Everyone Wants to Talk About Floyd's IV - What About Pac-Monster's Toradol Abuse???

Pac with suspect performances and cats out there trying to throw shade on Floyd's name. Have to set the record straight sugarmosley. Blood in, blood out. Pac looked old as **** against broner, whatchu mean????

Bruh why you bumpin (your own) 2 year old thread ?? Pac with suspect performances and cats out there trying to throw shade on Floyd's name. Have to set the record straight sugarmosley. Blood in, blood out.

Bruh why you bumpin (your own) 2 year old thread ??

The last post was in January. It's May, you moron. Go **** yourself. Let's be real, the way Pac handled Broner, you know he's on that Ariza Shake ish. We know what's up.

ooops... Looks like Quest's Dr. Sample already shut down another one of your lines of defenses. Lmaoooooo. Dude...you gotta stop doing this to yourself. Nsac attorney: Can you tie together the labcorp tests on 1/23 and 1/26 with the Quest test on 1/31 for us? Dr. Sample: It is next to impossible to tie together different specimens collected at different points of time. Particularly collected over different days. The nsac attorney thought he was going to say that it proves he smoked again...but got shut the fvck down. Lmao. JUST LIKE YOU! What do you know? The guy from the very lab that you are trying to defend is shooting down your bullshlt. Are you surprised? I'm not. LMAO!!!!! Let's see if you can say it. ADMIT THAT YOU ARE WRONGGGGGGG!!!! HAHAHAHAHA. ONCE AGAIN, THIS PROVES THAT YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. LEAVE IT TO THE EXPERTS! SO WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS YOUR STUPID ASS CALCULATIONS DON'T AMOUNT TO SHlT, AND WE ARE STILL LEFT WITH HOW THE FVCK DID DIAZ GO FROM WELL OVER 300NG/ML TO 61NG/ML IN 1HR 17MINUTES. AND IF YOU WANT TO SAY IT WAS 2 HOURS, PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW HE WAS NORMAL/SLIGHTLY DEHYDRATED AT THE TIME OF THE 2ND TEST, AND 1.009 AT THE THIRD TEST. HE STARTED DILUTING ALMOST AN HOUR BEFORE THE 2ND TEST, YET HE WAS SLIGHTLY DEHYDRATED?????? YOU'VE BEEN DUCKING THIS FOR A LONG TIME! bahahahahaha. Thanks for playing, chump! IT'S OVERRRRRRR!!!!! :fingersx: http://replygif.net/i/735.gif

This imbecile still talking about this, he had an IV when it wasn't nessaccary, get a life stupid

You're a complete moron. What you showed wasn't even considered a diluted sample. Try again. The only moron is you in all of this. If you do not understand, I'm OK with that but you are making yourself look like a fool when you make statements like you do. Just wave the flag already. Your responses are getting worse with each post. No comeback really. Not even a flinch from you. Pretty sad stuff. Well I get it. So much information out there that backs up my position and not yours. Wrong! Is it considered diluted by Quest or WADA standards, or any drug testing standard? Waitingggg! Look at subject F's CR value. A huge downward trend in just 1 hour. I thought this was supposed to be not medically plausible? And this was just a study not someone who must use all means to pass a test!!! This guy went from 1 end of the spectrum to the complete opposite end in 1 hour! and his THC metabolite level is not even readable! How many FOLDs was this dude able to dilute is supposed to be medically not plausible BUT he was able to .... Poof! Since you are lost, Creatinine = 340 means that the urine is extremely concentrated. Creatinine = 47 is when the urine is very diluted. Time that it took to go from 340 to 47? 1 hour!!!! BOOOOOOOOOM! Another point: So this subject was able to go to these type of extremes in 1 hour by rehydration yet Floyd, who we all saw drinking adequately enough to rehydrate after the weigh in, needed more time(delays), and an IV? lol SUBJECT F Time 4.0 to 5,0 to 8,8 THCCOOH 49.0 to 0,0 to 6.6 Creatinine 340 to 47 to 26 Volume 134 to 222 and these ones show that with that level of Creatinine, you can drop many FOLDs of THC metabolite levels. Below was not as extreme shift in dilution values but the substance drop was significant: SUBJECT G Time 20.5 to 23.0 to 24.0 THCCOOH 223.2 to 27.1 to 13.7 Creatinine 184 to 39 to 23 Volume 320 to 195 to 260 SUBJECT H Time 6.0 to 9.5 THCCOOH 234.2 to 59.6 Creatinine 174 to 45 Volume 116 to 390 I have no idea what you are trying to say. You seem flustered. Diluting from 733ng to 61ng would damn near put him in a coma. Do you understand that yet? If not, go look at your studies. lol. 1) According to Eichner, "ideal" specific gravity for a urine sample is approximately 1.020. A reading of 1.000 indicates water. "We can take it a little more diluted than that, but that's what is ideal," Eichner said. "Obviously, we don't want a sample that is too dilute. It's hard to find levels of what you're looking for. Ideally, we try to make sure nothing is diluted more than 1.008." according to Eichner, 1.009 is "significantly below normal" or ideal. > 2 FOLDs more dilute than ideal. Actually depending on the instrument used to check SG, WADA has several cutoff points. "Suitable Specific Gravity for Analysis: 1.05 with a refractometer, or 1.010 with lab sticks." 2) Still waiting for you to confirm that SG and CR have their limitations. Which is basically what my initial point was about. Then you can come back and say that YOU WERE WRONG!!! 3) Once you understand the above 2 points, you will understand that the SG can be significantly dilute so that the THC metabolites from a fresh urine sample will show a negative result. 4) Taking the limitations in mind, irrespective of what you say, it can and has thrown off SG/CR test results. I provided this information. You have not and cannot debunk FACTS!!! If you think you can, lets see facts. Did you really just quote all of that thinking that it means something? LMAOOO. You really are flustered, aren't you? You can't be this stupid. The point is: now try to understand this....: HE KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT DRUG TESTING. HE IS NOT AN MRO. NOT AN ANTI-DOPING EXPERT. HE IS A FVCKING REFEREE! YOU'RE A MORON! - Moron? I realized this a while back that when you post like that you are just deflecting. You were wrong about him. He spoke his mind "John McCarthy rips NSAC executive director Keith Kizer " and got blacklisted as well for doing so. He also did point out that he thought 5 years was too much. Just like what the SAC wanted him to say? lol - For one you are speculating about his knowledge and secondly, the data supports him. Third point is that he is much more knowledgeable than you about this!!!! - You are completely lost. The MRO is not there to bring up all evidence including ones that can incriminate Diaz. The MRO was Diaz's defense. So he will only point out what Diaz's team planned before going into the hearing. You seem to be to naive to understand any of this. - He is an MRO yet should have realized and told Diaz to get sample B tested. Most probably did but Diaz may have swayed it so that they should not check or else we would be seeing another positive test results. - I already explained this enough so that even you can understand it. They said that TEST 2 is the outlier because it was bookended by 2 negative results. That is more stupid talk. TEST #1 was an INVALID test. Secondly, the MRO and the other experts said that its possible to see DRAMATICALY varying test results. So again, do you have something that goes against all of this? NO!!! If yes, lets see what you got! And yet again, more useless information. LMAOOOO. Dude, who gives a fvck! He lied. We know he lied. That's the only reason that this was settle instead of NSAC getting roasted in court. That they relied on him lying shows what I've been telling your punk ass: THEY CAN'T PROVE HE DID ANYTHING BY HYDRATING!!!! Thanks for making this easy, chump! So let me get this straight. Diaz lied because what again? lol This is too easy! Are you for real? This is about Diaz abusing marijuana and on top of that he lied that he used it recently. That is perjury. Remember when you guys found that to be a big deal when it came to another substance that numbs you even though that one was legal? lol! Now you are contradicting yourself and saying "that's all they have on Diaz?" Well NO! They have several positive results on the same freaking substance!!! Chump! lol - The NSAC had a lot on Diaz. The pre-fight form, positive tests just before the fight and fight night and a prior offenses on the same substance. This was all taken into account but I agree that they went too far with 5 years ban (initially). - The funniest line of yours "THEY CAN'T PROVE HE DID ANYTHING BY HYDRATING" a) They have a positive test result! That is all they need!!! b) They do not have to prove. EXPLAIN WHY THEY NEED TO FREAKING PROVE THAT IT HAD TO BE THE WAY DIAZ's TEAM said? Are you saying that Diaz's team is saying, "If you cannot prove that its by way of dilution then Diaz is not guilty?" Well, what if Diaz did it another way? He is not guilty because it was not by way of dilution? THis is so freaking dumb!!!!! lol!!! Dude, the study you've been relying on says 1 liter = 1.003. LMAOOO. SO THIS MEANS ACCORDING TO THE STUDY YOU'VE BEEN RELYING ON, DIAZ DRANK LESS THAN A LITER OF WATERRRRRR! DERP! The point is either the study you've been relying on is shlt, or you have to accept Diaz drank less than a liter of water. So which is it? Man you are dense!!! There are plenty of studies not just one. There are many variables that need to be taken into account (factored in). Do YOU NOT GET THIS SIMPLE POINT??????? The studies that I pointed to: Some subjects took less amount of water and some more. They were able to do it without being intoxicated. Some articles pointed to big drops in THC metabolite is possible by just diluting. Yea yea yea. However, you still haven't found well over 300ng to 61ng have you? Have you????? Actually I did but you are still lost on this one. 1) The article that I showed you says that its possible to dilute THC metabolites many FOLDS quite easily by drinking water. The diagram that he used for diluting I saw in other articles. Its even easier and faster when using a diuretic to help with dilution. 400 to 50 (8 folds). Article states that it can be even more than 10 FOLDS. Subject G in point 2 is about 10 fold. What can a 7 or 8 or 10+ FOLD of 61ng be if it was NOT diluted? but you are lost when calculating. Come back when you learn all that! 2) These 3 subjects that I mentioned above were able to dilute and drop their metabolite levels many FOLDS and they were not Diaz who was someone who had to try to beat the test! Subject G: THCCOOH 223.2 to 27.1 Subject H: THCCOOH 234.2 to 59.6 Subject F: Creatinine 340 to 47 Here we have 2 values on the extremes of the urine concentration spectrum in only 1 hour!!!! Now its time that you show your proof of impossibility! lol .... Like I said, there are too many possible ways not just one! :lol1: Yet you say that its not possible. 3) You are clinging to Diaz's testimony on how its not medically plausible to do. I shot down their statements! So if you do not even have their statement, what do you have? NOTHING!!!! - Was the reliable number 733 or > 300? Diaz's team statement was not acceptable! - Was it 1:17 or over 2 hours(time before TEST #2 can affect TEST #3). Diaz's team statement was not acceptable! - Remember subject F? He went from being extremely dehydrated to extremely hydrated in 1 hour!!!!! Diaz's team statement was not acceptable! - 400 to 50 (8 folds). Article states that it can be even more than 10 FOLDS. Diaz's team statement was not acceptable! - SG and CR are tools used to help out but they have limitations. I gave you tons of reasons why YET you keep on asking me these silly questions. TEST #1 was invalid due to dilution. TEST #3 was very diluted. You can have diluted urine samples that pass certain substance thresholds. Its quite easy now for marijuana since they boosted the limits. Study on dilution and SG/CR values: "example, most subjects began producing negative specimens with creatinine 300 ng/ml (Let's use 425 ng/ml as you did above) CR = 309.8 FORMULA = (425 ng/ml * 100)/ 309.8 = 137 So are you trying to say that the failed test on 1/23 was actually a passed test? Let's go further. You gave your own arbitrary numbers for the above calculations. We know the GC/MS machine measured the 1/31 Quest value as 733ng. Dr. Sample said the value could in fact be higher, or lower, but certainly well above 300ng. So why not use that value??? Make sense? AFTER Fight: THC metabolite level > 300 (lets use 733.23 ng/ml) Creatinine = 168.4 FORMULA = (733.23 ng/ml * 100)/ 168.4 = 435 Wuh-oh! Look at the spike from 249 to 435. Tell me, expert, does that mean he smoked between test#1 and test#2???? Was he hitting the bong in the back of the venue??? This is an example of why you should leave this stuff to the experts. Furthermore, you gave an arbitrary value for the CR level above when it is well known that you can't take a SPG and from that get the CR. And finally, you conveniently left out test #3. Dudeeeee....what the actual fvck is wrong with you? That is a serious question. YOU REALLY DON'T BELIEVE THESE ANTI-DOPING EXPERTS ARE AS SMART AS YOU, DO YOU? THIS IS SAD. You could have stopped after saying you do not get it. Its simple. They cannot apply these type of calculations when they are not consistently testing the athletes as may be done in a study. Timely and consistent urine samples must be taken. When they test in boxing or UFC, its possible that they do not test regularly or may not be tested at all before a fight. Certainly with no consistency. So to say, they cannot and are not allowed to apply these types of calculations BUT they do exist and some use them. Its about improving the testing ... but Diaz's is more random (spot) type of test while the other is collected at more consistent intervals. WADA has their rules (diluted sample) instead of using these types of methods which indicates that Diaz smoke recently (after 1/26 but before TEST on 1/31) What i provided was a ratio that takes into account dilution as well. There is a definite spike and the spike is very dramatic. "The ratio method was successfully applied in a number of programs (3–5). Fraser and Worth (5–7) reported that the method predicted new use for chronic cannabis smokers in treatment. They noted that results were better when the time separation in urine collections was greater, recommending at least 48 h in one study and 96 h in another" "They recommended that THCCOOH concentrations be normalized by dividing each by the urine creatinine concentration (1). This technique reduces the variability in concentration due to hydration effects. Using these creatinine-normalized THCCOOH concentrations, a ratio is calculated that is the concentration of any urine specimen (U2) divided by the concentration in a previously collected urine specimen (U1)." Initial study had a ratio of 1.5 while a later study stated that 1.5 was not necessary and even .5 is enough to indicate new use by the user/ Concentration ratio 2(U2)/concentration ratio 1(U1) = 249/20 = 12.45!!!! Way more than .5 and even 1.5!!! WADA actually applies a normalization method but only on steroids type substances. BTW - Your examples are incorrect. 1) Made me crack up when you used the UNRELIABLE value instead of the evidence provided to you > 300. 2) The method that I presented to you also takes into account a time factor and consecutive urine samples. YOU did not apply that. You jumped(skipped results) and used unreliable numbers. But thanks for participating! Its that time .... time to say that you were WRONG!!! I pretty much shut down all your points. I certainly responded to them. You did not because you cannot ....

Go back and read my points .... :lol1: Read that a while ago. Jeff Novitsky was NOT well informed when responding. - (error #1 )If he was, he would red flag TEST #1 but he didn't. - He didn't know that the reliable number was >300 (error #2) and - there have been numbers well over 733 that I have seen so he is not knowledgeable enough when it comes to marijuana levels!!! (error #3). - (Error #4), SRMTL has had bad results overturned before. - (Error 5) The big one, he is giving out this information without knowing the full details of the case!!! He is operating directly with USADA for all UFC athlete anti-doping. So of course he is biased but the errors that I pointed out speak for themselves. lmaoooooooo. So once again, Mr. Adp02 knows more than an anti-doping expert! Dudeeee. This is overrrrrrrrr! You lost! You sound like a straight clown, homie. Seek some help! -----EDIT------ DUDE, HE CLEARLY KNOWS MORE ABOUT THE CASE THAN YOU KNEW! YOU WERE REPORTING THE SPG AT 1.006 ON AN ARTICLE THAT HAD THE QUEST METABOLITE AT 300NG. THE 733NG AMOUNT CAME OUT FROM THE ACTUAL PROCEEDING, SO UM.....I THINK HE IS INFORMED OF WHAT EXACTLY WENT ON HERE. You did it again. Deflected from actually posting about his remarks to something completely irrelevant!!! At least you are staying consistent! lol I posted what was stated on multiple sites including ESPN, I didn't make it up. If they made an error of .003 and you are stuck up on that then you should do the same with Jeff's response! With this of course you are not consistent. :lol1: If Jeff was trying to keep it real, he would bring up the points that I brought up and more. But we both know that he was riding the wave and being VP (part of UFC) he had a good reason to try to help Diaz. He even got their lawyers to help Diaz out! He is so impartial! lol You sure do know a lot! I mean, three months ago you said this: ADP02: "For example, urine cannabinoids levels which were higher than 10,000 ng / ml dropped to the low 100's after drinking 12 ounces of water. BADA-BOOM! LMAOOO. I love the BADA-BOOM after this!!! So um....didn't you say this? Did you ever admit that you were WRONGGGG? And what advanced courses have you been taking in the past 3 months that allowed you to go from a complete imbecile regarding this topic to knowing more than WADA lab scientists? We need to check your credentials. Is this why you saw plenty of marijuana metabolite values over 733ng? LMAO. 10,000ng reduced to 100ng with 350ml of water...less than a standard water bottle. LMAOOO. You know it all! THIS IS OVERRRRRRRRR! We don't believe you, you need more people! Again, more deflections. Again, I posted what was stated about the study. Funnier still, my point was not about how the 12 ounces of water was able to dilute but how with just a few liters of water in 2 hours or less, subjects were so diluted that they had switched from postive to negative results ..... which was more on topic AND I even explained all of this to you but still you need to bring it up. lol .... furthermore, I can tell by your reference to this quote that you are not even understanding any of this AGAIN. a) Can-nab-i-noid: any of the chemical compounds that are the active principles of marijuana. CBD is one of over 60 compounds found in cannabis that belong to a class of molecules called cannabinoids. Of these compounds, CBD and THC are usually present in the highest concentrations, and are therefore the most recognized and studied. The following table lists compounds that are positively detected in urine by the THC One Step Marijuana Test Strip at 5 minutes. 11-nor-D9-THC-9 is the target compound. Compound ----------------- Cutoff (ng/ml) 11-nor-D9-THC-9 ---------- 50 Cannabinol ------------------ 20,000 11-nor-D8-THC-9 ----------- 30 D8-THC ---------------------- 15,000 D9-THC --------------------- 15,000 b) Marijuana: Marijuana (THC), being highly fat soluble, needs to be interpreted according to its level, rather than its presence. Small amounts will linger in the body for weeks, or even months. Generally, one marijuana cigarette will produce approximately 200-600 ng/ml of THC metabolite in the urine. Chronic users can have over 1000 ng/ml., and up to 6000 ng/ml. For a chronic user, the decline in levels of THC is slower than occasional users. It may require 2-3 weeks to get below 100 ng/ml. Therefore, if a urinary level of of 75 ng/ml was reported, it may represent: an occasional user who stopped usage 2 or 3 days prior; a chronic user who stopped usage 2 weeks prior; or an individual taking 1 or 2 “hits” of a marijuana cigarette within the last 24 hours. The quality of the marijuana inhaled is another factor affecting urinary levels. Generally, marijuana cigarettes contain 1/2 to 1% THC (0.5-1.0%). However, if an individual were to smoke a poor quality cigarette, only 0.1% or less THC, he may never get over 100 ng/ml. On the other hand, there is a high quality marijuana available, which is up to 14% THC. One cigarette of this type may push urine levels over 1000 ng/ml. c) "Identification Number : 204204851 RESULTS: 1,000 ng/ml day 19: *** 11-Nor-9-carboxy delta9-THC = 923 ng/ml *** Called First Check and confirmed that their GC/MS cutoff is 1,000 ng/ml, so the test that started this thread (10 days clean) was probably in the 1600-2000 range. I was a *constant* all day smoker before this detox began, so I think it's safe to say I was anywhere from 3,000-3,800 ng/ml the day I quit. Definitely an eye opener. For the amount I smoked daily, I think a 60-day detox sounds about right. What is somewhat more shocking is that if you do the math backwards, I was probably about over 4,000 ng/ml on the day I quit. In all likelihood, given my smoking history and subsequent calculation of how fast the THC has been leaving my system, I was actually in the 2500-4500 ng/ml range when I tested (really high, but then again, so was I)." d) Jeff brought up "733 ng/ml, one of the highest I’ve ever seen. There are big issues in interpreting those results" That was unreliable stat instead he should have just given the reliable stat of >300. Kinda strange that he would do that IF he actually knew his stuff and had questioned that it was a number that was unusually high. Ironically, the "BIG ISSUE" is his interpretation of those results!!! :lol1: Poor Travestny cannot get a break. Just lots of LMAO and deflections BUT he is consistently WRONG!!! :lol1:

Say what? Fix your grammar. You seem a bit flustered. While I'm reading through your latest bull****, chew on this: How about another expert. Maybe he can help you understand, little guy. Here is Jeff Novitsky, an anti-doping expert. By the way, he worked on the Lance Armstrong case…and still believes you are wrong. LMAOOOOO! Jeffrey John Novitzky is an agent for the Food and Drug Administration investigating the use of steroids in professional sports. Before April 2008 he was a special agent for the Internal Revenue Service who investigated the use of steroids for over five years. His investigations have concerned Marion Jones, Tim Montgomery, Victor Conte, Dana Stubblefield, Tammy Thomas, Melky Cabrera, Trevor Graham, Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Bay Area Laboratory Co-operative, Kirk Radomski, Bill Romanowski, Justin Gatlin, Jose Canseco, Floyd Landis, Tyler Hamilton and Lance Armstrong. Starting in April 2015, Novitzky began working for the UFC as their Vice President of Athlete Health and Performance. Within this role, Novitzky will spearhead anti-doping efforts within the organization. How about Eichner from SMRTL: “The mass spectometry data that we do for the confirmation should definitely be consistent with other regulated programs like Quest.” Meaning that the Quantitative data should be consistent. 7:12pm: 49ng 10:38pm: 733ng 11:55pm: 61ng Both Eichner and the MRO stated that the 7:12pm and 11:55pm results were consistent. HOW THE HELL IS IT POSSIBLE THAT DIAZ WENT FROM 49, SHOT UP TO 733, AND THEN SHOT DOWN TO 61???? Caused by the noted spike in Marijuana. Nope. This study took care of that: http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h95/travestyny/nihms50442f3.jpg HYDRATION? WRONG. YOU CAN’T PROVE IT, AND YOUR STUDIES SHOW THAT IT IS WRONG! Even at SPG 1.001…53ng to 5ng. No subject could achieve anything like what you claim Diaz did: http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h95/travestyny/Screen%20Shot%202016-10-23%20at%206.18.34%20AM.png EXERCISE? WRONG. I already showed you this study: To summarize, neither exercise at moderate intensity for 45*min. nor 24-hr food deprivation caused significant elevations in blood or urine cannabinoid levels in our six human subjects. Our results are in accordance with data from a similar study, where only slight and transient THC plasma elevations were noted during exercise, and none during fasting. We conclude that exercise and fasting in regular cannabis users are unlikely to cause sufficient concentration changes to hamper interpretation in drug testing programmes. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bcpt.12235/full This is very simple. Can you explain how the marijuana metabolite went from 49ng to 733ng and back to 61ng? You already stated that you don’t know what Diaz did, so this means you simply don’t know, which in turn means you’ve admit you can’t blame this on hydration. Which in turn means you have no proof of the specific gravity level accepted by WADA being problematic. Thanks for playing, chump! Go back and read my points .... :lol1: Read that a while ago. Jeff Novitsky was NOT well informed when responding. - (error #1 )If he was, he would red flag TEST #1 but he didn't. - He didn't know that the reliable number was >300 (error #2) and - there have been numbers well over 733 that I have seen so he is not knowledgeable enough when it comes to marijuana levels!!! (error #3). - (Error #4), SRMTL has had bad results overturned before. - (Error 5) The big one, he is giving out this information without knowing the full details of the case!!! :lol1: He is operating directly with USADA for all UFC athlete anti-doping. So of course he is biased but the errors that I pointed out speak for themselves.

Dude, how many times do I have to fvck you up over this issue. You have NO IDEA how drug testing works. You're an absolute imbecile. I'll reply to your bullshlt, but before I do, chew on this: One question only. Do your studies provide any proof that he drank liters of water to dilute??? ACTUALLY, FORGET THE WATER PART OF IT SINCE NOW YOU ARE SQUIRMING SAYING HE DILUTED WITH SOMETHING BESIDES WATER. LMAOOOOOOO. YOU ARE SUCH A LITTLE BlTCH. REPHRASING: DO YOUR STUDIES SHOW HE DILUTED HIS SAMPLE TO PASS THE TEST? 1. 1.009 is his specific gravity. 2. Your ref said he needed 2-4 liters (by the way, funny you disregard a 20 year vet MRO because you believe he is biased...and instead say a referee that is employed by NSAC knows more about drug testing. Brilliant!) 3. 1 of your studies said 1 liter = spg 1.003 You are relying so heavily on this 2-fold, 8-fold dilution mumbo jumbo taking from this study, yet you are blatantly ignoring and not going near where it says DRINKING 1 LITER OF WATER PUTS THE SUBJECT AT 1.003 SPG!!! STOP PICKING AND CHOOSING WHAT YOU WANT!!! TAKE THE WHOLE DAMN STUDY IF YOU ARE GOING TO RELY ON IT SO MUCH. 4. Your study with live samples puts him at 1.006 or lower with slightly less than 2 liters of water and nowhere near the jump in marijuana metabolite amount. 4 liters puts the subjects at 1.001 spg. THIS STUDY IS PURELY ABOUT DILUTION, which is your point. I DON'T CARE WHAT ELSE DIAZ DID TO FOOL THE SYSTEM IF HE DID IT. THIS IS ABOUT SPECIFIC GRAVITY AND DILUTION AND NOW YOU ARE TRYING TO SQUIRM OUT OF IT. THIS WAS ALL ABOUT MAYWEATHER HAVING TO PASS THE SPECIFIC GRAVITY TEST. SO STOP TRYING TO MAKE IT ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE. So how much did Diaz drink to dilute???? Are you ever going to answer??? Oh, that's right, he drank something else in front of the 2 DCO's. lmao. And it still only got him to 1.009...and didn't get him down very much at all for the 2nd test. lmaoooooo. One of your studies that you are relying on says less than 1 liter he drank. Right or wrong? GIVE A SIMPLE ANSWER. STOP DUCKING IT. YOUR OTHER STUDY SAYS HAD HE DRANK 2 LITERS HE WOULD BE AT 1.006 OR LESS. RIGHT OR WRONG? STOP DUCKING IT!!!!! YOUR STUDIES SHOW....THE RESULT IS NOT BASED ON DILUTION AND YOU ARE WRONG ABOUT THE SPECIFIC GRAVITY TEST!!! LMAO. What did I tell you about using your stupid ass “boom.” Every time you do it, you get beaten to a pulp and just look like an utter moron. AHAHAHAHAHA. Now pay attention to how your new line of defense is shot down: Now look at the chart http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h95/travestyny/nihms50442f3.jpg Could Diaz’ marijuana metabolite fluctuate from 300 (lets use 425 ng/ml) Creatinine = 168.4 FORMULA = (425 ng/ml * 100)/ 168.4 = 252 So on 1/26 the concentration was only at 20 but it spiked up to 250 in TEST #1 and TEST #2. So this would conclude that Diaz used marijuana after his 1/26 test. .

Lots of things usada aren't supposed to do but it seems they really don't care about the rules

WRONG: 1) Diaz failed multiple times: "NAC licensed Diaz despite several failed pre-fight tests According to coach Cesar Gracie and NAC executive, Bob Bennett, Nick Diaz failed multiple drug tests in the weeks leading up to UFC 183. UFC 183 almost lost their main event. UFC welterweight superstar, Nick Diaz did not receive his license until the week of the fight, due to an inability to provide a clean urine sample until mere "days before" the fight, according to his coach, Cesar Gracie. MMA Fighting reports that NAC executive, Bob Bennett corroborates Gracie's story." 2) It was NOT voluntary: "Fighters who have failed tests previously must re-apply for licenses with the NAC before being allowed to compete again. Diaz had popped for weed twice before in Nevada. The process to get re-licensed requires submitting documentation of a clean drug test. Gracie said Diaz was not able to do so until the 11th hour. Bennett said he believes the paperwork came in Jan. 28, three days before UFC 183.": Correct, ALL results came back stating that Diaz had marijuana. The ones that didn't go over the limit on 1/31 were diluted urine samples. One of which even WADA considers it invalid. Secondly, Diaz's team uses that invalid result as evidence that Quest result must be the outlier. Mentions that the Quest results was bookended by 2 negative results. :lol1: Too funny! 2 positive tests pre-fight, 1 negative pre-fight, then on 1/31: 1 Invalid result by SMRTL, 1 QUEST positive result, 1 SMRTL negative result which was > 2 times dilute ..... Diaz's team was wrong again! Yet you believed their defense! Sorry but this just made me laugh. 1) QUEST does a SCREENING test. Correct. If positive (over the threshold) then they do a second test which is called a confirmation test. How do they do it? At one place in their facility (LAB) they get an amount of urine from Sample A then test it. If positive THEN at another separate area in the LAB they do a separate test that is different than the first test. This is to confirm the initial test result. They do this by getting another amount of urine from Sample A. If positive then this confirms that Diaz is positive on that substance. BOTH TESTS were positive. TWO positive tests on the same sample makes it a very reliable result!!! SMRTL: They did a SCREENING test too. It came back negative!!! So they did not do their confirmation test! You said that the SCREENING doesn't matter and is worth Sh$t. So since SCREENING test is all that SMRTL did then its worth Sh$t, right? Question to SMRTL: "Dr Eichner, when you do the GCMS review and an athlete sample does not test above the (threshold) limit do you then get a numerical indication of what it may be even though it may be below the limit established by WADA?" SMRTL Response: "No because its a threshold substance. If it does not meet that threshold, there is no point to do a confirmation analysis and it is reported as negative." Daniel Eichner, a Ph.D. who is the executive director of SMRTL said there is a lack of understanding of how testing procedures work. "If anything is detected during the initial SCREEN, that triggers MORE WORK." "If we see anything that could look remotely like a prohibited substance, we then go back to that urine sample in the A bottle and then we do a CONFIRMATION process," Eichner said. "We look specifically for that compound of the parent drug or the metabolite." So basically since the substance didn't go over the threshold, SMRTL only did a SCREENING not a confirmation test. QUEST did both a screening and a confirmation test. BOTH TESTS were positive. 2) Daniel Eichner, a Ph.D. who is the executive director of SMRTL said there is a lack of understanding of how testing procedures work. The sample is split into two, an A sample and a B sample. The analyst works with the A sample and puts the B sample aside. Eichner said the lab then looks for every known prohibited substance and metabolite, which he called "quite a vast and extensive SCREENING process." "Once a positive test is returned, the screen is completed and the test is implemented. A urine drug test is executed via the gas chromatography/mass spectrometer (GC/MS) to provide confirmation of the positive results." So TEST #2 done by QUEST confirmed TEST #1 done by QUEST. 3) The 2 step process used by QUEST has in the past caught what the single pass by GC/MS didn't catch. One such case (scenario) is when urine has a competing substance either accidentally or used to trick the test. Example: When the urine sample tested for marijuana and was detected because a positive immunoassay screen while was unexpectedly negative by GC/MS. The positive result got the LAB personnel to verify why. It was due to a substance that thru off the GC/MS not the immunoassay screen. Under these conditions, the concentration of the target drug may be dramatically decreased by the presence of the interferant. So AGAIN, its YOU that needs to show why Diaz is innocent. Not even Diaz's team wanted to know the results of Sample B. You know why? Because it would have told you that Diaz was guilty!!! There is no other possible explanation for that move. NONE!!!!! What are you saying? This appears to be a deflection! Lets hope you can answer it directly. True, Diaz's team were cowards for not having sample B tested. Remember that Russian athlete? She requested STRONGLY that WADA investigate SMRTL and have the urine reexamined. THey did and found out that SMRTL was wrong. Anyhow, if sample B was tested, it would show that Diaz is a marijuana abuser, as we already know. But Diaz's team knew that the B sample would be positive. Your still in denial. I can understand you buying that excuse initially but not now that you have the details. Its no longer an acceptable stance! WOW! a) Expert says IF. This is to imply that only if the scenario mentioned by Diaz's expert does his scenario apply. Its clear as day that there are other scenarios that were possible that Diaz's expert does not want to mention and his scenario is a fail from the get to!!! b) You said "How stupid do you have to be to keep saying this" Well, I laughed at your post because I kept telling you that no way did Floyd have hyponatremia for numerous reasons but you just pointed out one of them and now are saying "How stupid do you have to be to keep saying this" lol! Too funny!!!. Floyd was not rushed to no hospital. Hyponatremia is serious stuff where Floyd could potentially have had brain swelling. Floyd thanks Dr Alex Ariza ..... shady stuff man and now you are basically agreeing with me! BOOOM! I keep on going back and forth. Seriously, you just do not get it or pretending because you know you are wrong? There is no other explanation. Diaz's expert says that he must have drank X amount of water. A number that he couldn't even state but its a number that in which would produce severe water intoxication to drop if tried to drop so fast! I'm saying that even that scenario is not the only possible scenario. What if, as an example, Diaz drank less than what he considers impossible but also took another substance that acts as a diuretic and in fact the fluid itself didn't necessarily need to be just water. The fluid could have been and/or included a mild to not so mild diuretic and/or intake something that would be easier to take without intoxicating himself. So to say it would produce a dilute urine without drinking as much as the poor doctor tried to convince us .... well he convinced you Score that ADP02 = 1, Diaz's expert = 0. Travestny = 0 for believing Diaz's expert. BTW - Nothing will squash my point on Specific Gravity. Go read up. It has its limitations!!! That is my point! You are saying that it doesn't? lol! As I stated, SG and Creatinine are tools but have their limitations. You are basically agreeing with me without even realizing this! lol You need to read up. I did and even pointed this out to you. What gives? Still "The Quest report registered a creatinine level of 168.4 mg/dL, which is virtually right in the middle of Quest's reference range of 20-to-370 mg/dL." Still, Creatinine can be off due to numerous reasons!!! Same with SG!!! More deflections. Your come back is just you doing this "lmaoooooo. GIVE THE FVCK UP!" Why do you not have a valid response since its YOU that needs to prove that those positive tests were not right BUT again, you cannot because your team didn't request for the B sample to be tested. That was dumb unless they knew the results! lol! lmaoooooo. GIVE THE FVCK UP! You said: "Only way it's possible by only dilution is if he damn near kills himself." Diaz's team said what they said because they had nothing else left, why are you being ignorant? Do not be naïve and believe what Diaz's team said. Not too far up I explained that one can dilute by various ways. There are other ways too such as, remember what Lance Armstrong did? Floyd did? Used an IV. SO I keep on giving you examples over examples and you are stuck in neutral!!! lol What are you even talking about? Your ship has sunk and you know it. That is the only explanation I can think of. You are the rock here. I pointed it out already in this post and others. I read others who agreed with my points on other forums. Diaz's expert is formulating a specific scenario. WHY????? Because he is making it sound like its NOT possible! Why???? If its possible by another way, then Diaz's defense crumbles!!!!!!! For Diaz, WHo cares HOW but if its possible is what matters!!! If there is ANY explicable reason then Diaz's team cannot defend and Diaz is found guilty!!!!!!! What do you not get about this very very simple statement? If Diaz was trying to beat the test and it was NOT by drinking water alone as Diaz's team stated then Diaz's team has no defense!!! a) Its possible and b) There are 2 positive results (Screening by Immunoassays and confirmation by GCMS ). Go check up. When both are positive, you have a tough road to climb if you are trying to shoot these 2 positive results on a given urine sample! "Since IA and GC-MS are based on different principles, the probability of generating a false positive is significantly reduced" "An initial urinary screening test must be confirmed for evidence of drug use. Confirmatory testing is more sensitive and specific than screening tests and confirms the drug of interest as opposed to the drug class." c) Diaz's team was wrong in that there is nothing to bookend since TEST #1 is so extremely dilute that it is INVALID. THEN Diaz's team can go packing already!!!! :lol1: This is so funny .... why are you not getting this? Its so simple? lol d) I explained all this in this post and previous ones. What are you having difficulties with? Really? His defense is dumb if its what you think he is trying to say. DO YOU NOT GET IT? It does NOT matter from what its from. If its possible then his point is meaningless and dumb!!!!!!!!!! lol! If its possible then that meant that the test was valid and Diaz was guilty! lol! Its NOT irrelevant. It shows that Diaz has been caught in the past, uses and his tests kept on coming back positive up to days before the fight! On what? Marijuana! lol The only issue is that you are not getting any of this. Again, I already gave examples. Its not hard to understand! SG and Creatinine are used as a tool but have their limitations. Go read up. When I say that the LABS didn't do anything wrong as one of the possibilities: Its just like when testing any athlete that gets caught. The athlete was able to beat the other tests and not that 1 test. Its no fault of the LABS that they missed it the other times. It was not possible for them to get a positive result either due to masking or the PED was out of the system due to micro dosing or dilution or whatever. That's all. No test, no license! But you are having trouble understanding the other stuff so of course you want to stay consistent. lol! Diaz got caught several times before, caught diluting, avoided being testing, caught days before the fight twice ..... and again after the fight. Uses medical marijuana in California ..... ALL tests show levels of the substance. Diaz says he is consistent about one thing. Using marijuana! Whoopty doo!!! lol Reliable result is > 300. Even if it was more than 300, its more than possible as I pointed out already. The flaw in all of this is that YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND!!!! I'm the one that keeps on telling you that there are fluctuations due to numerous reasons BUT only now that it affects your logic you buy that. How convenient! lol BUT if you check out the studies and compare - BEFORE TEST #1 the urine was supposedly very concentrated but the THC levels were lower than TEST #1 which was extremely diluted. When urine is more dilute it should show a much lower level of THC metabolites compared to a heavily concentrated urine sample. Plus a good 5 days passed by so that too should lower the number of THC metabolites. Studies state to get ratios THC/Creatinine levels to get a better read not just the THC metabolite levels. Use logic. WHy does one dilute their urine? What is the effect if done right? To lower the THC metabolite levels. So to say, TEST #1's number would have been much higher that 50 since he had diluted 10X (FOLD). If you still accept what you think then you cannot say that any of this was impossible like you keep on saying. What? I keep on telling you that SG reading has its limitations. - 1.009 is > 2 FOLD diluted. So it was definitely a diluted sample! - Remember that Diaz was in a fight. Remember that I provided to you info where athletes urine can have higher volumes of lots of substances due to trauma, exercise and stress!!! That can EASILY account for differences in SG values .... . - SG values and concentration values of a substance is not exactly linear. SG can rise or fall more or less compared to concentration readings of a given substance. Lots of reasons why. - Diaz had just voided by urinating in TEST #2 and soon after, 1:17 later, had a fresh batch of urine where Diaz clearly was rehydrating himself when you compare to TEST #2. Marijuana concentration levels were lower on a fresh sample since its possible that in such a short time, less was excreted than on previous samples. - "one should be aware that heavy molecules not normally present in large quantities in urine can falsely affect specific gravity readings" - SG readings are also affected by temperature fluctuations, which make specimens expand or contract, altering their density. - CR excretion over short intervals also shows considerable variation. Studies showed that subsequent 2-h interval samples varied by >100%, and several studies have reported that spot-sample CR variation is several times higher than variation for 24-h values. - Can be a combo of dilution that brings down the substance level and an interfering substance that further brought down the THC metabolite levels. - refrigerated samples may have falsely elevated readings, as may specimens exposed to excessive heat and dryness. - Was urine sample tested immediately after the specimen was collected? Can give a different SG reading the longer one waits to measure. - Allession et al. (9) suggested rejection of specimens that had specific gravity measures that were 1.030 and specimens with creatinine 300 mg/dL. - Lots of other reasons for a change in SG readings. Read up! - Diuretics can have an effect on SG. - As a measure of urine concentration, Urine osmolality is more accurate than specific gravity. Travestyny thinks that there is no limitations to SG. Oh No! - Other ways is to actually try to mask the accurate SG/CR values. For example, creatinine converted to creatinine will mask the dilution efforts. - In a dilute sample, negative or none detected results should never be interpreted as indicating no drug use (abstinence), because if, in fact, drugs were present, they probably could not be detected by the test. and the above is just to answer your misunderstanding about all of this because as I stated and the experts stated and other studies have stated: - There can be dramatic differences between samples and between different labs, protocols, and so on. - With no bookends due to TEST #1 being clearly an invalid test and with SMRTL's testing being just a screening test with "no additional confirmation test" done, and no B sample tested, the A sample stands!!!! Its just that simple. - "URine samples in 139 professional boxers before and after a bout were examined. 46% of the fighter's urine changed from clear before the fight to turbid immediately afterwards and the specific gravity increased in 80% of the cases. Traces of aceton were manifest in 14%. Sugar spilled in the urine in 9% of the boxers. Albuminuria: 68% that had none present before the fight, 68% was present after the fight. Red blood cells were found in significant pathological amounts in 73% after the fight .... and more." - "for example, glucose, albumin, or radiocontrast dyes will elevate urinary specific gravity out of proportion to the actual concentration." read above line. It mentions glucose, albumin, .....!!!! Secondly, you are stuck with just the THC metabolite value. When verifying if a user smoked after a previous test, they use ratios. If the concentration of 1/26 is very high and 1/31 is very dilute then that can have a dramatic difference in the true values. Using that, 1/26 THC ratio would be significantly lower than any of the 1/31 tests. Which implies that Diaz did smoke after 1/26. GO READ UP!!! I already provided you with a lot of information that shows that an SG value can be skewed. SG has its limitations. Did you finally understand this? Secondly, the SMRTL test was just 1 test plus it was just a screening test. QUEST had 2 tests. The screening test and then the confirmation test done by way of the GC/MS. In a screening test, it can be a less specific test compared to the confirmation test. GC/MS test can vary as there are multiple variables in the test. It can be less specific by using a certain testing method or it can be a more refined test. Both with its own advantages and disadvantages. BUT as stated, the QUESTS test complimented each other and removed in essence the possibility of an incorrect positive test. SMRTL's test was just a negative test. Again, a negative test does NOT mean that Diaz did not cheat. A positive test on s substance that we both know that Diaz has been associated to on many other occasion and admitted to doing and admitted to trying to beat the test ...... is harder to deny!!! "The confirmatory GC-MS test is extremely specific – it produces almost no false positives." Now add the fact that another test on the same sample also gave a positive result? - A reasonable person would have said "Diaz's team used the over inflated and unreliable number of 733. QUEST said the reliable number was > 300 - A reasonable person would have said "using Diaz's team own evidence, the time after the fight needs to be factored in. So its not only the time between TEST #2 and TEST #3 that should be taken into account. - A reasonable person would have said "Lots of studies, website state that you should try to dilute just prior to the test (1-2 hours before) and drink not many gallons but just liters. - A reasonable person would have said "You can dilute by a combination of ways not just by drinking water" - A reasonable person would have said "wait a second. Diaz's team's scenario is NOT the only possible explanation. So it is medically plausible. So why did Diaz's team not tie up all the lose ends? Because they couldn't as it negates what Diaz's team said. - A reasonable person would have said "If you are so sure, why not have another LAB test the B sample" After reading about the SG/Cr limitations and hearing the experts stating that you cannot just correlate the different urine sample done at different labs because its quite possible that they can give your dramatically different results!!!!!!! This should be an open and shut case. Time to carefully read and UNDERSTAND all of this!!! You can do it!!! I provided quite a bit but there is a lot more that you can do on your own. Wash, rinse and repeat. Time to carefully read and UNDERSTAND all of this!!! Again, it was all possible .... so no hyponatremia. but the funny part is that you now think that Floyd I mean Diaz would have had to have gone rushing to a hospital if he had hyponatremia .... lol. Remember that was your last line of defense for Floyd. So maybe you are not ignorant. Just cannot admit the truth. Its not a bad trade off, I guess ...... BOOOOM! Several were above the levels that they state is diluted (eg. Cr < 20) yet made it below the many known testing cutoffs (eg. 150, 100, 50 and in some cases even 20, 15). If you understand, Subject G and H went down in value many FOLDs yet was above the CR < 20 level. So its possible to go down many FOLDS and not even get flagged as too dilute! SUBJECT G Time 20.5 to 23.0 to 24.0 THCCOOH 223.2 to 27.1 to 13.7 Creatinine 184 to 39 to 23 Volume 320 to 195 to 260 SUBJECT H Time 6.0 to 9.5 THCCOOH 234.2 to 59.6 Creatinine 174 to 45 Volume 116 to 390 Look at subject F's CR value. A huge downward trend in just 1 hour. I thought this was supposed to be not medically plausible? And this was just a study not someone who must use all means to pass a test!!! This guy went from 1 end of the spectrum to the complete opposite end in 1 hour! Poof! SUBJECT F Time 4.0 to 5,0 to 8,8 THCCOOH 49.0 to 0,0 to 6.6 Creatinine 340 to 47 to 26 Volume 134 to 222 and again, SG and CR have their limitations. It's used as a tool but as I pointed out, limited!!! - Diaz was exercising, under stress and in a fight where there is trauma occurring to the body. Add hormone, body metabolism, dieting fluctuations (making weight) and All can increase the excretion of THC metabolites. The studies show a variance and it was not in a fight!!! Some were in the negative and some were significantly positive and again, none were named Diaz who had just finished fighting. I think you pointed to a study where they admitted that it was too limited in that they only had about 6 subjects where a few goofed up and it was not a controlled study. Even then, there was a subject that showed a significant increase of over 30%. The other study also noted that some participants went over the testing threshold that they used. That is to say, would have turned from negative to positive.- Diaz was exercising, under stress and in a fight where there is trauma occurring to the body. Add hormone, body metabolism, dieting fluctuations (making weight) and All can increase the excretion of THC metabolites. The studies show a variance and it was not in a fight!!! Some were in the negative and some were significantly positive and again, none were named Diaz who had just finished fighting. I think you pointed to a study where they admitted that it was too limited in that they only had about 6 subjects where a few goofed up and it was not a controlled study. Even then, there was a subject that showed a significant increase of over 30%. The other study also noted that some participants went over the testing threshold that they used. That is to say, would have turned from negative to positive. Wash, rinse and repeat. I told you enough for you to stop talking foolishly! Just say that its all going over your head and we are all good. Trust me that it gets simpler if you stop saying "LMAO" and start to read up and actually understand all this. Wash, rinse and repeat. I told you enough for you to stop talking foolishly! Like I said, you need to stop saying LMAO and read up! If you read up its explained that the THC value on its own is not always enough. TEST #1 was extremely diluted yet only at around 50 while the other previous tests were extremely concentrated and also at 50 or higher (failed ones). Logically it makes sense. For a given individual, if a sample is very diluted then that means that the concentration of that substance is lower than when its heavily diluted. So to say, TEST #1 on 1/31 would have been much higher than 50 if it was extremely concentrated .... plus 5 days passed. Why no drop? lol, I said that there are many possibilities. Only Diaz can know ... and I said that we do not know how exactly Diaz cheated and you said BINGO!!! lol Finally, do you understand the concept that IF there are 5 negative tests and 1 is positive that the positive test trumps all the negative ones? Sure, the athlete may get defensive and deny it all and use excuses like you and Diaz are trying to do but YOU cannot deny that you have no answers as to why 2 tests on 1/31 came up positive. I answered all of your questions at length. You never did. As has been stated, a positive screen then positive CONFIRMATION test is very tough to beat. Only way was by verifying sample B. Diaz's team knew this but they couldn't go there. There were no bookends because TEST #1 was a fail. TEST #3 can be explained. So its over! lol! Just deflecting ..... Do you not see that the system is completely flawed as far as this test is concerned. That is why the threshold's used to be much lower. So they can catch people and even when the thresholds were very low (eg. thresholds of <50, <20 , <15) some athletes such as Diaz still attempted to beat the thresholds. So you think that 150 will be difficult? lol Its flawed. THINK!!! Many athletes will not have to go to extreme dilution ranges to beat this test. As I stated above. Its not difficult to pass this test given the new thresholds. If the thresholds were lower, its more difficult but not at 150. Anyways, I said enough that you can understand all this. Wash, rinse and repeat. I told you enough for you to stop talking foolishly! Wash, rinse and repeat. I told you enough for you to stop talking foolishly! I'm trying to show you that even on the same sample they can get it wrong. Its to point out that if we can get different results on the same sample then you cannot compare TEST #1 with TEST #2 and then with TEST #3 results as you and Diaz's team tried to do. BUT at least Diaz's team admitted to the issue ..... but that killed his case! ... BINGO!!! You are smoking not me. Stop clinging to TEST #1. Its invalid. If you correct the values due to the extreme dilution, the values would be way above 150!!! TEST #1 was diluted by about 10 FOLD. What? Stop deflecting. First of all you are totally confused and mixing the topics. 1) Diaz's defense. His case is to try to provide evidence that he did not cheat. It was NOT about Diaz trying to convince us that he was not cheating by way of dilution. SO if Diaz's team explains about dilution but there are other ways to cheat, well, Diaz is guilty. So stick with this simple point!!!!! 2) Dilution: I explained this already. There are multiple ways to dilute. NOT just by drinking water. There are other ways that the SG can be wherever it is because Testing in general and the SG and CR tests have their limitations. BUT I explained this already. Got it? 3) TEST #1 was invalid. TEST #2 had a normal concentration and was tested positive by 2 different ways on the sample in question. No B sample was tested. TEST #3 was over 2 Folds diluted. So to say, it was diluted more than normal. So now you need to explain to me how you can believe TEST #3 by way of screening only vs 2 tests on TEST #2 in which complement each other? More importantly, since all the experts said that you cannot do what you are doing yet you are trying to correlate the results of TEST #2 and TEST #3 and say TEST 2 is wrong because of TEST #3? lol!!!! Note: When you bring up these points, I try to give you possibilities as we both do not know exactly what Diaz did. Again, if I would have told you as an explanation that Lance used an IV right under the DCO's nose to dilute, you would be saying "LMAO, what are you smoking" but I would be right!!! Diaz was not alone in being tested multiple times. Also they were supposedly tested multiple times because they were in the process of getting USADA/WADA involved in their testing process. Silva was tested as well. You think they were after him too? Diaz got caught. Simple as that. All tests showed levels of marijuana. Secondly, your point does NOT make any sense. Why would the NSAC want to go after Diaz BEFORE even knowing about his positive test? That is nonsense! If you read up you would find out that they kept on contacting Diaz so that he gets tested often enough before the fight until he passes so he can get his license to fight. If they wanted Diaz out then they wouldn't have bothered and wouldn't even have given him a license to begin with. These organizations want the fights and athletes to fight. Its all a business. Diaz failed 3 times so he got a harsher penalty but the NSAC eventually cut it down dramatically. Why would they if they wanted Diaz out? They could have dragged it out until Diaz would just call it quits ..... Finally, what makes your point worse is Diaz's defense was NOT strong. So if you say that the NSAC was out to get Diaz, then why go in with such a useless defense where the NSAC could EASILY shoot Diaz down and find him guilty? You expected the NSAC to be after Diaz yet what did you expect? From the pre-fight form (lie), multiple repeat offenses, avoided being tested, admitted cheater, admitted to trying to beat the tests. On what? Marijuana. You can only blame Diaz for this. Even SMRTL found a high level of THC metabolites .... even his tests prior to 1/26 failed. Blaming the NSAC for Diaz's mistakes is a joke! So to answer your question, YES, I would definitely have had Sample B tested. It's better than no defense and having the NSAC definitely find you guilty! Even after the sentence of 5 years, they could have requested that the B sample be checked at a different LAB. Having the B sample tested was the BEST WAY OUT!!!! NOT pointing to a different urine sample. BTW - Why would the NSAC and QUEST be "fixing" a urine sample test to make it positive? Who the freak is Nick Diaz to have this grand "fixing" scheme that makes no sense? Remember that he was tested positive days before getting his license. Stop blaming others. This is a no brainer. At least with Floyd it makes a lot of sense. It was to make money for all and Floyd was Nevada's golden PPV egg. Nick Diaz is a pawn. So they only need to test once negative and it means that the athlete is not using PEDs? lol Also, SMRLT's Screening test vs 2 tests done by QUEST that compliment each other and BOTH concluded that Diaz did use marijuana. THC metabolites were in all urine samples but QUEST proved that it was above the limit. So what. They also said that TEST #1 was too dilute (INVALID) and TEST #3 was dilute. Studies show that the THC metabolite numbers can go way lower than 150 by diluting. Its not hard to beat. Subject F was able to dilute in 1 hour!!! Yet is supposedly "Medically not plausible" :lol1: Anyways, I explained all of that SG and CR limitations. Its time that you find a new excuse! Lance ARMSTRONG used IVs and so did many others. Floyd did too. Why do you think that they do not want you to dilute? Yet you are laughing at people using IVs? You a definitely King T@rd. so much time wasted to prove what? What? The fight is over, PAC lost, end thread.

https://scontent-mxp1-1.cdninstagram.com/t51.2885-15/e15/11333581_1664487117115184_1522949883_n.jpg

No you don't. One positive test on 1/23. One negative test on 1/26. These were voluntary tests that he took to make sure he could pass (without diluting, I might add). WRONG: 1) Diaz failed multiple times: "NAC licensed Diaz despite several failed pre-fight tests According to coach Cesar Gracie and NAC executive, Bob Bennett, Nick Diaz failed multiple drug tests in the weeks leading up to UFC 183. UFC 183 almost lost their main event. UFC welterweight superstar, Nick Diaz did not receive his license until the week of the fight, due to an inability to provide a clean urine sample until mere "days before" the fight, according to his coach, Cesar Gracie. MMA Fighting reports that NAC executive, Bob Bennett corroborates Gracie's story." 2) It was NOT voluntary: "Fighters who have failed tests previously must re-apply for licenses with the NAC before being allowed to compete again. Diaz had popped for weed twice before in Nevada. The process to get re-licensed requires submitting documentation of a clean drug test. Gracie said Diaz was not able to do so until the 11th hour. Bennett said he believes the paperwork came in Jan. 28, three days before UFC 183.": This is dumb and I've told you this a billion times. If he is below the threshold, he is not guilty. Right? Why are you bringing up so much **** that doesn't matter? Every single test found marijuana. Only 2 were above threshold. One where he was seeing if he could pass...then negative..then negative...then whopping positive...then negative. Something look out of place to you yet? Correct, ALL results came back stating that Diaz had marijuana. The ones that didn't go over the limit on 1/31 were diluted urine samples. One of which even WADA considers it invalid. Secondly, Diaz's team uses that invalid result as evidence that Quest result must be the outlier. Mentions that the Quest results was bookended by 2 negative results. :lol1: Too funny! 2 positive tests pre-fight, 1 negative pre-fight, then on 1/31: 1 Invalid result by SMRTL, 1 QUEST positive result, 1 SMRTL negative result which was > 2 times dilute ..... Diaz's team was wrong again! Yet you believed their defense! You are really not too bright. One was a SCREENING. WADA labs don't screen because maybe they can afford to do the main test that Quest is trying to avoid doing because of the cost. What you are doing is cowardly. If the GC/MS was negative, would you still say there was a legit positive? NO! So stop being a coward. The GC/MS was done by both and the screening doesn't matter worth shlt. Sorry but this just made me laugh. 1) QUEST does a SCREENING test. Correct. If positive (over the threshold) then they do a second test which is called a confirmation test. How do they do it? At one place in their facility (LAB) they get an amount of urine from Sample A then test it. If positive THEN at another separate area in the LAB they do a separate test that is different than the first test. This is to confirm the initial test result. They do this by getting another amount of urine from Sample A. If positive then this confirms that Diaz is positive on that substance. BOTH TESTS were positive. TWO positive tests on the same sample makes it a very reliable result!!! SMRTL: They did a SCREENING test too. It came back negative!!! So they did not do their confirmation test! You said that the SCREENING doesn't matter and is worth Sh$t. So since SCREENING test is all that SMRTL did then its worth Sh$t, right? Question to SMRTL: "Dr Eichner, when you do the GCMS review and an athlete sample does not test above the (threshold) limit do you then get a numerical indication of what it may be even though it may be below the limit established by WADA?" SMRTL Response: "No because its a threshold substance. If it does not meet that threshold, there is no point to do a confirmation analysis and it is reported as negative." Daniel Eichner, a Ph.D. who is the executive director of SMRTL said there is a lack of understanding of how testing procedures work. "If anything is detected during the initial SCREEN, that triggers MORE WORK." "If we see anything that could look remotely like a prohibited substance, we then go back to that urine sample in the A bottle and then we do a CONFIRMATION process," Eichner said. "We look specifically for that compound of the parent drug or the metabolite." So basically since the substance didn't go over the threshold, SMRTL only did a SCREENING not a confirmation test. QUEST did both a screening and a confirmation test. BOTH TESTS were positive. 2) Daniel Eichner, a Ph.D. who is the executive director of SMRTL said there is a lack of understanding of how testing procedures work. The sample is split into two, an A sample and a B sample. The analyst works with the A sample and puts the B sample aside. Eichner said the lab then looks for every known prohibited substance and metabolite, which he called "quite a vast and extensive SCREENING process." "Once a positive test is returned, the screen is completed and the test is implemented. A urine drug test is executed via the gas chromatography/mass spectrometer (GC/MS) to provide confirmation of the positive results." So TEST #2 done by QUEST confirmed TEST #1 done by QUEST. 3) The 2 step process used by QUEST has in the past caught what the single pass by GC/MS didn't catch. One such case (scenario) is when urine has a competing substance either accidentally or used to trick the test. Example: When the urine sample tested for marijuana and was detected because a positive immunoassay screen while was unexpectedly negative by GC/MS. The positive result got the LAB personnel to verify why. It was due to a substance that thru off the GC/MS not the immunoassay screen. Under these conditions, the concentration of the target drug may be dramatically decreased by the presence of the interferant. If the sample was adulterated, would the result be different? Would it? Stop making dumb accusations. So AGAIN, its YOU that needs to show why Diaz is innocent. Not even Diaz's team wanted to know the results of Sample B. You know why? Because it would have told you that Diaz was guilty!!! There is no other possible explanation for that move. NONE!!!!! What are you saying? This appears to be a deflection! Lets hope you can answer it directly. LMAO. Coward. True, Diaz's team were cowards for not having sample B tested. Remember that Russian athlete? She requested STRONGLY that WADA investigate SMRTL and have the urine reexamined. THey did and found out that SMRTL was wrong. Anyhow, if sample B was tested, it would show that Diaz is a marijuana abuser, as we already know. But Diaz's team knew that the B sample would be positive. Your still in denial. I can understand you buying that excuse initially but not now that you have the details. Its no longer an acceptable stance! How stupid do you have to be to keep saying this? You treat hyponatremia by being rushed to a hospital and having an IV. We know he didn't get rushed to a hospital because he went to the press conference after. Stop being dumb. WOW! a) Expert says IF. This is to imply that only if the scenario mentioned by Diaz's expert does his scenario apply. Its clear as day that there are other scenarios that were possible that Diaz's expert does not want to mention and his scenario is a fail from the get to!!! b) You said "How stupid do you have to be to keep saying this" Well, I laughed at your post because I kept telling you that no way did Floyd have hyponatremia for numerous reasons but you just pointed out one of them and now are saying "How stupid do you have to be to keep saying this" lol! Too funny!!!. Floyd was not rushed to no hospital. Hyponatremia is serious stuff where Floyd could potentially have had brain swelling. Floyd thanks Dr Alex Ariza ..... shady stuff man and now you are basically agreeing with me! BOOOM! LMAO. Again, thanks for proving that your whole premise about specific gravity is shlt. I keep on going back and forth. Seriously, you just do not get it or pretending because you know you are wrong? There is no other explanation. Diaz's expert says that he must have drank X amount of water. A number that he couldn't even state but its a number that in which would produce severe water intoxication to drop if tried to drop so fast! I'm saying that even that scenario is not the only possible scenario. What if, as an example, Diaz drank less than what he considers impossible but also took another substance that acts as a diuretic and in fact the fluid itself didn't necessarily need to be just water. The fluid could have been and/or included a mild to not so mild diuretic and/or intake something that would be easier to take without intoxicating himself. So to say it would produce a dilute urine without drinking as much as the poor doctor tried to convince us .... well he convinced you Score that ADP02 = 1, Diaz's expert = 0. Travestny = 0 for believing Diaz's expert. BTW - Nothing will squash my point on Specific Gravity. Go read up. It has its limitations!!! That is my point! You are saying that it doesn't? lol! You're so smart. Fight ended at 9:34ish. He stayed in the ring till about 9:45ish. First test was at 10:38 and he was slightly dehydrated. How the hell was he slightly dehydrated if he began drinking immediately? If he didn't begin drinking immediately, how is he at 1.009 after 1hour 17 minutes? LMAOOO. GIVE UP! As I stated, SG and Creatinine are tools but have their limitations. You are basically agreeing with me without even realizing this! lol You need to read up. I did and even pointed this out to you. What gives? Still "The Quest report registered a creatinine level of 168.4 mg/dL, which is virtually right in the middle of Quest's reference range of 20-to-370 mg/dL." Still, Creatinine can be off due to numerous reasons!!! Same with SG!!! There you go again saying it's now something else..the protocols...not dilution. LMAO. Do you understand that you are arguing against your point yet? This is really stupid. Only way it's possible by only dilution is if he damn near kills himself. Isn't that what your studies show? Isn't it????? lmaoooooo. GIVE THE FVCK UP! When you stop ducking the questions about what your studies show, then we should discuss further. More deflections. Your come back is just you doing this "lmaoooooo. GIVE THE FVCK UP!" Why do you not have a valid response since its YOU that needs to prove that those positive tests were not right BUT again, you cannot because your team didn't request for the B sample to be tested. That was dumb unless they knew the results! lol! lmaoooooo. GIVE THE FVCK UP! You said: "Only way it's possible by only dilution is if he damn near kills himself." Diaz's team said what they said because they had nothing else left, why are you being ignorant? Do not be naïve and believe what Diaz's team said. Not too far up I explained that one can dilute by various ways. There are other ways too such as, remember what Lance Armstrong did? Floyd did? Used an IV. SO I keep on giving you examples over examples and you are stuck in neutral!!! lol Your "expert" said it was 2-4 liters. Your studies beg to differ. LMAO. What are you even talking about? Your ship has sunk and you know it. That is the only explanation I can think of. LMAOOOO. DUDEEEEEEE????? CAN YOU READ????? CAN YOU UNDERSTAND ENGLISH???????? I CORRECTED YOU ON THIS A BILLION TIMES. MEDICALLY IMPLAUSIBLE. NOT IMPOSSIBLE. MEANING, IF IT WAS DONE BY DILUTING ALONE, HE WOULD HAVE BEEN DAMN NEAR IN A COMA! SO BRINGING UP OTHER SCENARIOS IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH WHAT THE MRO IS SAYING! YOU HAVE A HEAD LIKE A FVCKING ROCK. You are the rock here. I pointed it out already in this post and others. I read others who agreed with my points on other forums. Diaz's expert is formulating a specific scenario. WHY????? Because he is making it sound like its NOT possible! Why???? If its possible by another way, then Diaz's defense crumbles!!!!!!! For Diaz, WHo cares HOW but if its possible is what matters!!! If there is ANY explicable reason then Diaz's team cannot defend and Diaz is found guilty!!!!!!! What do you not get about this very very simple statement? If Diaz was trying to beat the test and it was NOT by drinking water alone as Diaz's team stated then Diaz's team has no defense!!! a) Its possible and b) There are 2 positive results (Screening by Immunoassays and confirmation by GCMS ). Go check up. When both are positive, you have a tough road to climb if you are trying to shoot these 2 positive results on a given urine sample! "Since IA and GC-MS are based on different principles, the probability of generating a false positive is significantly reduced" "An initial urinary screening test must be confirmed for evidence of drug use. Confirmatory testing is more sensitive and specific than screening tests and confirms the drug of interest as opposed to the drug class." c) Diaz's team was wrong in that there is nothing to bookend since TEST #1 is so extremely dilute that it is INVALID. THEN Diaz's team can go packing already!!!! :lol1: This is so funny .... why are you not getting this? Its so simple? lol d) I explained all this in this post and previous ones. What are you having difficulties with? Really? Looks like you are buying what he is saying because he says this can't be just from diluting. Don't you feel stupid yet? His defense is dumb if its what you think he is trying to say. DO YOU NOT GET IT? It does NOT matter from what its from. If its possible then his point is meaningless and dumb!!!!!!!!!! lol! If its possible then that meant that the test was valid and Diaz was guilty! lol! That's exactly what I'm saying, because it is irrelevant. The issue is whether his marijuana metabolite was below the threshold, and if not, why the discrepancy. The issue between you and me is was it due to only diluting and the specific gravity test being faulty. You claim now that it wasn't due only to diluting and that all labs could have been correct, so why do we need to continue? You admit defeat. Its NOT irrelevant. It shows that Diaz has been caught in the past, uses and his tests kept on coming back positive up to days before the fight! On what? Marijuana! lol The only issue is that you are not getting any of this. Again, I already gave examples. Its not hard to understand! SG and Creatinine are used as a tool but have their limitations. Go read up. When I say that the LABS didn't do anything wrong as one of the possibilities: Its just like when testing any athlete that gets caught. The athlete was able to beat the other tests and not that 1 test. Its no fault of the LABS that they missed it the other times. It was not possible for them to get a positive result either due to masking or the PED was out of the system due to micro dosing or dilution or whatever. That's all. The tests were voluntary. If they weren't, he wouldn't have gotten his license, genius. No test, no license! But you are having trouble understanding the other stuff so of course you want to stay consistent. lol! Whoopty doo. You found a quote saying he smoked it before fights in what? 2006? 2009? Good for you. I highly doubt he is dumb enough to pay out of pocket to make sure he can pass, then get reinstated, then smoke again right before knowing he would be tested. Makes no damn sense and you know it. Diaz got caught several times before, caught diluting, avoided being testing, caught days before the fight twice ..... and again after the fight. Uses medical marijuana in California ..... ALL tests show levels of the substance. Diaz says he is consistent about one thing. Using marijuana! Whoopty doo!!! lol LMAO. Have you paid attention to your studies about marijuana and the patterns in the levels. How many times have you seen them fluctuate maybe 10ng. Now how many times have you seen them fluctuate about 600ng? Yea, I thought so. Reliable result is > 300. Even if it was more than 300, its more than possible as I pointed out already. The flaw in all of this is that YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND!!!! I'm the one that keeps on telling you that there are fluctuations due to numerous reasons BUT only now that it affects your logic you buy that. How convenient! lol BUT if you check out the studies and compare - BEFORE TEST #1 the urine was supposedly very concentrated but the THC levels were lower than TEST #1 which was extremely diluted. When urine is more dilute it should show a much lower level of THC metabolites compared to a heavily concentrated urine sample. Plus a good 5 days passed by so that too should lower the number of THC metabolites. Studies state to get ratios THC/Creatinine levels to get a better read not just the THC metabolite levels. Use logic. WHy does one dilute their urine? What is the effect if done right? To lower the THC metabolite levels. So to say, TEST #1's number would have been much higher that 50 since he had diluted 10X (FOLD). If you still accept what you think then you cannot say that any of this was impossible like you keep on saying. Again, you are assuming he smoked after the 1/26 test, which makes no sense first of all. Second, doesn't explain why the third test would be so low, now does it? Where did all of that metabolite go? Wasn't due to dilution, was it? Nope. 1.009. What? I keep on telling you that SG reading has its limitations. - 1.009 is > 2 FOLD diluted. So it was definitely a diluted sample! - Remember that Diaz was in a fight. Remember that I provided to you info where athletes urine can have higher volumes of lots of substances due to trauma, exercise and stress!!! That can EASILY account for differences in SG values .... . - SG values and concentration values of a substance is not exactly linear. SG can rise or fall more or less compared to concentration readings of a given substance. Lots of reasons why. - Diaz had just voided by urinating in TEST #2 and soon after, 1:17 later, had a fresh batch of urine where Diaz clearly was rehydrating himself when you compare to TEST #2. Marijuana concentration levels were lower on a fresh sample since its possible that in such a short time, less was excreted than on previous samples. - "one should be aware that heavy molecules not normally present in large quantities in urine can falsely affect specific gravity readings" - SG readings are also affected by temperature fluctuations, which make specimens expand or contract, altering their density. - CR excretion over short intervals also shows considerable variation. Studies showed that subsequent 2-h interval samples varied by >100%, and several studies have reported that spot-sample CR variation is several times higher than variation for 24-h values. - Can be a combo of dilution that brings down the substance level and an interfering substance that further brought down the THC metabolite levels. - refrigerated samples may have falsely elevated readings, as may specimens exposed to excessive heat and dryness. - Was urine sample tested immediately after the specimen was collected? Can give a different SG reading the longer one waits to measure. - Allession et al. (9) suggested rejection of specimens that had specific gravity measures that were 1.030 and specimens with creatinine 300 mg/dL. - Lots of other reasons for a change in SG readings. Read up! - Diuretics can have an effect on SG. - As a measure of urine concentration, Urine osmolality is more accurate than specific gravity. Travestyny thinks that there is no limitations to SG. Oh No! - Other ways is to actually try to mask the accurate SG/CR values. For example, creatinine converted to creatinine will mask the dilution efforts. - In a dilute sample, negative or none detected results should never be interpreted as indicating no drug use (abstinence), because if, in fact, drugs were present, they probably could not be detected by the test. and the above is just to answer your misunderstanding about all of this because as I stated and the experts stated and other studies have stated: - There can be dramatic differences between samples and between different labs, protocols, and so on. - With no bookends due to TEST #1 being clearly an invalid test and with SMRTL's testing being just a screening test with "no additional confirmation test" done, and no B sample tested, the A sample stands!!!! Its just that simple. - "URine samples in 139 professional boxers before and after a bout were examined. 46% of the fighter's urine changed from clear before the fight to turbid immediately afterwards and the specific gravity increased in 80% of the cases. Traces of aceton were manifest in 14%. Sugar spilled in the urine in 9% of the boxers. Albuminuria: 68% that had none present before the fight, 68% was present after the fight. Red blood cells were found in significant pathological amounts in 73% after the fight .... and more." - "for example, glucose, albumin, or radiocontrast dyes will elevate urinary specific gravity out of proportion to the actual concentration." read above line. It mentions glucose, albumin, .....!!!! Secondly, you are stuck with just the THC metabolite value. When verifying if a user smoked after a previous test, they use ratios. If the concentration of 1/26 is very high and 1/31 is very dilute then that can have a dramatic difference in the true values. Using that, 1/26 THC ratio would be significantly lower than any of the 1/31 tests. Which implies that Diaz did smoke after 1/26. GO READ UP!!! I understand that you are wrong. GC/MS is the same test for both, right? You are saying the problem was the specific gravity test? Right? Not one person besides you has drawn that conclusion, and all because you have a hatred for Floyd Mayweather. It's really sad, bro. Really. Having a specific gravity of 1.009 is not going to dilute 733ng or even well over 300ng to 61ng. You know it and I know it, so why are you still going? Show me one study that shows you can dilute well over 300ng of marijuana by diluting to 1.009SPG. I'll wait. I bet you come up with nothing and ignore this. I already provided you with a lot of information that shows that an SG value can be skewed. SG has its limitations. Did you finally understand this? Secondly, the SMRTL test was just 1 test plus it was just a screening test. QUEST had 2 tests. The screening test and then the confirmation test done by way of the GC/MS. In a screening test, it can be a less specific test compared to the confirmation test. GC/MS test can vary as there are multiple variables in the test. It can be less specific by using a certain testing method or it can be a more refined test. Both with its own advantages and disadvantages. BUT as stated, the QUESTS test complimented each other and removed in essence the possibility of an incorrect positive test. SMRTL's test was just a negative test. Again, a negative test does NOT mean that Diaz did not cheat. A positive test on s substance that we both know that Diaz has been associated to on many other occasion and admitted to doing and admitted to trying to beat the test ...... is harder to deny!!! "The confirmatory GC-MS test is extremely specific – it produces almost no false positives." Now add the fact that another test on the same sample also gave a positive result? Not by diluting alone. Nope. And you agree...so what's your problem with SPG? - A reasonable person would have said "Diaz's team used the over inflated and unreliable number of 733. QUEST said the reliable number was > 300 - A reasonable person would have said "using Diaz's team own evidence, the time after the fight needs to be factored in. So its not only the time between TEST #2 and TEST #3 that should be taken into account. - A reasonable person would have said "Lots of studies, website state that you should try to dilute just prior to the test (1-2 hours before) and drink not many gallons but just liters. - A reasonable person would have said "You can dilute by a combination of ways not just by drinking water" - A reasonable person would have said "wait a second. Diaz's team's scenario is NOT the only possible explanation. So it is medically plausible. So why did Diaz's team not tie up all the lose ends? Because they couldn't as it negates what Diaz's team said. - A reasonable person would have said "If you are so sure, why not have another LAB test the B sample" After reading about the SG/Cr limitations and hearing the experts stating that you cannot just correlate the different urine sample done at different labs because its quite possible that they can give your dramatically different results!!!!!!! This should be an open and shut case. Good for them. Waiting for you to show me well over 300ng to 61ng with spg 1.009. Time to carefully read and UNDERSTAND all of this!!! You can do it!!! I provided quite a bit but there is a lot more that you can do on your own. Again, then how was he slightly diluted at 10:38pm? Why was spg 1.009 an hour and 17 minutes after that. Oh, he drank so much. LMAO. Wash, rinse and repeat. Time to carefully read and UNDERSTAND all of this!!! This is one of your most idiotic arguments. The dude says he could happen if he treated his hyponatremia, and you think DIAZ thought of some novel way to treat hyponatremia in a few minutes in the back of a stadium. LMAOOOOOO! Dude, go away. Again, it was all possible .... so no hyponatremia. but the funny part is that you now think that Floyd I mean Diaz would have had to have gone rushing to a hospital if he had hyponatremia .... lol. Remember that was your last line of defense for Floyd. So maybe you are not ignorant. Just cannot admit the truth. Its not a bad trade off, I guess ...... BOOOOM! Good for you. Did you reveal the specific gravities for those subjects? Did you? Did you???? Keep your focus. Several were above the levels that they state is diluted (eg. Cr 300ng???? What the fvck are you smoking? Like I said, you need to stop saying LMAO and read up! If you read up its explained that the THC value on its own is not always enough. TEST #1 was extremely diluted yet only at around 50 while the other previous tests were extremely concentrated and also at 50 or higher (failed ones). Logically it makes sense. For a given individual, if a sample is very diluted then that means that the concentration of that substance is lower than when its heavily diluted. So to say, TEST #1 on 1/31 would have been much higher than 50 if it was extremely concentrated .... plus 5 days passed. Why no drop? BINGO! You're done! lol, I said that there are many possibilities. Only Diaz can know ... and I said that we do not know how exactly Diaz cheated and you said BINGO!!! lol Finally, do you understand the concept that IF there are 5 negative tests and 1 is positive that the positive test trumps all the negative ones? Sure, the athlete may get defensive and deny it all and use excuses like you and Diaz are trying to do but YOU cannot deny that you have no answers as to why 2 tests on 1/31 came up positive. I answered all of your questions at length. You never did. As has been stated, a positive screen then positive CONFIRMATION test is very tough to beat. Only way was by verifying sample B. Diaz's team knew this but they couldn't go there. There were no bookends because TEST #1 was a fail. TEST #3 can be explained. So its over! They use that for samples that are found to be DILUTED! 1.009 is not found by anyone or any organization to be diluted. Nice try. lol! Just deflecting ..... Do you not see that the system is completely flawed as far as this test is concerned. That is why the threshold's used to be much lower. So they can catch people and even when the thresholds were very low (eg. thresholds of Lance ARMSTRONG AGAIN? I'M DONE! Lance ARMSTRONG used IVs and so did many others. Floyd did too. Why do you think that they do not want you to dilute? Yet you are laughing at people using IVs?

@Dosumpthin has spoken. Release the PEDquiao! :dance:

Let’s get back on track of the main issue. You’ve stated in the past that Mayweather’s IV would allow him to submit a diluted sample. This is not accurate. Will you admit that you were wrong? The above quotation makes it clear that an athlete that receives an IV cannot submit a diluted sample. The sample will still have to pass the specific gravity test. Then, you initially tried to state there is a flaw with the specific gravity test that allows PED cheaters to pass drug tests. Your quotations make it clear that you believed WADA standards for the specific gravity test would allow an athlete to submit a urine sample that is too diluted to find evidence of doping: Here, you are clearly saying that the SG test didn’t catch the sample was too diluted. Ok. Do you see your point mentioned above? One lab (using creatinine) found large amounts of metabolites, while the other lab (using specific gravity) found a negative result. You state THAT IS YOUR POINT. NOW LOOK HOW YOU’VE CHANGED: You said: Then you said: Dude……these statements are directly in conflict with each other. First you say there is clearly a flaw with WADA's use of the sg test as opposed to the creatinine test, now you’re saying it’s not about that at all. So now do you have any problem with the spg test? You said: Then you said: First it was the spg test didn’t catch that the sample was too diluted, now you say it’s possible that none of the labs had it wrong. You didn’t mention anything about other factors at first. You said this was based on the sg test not catching that the urine was too diluted. This changed to dilution only being one factor, and possibly not being a factor at all depending on what Diaz did. Your stance has changed dramatically. Isn’t it safe to say this is over now? Mayweather’s sample was required to pass the specific gravity test due to USADA being a signatory of WADA. The sample was not allowed to be diluted. There is no proof that WADA’s specific gravity test would allow a dirty sample to pass as clean, and you are admitting that by now trying to introduce other factors and by saying that this is no longer about specific gravity vs. creatinine tests. Your only angle left is to speculate that Mayweather used “other factors” to abuse PED’s and pass the test. This should effectively end this. As I stated, SG and even Creatinine tests are just a tool but have their limitations. Secondly and again, using an IV one can dilute and still pass the SG test. Third point is that the SG can have a result that is passable but the substance abused is under the threshold still. Finally, as we saw with Diaz, the lab got a hold of an invalid urine sample due to it being too diluted. USADA should NOT have given Floyd a RETRO TUE when we saw that Floyd could have drank easily enough to rehydrate himself and we saw that his vitals and weigh in agrees with my statement. Floyd's weight hardly budged for 30 days and just after getting the IV, Floyd boasts that he doesn't dehydrate himself like others because he walks around at close to his weigh in weight! That is just crazy! Add the delays and statistics that state that Floyd should have been able to urinate a messily 90ml in 6+ hours without an IV .... Finally his excuses for having the IV are lies in that urinating, giving blood 10 days before and exercising "a little" would have him fail as excuses. So to say, lots of things that happened that day should not have happened but Floyd's tag team partner, USADA, let it happen! ----------------------------------------- I was correct. THANK YOU! SMRTL didn't catch what QUEST did! ------------------------------------------- I was correct. THANK YOU! SMRTL didn't catch what QUEST did! ------------------------------------------- I was correct. THANK YOU! SMRTL didn't catch what QUEST did! ------------------------------------------- I was correct. THANK YOU! SMRTL didn't catch what QUEST did! ------------------------------------------- I was correct. Its apples and oranges in that I'm also responding to Diaz's defense. There are many ways. Diaz's expert witness said that Diaz couldn't have drank enough in so little time. You agreed but as I stated there was more time than he said plus Diaz could have used for example a diuretic to speed up the process or done something else other than drink lots of fluids. My example is still technically about dilution but as you can see, it was possible for Diaz as I keep on telling you. Diaz's expert knows all this but he made it sound like it was only about his specific scenario but as I pointed out, there were too many IFs in his statements. I caught that and tried to explain it to you ...... But lets face it, I gave you several days yet you deflected my post big time!!!! You didn't because you know that using your own point, Diaz had to have used marijuana since his levels were actually higher than the 1/26 results. BOOOM! -------------------------------------------

You wrote a lot. Stay here. Let's get this over with. 1. People mentioned you over and over in the Thunderdome thread. So I know you know what it is and how to get there. You are just ducking it. Point blank. 2. You said this was about specific gravity vs. Creatinine. Now why are you saying it is not about that? 3. The MRO never used the word impossible. He said implausible. Why do you keep insisting when I corrected this over and over. 4. Everything you said is wrong. Do you have time for me to go through this point by point so we can get this dumb **** over??? Gotta get some shut eye. I'm working tomorrow and its late here. I will read it tomorrow hopefully.

Nice. Except getting a cold, seems like you had a good time. Yup, I had a good time. I haven't been there in a while and the traffic was very noticeable this time around. Quite crazy trying to get around. The weather, while mostly cloudy while I was there, it was nice and warm compared to where I'm at now!

Welcome back. Hope you enjoyed Boracay. I really like it there. Thanks, I wished I was there now! Where I'm at now, the weather is not good! Here's the thing. You're not going to get what I'm saying to you unless some other people come on board to tell you that you are wrong. This is why I asked you to go to the Thunderdome or make a new thread. You refuse. My hunch is that you refuse because deep down you know you are wrong. I don't know why you want to continue bickering about this thing. I can type to you until my fingers fall off about why you are wrong, and you still won't get it. I'll try again...hopefully for the last time. Your hunch is wrong I never been to the Thunderdome section and do not even know what the difference would be. Like I told you, all that has to be said can be said here since we already began the discussion here. Secondly and more importantly: - I have 2 positive tests just days before the fight, - The positive test after the fight, - The ruling against Diaz - Diaz's team agreeing to the negotiated deal. - PLUS, previous positive tests by Diaz and suspensions. On what? Marijuana!!! BTW - PLUS, previous times and after the fact where Diaz tried to delay giving samples - PLUS, Diaz admitting to trying to beat the test. - PLUS, Diaz stating that it was not about Diaz using marijuana but being below a threshold! :lol1: - PLUS, Diaz supposedly had a prescription. To what? To use marijuana!!! - PLUS, QUEST has a 2 test protocol. BOTH came up positive!!! So AGAIN, its YOU that needs to show why Diaz is innocent. Not even Diaz's team wanted to know the results of Sample B. You know why? Because it would have told you that Diaz was guilty!!! There is no other possible explanation for that move. NONE!!!!! Actually, this is what you decided to do. That's the whole point of why we are debating this issue, is it not? You said that SMRTL dropped the ball because it uses Specific Gravity and that's why Mayweather's samples being required to pass the SPG test doesn't mean much. Right? Obviously the two can be compared when discussing hydration level. The two can NOT be compared when you show the study above and say it proves SPG would allow an athlete to do what Nate Diaz did....but then show no specific gravity results. 1. Your studies don't show marijuana metabolite levels of well above 300ng. 2. Your studies don't correlate with the amount of time Nate Diaz had. 3. Your study doesn't even mention specific gravity. You want to talk about apples and oranges? There you have it. Deflecting again. Diaz's team gave a specific scenario that didn't make sense for a number of reasons. You bought their explanation. I showed you several studies and articles that point out that that is similar to what people are doing as far as drinking to dilute!!! So Specific Gravity or Creatinine test was not the point. The point is that one can dilute without being intoxicated. BUT as I stated before, what Diaz's team says has a few "IFs" in their statements. In other words, even if you buy into their version, you need to ask yourself, what "IF" Diaz did something different? Diaz's team: "IF not properly corrected it can lead to serious medical condition such as headaches" Well that means that IF Diaz properly corrected it, then Diaz's expert is saying its possible!!! Diaz's team: "If its from hydration alone its not medically plausible." Well that means that IF Diaz did not do it by "hydration alone", then Diaz's expert is saying its possible!!! Diaz's team: "To drop in 1:17 minutes between the 2 tests after the fight, absolutely not (possible)." But the so called expert didn't calculate that Diaz could have started drinking well before the 1:17 minutes!!! A Study does not have to show over 300 as long as the ratios are similar or at least shows that one can drop 8-10 FOLDs by drinking just water ...... As for over 300, 400 > 300 and the article that I pointed to shows that by just diluting 8 FOLDS, urine samples can drop from 400 to 50!!! BTW - I remember seeing a similar diagram where they demonstrate that by drinking just 1-2 liters of water the urine production increases dramatically! How long does it take? The effects are quick and comparable to Diaz's scenario. BTW - AGAIN, I do not even need to show you any of this but I did. YOU on the other hand have shown me NOTHING and its you that needs to start showing me how its not possible. Oh wait, you cannot because you do not have the B sample and all experts say that 2 samples taken at different times by different labs and different protocols can have dramatically different results! Ooops! Dude, you are proving the medical review officer's point. He clearly states that if this result is purportedly due to dilution alone, it is not plausible. Here you've said over and over "what else did Nate Diaz do." Thanks for admitting that this was not from dilution alone, which is what you first tried to state. I know what it was from. It was from Quest fvcking up the test, just as they did on the same exact day with Silva's test. Lame. 1) Read my points that I made already in this post. Experts timeframe of 1:17 min was inaccurate and you do NOT need to drink an amount that the expert couldn't even tell us! :lol1: 2) So you are now agreeing that there are other scenarios!!! So Diaz's defense team is wrong! Its not impossible!!! So to say, Diaz's positive results was possible. You think that is what Diaz's team was trying to convey? :lol1: Like I said, lame by both YOU for buying that crock and Diaz's team for coming up with all those "IFs"! BTW - Its not Nate its Nick You keep bringing this up. Why is it relevant? We all know he was busted in the past. SMRTL found that he took marijuana as well. What IS relevant is the amount. That's Nick's (is it Nick or Nate....I don't even remember) point. You are trying to say the amount isn't an issue but that IS the issue. Is this a joke? Diaz has a long history of marijuana abuse and this is about marijuana abuse and you ask why am I bringing it up? Diaz also has a history and admitted to trying to use and beat the system by ways such as diluting his urine sample. Are you saying that is all irrelevant? lol First of all, you are giving false information yet again (surprise, surprise). The two tests taken days before the fight were voluntary tests. He took them to make sure that he can pass and get his license. He tested once and found that he could not pass. Tested three days later and found that he could pass, and then applied for reinstatement. That's right. We have a labcorp test which was his voluntary test to make sure that he would pass: 1/26/15 creatinine: 240.1mg/dl Very Concentrated 300 not 733 2) From the time of the end of the fight to TEST #3 it was more than 1:17 min. Close to double that amount of time. 3) MRO had too many "IFs" to make his statement credible. 4) ALMOST EVERY STUDY AND ARTICLE THAT i READ SAYS THAT YOU CAN DILUTE AND YOU SHOULD DILUTE WITHIN HOURS OF YOUR TEST because trying to dilute way before that time is useless!!!! I pointed out one article where 400 ng/ml drops to 50 (8 FOLD) and they mention it that it can be dropped easily at 10 FOLDS and more since THC metabolites are usually not in the 10s of thousands like some other substances. Anyhow, - Diaz was extremely diluted before the fight and was also diluted in TEST #3. 1.009 is considered more than 2 FOLDs diluted. - Diaz's TEST #2 was supposedly more concentrated . - THC metabolite concentrations follow a "sawtooth" pattern of increases and decreases dependent upon urine volume and other factors. - Studies state not to do any exercise for at least 2 hours prior to the test as it can elevate your THC metabolite levels. - What did Diaz do besides drinking water to beat the system? - If the THC metabolite levels drop it does not necessarily mean that there was a reduction. Why? As stated there are variables to consider. Urine volume, dilution, other substances in the urine sample, less THC excreted for that sample compared to previous samples (example: due to exercise, muscle/body injuries and so on) - Urine sample: Did Diaz collect mid-stream sample of urine in the collection cup for both or was it done differently? - TEST #2 which had higher concentrations of THC metabolites was flushed out of his system. TEST #3 was more dilute. - The state of polyuria typically lasts from 1-4 hours. Some cases it can be longer than that! - Study: "The marijuana assay turned negative and stayed that way, even after specific gravity levels had returned to normal!" - Studies have reported that after combat fighting, the athlete can have more substances in his urine due to exercise and trauma. This could affect specific gravity and creatinine levels. - MRO, the so called expert, made the mistake of not advising Diaz to test Sample B so that means Sample A stands. When possible, they take a THC/Creatinine ratio to be sure that a drop in THC really means an overall reduction. There is a possibility that the THC metabolite levels can drop yet the user actually used marijuana compared to previous samples where the THC levels were actually higher. In summary, lots of stuff could have happened. SMRTL would have had to have gotten it wrong twice, and Labcorp would have also had to get it wrong. OR, QUEST, who got another test wrong on the same exact day taken at around the same exact time for another combatant in the same exact fight, could have gotten it wrong. Now, which do you think is more likely? That's not a rhetorical question. Please answer. WRONG! I explained it to you already in this post. SMRTL had it wrong at least once since one sample was sent to the LAB was extremely diluted. That goes against their own protocol and YOU cannot turn around and say that was done right! Secondly, LABCORPs result is more in line with QUESTs positive result not SMRTLs negative result as I explained already. In other words, one would expect that a sample taken 5 days later would have a much lower level of THC metabolite especially if its a very diluted sample compared to the more concentrated sample from 1/26. Well that was not the case for any of the 3 test results from 1/31 date. Secondly, there is also the possibility that none of the LABs had it wrong in that they reported what they could find and that's it. We do not know exactly what Diaz did to cheat. Its like athletes who get tested multiple times and pass all but 1. You do not throw out that 1 because the others turned up negative. Nor is it the testing agency that needs to prove what exactly the athlete did to cheat. All they need to do is find the illegal substances. LMAO. Come on, dude. Really? Where are you getting 1.020 from? Normal specific gravity falls between 1.002 and 1.030. Should we assign an arbitrary creatinine level to him to fit an agenda? 1.020 is not a random number. Its mentioned by WADA and SMRTL and others as a point of reference. Its used as a baseline to normalize their values/results. Its used as a guide to state if > 1.020 then the athlete is considered to be more dehydrated and 300 ng/ml 1/31 TEST #3: Diaz passed but urine sample was > 2 FOLDs dilute. THC = 61 but would be much higher if corrected for dilution. Red flag if taking 1/26 results into consideration. The above is enough for most but remember that Diaz has failed and been suspended twice before and has avoided being tested before. He also said that he can pass any marijuana test. Its too easy! Dude, we have the urine concentration values. I don't know why you keep throwing out bs hoping that anything will stick. Look, Nick had TWO DCO's waiting for him directly after the fight. TWO! One from NSAC and one from SMRTL. The NSAC DCO testified that they both watched him when he left the cage. The QUEST test taken at that time was found to be slightly dehydrated, I believe they said. That means he didn't overdrink. At that point he had 1hr 17 minutes to drink it up. He drank enough to dilute well over 300ng AT THE TIME OF THE QUEST TEST to 61ng in 1hr17 minutes in front of now at least one DCO? His specific gravity was well within range of what is allowed by WADA.--1.009, and your studies show that had he drank as much as you claim he did, it would have been lower. Right or wrong? Don't your studies show that?????? Please answer. That is why you are wrong. That is also why NSAC's decision had a lot more to do with Nick lying instead of the tests. One of the "judges" even admit that Nick's legal team did a hell of a job. Quest fvcked up twice in one day. Get over it! No. Diaz's team did the best they can under the circumstances but lets face it. If they thought that TEST #2 was wrong, they would have had the B sample tested. Being that they made that fatal mistake, Sample A stands!!! They could have even requested Sample B be tested after the case since they wanted to retry yet they instead agreed that they made a mistake when pleading the 5th and made a mistake in not saying that Diaz smoked but not during "in-competition". That was Diaz's statement in order to reduce his suspension time. Say the truth. If Manny Pacquaio was tested 10+ times against Floyd and failed only once, would you have said that it was wrong since Manny passed those other 9 times? Everyone in the case stated that TEST #1 was way too dilute and TEST #3 was more dilute than normal. Nobody disputed that. So you cannot say that is not the case. Lance Armstrong passed many times but that didn't mean that he didn't cheat. If I would have told you that he smuggled right in front of the DCO an IV and used it just minutes before giving a sample, you would have laughed and said that its idiotic to believe that the DCO would have not seen that. We do not know what Nick Diaz did exactly but one thing is for sure, he has diluted in the past and TEST #1 and #3 were diluted samples! TEST #1 was so much so that it was an invalid result.

Welcome back. Hope you enjoyed Boracay. I really like it there. Here's the thing. You're not going to get what I'm saying to you unless some other people come on board to tell you that you are wrong. This is why I asked you to go to the Thunderdome or make a new thread. You refuse. My hunch is that you refuse because deep down you know you are wrong. I don't know why you want to continue bickering about this thing. I can type to you until my fingers fall off about why you are wrong, and you still won't get it. I'll try again...hopefully for the last time. Actually, this is what you decided to do. That's the whole point of why we are debating this issue, is it not? You said that SMRTL dropped the ball because it uses Specific Gravity and that's why Mayweather's samples being required to pass the SPG test doesn't mean much. Right? Obviously the two can be compared when discussing hydration level. The two can NOT be compared when you show the study above and say it proves SPG would allow an athlete to do what Nate Diaz did....but then show no specific gravity results. 1. Your studies don't show marijuana metabolite levels of well above 300ng. 2. Your studies don't correlate with the amount of time Nate Diaz had. 3. Your study doesn't even mention specific gravity. You want to talk about apples and oranges? There you have it. Dude, you are proving the medical review officer's point. He clearly states that if this result is purportedly due to dilution alone, it is not plausible. Here you've said over and over "what else did Nate Diaz do." Thanks for admitting that this was not from dilution alone, which is what you first tried to state. I know what it was from. It was from Quest fvcking up the test, just as they did on the same exact day with Silva's test. You keep bringing this up. Why is it relevant? We all know he was busted in the past. SMRTL found that he took marijuana as well. What IS relevant is the amount. That's Nick's (is it Nick or Nate....I don't even remember) point. You are trying to say the amount isn't an issue but that IS the issue. First of all, you are giving false information yet again (surprise, surprise). The two tests taken days before the fight were voluntary tests. He took them to make sure that he can pass and get his license. He tested once and found that he could not pass. Tested three days later and found that he could pass, and then applied for reinstatement. That's right. We have a labcorp test which was his voluntary test to make sure that he would pass: 1/26/15 creatinine: 240.1mg/dl Very Concentrated <50ng/ml Then we have the QUEST test: 1/31/15 Creatinine 168.4mg/dl 733.23ng/ml No apples and oranges here, so this should make you happy. Can you explain? He was less diluted for the 1/26 test, yet he was found to have less than 50ng of marijuana. Five days later he passed two tests lower than 70ng, and somehow failed Quest's test with a whopping 733.23ng (or certainly well above 300ng). How does this make sense to you? Was he dumb enough to voluntarily test himself, find out that he was below the limit, apply for reinstatement, get it, and then smoke again right before the test? IT MAKES NO SENSE! The 1/30 test was more diluted than the 1/26 test, yet the marijuana level is 14 times higher!!! I dare you to attempt to reconcile this. Please answer how this makes sense to you without ducking. Thanks. He is absolutely right. Why is he wrong about that? He is allowed to be below a certain threshold. You fail to see what's the issue here. This is where you should answer the questions I asked you instead of ducking. You still haven't answered clearly. Diaz was at 1.009 specific gravity. A. The podcast from your referee says that Diaz needed to drink 2-4 liters of water. B. The study that you showed claimed that drinking 1 liter of water puts the subject at a specific gravity of 1.003. So accordingly, he drank less than a liter of water, right or wrong? Can you answer? C. The live study you provided of seven subjects who drank slightly less than 2 liters of water each had specific gravities of 1.006 or lower after drinking, and the biggest jump they made after drinking 3.79liters of water was 94ng to 8ng of marijuana metabolite with a specific gravity of 1.001. This shows his specific gravity would be lower than 1.009 had he drank 2 liters of water, and even 4 liters wouldn't be enough to do what he would have needed to do. Just as the MRO stated. Can you please address this and stop ducking it. This shows your referee/expert has no idea what he is talking about. SMRTL would have had to have gotten it wrong twice, and Labcorp would have also had to get it wrong. OR, QUEST, who got another test wrong on the same exact day taken at around the same exact time for another combatant in the same exact fight, could have gotten it wrong. Now, which do you think is more likely? That's not a rhetorical question. Please answer. LMAO. Come on, dude. Really? Where are you getting 1.020 from? Normal specific gravity falls between 1.002 and 1.030. Should we assign an arbitrary creatinine level to him to fit an agenda? No. The problem is you believed a study that tried to make this into a math equation when it clearly doesn't work that nearly. The study that you are referencing is shlt. But feel free to reference that study if you'd like, but you'd have to accept that it clearly states 1 liter of water puts a person at 1.003 specific gravity. Again, this means Diaz drank less than 1 liter. Right or wrong? Don't duck, bro. And if this is another attempt at you saying Diaz must have done something else, then you admit this wasn't about dilution, in which case you still lose. You have nowhere to go with this. LMAO. There you go again. What factors? Like non-dilution factors? Thanks for admitting you are wrong yet again. OOPS! All of the results are positive. I don't see your point. You have one positive result. Two if you want to include the labcorp result that was taken on 1/23. I have 3 results that are under the threshold. I have 2 negative results in a row, then comes your positive result that had a value that was sky high, then another negative result coming after. Now, which do you think seems out of place? Nothing seems out of place due to dilution, and that's why you yourself are squirming to hint that he did something besides dilution. You shot yourself in your own face. Dude, we have the urine concentration values. I don't know why you keep throwing out bs hoping that anything will stick. Look, Nick had TWO DCO's waiting for him directly after the fight. TWO! One from NSAC and one from SMRTL. The NSAC DCO testified that they both watched him when he left the cage. The QUEST test taken at that time was found to be slightly dehydrated, I believe they said. That means he didn't overdrink. At that point he had 1hr 17 minutes to drink it up. He drank enough to dilute well over 300ng AT THE TIME OF THE QUEST TEST to 61ng in 1hr17 minutes in front of now at least one DCO. His specific gravity was well within range of what is allowed by WADA. 1.009, and your studies show that had he drank as much as you claim he did, it would have been lower. Right or wrong? Don't your studies show that?????? Please answer. That is why you are wrong. That is also why NSAC's decision had a lot more to do with Nick lying instead of the tests. One of the "judges" even admit that Nick's legal team did a hell of a job. Quest fvcked up twice in one day. Get over it! http://replygif.net/i/1196.gif