who among suspected PED user got away the most: Pacquaio, Mayweather or Marquez?

[Rath]

So USADA was the only one to say he was dehydrated? lol. WRONG.
[IMG]http://i62.***********.com/albums/h95/travestyny/Screen%20Shot%202016-03-22%20at%2010.15.18%20PM.png[/IMG]

Can you read and comprehend that? It's part of the TUE application. What do you think that means?

present the full copy of the TUE application

Because unlike you, I'm not an idiot.

yeah those who don't have copies of the TUE application are idiot

[IMG]http://i62.***********.com/albums/h95/travestyny/Screen%20Shot%202016-03-22%20at%2010.11.03%20PM.png[/IMG]

Do you know what that is? It's part of the TUE application. Now try to put 1+1 together.

present the full copy of the TUE a document without name and signature is null and void if you know what that means.



Then why did you say that 250ml of IV fluid would take 2-4 hours.

is it not possible?


LMAO. You still need to see the link? Have at it.
http://allnurses.com/general-nursing...us-291618.html

Last week I had a trauma patient that we ran boluses and blood into her with two Level 1 infusers. On a infuser you can transfuse a unit of PRBC's in less than a minute, and a liter bolus in a couple minutes.

The woman ended up bleeding out from her pelvic fx. Her pH was 6.93 and Hgb was 3 after 24 units of PRBC's. Terrible case.

what does this means?


Your theory has to do with foul play. Did you ever explain how the judges gave rounds 4 and 6 to Mayweather if your theory is to be believed? Many posters told you that. Why didn't you ever respond?

the final score card says red corner won fact.


Where is your proof of that? Let's see it!

go ask zero


I think I understand what the problem is here. You stated that you believe he took it in 15 minutes and that means it's for a flush. Do you believe that the IV process physically flushes out the traces of PED? lol. Wow. You are definitely a moron, man. This probably explains why you had a problem with me showing you the IV being used to cure a hang over. You believe that different speeds of infusion are used for different things? You think that an IV used for dehydration should be delivered at a different speed than an IV used for a hangover? And you believe that an IV used to flush should be delivered extremely quickly...like in 15 minutes, or it won't flush? lol. There are layers to your ******ity. The only concern about the IV delivery rate for IV fluid is if the patient isn't healthy enough in the sense that giving too much too quickly can be harmful. Your link mentions cardiac or renal issues. Did you really think the amount of time used for a patient with cardiac or renal issues would be applicable to this case? lol. I've shown PROOF that an IV FOR REHYDRATION can be given in 30-45 minutes, and that's with 1000ml of IV fluid. God, I can't believe how idiotic you are.

i calculated how fast floyd was able to finish 750 ml of unknown solution.
it was extremely fast for rehydration purpose.

until now you can not prove that my calculation is wrong


Didn't you just say that it was immediately before the IV, which was after the weigh-in. So you must believe the first urine sample came after the weigh-in. Now show your proof.

where did you find the word "immediately" you inserting comments in my post LOL

my answer was before the IV was administered NOT after the weigh in

my answer was exactly your answer and you are dis*****g it LOL


Stop doing this to yourself. Come on, now!

game set and match LOL

[ADP02]

Lets review. Wada states :

4.2 Unless one of the exceptions set out in Article 4.3 applies, an Athlete who
needs to Use a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method for The****utic reasons
must obtain a TUE prior to Using or Possessing the substance or method in
question.

I have said that it is possible according to wada to be granted approval for a retroactive tue application submission based on the above statement. This is evident because each exeption in 4.3 has the word OR in between them.


I gave you an example of asthma being a chronic illness in which the athelete would not have requested, or been granted, a tue prior to 30days........

"What if the athlete had been diagnosed with a chronic medical condition, such as asthma, as a child - but is not currently using any medication; 2 weeks before the event he has a minor asthma attack that was treated without the need of hospitalization."


You are saying this would be an acute condition. "Whatever you said would more than likely fall under acute medical conditions".

But it is a chronic illness and the athlete should have known. Right? You previously said:

ADP02 WROTE:



This is contradicting stance isn't it?

We can keep referencing chronic illnesses that can be in remission for years. We can keep going in circles.


Or you can admit you are wrong in the way you are interpeting the wording for the rules of obtaining a tue retroactively.


The official code is:

4.2 Unless one of the exceptions set out in Article 4.3 applies, an Athlete who
needs to Use a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method for The****utic reasons
must obtain a TUE prior to Using or Possessing the substance or method in
question.


4.3 An Athlete may only be granted retroactive approval for his/her The****utic
Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method (i.e., a retroactive TUE) if:

a. Emergency treatment or treatment of an acute medical condition was
necessary; or

b. Due to other exceptional circumstances, there was insufficient time or
opportunity for the Athlete to submit, or for the TUEC to consider, an
application for the TUE prior to Sample collection; or

c. The applicable rules required the Athlete (see comment to Article 5.1) or
permitted the Athlete (see Code Article 4.4.5) to apply for a retroactive
TUE;
[Comment to 4.3(c): Such Athletes are strongly advised to have a medical file
prepared and ready to demonstrate their satisfaction of the TUE conditions set out
at Article 4.1, in case an application for a retroactive TUE is necessary following
Sample collection.]

or

d. It is agreed, by WADA and by the Anti-Doping Organization to whom the
application for a retroactive TUE is or would be made, that fairness
requires the grant of a retroactive TUE.
[Comment to 4.3(d): If WADA and/or the Anti-Doping Organization do not agree
to the application of Article 4.3(d), that may not be challenged either as a defense
to proceedings for an anti-doping rule violation, or by way of appeal, or otherwise.]

No, what I was saying is, for your examples, the best bet was to associate them as an acute medical condition since you stated that the athlete did not request for a TUE for a chronic type medical condition.

Again, I'm not saying that they would get a TUE. I'm just saying that you gave what appears to be examples of someone who cannot say that they have a chronic condition.

I think you are confusing all of this and I'm not even sure where you are going with this because it has little to do with Floyd.

Just to clear this up a bit. WADA requests that TUEs related to chronic medical conditions be given 30 days from the event. You may think that its coincidental but they also state that the athlete should make their TUE requests 30 days from the event. Well, its not just a coincidence.

Its because if you have a chronic medical condition then you know about it. Furthermore, unlike what you stated, yes, the athlete should provide a history about their condition. If the information is old, as you stated in your example, then its up to the athlete to provide the most current up to date related history on the condition.

By definition, an Acute and Emergency type condition can occur before or after the 30 day mark. So that is why they only state Acute and Emergency. Makes sense to me. After my explanation, it should start making sense to you to, I hope.


BTW - Nice deflection from the rest of my post.



.

[ADP02]

Shocking!

Froid is relatively stable in weight loss going into the fight.

Yet Floyd says "I was extremely dehydrated".

FLoyd fans: "That is believable."

[ADP02]

was Floyd dehydrated? with proof if possible
Yes he was. The proof is that the IV was prescribed by a medical practitioner and approved by USADA.
So was Lance Armstrong!!!

How fast was floyd able to finish 750ml of unknown solution?
Much faster than in 2-4 hours which you claim is the time for 250ml of IV fluid to be administered.
I actually had an IV last weekend. They used a bag like Floyd's but just before that they injected some medication as well. It took over an hour but the nurse said it can be done in less time. She gave as reference the ER room where they sometimes give it at a much faster rate.

See my response in red.

No Floyd fan has been able to answer why did Floyd even receive an IV when:
- There are alternatives.
- Floyd's weight was relatively stable including fight night weight,
- At 149lbs, Floyd said he was "physically extremely strong" on fight night,
- from NSAC examination: clinical signs were normal,
- NSAC reported no significant signs of dehydration.
- As stated and witnessed, Floyd was able to drink a lot right after the weigh in. Floyd said that he drank and "I ate a lot".
- Floyd, Ellerbe said that the reason for the IV was dehydration and it was due to training, giving some blood 10 days before ....
- They did not correct their initial statements if it was untrue. They doubled down and said "I was extremely dehydrated"
- NSAC reported that Floyd used the IV for hydration purposes.
- Pre-fight form: Floyd did not say that he was extremely dehydrated.
- Floyd admits that he makes weight easily.


None of this adds up. Floyd fans can only provide deflections.



.

[Dosumpthin]

No, what I was saying is, for your examples, the best bet was to associate them as an acute medical condition since you stated that the athlete did not request for a TUE for a chronic type medical condition.

You are saying the physician or the athlete should have to lie? Asthma Is a chronic medical condition. I gave an example of a very real scenario of such. You said the rules are if it is a chronic condition you can't get a retroactive tue. Your misinterpretation not mine.

Again, I'm not saying that they would get a TUE. I'm just saying that you gave what appears to be examples of someone who cannot say that they have a chronic condition.

One example was an athlete diagnosed with chronic asthma but has not had an attack 15 years later. That's chronic According to wada. No need for the physician to lie, just follow the rules and apply.

I think you are confusing all of this and I'm not even sure where you are going with this because it has little to do with Floyd.

Nothing to do with Floyd. This is about you not understanding the word "or" where it appears throughout wada code - so you are confused.

Just to clear this up a bit. WADA requests that TUEs related to chronic medical conditions be given 30 days from the event. You may think that its coincidental but they also state that the athlete should make their TUE requests 30 days from the event. Well, its not just a coincidence.

Yes but if an athlete has a chronic medical condition that is in remission and do not currently take medication for it - then how can they apply for a the****utic use exemption if there is not current the****utic use? Can you answer that for me?

Its because if you have a chronic medical condition then you know about it. Furthermore, unlike what you stated, yes, the athlete should provide a history about their condition. If the information is old, as you stated in your example, then its up to the athlete to provide the most current up to date related history on the condition.

Wada provides the physician with guidelines on what the TUEC is looking for relating to a chronic condition such as asthma.


Medical history
- A history of asthma may include a family history of allergies, hay fever or
eczema. Individuals may also describe a personal history of childhood
respiratory problems, rhinitis, allergic conjunctivitis or dermatitis. In these
cases, the development of asthma may be part of an atopic predisposition.
However asthma might also develop in otherwise healthy individuals at any age.


That's a description of something that's chronic. Right?
On the same document.......

XII. Special circumstances
Where circumstances are deemed to be exceptional and treatment must be initiated
before a TUE could be approved, reference should be made to WADA ISTUE article 4.3
concerning retroactive/emergency TUEs. Full and clear documentation of the medical
incident is required and the TUE application process must be initiated at the first
opportunity.

According to your interpretation, why would wada put a provision that explains how to obtain a retoactive tue for a CHRONIC condition?


Maybe you should start to rethink what the word "or" means?

By definition, an Acute and Emergency type condition can occur before or after the 30 day mark. So that is why they only state Acute and Emergency. Makes sense to me. After my explanation, it should start making sense to you to, I hope.

Nope doesn't make sense to me because I know the meaning of the word "or" in the English language. So no they do not ONLY state acute emergency like you misinterpret. When you accept you were wrong about the word "or" - things will start to make sense.

Hint. Re read 4.2 over and over again. Or means pick one.

BTW - Nice deflection from the rest of my post.

I'm not discussing Floyd's weight and urine color until you have demonstrated that you understand conjunctions. Specifically the word or.

The entire community has answered you on multiple occasions. Being severely dehydrated is not the only way you can obtain a retroactive tue for iv use. But you ignore the "or" in that section too.

[travestyny]

See my response in red.

No Floyd fan has been able to answer why did Floyd even receive an IV when:
- There are alternatives.
- Floyd's weight was relatively stable including fight night weight,
- At 149lbs, Floyd said he was "physically extremely strong" on fight night,
- from NSAC examination: clinical signs were normal,
- NSAC reported no significant signs of dehydration.
- As stated and witnessed, Floyd was able to drink a lot right after the weigh in. Floyd said that he drank and "I ate a lot".
- Floyd, Ellerbe said that the reason for the IV was dehydration and it was due to training, giving some blood 10 days before ....
- They did not correct their initial statements if it was untrue. They doubled down and said "I was extremely dehydrated"
- NSAC reported that Floyd used the IV for hydration purposes.
- Pre-fight form: Floyd did not say that he was extremely dehydrated.
- Floyd admits that he makes weight easily.


None of this adds up. Floyd fans can only provide deflections.
.

Deflections?
What do you call bringing up Lance Armstrong over and over again? I certainly call that a deflection.

We've already gone over the things you mentioned above over and over again. This isn't going to change that you can't prove anything without the medical records. The TUE application clearly states that a medical practitioner must justify the IV use. If you have a problem with USADA approving of what the medical practitioner pointed out, I suggest you contact Pacquaio's legal team and tell them to do something about it instead of just giving up.

[Lester Tutor]

Deflections?
What do you call bringing up Lance Armstrong over and over again? I certainly call that a deflection.

We've already gone over the things you mentioned above over and over again. This isn't going to change that you can't prove anything without the medical records. The TUE application clearly states that a medical practitioner must justify the IV use. If you have a problem with USADA approving of what the medical practitioner pointed out, I suggest you contact Pacquaio's legal team and tell them to do something about it instead of just giving up.

I have to agree. They use the Lance Armstrong bit to specifically confuse readers or are in denial about who knows what since they can't make sense themselves. They are saying Floyd bought at everyone, USADA, the commission, and Top Rank. How would that failed theory even benefit all of them, or moreso, how would that have benefited Lance's career? If Lance were to go down like that surely he would admit all those involved including USADA whom were the ones that cracked down on him.

Too many inconsistencies with their suspense theories only proves genuine denial or just to make the thread active to hope in making Floyd look bad. If it were truly bad and the boxing community were convinced including the BWAA, why even still talk about dream matchups even after retired.

I am starting to think that many of you are the same people...

[Zaroku]

I have to agree. They use the Lance Armstrong bit to specifically confuse readers or are in denial about who knows what since they can't make sense themselves. They are saying Floyd bought at everyone, USADA, the commission, and Top Rank. How would that failed theory even benefit all of them, or moreso, how would that have benefited Lance's career? If Lance were to go down like that surely he would admit all those involved including USADA whom were the ones that cracked down on him.

Too many inconsistencies with their suspense theories only proves genuine denial or just to make the thread active to hope in making Floyd look bad. If it were truly bad and the boxing community were convinced including the BWAA, why even still talk about dream matchups even after retired.

I am starting to think that many of you are the same people...

They are the same trolls who keep this thread alive!!

Did you vote in my thread? Who came closest to beating Floyd?
DLH & PAC not doing well!

[Lester Tutor]

They are the same trolls who keep this thread alive!!

Did you vote in my thread? Who came closest to beating Floyd?
DLH & PAC not doing well!

Gatti was tearing Floyd up!!

[Zaroku]

Gatti was tearing Floyd up!!

Until the body shots came back and Floyd stopped him! That was a good fight!