Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Everyone Wants to Talk About Floyd's IV - What About Pac-Monster's Toradol Abuse???
Collapse
-
-
-
Originally posted by Shape up View PostThat didn't answer one thing I questioned dickhead, why didn't he tell the NSAC about the IVOriginally posted by Shape up View PostWhy didn't he write the dehydration on the questionnaire if it was so significant that he needed an IV
NO FIGHTER writes that they are dehydrated before a fight. NONE. ZERO. If you can find me one, do it. I dare you.
Do you really believe that NSAC would just sit by and let that sit there on the medical record so that if something goes wrong they can be blamed? No. A boxer can die due to complications from dehydration.
Never heard of someone dying from a bad shoulder. Have you? If Manny would have showed the MRI, the NSAC could have looked it over and approved his meds. As it was, they decided not to because there was NO EVIDENCE OF AN INJURY!
Comment
-
Is dehydration a medical condition, emphatically yes is the answer, it should have been written on the questionaire, you are right that boxers die from being dehydrated, more reason to put it on the questionaire dickhead, but tell me how the doctor at the weigh in found no signs of dehydration, no low blood pressure, no fast or irregular breathing, no white tongue, no confusion or any other symptoms of severe dehydration, so it doesn't seem to be a medical emergency, he wasn't rushed to hospital, physically he seemed in terrific shape yet he required an IV 2-3 hours after the weigh in
Comment
-
Originally posted by ADP02 View PostNo, you are not getting it.
Why would one use Toradol?
"A drug that enables injured players to play thru their pain"
As I pointed out, its useless unless its to decrease pain. So to say, Manny used it because of pain! There is no other reason to use it! You are making it sound like its for something else. Right?
So tell me why? Was it for pain or not?
Here is what a doctor said.
"Questions surrounding the rotator cuff tear in Manny Pacquiao’s shoulder - Would Toradol have helped Pacquiao?
Now knowing what his injury was, we can assume that a pre-fight Toradol injection might not have helped much. The controversial injection is an anti-inflammatory given to decrease pain during competition. Pacquiao might not have felt as much shoulder pain during the bout, but Toradol would not have helped any weakness from a tear."
Now lets go thru this fight.
It was a very high technical fight with very few punches thrown. As expected, Floyd thru mostly "touch" jabs and a few right hands where most had little on them. So to say, Floyd did what we expect out of him. Nothing new. Manny was not expecting in the exchanges Mike Tyson type bombs. Nor Paul Williams type work rate.
So AGAIN, what's your point????
I rank this like your other points. You know, like the "waving flag", the "swimming documents" and now this.Originally posted by travestyny View PostNo, I don’t have pain or injury before the fight. I just want to make sure that whatever happened, I’m still there. I’m not saying I’m not 100 percent condition.” -- Manny Pacquiao
LMAO.
Please explain.
Why take something to reduce pain?
After the injury, Manny would take his meds before he trained. It apparently helped. So there plan was to fight May 2nd but they thought that they can take the meds just like they were doing during their training camp.
Your quote:
When was that said? Before or after they realized that the NSAC may investigate and potentially suspend his license to fight? Before you answer, remember that Floyd indicated that he hurt his left shoulder after the Castillo fight then his right shoulder another time .... did you laugh at Floyd? You Called him a liar? Let me know? Or did you try to protect your hero with an excuse?
Manny said numerous times after the fight that he was NOT 100%. Roach said he was NOT 100%.
Still, the point is that Toradol is used to reduce pain. Why else would he take the meds?
.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Shape up View PostIs dehydration a medical condition, emphatically yes is the answer, it should have been written on the questionaire, you are right that boxers die from being dehydrated, more reason to put it on the questionaire dickhead, but tell me how the doctor at the weigh in found no signs of dehydration, no low blood pressure, no fast or irregular breathing, no white tongue, no confusion or any other symptoms of severe dehydration, so it doesn't seem to be a medical emergency, he wasn't rushed to hospital, physically he seemed in terrific shape yet he required an IV 2-3 hours after the weigh in
CAN YOU PLEASE GO AND FIND JUST ONE INSTANCE OF THE NEVADA STATE ATHLETIC COMMISSION FINDING A BOXER TO BE DEHYDRATED BEFORE A FIGHT?
JUST ONE.
WHAT? DO BOXERS NOT GO INTO FIGHTS DEHYDRATED EVER?
Either:
1. NSAC doesn't care about dehydration
or
2. NSAC is terrible at diagnosing dehydration
or
3. Both 1&2
You love reading Thomas Hauser's drivel. How about you give this one a look. Knock yaself out.
Originally posted by Thomas Hauser
The committee report correctly decries what it calls "a culture of abnormal weight-loss measures being employed by fighters on a regular basis that are unsafe and potentially deadly." Foremost among the measures referenced in the report is dehydration.
However, to remedy the problem, the committee recommends that a fighter be automatically fined ten percent of his purse if he fails to make weight on his first attempted weigh-in. This "reform" would do nothing to safeguard fighters. It simply punishes a fighter who endangers a fight.
The report also recommends that, to combat dehydration, fighters be allowed to quaff "electrolyte drinks" between rounds. This should lead to some interesting foreign substances on gloves.
Other weight issues are deferred pending further study. There is no serious discussion of requiring same-day weigh-ins, which would require fighters to fight in a more appropriate weight division.
Next, the committee report observes, "It is considered common knowledge that not reporting injuries to the appropriate officials is common practice among fighters, their trainers, managers, and gym owners. Of particular concern are the seriousness of the injuries not reported and specifically [a fighter] being 'buzzed' or concussed before a fight."
Here, the committee recommends that state law be revised to allow (but not require) the NSAC to revoke the license of a licensee who "has failed or refused to inform the commission about a serious injury suffered by an unarmed combatant during training about which the licensee has personal knowledge."
That wording has loopholes big enough to drive a truck through. What constitutes a "serious" injury? What is "personal knowledge?" And why is the revocation discretionary?
What do you think?
Comment
Comment