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

[LoadedWraps]

I keep telling pact@rds calling and asking USADA if something is banned IS NOT AN APPROVAL.

And recently Bob arum claiming he received a ****ing TUE???? Lmao

But we all know Bob is a liar. But it's the ****ing insane people that believe their bull****.



Bottom line - NSAC CAUGHT TEAM PAC TRYING TO USE TORADOL - THEN THEY LIED ABOUT WHO GAVE THE APPROVAL TO DO SO.

Smh.

If it was a legit - then why lie about the APPROVAL?

[ADP02]

Are you ******ed. Try to follow.

1. You quoted a NSAC physician about Floyd using xylocaine on his hands in a video about Floyd using xylocaine on his hands that was televised during a NSAC sanctioned fight.

2. Did any NSAC physician know about Manny's shoulder before the fight? Did he try to use xylocaine or toradol?

See your mistake now?

By the way, IV is not banned by NSAC and not banned by WADA when a TUE is approved. Stop crying already.

Actually you made several mistakes and your point is what again?

NSAC said that they were aware about Manny's injury just before the fight (too late according to them).

The NSAC did not say that he was allowed to use one type or another type of med. It appeared that they wanted Manny to feel the most pain that he can that night since they told people that they wanted Manny in a "natural state".

I'm no doctor nor do I know why they wanted certain type of meds. It could be that for Manny's injury, Toradol was the most effective treatment. Anything else was either banned or not as effective or not effective at all. This happens and quite possible.


Sorry but you talk differently when you talk about Manny and Floyd. You down play XYLOCAINE but make Toradol be something that its not. That is why I keep on asking you. What's your problem with Toradol?


Just like an IV is not banned, neither was Toradol but the NSAC wanted an investigation for the person that didn't use it while no investigation for the one that did use it. Crazy no?

The NSAC: They were aware about Manny's injury just before the fight. That was not good enough for the NSAC nor YOU. They wanted proof before allowing Manny any meds.

Floyd's IV: The NSAC knew NOTHING about how serious his medical condition was. With Manny the NSAC said that they should have known better and notify but with Floyd? What happened?

Floyd's IV: NSAC wanted proof BEFORE use while USADA allowed Floyd to use a banned method then have FLoyd think of a BS excuse for 3 weeks.

Also, how does Floyd/USADA get to decide when to notify the NSAC when the NSAC states otherwise?

[travestyny]

Actually you made several mistakes and your point is what again?

NSAC said that they were aware about Manny's injury just before the fight (too late according to them).

The NSAC did not say that he was allowed to use one type or another type of med. It appeared that they wanted Manny to feel the most pain that he can that night since they told people that they wanted Manny in a "natural state".

I'm no doctor nor do I know why they wanted certain type of meds. It could be that for Manny's injury, Toradol was the most effective treatment. Anything else was either banned or not as effective or not effective at all. This happens and quite possible.


Sorry but you talk differently when you talk about Manny and Floyd. You down play XYLOCAINE but make Toradol be something that its not. That is why I keep on asking you. What's your problem with Toradol?


Just like an IV is not banned, neither was Toradol but the NSAC wanted an investigation for the person that didn't use it while no investigation for the one that did use it. Crazy no?

The NSAC: They were aware about Manny's injury just before the fight. That was not good enough for the NSAC nor YOU. They wanted proof before allowing Manny any meds.

Floyd's IV: The NSAC knew NOTHING about how serious his medical condition was. With Manny the NSAC said that they should have known better and notify but with Floyd? What happened?

Floyd's IV: NSAC wanted proof BEFORE use while USADA allowed Floyd to use a banned method then have FLoyd think of a BS excuse for 3 weeks.

Also, how does Floyd/USADA get to decide when to notify the NSAC when the NSAC states otherwise?

Dude. You didn't answer any of my questions.

And you are WRONG. NSAC said there was no proof of the injury. They said they were told about an injury right before the fight, BUT HAD NO PROOF OF IT.

Now, can you answer my questions. Please try again.

1. Did Bob Arum lie when he said info about the injury was sent to NSAC directly by his lawyers?

2. Did Pac's team lie when they said info about the injury was sent to USADA? And I mean enough info that USADA could prove the injury to NSAC as Arum has been saying they agreed to do.

3. Did Pacquiao state he had no pain before this fight? Do you believe he was lying?

4. Did Bob Arum lie about Pac receiving a TUE for toradol?

[travestyny]

Sorry but you talk differently when you talk about Manny and Floyd. You down play XYLOCAINE but make Toradol be something that its not. That is why I keep on asking you. What's your problem with Toradol?

Dude, I gave you quotations about Toradol, a video about Toradol, what else do you possibly need?

I'm making it to be something that it's not? Open your eyes.

Read the damn article yourself:
http://boxingtribune-news.com/posts/...injection.html

[ADP02]

Man, don't listen to that dude. The bullshlt he is talking about with Nick Diaz had NSAC being railed left and right over.

Test 1: Pre-fight, 7:33pm. WADA accredited, anonymous, negative for marijuana, far under.

Test 2: Post-fight, 10:38pm. Not accredited or regulated, not anonymous, not properly sealed, positive for marijuana (THC metabolites TEN times higher than Test 1). This lab also collects much less urine, which gives less accurate results than when more urine is collected

Test 3: 11:55pm (less than 90 minutes after test 2). WADA accredited, anonymous, negative and consistent with Test 1.
The NSAC didn't even look at Test 1 and 3, but instead brought charges only on the unaccredited test that consistently broke protocol.

The most accredited doctor (who analyzes for criminal/court testing) stated that this shouldn't even be questioned, but treated as a negative result.

An expert witness provided by Diaz's defense expressed doubt as to the validity of the positive test, arguing that it was "not medically possible" for an individual to hydrate themselves so thoroughly within a span of less than two hours as to dilute their urine enough to cause the dramatic separation from the 10:38 p.m. results and the 11:55 p.m. negative test.

And Mayweather was not allowed to give a diluted sample after the IV:

IV infusions before sample collection could actually prolong the doping control sample process
because it has a greater potential to produce multiple dilute samples. (SPECIAL THANKS TO IR0NFIST FOR THIS)


Let this clown keep stumbling over his microdosing speculation theory.

So now we are not to believe testing results?

Test 1 and 3 used sg test while test 2 used a different protocol.

"The WADA-approved method consists of reading specific gravity of samples, while Quest relies on creatinine levels."


My point is that one lab found a positive result while the one using sg test found a negative result even if the sg of one was acceptable as per WADA rules. That was my point.

Now you can go ahead and spin it as I see you are already trying to do ..... FAIL

[travestyny]

So now we are not to believe testing results?

Test 1 and 3 used sg test while test 2 used a different protocol.

"The WADA-approved method consists of reading specific gravity of samples, while Quest relies on creatinine levels."


My point is that one lab found a positive result while the one using sg test found a negative result even if the sg of one was acceptable as per WADA rules. That was my point.

Now you can go ahead and spin it as I see you are already trying to do ..... FAIL

Did you read what the specialists said?

The most accredited doctor (who analyzes for criminal/court testing) stated that this shouldn't even be questioned, but treated as a negative result.

An expert witness provided by Diaz's defense expressed doubt as to the validity of the positive test, arguing that it was "not medically possible" for an individual to hydrate themselves so thoroughly within a span of less than two hours as to dilute their urine enough to cause the dramatic separation from the 10:38 p.m. results and the 11:55 p.m. negative test.

Yea, we should believe an unaccredited lab that found 10 times higher of a level than the accredited lab. I guess we should have believed when Cung Le got busted for HGH by the unaccredited lab. Oh yea...that turned out to be bullshlt.


Now you spin it.

[aldo5408]

this thread is so funny green k sent

[ADP02]

Actually you made several mistakes and your point is what again?

NSAC said that they were aware about Manny's injury just before the fight (too late according to them).

The NSAC did not say that he was allowed to use one type or another type of med. It appeared that they wanted Manny to feel the most pain that he can that night since they told people that they wanted Manny in a "natural state".

I'm no doctor nor do I know why they wanted certain type of meds. It could be that for Manny's injury, Toradol was the most effective treatment. Anything else was either banned or not as effective or not effective at all. This happens and quite possible.


Sorry but you talk differently when you talk about Manny and Floyd. You down play XYLOCAINE but make Toradol be something that its not. That is why I keep on asking you. What's your problem with Toradol?


Just like an IV is not banned, neither was Toradol but the NSAC wanted an investigation for the person that didn't use it while no investigation for the one that did use it. Crazy no?

The NSAC: They were aware about Manny's injury just before the fight. That was not good enough for the NSAC nor YOU. They wanted proof before allowing Manny any meds.

Floyd's IV: The NSAC knew NOTHING about how serious his medical condition was. With Manny the NSAC said that they should have known better and notify but with Floyd? What happened?

Floyd's IV: NSAC wanted proof BEFORE use while USADA allowed Floyd to use a banned method then have FLoyd think of a BS excuse for 3 weeks.

Also, how does Floyd/USADA get to decide when to notify the NSAC when the NSAC states otherwise?

Dude. You didn't answer any of my questions.

And you are WRONG. NSAC said there was no proof of the injury. They said they were told about an injury right before the fight, BUT HAD NO PROOF OF IT.

Now, can you answer my questions. Please try again.

You skipped on what I posted ..... Maybe you were looking in the mirror and avoided answering my questions.


EDIT: I already told you that the NSAC said that they were aware but required proof. READ MY POST!!!! ..... oh wait, you are deflecting, Never mind!


.

[travestyny]

You skipped on what I posted ..... Maybe you were looking in the mirror and avoided answering my questions.


EDIT: I already told you that the NSAC said that they were aware but required proof ..... oh wait, you are deflecting, Never mind!


.

I do believe my questions have been posted longer. You gonna answer or duck?

--edit--
So they were aware of his claim. What the actual **** does that prove?

[ADP02]

Dude, I gave you quotations about Toradol, a video about Toradol, what else do you possibly need?

I'm making it to be something that it's not? Open your eyes.

Read the damn article yourself:
http://boxingtribune-news.com/posts/...injection.html

Read the first line of that link. Explains it all.

The rest keeps on saying that its more than just meds for pain but then all it says is that its basically for pain .... so again, what's your point?

For me, the worst thing is to numb your hands. You keep on side stepping this point. What do you think about numbing your hands before a fight? Floyd used to do that before his fights.