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

[LoadedWraps]

No he wasn't.

Proof??????

[Shape up]

1. Why don't you learn how to consistently use the quote function so that this dialogue goes more smoothly, unless you are trying to avoid me.

2. How the hell did I back up what you just said? You said he gave diluted urine after the IV. I clearly showed you that in their rule book, he is not allowed to give diluted urine after rehydrating.

Please work on your comprehension skills, "****head."

So do you admit you were wrong and giving false information now?

It clearly say also that IV is a prohibited method that should only be given under specific conditions, none of with floyd met, it also says that only 50ml per 6 hours is allowed, another part floyd ignored,how about the part where usada gave a tue with no authority as the NSAC stated, how about the fact floyd had only lost 2lb in 2 weeks so he could not have been more than slightly dehydrated, how about the fact he didn't mention it on his pre fight medical questionaire, how about the fact no doctors name has been put forward as to who authorised the IV, how about the fact there was reps for the NSAC everywhere on fight night yet nothing was mentioned about the IV, how about the fact that on fight night the NSAC and usada were discussing pacquaios possible injection but usada didn't find it nessaccary to inform the NSAC of floyds IV arter the weigh in, so many things were wrong with what happened but ****heads like you stick your head in the sand and try to justify what he did, if it was pacquaio that had the IV you would all be saying you knew he was a drug cheat, yet floyd actually did it and he's innocent, your a ****head

[Shape up]

7.3
Insufficient
Sample
Volume
If an
Athlete
is unable to provide 90 mL of urine, the
DCO
follows this sequence of
actions:
1.
Advises the
Athlete
that the partial
Sample
provided shall be secured and a
further
Sample
or
Samples
collected until a
Suitable
Volume for Urine
Analysis
is provided.
2.
Instructs the
Athlete
to select partial
Sample
Collection Equipment
, as per
Guidelines
Section 6.1.
Recommended:
Provide the
Athlete
with at
least 3 partial
Sample Collection
kits
from which to select.
3.
Instructs the
Athlete
to open the relevant equipment, pour the insufficient
Sample
into the new container (unless the
Sample
Collection Authority’s
procedures permit retention of the insufficient
Sample
in the original
collection vessel), and seal it as directed by the
DCO
.
4.
In full view of the
Athlete
, checks that the container (or original collection
vessel, if applicable) has been properly sealed.
5.
With the
Athlete
, checks that the equipment code number, the volume and
identity of the insufficient
Sample
are recorded
accurately on the
Doping
Cont
rol
form
.
6.
With the
Athlete
,
initials or signs the
Doping Control
form to show both are
satisfied with the temporary sealing procedure.
The
Athlete
then return to the waiting area, and remains under continuous
observation until
ready to provide a further
Sample
.
Subject to the color or the initial
T
esting
of any residue of the
Athlete’s
partial urine
Sample
, the
Athlete
should be advised if further hydration is appropriate or not
,
to
avoid providing a
Sample
that doesn’t have a
Suitable Specific Gravity for Analysis
.
Either the
Athlete
or the
DCO
retains control of the
Sample
.
The
DCO
ensures that the sealed partial
Sample
is securely stored under continuous
observation or in a secure area within the
Doping Control
Station
.If
the
Athlete
retains control of the
Sample
, he/she must remain with the partial
Sample
within the
Doping Control
Station
, under the continuous observation of
Sample
Collection Personnel
.
When the
Athlete
is ready to provide more urine, the
Sample
provision
process is
repeated until the
DCO
is satisfied that
Suitable Volume for Urine Analysis
has been
met by combining the subsequent
Sample/s
with
the stored partial
Sample
.
To ensure process continuity and for the
Athlete’s
comfort, the same
Witness
of the
in
itial attempt is used if possible. However, a change of
Witness
in no way affects
process integrity.
The
Athlete
selects a new
Sample
collection vessel each time he/she attempts to
pass an additional
Sample
.
Once the
Athlete
has provided a further
Sample,
the
DCO
asks the
Athlete
to
inspect the container used to temporarily store his/her their partial
Sample
, to
ensure the seals are secure and consistent with the information recorded on the
Doping Control
form.
Any irregularities in seal integrity
are recorded by the
DCO
, either
on the
Doping
Control
form or in a separate report to the
Sample
Collection Authority
, and
investigated according to ISTI Annex A
-
Investigating a
Possible
Failure to Comply
.
The
DCO
then directs the
Athlete
to remove/break
the seal of the partial
Sample
container(s) and combine the
Sample
with the partial
Sample
until the desired
volume is reached or, if additional volume is available, until the maximum level of
the
Sample
c
ollection vessel is reached.
I
f a subsequent
Sampl
e
provided by the
Athlete
looks more diluted than the
Sample
stored in the partial
Sample
kit
, the
DCO
is to advise
the
Athlete
to pour
only the
amount
of urine required
to meet the
Suitable Volume for Analysis
.
Otherwise there is a risk that the specific gravity of the
Sample
may be reduced to
a
n unacceptable
level
,
which then require
s
the
Athlete
to provide an additional
Sample
or
Samples
.
Once a minimum of 90 mL of urine or greater is collected, th

[travestyny]

It clearly say also that IV is a prohibited method that should only be given under specific conditions, none of with floyd met,

Don't you think you need his medical records to decide whether he met the conditions or not? This isn't rocket science.

it also says that only 50ml per 6 hours is allowed, another part floyd ignored,

Wrong. That is what is allowed unless a TUE is granted. Get your facts straight.

how about the part where usada gave a tue with no authority as the NSAC stated,

Wrong. An IV is not illegal with regards to NSAC's rules, so there would be no need for a TUE. The only reason a TUE was needed was to follow WADA's rules, which is why it makes sense that USADA issued the TUE since it is a signatory of WADA and NSAC is not. Again, not rocket science. Also, NSAC has come forward and said Mayweather did nothing wrong, so if you are going to look into their statements, don't leave that out.

how about the fact floyd had only lost 2lb in 2 weeks so he could not have been more than slightly dehydrated,

I've asked you plenty of times. Do you think this is the most important issue regarding whether he was dehydrated or not? You can't find out whether someone is dehydrated or not simply because they only lost 2lbs in 2 weeks. If you think that's how it works, you are a moron.

how about the fact he didn't mention it on his pre fight medical questionaire,

I dare you to find any boxer who has ever mentioned dehydration on a medical questionnaire. Let's see what you bring back.

how about the fact no doctors name has been put forward as to who authorised the IV,

Maybe this will help you:
The purpose of the International Standard for the Protection of Privacy and Personal Information (ISPPPI) is to ensure that all relevant parties involved in anti-doping in sport adhere to a set of minimum privacy protections when collecting and using athlete personal information, such as information relating to whereabouts, doping controls, and the****utic use exemptions (TUE).

USADA adheres to the WADA ISPPPI.
http://www.usada.org/testing/results/athlete-privacy/

how about the fact there was reps for the NSAC everywhere on fight night yet nothing was mentioned about the IV,

NSAC was informed a month before the fight that in the event that a TUE is granted, they would be notified upon it's approval. If NSAC had a problem with this, they had plenty of time to speak up, don't you think?

how about the fact that on fight night the NSAC and usada were discussing pacquaios possible injection but usada didn't find it nessaccary to inform the NSAC of floyds IV arter the weigh in,

See the above.

so many things were wrong with what happened but ****heads like you stick your head in the sand and try to justify what he did, if it was pacquaio that had the IV you would all be saying you knew he was a drug cheat, yet floyd actually did it and he's innocent, your a ****head

Once again, all of your bullshlt shot down. You have to try harder. That hate in your blood is not allowing you to think properly. I'm always here to help you out, little guy.

[travestyny]

7.3
Insufficient
Sample
Volume
If an
Athlete
is unable to provide 90 mL of urine, the
DCO
follows this sequence of
actions:
1.
Advises the
Athlete
that the partial
Sample
provided shall be secured and a
further
Sample
or
Samples
collected until a
Suitable
Volume for Urine
Analysis
is provided.
2.
Instructs the
Athlete
to select partial
Sample
Collection Equipment
, as per
Guidelines
Section 6.1.
Recommended:
Provide the
Athlete
with at
least 3 partial
Sample Collection
kits
from which to select.
3.
Instructs the
Athlete
to open the relevant equipment, pour the insufficient
Sample
into the new container (unless the
Sample
Collection Authority’s
procedures permit retention of the insufficient
Sample
in the original
collection vessel), and seal it as directed by the
DCO
.
4.
In full view of the
Athlete
, checks that the container (or original collection
vessel, if applicable) has been properly sealed.
5.
With the
Athlete
, checks that the equipment code number, the volume and
identity of the insufficient
Sample
are recorded
accurately on the
Doping
Cont
rol
form
.
6.
With the
Athlete
,
initials or signs the
Doping Control
form to show both are
satisfied with the temporary sealing procedure.
The
Athlete
then return to the waiting area, and remains under continuous
observation until
ready to provide a further
Sample
.
Subject to the color or the initial
T
esting
of any residue of the
Athlete’s
partial urine
Sample
, the
Athlete
should be advised if further hydration is appropriate or not
,
to
avoid providing a
Sample
that doesn’t have a
Suitable Specific Gravity for Analysis
.
Either the
Athlete
or the
DCO
retains control of the
Sample
.
The
DCO
ensures that the sealed partial
Sample
is securely stored under continuous
observation or in a secure area within the
Doping Control
Station
.If
the
Athlete
retains control of the
Sample
, he/she must remain with the partial
Sample
within the
Doping Control
Station
, under the continuous observation of
Sample
Collection Personnel
.
When the
Athlete
is ready to provide more urine, the
Sample
provision
process is
repeated until the
DCO
is satisfied that
Suitable Volume for Urine Analysis
has been
met by combining the subsequent
Sample/s
with
the stored partial
Sample
.
To ensure process continuity and for the
Athlete’s
comfort, the same
Witness
of the
in
itial attempt is used if possible. However, a change of
Witness
in no way affects
process integrity.
The
Athlete
selects a new
Sample
collection vessel each time he/she attempts to
pass an additional
Sample
.
Once the
Athlete
has provided a further
Sample,
the
DCO
asks the
Athlete
to
inspect the container used to temporarily store his/her their partial
Sample
, to
ensure the seals are secure and consistent with the information recorded on the
Doping Control
form.
Any irregularities in seal integrity
are recorded by the
DCO
, either
on the
Doping
Control
form or in a separate report to the
Sample
Collection Authority
, and
investigated according to ISTI Annex A
-
Investigating a
Possible
Failure to Comply
.
The
DCO
then directs the
Athlete
to remove/break
the seal of the partial
Sample
container(s) and combine the
Sample
with the partial
Sample
until the desired
volume is reached or, if additional volume is available, until the maximum level of
the
Sample
c
ollection vessel is reached.
I
f a subsequent
Sampl
e
provided by the
Athlete
looks more diluted than the
Sample
stored in the partial
Sample
kit
, the
DCO
is to advise
the
Athlete
to pour
only the
amount
of urine required
to meet the
Suitable Volume for Analysis
.
Otherwise there is a risk that the specific gravity of the
Sample
may be reduced to
a
n unacceptable
level
,
which then require
s
the
Athlete
to provide an additional
Sample
or
Samples
.
Once a minimum of 90 mL of urine or greater is collected, th

Keep going. Wait till you get all the way to 7.4.11.

Oh what the hell. I'll post it up for you.

7.4.11 The DCO shall confirm that the Sample meets the requirements for analysis, as specified by the ADO in accordance with the laboratory standards, by testing the residual volume of urine remaining in the collection vessel for specific gravity (greater than or equal to 1.005 if using a refractometer, or 1.010 with lab sticks. Reagent strips and/or a refractometer may be used.


So um....give up now? LMAO! You just bodied yourself, clown!

[Shape up]

do you live under a rock, you must with those answers ****head

[travestyny]

do you live under a rock, you must with those answers ****head

Looks like I just dropped a boulder on you since you came back with nothing, "****head."

[Shape up]

Bennett said unless the IV was administered at a hospital, it needs to be cleared by filing a the****utic-use exemption, or TUE, and supporting documents through the Nevada commission and authorized by the commission’s medical expert.

“He cannot have it done at his house and [USADA] can’t authorize it.... I have specifically articulated and memorialized to USADA that [NSAC] is the sole authority that can authorize a the****utic-use exemption for a fighter in the state of Nevada,” Bennett said. “USADA never told us prior to the IV that they had their own TUE, and they never kept us informed about it being administered.

“If they think they can do what they want, where and whenever they want in the state of Nevada, they are grossly mistaken.”

[travestyny]

Bennett said unless the IV was administered at a hospital, it needs to be cleared by filing a the****utic-use exemption, or TUE, and supporting documents through the Nevada commission and authorized by the commission’s medical expert.

“He cannot have it done at his house and [USADA] can’t authorize it.... I have specifically articulated and memorialized to USADA that [NSAC] is the sole authority that can authorize a the****utic-use exemption for a fighter in the state of Nevada,” Bennett said. “USADA never told us prior to the IV that they had their own TUE, and they never kept us informed about it being administered.

“If they think they can do what they want, where and whenever they want in the state of Nevada, they are grossly mistaken.”

Maybe you shouldn't have glossed over this part.

Bennett said he has no concerns Mayweather was working to mask drug use, saying the boxer “has always been an advocate of drug testing and has set a fine example for all fighters.”

[Shape up]

They sounded really happy about the TUE ****head