Still some major flaws. 25 games for essentially getting a mickey? Please....then I spike the Gatorade when the sux visit the stadium and get the entire team booted for a month. And 100 games for steroids, where we know that is the one area that cannot be defended as street chemists can easily work around testing protocols. USADA is a joke.
Me too, I'm glad...I wonder though how they figure out what "inadvertent use is"....that one is tricky, what cough syrup or something, I don't know, is sudafed to much??, Where are the lines, where is the grey zone between the lines???? Yet, it is a good start, and it about blew my mind, when I saw A-Roid is getting almost 4 million to set out. It's like getting suspended from school but having to go to school. Or giving an employee a 3 day off warning notice, and making them stay and work those 3 days, now that's worse than the 3 days off, I think.
...I think every player is given a very extensive list of what he can and cannot have in his system...even OTC meds. And if a player still takes something that is on the list and gets popped, that's simply too bad. ...And sorry, but players who after the fact claim they "did not know what they were taking" are too stupid to have a job, much less a big MLB salary.
That is very good news. Not only was the 50 games a Joke but I'm also tired of players being given large contracts after coming back. I'd like to see another thing pushed if possible (though I don't know the legalities of it). But somehow I'd like to see something in the contracts that says basically a player will be penalized (salary) if they're suspended for drug use.
No Doubt... It erks me, pisses me off actually to know A-Roid is walking around with almost 4 million $$$$, to not play, and lie about his abusive use of Roids, and his lies, which he should not receive a dime, to walk the streets with. If he hasn't stashed away some of his past bucks, and I doubt he has, then he is a fool. He dropped his lawsuit, as he knew he could not afford the cost of the lawyers, over a long bullshit law suit, which would of only confirmed his ridiculous plight of lies, and abuse of Roids. A-Roid should not be getting a dime......for a phone call maybe..
25 is too high for inadvertent use. MLB does not have a comprehensive list of approved supplements and OTC medications, not even close. What about substances that crop up new all the time or things in other countries? Recognizing accidental consumption should be on a scale...1st time, 2nd time, strike 3. Say 5, 10 and then the full 25. There are way too many ways to get a spiked drink or supplement. Manufacturers share compounding, filling equipment all the time. And the QC done on raw materials is laughable in that business.
Interesting, that's what I am asking about: INADVERTENT USE. I think this is a broad un-defined grey area. A Big White Elephant??? I understand 59's take and I see how what he say's make's perfect sense.... Yet, I worry about OTC meds, that are yet to come, and not on any list, of approved or banned substances. As well as new meds yet to hit the prescription markets. The world of meds is always in a state of constant flux, and behold the future, and what it may bring out of its deep dark closet...?
...how many players have been falsely accused thus far?...how many false positives have there been thus far?...why would a player take a drug from another country?...spike someone's drink?...really? ...no one said the system is perfect but it beats not having one at all. Will there be some collateral damage?...possibly. But again, just as with the court and judicial system there will be some that slip through the cracks and there will be some that are falsely punished...but, it beats having no system at all.
List of banned substances Natural cannabinoids (e.g., THC, hashish and marijuana) Synthetic THC and cannabimimetics (e.g., K2 and Spice) Cocaine LSD Opiates (e.g., oxycodone, heroin, codeine, and morphine) MDMA (Ecstasy) GHB Phencyclidine (PCP) Steroids Androstadienedione Androstanediol Androstanedione Androstatrienedione (ATD) Androstenediol Androstenedione Androstenetrione (6-OXO) Bolandiol Bolasterone Boldenone Boldione Calusterone Clenbuterol Clostebol Danazol Dehydrochloromethyltestosterone Desoxy-methyltestosterone Δ1-Dihydrotestosterone 4-Dihydrotestosterone Drostanolone Epi-dihydrotestosterone Epitestosterone Ethylestrenol Fluoxymesterone Formebolone Furazabol 13α-Ethyl-17a-hydroxygon-4-en-3-one Gestrinone 4-Hydroxytestosterone 4-Hydroxy-19-nortestosterone Mestanolone Mesterolone Methandienone Methandriol Methasterone (Superdrol) Methenolone Methyldienolone Methylnortestosterone Methyltestosterone Methyltrienolone (Metribolone) Mibolerone 17α-Methyl-Δ1-dihydrotestosterone Nandrolone Norandrostenediol Norandrostenedione Norbolethone Norclostebol Norethandrolone Oxabolone Oxandrolone Oxymesterone Oxymetholone Prostanozol Quinbolone Selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMs) Stanozolol Stenbolone Testosterone Tetrahydrogestrinone Tibolone Trenbolone Zeranol Zilpaterol Any salt, ester or ether of a drug or substance listed above Human growth hormone (hGH) Insulin-like growth factor (IGF-1), including all isomers of IGF-1 (mechano growth factors) Gonadotrophins (including LH and hCG) Aromatase inhibitors, including anastrozole, letrozole, aminoglutethimide, exemestane, formestane, and testolactone Selective estrogen receptor modulators, including raloxifen, tamoxifen, and toremifen Other Anti-estrogens, including clomiphene, cyclofenil, and fulvestrant Stimulants Adrafinil Amfepramone (diethylproprion) Amiphenazole Amphetamine Amphetaminil Armodafinil Benfluorex Benzphetamine Benzylpiperazine Bromantan Carphedon Cathine (norpseudoephedrine) Chloroamphetamine Clobenzorex Cropropamide Crotetamide Dimethylamphetamine Ephedrine Etamivan Ethylamphetamine Etilefrine Famprofazone Fenbutrazate Fencamfamine Fenethylline Fenfluramine Fenproporex Furfenorex Heptaminol Isometheptene Meclofenoxate Mefenorex Mesocarb Mephentermine Methamphetamine (methylamphetamine) Methylenedioxyamphetamine Methylephedrine Methylhexaneamine (dimethylamylamine, DMAA) Modafinil Nikethamide Norfenefrine Norfenfluramine Octopamine Oxilofrine Pemoline Pentetrazol Phentermine Phenpromethamine Prenylamine Prolintane Phendimetrazine (phenmetrazine) Propylhexedrine Pyrovalerone Sibutramine Tuaminoheptane
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-drug-program-changes-could-impact-the-league How MLB's Proposed New Drug Program Changes Could Impact the League MLB is ready to once again amend its Joint Drug Agreement (JDA) that sets the terms for the drug-testing program and penalties. The changes to the drug agreement were first reported by Ronald Blum of The Associated Press. Both the AP and other sources peg the new penalties at 80 or 81 games for the first offense, 162 games (a full season) for the second offense, while the third offense remains at a lifetime ban. MLB is expected to announce the new JDA before Opening Day, perhaps in concert with the first Sunday-night game. Negotiations over proposed changes have been ongoing since last year, spurred by the Biogenesis case. While increased penalties will be the big story for most, in fact, the key development is a very technical change that could impact why players are penalized. Bud Selig gets to announce new, stronger penalties, something he had been pushing for since the Biogenesis case came to light. The penalties have increased for the fourth time since the initial JDA, something no other league has done even once. With Selig's last season as commissioner about to start, he's hoping that a firm stance on performance-enhancing drugs will now help his legacy. It is widely believed that MLB's acceptance of HGH blood tests and this change seek to put more pressure on the NFL, whose ineffective drug policy has been ignored by the media. The NFL's stance on its policy is clear; it is more about public relations than getting drugs out of the game. MLB has always taken the opposite approach, absorbing media blow after media blow and keeping "steroids" on the tongues of too many pundits and fans. Selig's push for harsher penalties was well-known, but he was hardly alone. A source with knowledge of the negotiations told me on Tuesday that the players actually encouraged stiffer penalties. "[Players] suggested starting with a one-year suspension and maybe going away from three strikes," he explained. It seems the players weren't speaking idly during the Alex Rodriguez hearing. They were willing to accept stricter punishment for the betterment of the game, even compromising their self-interest to some extent. Stacy Revere/Getty Images On the MLB side, the longer penalties will give the owners an easy win, plus the notion of valuation could become a non-issue. Several players have been suspended and then awarded large contracts, such as Jhonny Peralta this offseason. With a longer suspension that could carry over to the following season in many cases, general managers may exercise more inhibition. However, that remains to be seen, as offenders have been known to receive significant raises in the past, including Guillermo Mota, who was given a free-agent deal with his entire suspension ahead of him. Another major change in the policy is that MLB will employ new types of testing. While I won't try to explain things like LC-MS/MS testing procedures, suffice it to say that new techniques make it more likely that MLB's testing program will detect HGH and other growth hormones, including MGF. Baseball is also making use of more advanced testing for testosterone and peptides, which were a major part of the Biogenesis program. Blum and others also report significant alterations to how penalties are calculated, closing the loophole that Alex Rodriguez's attorneys found. That loophole, where pay is based on days rather than games, will result in Rodriguez getting a $2.8 million paycheck this year despite the 162-game suspension handed down. So with all that the MLBPA sacrificed in this negotiation, what did it get? First, it followed the wishes of the membership, which called for stronger penalties. However, it did get a major gift from MLB in the form of a new procedure and penalty for what it is calling "inadvertant use." This is not the so-called "false positive." MLB has had cases where a player has used a product that was later found to be tainted. The cases of J.C. Romero and Guillermo Mota offer instances where a player has taken a supplement, tested positive and had a real defense. Romero, for his part, took the makers of the supplement to court. The case was settled, giving Romero back some measure of his income lost during the suspension. With the new rules, Romero may have been able to significantly reduce the suspension, down to a suggested 25 games. The reported new arbitrator guidelines regarding "intent" are very interesting. This is the first major drug-testing agreement to move away from the standard of strict liability. Under all other rules, including that of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), this tenet of the code that makes an athlete liable for anything ingested has been sacrosanct. It appears that MLB is giving players the option to use "unintentional use" as an affirmative defense. The new agreement also is said to clarify how non-analytic positives will be handled. While the commissioner does retain "just cause" power, it will take a lot more than what MLB had in the bulk of the Biogenesis cases. While the details of this are not yet public, it will make arbitrary suspensions more difficult and more likely to be handed down by an arbitrator rather than the commissioner. The new JDA does not appear to incorporate any changes for non-PED violations, such as stimulants or "street drugs." This would come as something of a surprise, but the penalties have never matched since amphetamines were added to the JDA in 2006. Biogenesis and the athletes caught in the investigation are the clear catalysts for change here, but for the players, there are many reasons to approve. The PED stigma has always worked against baseball, and players have reacted to this by making strong statements. Increased penalties improve that perception while also making the overall system more fair to them. It appears that Tony Clark has his first big win as MLBPA director. Taking over for the popular Michael Weiner, Clark's bona fides as a negotiator and advocate have been questioned, but with this, the former player has proved to be a strong leader while maintaining the trust that Rob Manfred and Weiner built up since 1994. While the MLBPA director normally does not handle negotiations like this, I am told by multiple sources they began last year before Weiner's passing. On the management side, talks were handled by Daniel Halem and Rob Manfred, whom many expect to be the next commissioner. Spearheading this project and increasing penalties may help Manfred solidify his position as Bud Selig's replacement. This should be a win-win for MLB and its players. A more severe penalty for violating the drug policy will not only continue to drive drugs out of the game, but it may quiet some of baseball's critics who say the policy was not strong enough despite significant evidence to the contrary. While there will always be someone who thinks they can beat the system or is desperate enough to try to outsmart the policy that even USADA says is the best in professional sports, MLB is doing everything it can and more than any other organization to nip it in the bud.
Until they test for blood and even then who knows if the chemists can still beat them its a waste of time. Only people found out will be thru places like biogenesis that blow up and the such
I can beat that list...the any salt, ester or ether thereof is the Achilles heel. As are the specific naming of drugs by trade name. You see medicinal chemists are trained to beat another company's drug patent by working around the intellectual property space. There are analogs that can be made to each compound listed there, and they will not be identifiable, even with LCMS/MS. Only blood tests and specific marker testing can really determine if you are experiencing an unnatural level of agonism to specific receptor targets. In laymen terms, you don't look for the "key" that opens the front door, you look behind the door after the key opens the lock. The markers are the objects in the foyer. That is how you catch people with the intent to break the JDA. Any other positive test from peeing in a cup is either (a) to total idiot, or (b) unintended consumption.
...not everyone will get them from the same supplier and will not necessarily have the most "current" PED.
...again, it is not a perfect system but it IS a system and like I said, it's a start...and if MLB, the MLBPA, and the players are all for this, I don't see the problem. And if someone is genuinely convinced they were a victim of a false negative, there is still an appeals process. ...also, there will be more back room suppliers to take the place of biogenesis, and sooner or later they'll also be exposed as will the players who were buying from them. And recently the MLBPA has shown no desire to protect players who are determined to cheat.
