Dillian Whyte PED Discussion: Guilty? Not Guilty? Who Cares?

Aydamn your a good poster,a funny guy but its time to accept a few things mate.

 

This throws the wbc mandatory for whyte down the toilet if true

 

This content is protected

 

It matters what threshold levels they are using between the two agencies, ie. whose protocol. The adverse findings of two metabolites were very very low fwiw. It comes down to what constitutes an adverse finding due to the level of the detected substances. From what I understand UKAD have zero tolerance for metabolites.

Now before I post this quote, it's not my intention to give some crazies a reason to doubt anything but the science of it is what it is.

"When nandrolone is ingested or injected by humans subjects, three metabolites of nandrolone can be isolated and measured in the urine by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. These metabolites have been identified as 19-norandrosterone (NA; 3α-hydroxy-5α-oestran-17-one), 19-noretiocholanolone (3α-hydroxy-5β-oestran-17-one), and 19-norepiandrosterone (3β-hydroxy-5α-oestran-17-one).8–13 These metabolites are isomeric compounds, having the same chemical composition and molecular mass but different chemical structure. NA is usually the most abundant urine metabolite of nandrolone.9–13 The presence of these metabolites in the urine forms the basis of doping analysis for the illegal use of nandrolone by athletes.8,12,14–16 This was based on the premise that these urine metabolites could only have been derived from exogenous nandrolone.

This content is protected

8 In 1996, the IOC stated that a critical concentration for nandrolone metabolites in the urine had been established.

This content is protected

"

The yellow bolded part is referring to the levels. And afaik the levels were very very low. Thus the question comes down to what the levels were.

 

8 years... ****in hell.... That cant be right

 

God dammit Dillian, you complete ****ing helmet. Career is done for sure and he will go down in history as shooting himself in the foot destroying his own career after finally being awarded a long awaited title shot.

 

You are way more versed in drug testing protocols than I am, as I haven't been a tested athlete for almost 20 years and know jack squat about todays methods. We simply pee'd in a cup and did no blood testing at all. But, couldn't this be a case of Whyte not stopping his cycle soon enough to flush his system of all metabolites? Or is that not probable with today's testing procedures?

 

Wilder opening a bottle of Cristal over this joyous news.

 

How would I know that and why would it matter? Was he super ripped when he got busted the first time?

 

And don't forget their pro Fluid nonsense that taking a substance won't give you a huge effect right after.

This content is protected

Look at this craziness. The 2006 TdF Stage 17 comeback win by Landis was the greatest single athletic achievement in World Sports history. In one day after bonking hard and losing the whole tour, Landis slaps on a couple T patches, you know hard work and medication, he went out there and won the world!

Then 3 days after the Tour ended and the testings results came back...

This content is protected

 

Let's deal in facts, and this is the exact quote:

"The WBC is not aware that any of the test’s results VADA has received up to now have yielded any adverse findings. The WBC created the Clean Boxing Programme which is administered by VADA, and which is a top priority of our organisation. The WBC will not make any comments about the situation at hand until it receives the proper, formal communication from the BBBofC."

'Not aware' does not exactly mean 'clean'. Also it's not a best of three. A failed test is a failed test irrespective of any others which are not. This is politics at work. But the WBC are right on one aspect... the BBBoC should release their findings. So Whyte better hurry up and decide if he wants the B sample testing.

About this Clean Boxing Programme. Some context. The WBC pays VADA $10K per month to run this scheme. Divided by the number of WBC ranked boxers that's approx $40 per month, per boxer. Hardly a massive commitment to cleaning up the sport.

 

Everything you just said is wrong, 100% of it.

Kirk already explained it all.

"Theoretically" LMFAO. PEDS give an unfair advantage to ANY athlete to uses them. There's a reason they use them. If they didn't provide advantages, why would athletes risk their testicles shrinking to use them? Duhh!!!

Weren't you the guy who kept ragging on Mayweather for doing peds (despite having 0 evidence to suggest it) and kept telling us that he needed them to beat Pacquiao LMFAO. I remember having this convo with you in the past. You also alleged that he failed 3 tests (And once again 0 evidence to back this up)

 

I learned a lot from a decade or more of watching Lance. All the chicanery the ins and outs, the science, etc. That said I shouldn't know as much as I do and to be fair, I still am just a casual.

Well, for WADA they have level requirements in order for it to be an adverse finding, so it depends on what his levels actually were. Also considering the levels were very very low (heresay), that tends to mean that he took the substance a while ago. And these metabolites can stay in the system for nearly a month.