Big Name Tests Positive

The Rooster · 03-09-2004 3:13pm

Creatine:
I heard about the studies alright. Can you prove that something has no long term effects, when it hasnt been around for a long time? There's a lot of money being made out of creatine (widely used in boxing too) so its in the interest of many to see it looking squeaky clean.

I dont know of any scientific evidence that suggests it causes any harm, but I've heard anecdotal evidence that it does have effects. I am aware of scientific evidence that says its unlikely to have any long term effects. I certainly wouldnt use it, but every man for himself!

Chrisite:
Yeah it was 1988. No idea what kind of drug or stimulant it was, but I've heard Chrisite talk about it briefly before, as he's brushed it aside as a mistake that was made (not by him!). Conspiracy theorists say it was a cover up and that athletics couldnt afford another big name casualty at the same time as Johnson. But thats certainly never been proven. Dont know if you have any more details on it ecksor?

It does bring on the question about when somebody tests positive and is banned, does it taint all medals won and achievements by that athlete previously? Its interesting to compare how Michelle Smith is treated in Ireland compared to Linford Chrisite in the UK with broadly similar stories - i.e. test negative after winning Olympic Gold but test positive later.

Lewis:
Back to Carl for a second. While he admits that if the US followed exact procedure he would have been banned from the Seoul Olympics, he said he tested positive for a cold remedy (or similar), which he says is no longer even on the banned list and which he says bears no comparison whatsoever to the steroids that Ben Johnson was found to be taking.

ecksor · 03-09-2004 3:30pm

The Rooster wrote:

Chrisite:
Yeah it was 1988. No idea what kind of drug or stimulant it was, but I've heard Chrisite talk about it briefly before, as he's brushed it aside as a mistake that was made (not by him!). Conspiracy theorists say it was a cover up and that athletics couldnt afford another big name casualty at the same time as Johnson. But thats certainly never been proven. Dont know if you have any more details on it ecksor?

It was a low concentration of pseudo-ephedrine and he was "given the benefit of the doubt" (he wrote in his autobiography that he felt that term was down to the poor English of the Koreans but I think it sounds perfectly plausible myself) after he revealed that he had been drinking some of the Korean teas. Athletes nowadays are genereally warned to stay away from herbal teas and drinks but not back then as far as I know. IIRC the concentration was similar to the concentration in the Lewis case, therefore it was up to the relevant testing body to make a judgement call on it.

The Rooster wrote:

Lewis:
Back to Carl for a second. While he admits that if the US followed exact procedure he would have been banned from the Seoul Olympics,

Where did he admit that? My readings of that incident didn't include any mention of a deviation from proper procedure (apart from details being leaked to the press 15 years later).

he said he tested positive for a cold remedy (or similar), which he says is no longer even on the banned list and which he says bears no comparison whatsoever to the steroids that Ben Johnson was found to be taking.

Those substances are most commonly attributed to cold remedies although Lewis' explanation was a herbal supplement of some sort. They're still banned in competition though, but the penalities for a positive test have reduced from 3 months to a disqualification. (Compare to 4 years to 2 years and subsequent life bans for an idea of the difference in the severity of the offence).

Big Ears · 03-09-2004 3:47pm

Amz wrote:

Well it is an anabolic steroid, so presumably these soccer players you refer to shouldn't be using it.

Tell Edger Davids and several other players , who tested positive for this drug.

Creatine is widely used in soccer , and almost all players in the Man City squad use it .
people are unsure of its long term affects , findings of wheather its ok to use or not vary from test to test .

The Rooster · 03-09-2004 3:53pm

Lewis:
I should have said, Lewis admitted he "could" have been banned rather than "should". I saw him on BBC a week or two ago talking about it.

Creatine:
Arsenal were the first team I heard that admitted using it. That was about 5 years ago.

Big Name Tests Positive

Comments