[Bette]

In an interview with media, David Ortiz says he had not used steroids. His name was on a list of players who tested posititve for performance enhancing drugs in 2003. He said he used over the counter supplements, but never steroids.
He said he was a bit careless in those days about taking supplements. He said he as been tested 15 times since then and never tested positive.
For the first time ever, an union official publicly sat next to one of the accused in the scandal that has touched several top players. Michael Weiner, general counsel for MLB Association, said ust because a player's name is one the list doesnt mean they tested positive. He said there are "substantial scientific questions" about the 2003 testing.

Boston Red Sox - Ortiz: I never used steroids - The Boston Globe

Does any of this change your mind about Ortiz using steroids. Not because he says he didnt, but the questions arising about the testing back then itself.
No specific drugs were specified in the leak.
And why did they wait until now? Why didnt they deal with this in 2003?

[simple simon]

Originally Posted by Bette

Does any of this change your mind about Ortiz using steroids.

wait wait wait .... no one ever said he did steroids .... well ok, people said it .. but they never proved it or provided any evidence .... there are other PEDs then steroids

Why didnt they deal with this in 2003?

because the test was supposed to be sealed and kept anonymous .... these names are truly being leaked out and i believe if the leak is ever discovered that person(s) could be prosecuted

[Bette]

Originally Posted by simple simon

wait wait wait .... no one ever said he did steroids .... well ok, people said it .. but they never proved it or provided any evidence .... there are other PEDs then steroids


because the test was supposed to be sealed and kept anonymous .... these names are truly being leaked out and i believe if the leak is ever discovered that person(s) could be prosecuted

You didnt say it changed your mind or not.
How was his performance after 2003?

[simple simon]

Originally Posted by Bette

You didnt say it changed your mind or not.

my thoughts about PEDs was changed long before his name came out

Ortiz
Manny
Sosa
Mac
Palmiero
Clemens
Petite
Canseco
Bonds

thats a small list of the players in MLB that have done PEDs .... i used to be outraged .... now i just throw my hands up .... in 2003 almost 10% of the players tested positive ... thats a lot imo .... so now i say screw it .... i dont care anymore

How was his performance after 2003?

he has been stellar with the Red Sox until this season ..... and i think there are two reasons why ... and neither has to do with PEDs ..... last season he hurt his wrist .. i think he started this season a little skiddish to use all his power in fear his wrist wasnt completely healed .... the other reason .. he didnt have Manny protecting him anymore .. two power hitters back to back in a lineup make a huge difference then just one .... you can pitch around one .. but you would rarely try and pitch around both

[squirrel15]

I for one don't care who is on the list. In 2003 peds where not banned. MLB allowed this to go on you can't look back now and say players shouldn't have taken advantage of the situation. How exactly did they choose who the test group was going to be in the first place? Was it random or did they test players under suspicion of using. I for one think the testing system in place now is working how many positive tests have there been since its induction? Stop worrying about what happened pre 2003 and look at today

[LSC9901]

There are just so many avenues of thought when it comes to the PED's. I immediately consider records and how real they are for that era. Is it really fair to consider a player who is known to have used the PED's against a player who has never tested positive ??? What if there is only minimal difference between the two ? The asterisk in the record books wouldn't remove that player from the record books but it would note that PED's tested positive during the period the record was set. Nothing more than that.

Personally I do care about how these guys treat their bodies to attain better performance. When caught and proven guilty it often tells others, both professional and little leaguers, that drugs can put you on top of the charts. MLB may well be doing a better job but it still has a ways to go to clean up the act.

Testing will always be questioned by those that are accused. NASCAR is currently going through an ordeal right now with tests done on a driver. He is obviously arguing that they are false results and that NASCAR is singling him out. When you have two opposing sides there will be two different views of the truth.

[squirrel15]

Of course there will always be two sides of the arguement. He tested positive for amphedimenes. He says he took cold medicine. What do to think they use to make crystal meth? Cold medicine. There is no way to ever know for sure unless the person in question is willing to stand up and take responsibility if they are guilty. Of course this is not going to happen so it leaves us with the same tired old he said she said routine about it. That's why I choose to take it for what it is and move on.

[LSC9901]

So if Mark Maguire and Sammy Sosa say they used cough medicine will you believe that ???? I've taken a hit or two in my time and my upper body never developed into what theirs did !!!

I'm not saying you are wrong but I believe anytime anyone bulks up like that and claims cough syrup made the test positive is leaving way to much room for doubt.

I know ... innocent until proven guilty.

[squirrel15]

Hello I was talking about Mayfield. You the one who brought Nascar into the discussion. That was his defense that he took cold medicine. Same with baseball players saying I only took over the counter supplements. It is all in what you want to believe and like I said unless the person being accused actually admits it we are never going to know for sure. There are too many variables that allow a defense no matter how far fetched it may be

[LSC9901]

Yup I see what you are saying about Mayfield. The Maguire story has a few holes in it like taking the 5th at a congressional hearing. Had he denied it he could have been prosecuted for perjury. Innocent until proven guilty but taking the 5th isn't proclaiming innocence either.

No matter what there will always be differing opinions on this subject and I can look at each of them and accept them. In our minds we are all correct in our views.

[Bette]

Originally Posted by simple simon

he has been stellar with the Red Sox until this season .....

The reason I asked how he has played since 2003 was because we discussed this earlier before he admitted to being guilty of using PEDs. If I remember right the thought was he must have been using steroids previously and stopped, thats why he was in a slump. But he says he has tested clean since 2003. So they didnt have an effect on his performance.
Does that make sense?
To me your theory of why his play dropped off makes sense and is probably the reason for his slump.