government). Mark McGwire has to stand outside of Cooperstown in the rain holding up a hand-written sign pleading to be let in, but he can do it wearing a fancy raincoat and duck back inside of his Rolls Royce because he still has millions of dollars earned from when he was a star.
checks out!
He didn't get banned for PED's. He was caught using using Furosemide, which is a diuretic and isn't a banned substance. That means MLB had to prove he was using it to mask another drug. How they proved it I have no idea.
TBH his excuse of "A real doctor in the DR gave this to me" is pretty believable too.
I thought it is a banned substance and is banned specifically because of its use as a masking agent.
wait -- what if he legitimately just had high blood pressure or something and was taking the pills for that? How do you ban someone for a prescribed medication that can treat legitimate symptoms and may not have just been masking a PED with more urine?
If they have prior doctor approval. He did not have this approval.
Wow. Never liked him when he was a Yankee.
I am also on PEDs
I say make PED's mandatory. I want to see 500ft. homers and 100mph fastballs on the regular.
but this popped in my head when I read that lol.. SNL's all drug Olympics
I wonder if I start having my students use steroids if they will perform better on the M-Step test we are currently taking. Since my raise depends on it I might as well try to gain an advantage over the other teachers.