Comments Thread For: Pacquiao: In The Eyes of The People - I Beat Floyd Mayweather

[Elroy The Great]

Oh sorry, .... I will let you sleep!

bless you.....

[travestyny]

The only problem that I have is with your DEFLECTION to the question!


The first guy NEVER went thru the process of giving blood 5-6 or possibly more times. SO HE HAD A CONCERN!!! Going into a huge fight with a concern where he thought it would put him at a disadvantage. Not that he thought that he would be requiring an IV which was a banned method. Only Floyd can get away with that!

The CONCERN came from an incident just prior to the Morales fight where he gave blood. In that case, he felt that it affected him when he factored in that he was already dehydrating himself to make weight.

So if you read below, it was NOT the only reason for Manny. It was a combination of things and guess what? He didn't have the red carpet IV treatment that Floyd had!!! Manny took nothing banned, while Floyd took a banned method. YET, you are saying what you are saying?


Floyd and his fans said that Manny's excuse was BS for 5 years. Now they are not saying that about Floyd. That is stupid and hypocritical!!! Are you?

Do you think that giving urine contributed to his severe dehydration?

Do you think that giving just <1 tbsp. 10 days before contributed to his severe dehydration?

If you do a bit of exercise the day before, just to stay sharp, that contributed to his severe dehydration?

To the point that he had to use a banned method?


Respond to the above questions. DO not DEFLECT AGAIN!!!

Pssst ..... Floyd fans, do you agree with Floyd's BS?



Manny Pacquiao:"So I went back to my training until the fight, then I was already reducing my intake. The next day, it’s the weigh-in, it was 2 days before the fight. I didn’t eat, I didn’t drink water because my weight was right on. Now, all of a sudden, the commission called asking for my blood for the ‘medical’. "
"And you know, after they took blood from me. I felt dizzy, the back of my head started hurting. The doctor said to drink a lot of water, but I couldn’t drink water, I couldn’t eat, so I just lied down and had it massaged.”

Dong Puno: “So, by fight time, you really felt your body weakened?”

Manny Pacquiao: “Yeah, I really felt it. When I was hitting Morales with my punches. I said to myself that if this is the only power I have, I won’t be able to knock Morales down.”

Dong Puno: “You know, Morales said that after the fight, He said that he didn’t feel any power from your punches.”

Manny Pacquiao: “That’s much better because he doesn’t know how much power I have yet.”

Dong Puno: “Haha, so next time, you’ll make him feel it.”

Lmao. Going around saying everyone is deflecting is your new thing.

How about when PAC rejected 14 days out? What u got?

You are such a little bltch. Any excuse. Remember when you said he was saying salt water cured his scar? Lmaoooooo!!!

BY THE WAY, I'LL GLADLY ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS...RIGHT BACK AFTER YOU GO BACK AND ANSWER MY 6 QUESTIONS AND STOP DUCKING THEM!

[travestyny]

Man, you are too funny!

Most people would have gotten what I simplified for you BUT you cannot?

Aliquot was explained to you. Its a portion of the urine sample .... from sample A!!! DING DING DING!!!

LMAO. Exactly, moron. Now look at what you initially wrote.

You are mixing up getting a quatitative value of the screened urine sample vs confirmation test that would be done on a completely different urine sample!!!

Now tell me. If an aliquot is a portion from sample A, how the actual **** is a confirmation test done on “a completely different urine sample.” BOTH the screening test and the confirmation test are done on the SAME urine sample, which is sample A

ding ding ding! You’re a moron. But I’m not through with you.

I told you that GC/MS can do different types of tests. The screening was not specific, as I pointed out to you a long time ago, but still the test can capture enough information to deduce the concentration levels. As SMRTL said, during their confirmation process, a more rigorous test is done BUT its not required when the screening comes back negative ......

You’re an idiot. SMRTL NEVER SAID THE SCREENING CAME BACK NEGATIVE. You are trying to point out that SMRTL did no confirmation. That’s because it’s YOU that has no idea what a screening test does as opposed to what a confirmation test does. Don’t worry, I’ll teach you.

I like this.
You finally admitted that SMRTLs SCREENING test was not rigorous and specific, as I kept on telling you!!! SMRTLs SCREENING test was not as good as QUESTs SCREENING followed by the confirmation test which as you finally are agreeing to, was specifically tested for marijuana and the tests was much more rigorous than the screening process alone. CHECKMATE!!!

LMAO. Again, what you are not getting is that SMRTL did a confirmation, dummy.

THINK!!!

QUEST gave you 2 results. SCREENING was positive and CONFIRMATION was positive. SMRTL only came back with one result. NEGATIVE!


KABOOOOOOOOM!!!!

WHEN HAS A WADA LAB EVER GIVEN THE RESULTS OF A SCREENING TEST????? YOU ARE A ****ING IDIOT!

Just coming back with one result does not mean they didn’t do a confirmation test. This is the reason you ducked my questions.

I asked you 6 questions. YOU ANSWERED 0 OUT OF 6. This is after I asked you not to duck them. And you actually think the BS you wrote above meant something. Why did you duck the questions? This is why:

You are mixing up getting a quatitative value of the screened urine sample vs confirmation test

Maybe I should change your name to projector, because this is exactly what you are doing. A screening test is used to identify a substance. A confirmation test is used to confirm the substance is present and also quantitate the sample. Need proof?

Eichner said the lab then looks for every known prohibited substance and metabolite, which he called "quite a vast and extensive screening process."
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."

Eicher says substances are identified during the screen, and if found, a confirmation process is done where the SPECIFIC compound or metabolite is looked for. The specific compound or metabolite is not looked for during the screen. Being that SMRTL got the specific amount of marijuana metabolite, this proves they confirmed. Need more?

How about the head of QUEST WHO SAYS THE SAME THING
VIDEO1: THE SCREEN IS QUALITATIVE, NOT QUANTITATIVE:


Oh, by the way, their screening cut off is 50ng and does not account for other similar compounds that may react. The 50ng is stated in this video. That other compounds may react in this screen was stated later. If you need that part of the video, feel free to let me know.

Dr. Sample also said that the GC/MS is used to SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFY AND QUANTIFY THE MARIJUANA METABOLITE. You aren’t doing too well, are you?

Video2: The GC/MS CONFIRMATION SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIES AND QUANTIFIES


IS THAT ENOUGH, OR DO YOU NEED MORE?

screening methods are designed to detect entire classes of compounds and are not optimized for individual compounds.

This clearly states that WADA’s screening doesn’t look for individual compounds. The confirmation test does. Being that SMRTL came back with the individual metabolite amount, this reveals they did confirmation testing. Need more?

At this time, GC/MS remains the “gold standard” for confirmation testing. This technique uses GC to separate the analytes in a specimen, and the highly specific and sensitive MS to identify the specific molecular structures of the drug and metabolites.9 One of the advantages of this technique is that it provides the chemical equivalent of a “fingerprint” of an analyte. Additionally, it can quantify the amount of drug/metabolite present in the sample.

http://paindr.com/wp-content/uploads...UG-TESTING.pdf

Quantitative (ie, confirmatory) urine drug testing, in the pain management or substance abuse setting, may be MEDICALLY NECESSARY under the following circumstances:

When immunoassays for the relevant drug(s) are not commercially available. 
In specific situations for which quantitative drug levels are required for clinical decision making

https://www.harvardpilgrim.org/pls/p...99B435B9DA0058

The use of presumptive qualitative versus definitive quantitative confirmation depends on whether or not there is a medical necessity to obtain the exact concentration of the drug or its metabolite in the specimen.

Quantitative testing is usually done:
To confirm the screening result identifying the analyte causing a positive reaction or to ensure 
that the patient is truly negative for a drug.

https://www.unitedhealthcareonline.c...ug_Testing.pdf

Dr. Jannetto discusses the use of qualitative urine screening assays and quantitative confirmatory testing to determine compliance in pain management patients.

So what types of urine opiate tests are being used by physicians to determine compliance to opioid pain management therapy? Routinely, physicians may use qualitative screening assays. These tests typically identify the drug and/or drug metabolite with variable specificity and often only by drug class. Alternatively, physicians may use quantitative or more confirmatory assays where they can identify and quantify the individual drug and/or drug metabolite with high specificity and better sensitivity.

http://www.mayomedicallaboratories.c...in-management/

Presumptive/Qualitative testing to determine the presence or absence of drugs or drug classes as a Urine Drug Test; results may be negative, positive, or numeric, and methods may be TLC or immunoassay.

Definitive/Quantitative testing identifies specific medications, illicit drugs, or metabolites [note these are specific chemical en******, not classes], which are absent or present in ng/ml; and tested by GC-MS or LC- MS methods.

https://uhahealth.com/uploads/forms/...eening-UDS.pdf

Pg. 1, Section, I, language indicating the use of presumptive qualitative versus definitive quantitative confirmation depends on whether or not there is a medical necessity to obtain the exact concentration of the drug or its metabolite in the specimen. Proper documentation by the ordering provider (physician) will include the medical necessity of the order.

https://www.priorityhealth.com/provi...cies/91611.pdf

Do you see where it says “Confirmatory”?
Do you see where it says “use”?
Do you see where it says “Quantitative Analysis”?

LMAOOOO!

Even Quest offers screening by GC/MS, but not on their own behalf because it is too expensive lmaooooo. They only offer it to physicians and hospitals meaning the hospitals come out of pocket. Well, look what is searched for in the screen:

DRUG SCREEN BY GC-MS,BLOOD AND URINE
INCLUDES:

Acetone, Acetaminophen, Alprazolam, Amantadine, Amitriptyline, Amobarbital, Amphetamine, Atropine, Benzoylecgonine, Benztropine, Brompheniramine, Butabarbital,Butalbital, Caffeine, Cannabinoids, Carbamazepine,Carisoprodol, Chlordiazepoxide, Chlorpheniramine,Chlorpromazine, Chlorpropamide, Chlorprothixine,Chlorzoxazone, Clomipramine, Clonazepam, Clonidine, Cocaethylene, Cocaine, Codeine, Cotinine, Cyclobenzaprine, Desalkyflurazepam, Desipramine, Dextromethorphan, Diazepam, Diphenhydramine, Diphenoxylate, Doxepin, Doxylamine, Ethanol, Ephedrine, Fluoxetine, Glutethimide, Haloperidol, Hydrocodone, Hydromorphone, Hydroxyzine, Ibuprofen, Imipramine, Isopropanol, Levorphanol, Lidocaine, Lorazepam, Loxepine, Maprotiline, Meperidine, Mephenytoin, Mephobarbital, Meprobamate, Methadone, Methamphetamine, Methanol, Metharbital, Methaqualone, Methprylon, Methuxsimide, Methylphenidate, Mexiletine, Midazolam, Morphine, Monoacetylmorphine, Nalorphine, Naproxen, Nicotine, Nordiazepin, Nordoxepin, Nortriptyline, Oxazepam, Oxycodone, Paramethadione, Pentazocine, Pentobarbital, Phencyclidine, Phenmetrazine, Phenobarbital, Phenothiazine-Metabolites, Phentermine, Phenylpropanolamine, Phenytoin, Primidone, Promethazine, Propoxyphene, Pseudoephedrine, Pyrilamine, Quinine, Ranitidine, Salicylate, Secobarbital, Strychnine, Temazepam, Theophylline, Thioridazine, Tocainide, Tramadol, Trazodone, Triazolam, Trihexyphenidyl, Trimethoprim, Trimipramine, Valproic Acid, Verapamil.

Did you find all classes of cannabinoids, or just carboxy-thc?

Screening Identifies….it does not quantify. Even the head of Quest says this. THE QUANTITATION IS THE CONFIRMATION TEST PROVIDED BY THE GC/MS MORON. IF THAT’S WHAT QUEST WENT AND GOT, AND CALLED IT THEIR CONFIRMATION, HOW CAN YOU SAY SMRTL DIDN’T GET A CONFIRMATION WHEN THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT IT GOT AS WELL.

YOU'RE GETTING THE SHlT KICKED OUT OF YOU. NOW GO BACK AND ANSWER MY 6 QUESTIONS SO I CAN CONTINUE LAUGHING AT YOU, MORON. STOP DUCKING THEM!!!!

[ADP02]

WRONGGGGG.

LMAO.

Did you just write that coming back with the final amount of marijuana metabolite is not specific??? LMAOOOO.

Dude, why are you ducking my questions. Waiting for your reply. You scared to answer?

Talk about checkmate... why did Eichner say the confirmation should be consistent with Quest.

Waitinggggg... lmao. I'm gonna keep beating the shlt out of you until you learn, chump. ANSWER MY QUESTIONS. STOP DUCKING!!!

LMAO. Exactly, moron. Now look at what you initially wrote.




Now tell me. If an aliquot is a portion from sample A, how the actual **** is a confirmation test done on “a completely different urine sample.” BOTH the screening test and the confirmation test are done on the SAME urine sample, which is sample A

ding ding ding! You’re a moron. But I’m not through with you.



You’re an idiot. SMRTL NEVER SAID THE SCREENING CAME BACK NEGATIVE. You are trying to point out that SMRTL did no confirmation. That’s because it’s YOU that has no idea what a screening test does as opposed to what a confirmation test does. Don’t worry, I’ll teach you.



LMAO. Again, what you are not getting is that SMRTL did a confirmation, dummy.


WHEN HAS A WADA LAB EVER GIVEN THE RESULTS OF A SCREENING TEST????? YOU ARE A ****ING IDIOT!

Just coming back with one result does not mean they didn’t do a confirmation test. This is the reason you ducked my questions.

I asked you 6 questions. YOU ANSWERED 0 OUT OF 6. This is after I asked you not to duck them. And you actually think the BS you wrote above meant something. Why did you duck the questions? This is why:



Maybe I should change your name to projector, because this is exactly what you are doing. A screening test is used to identify a substance. A confirmation test is used to confirm the substance is present and also quantitate the sample. Need proof?



Eicher says substances are identified during the screen, and if found, a confirmation process is done where the SPECIFIC compound or metabolite is looked for. The specific compound or metabolite is not looked for during the screen. Being that SMRTL got the specific amount of marijuana metabolite, this proves they confirmed. Need more?

How about the head of QUEST WHO SAYS THE SAME THING
VIDEO1: THE SCREEN IS QUALITATIVE, NOT QUANTITATIVE:


Oh, by the way, their screening cut off is 50ng and does not account for other similar compounds that may react. The 50ng is stated in this video. That other compounds may react in this screen was stated later. If you need that part of the video, feel free to let me know.

Dr. Sample also said that the GC/MS is used to SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFY AND QUANTIFY THE MARIJUANA METABOLITE. You aren’t doing too well, are you?

Video2: The GC/MS CONFIRMATION SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIES AND QUANTIFIES


IS THAT ENOUGH, OR DO YOU NEED MORE?



This clearly states that WADA’s screening doesn’t look for individual compounds. The confirmation test does. Being that SMRTL came back with the individual metabolite amount, this reveals they did confirmation testing. Need more?
















Do you see where it says “Confirmatory”?
Do you see where it says “use”?
Do you see where it says “Quantitative Analysis”?

LMAOOOO!

Even Quest offers screening by GC/MS, but not on their own behalf because it is too expensive lmaooooo. They only offer it to physicians and hospitals meaning the hospitals come out of pocket. Well, look what is searched for in the screen:


Did you find all classes of cannabinoids, or just carboxy-thc?

Screening Identifies….it does not quantify. Even the head of Quest says this. THE QUANTITATION IS THE CONFIRMATION TEST PROVIDED BY THE GC/MS MORON. IF THAT’S WHAT QUEST WENT AND GOT, AND CALLED IT THEIR CONFIRMATION, HOW CAN YOU SAY SMRTL DIDN’T GET A CONFIRMATION WHEN THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT IT GOT AS WELL.

YOU'RE GETTING THE SHlT KICKED OUT OF YOU. NOW GO BACK AND ANSWER MY 6 QUESTIONS SO I CAN CONTINUE LAUGHING AT YOU, MORON. STOP DUCKING THEM!!!!

Is the above just to deflect from what we are discussing?

Quest's screening was not done in the same way as SMRTL's screening process. Got it?


Why are they Screening? To check if something comes back positive?

Did QUEST's screening result come back positive? YES, So they did a confirmation test.


Did SMRTL's screening result come back positive? NO, So they did NOT do a confirmation test.

Why are they doing a Confirmation? Confirmation is on a positive screening result.


Fyi - While we are discussing Diaz's case which is just about marijuana threshold's, but for some specific substances, they do other tests too (Biological Passport, CIR, ....) BUT again, we are discussing marijuana.

So for marijuana, if the user has marijuana in his system but its below a certain threshold then there is no reason to report the number associated to the screening process. They will just report back that its NEGATIVE, as SMRTL pointed out to you.

BUT since there was a request, QUEST provided their qualitative number which going by memory was around 1.4 or 1.5. Anything above 1 meant positive result.

SMRTL uses GC/MS so they can provide a numerical concentration level as per their screening since their equipment can do that!!!

IF SMRTL's screening came back with a POSITIVE result then they would be doing more extensive testing on another aliquot taken from Sample A.

SMRTL did not do their extensive and more rigorous testing since the result came back NEGATIVE ..... If they did, let me know where SMRTL says that that is what they did!!!!


BTW - I explained it already. What I said was that the Screening was done on an aliquot of sample A for urine testing. While the Confirmation testing was done on a separate aliquot from Sample A .... in Quest's case. SMRTL didn't do that since it turned up negative on their screening test!

I said it enough times that ironically even a moron should have understood by now! But you didn't!!!

[ADP02]

Lmao. Going around saying everyone is deflecting is your new thing.

How about when PAC rejected 14 days out? What u got?

You are such a little bltch. Any excuse. Remember when you said he was saying salt water cured his scar? Lmaoooooo!!!

BY THE WAY, I'LL GLADLY ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS...RIGHT BACK AFTER YOU GO BACK AND ANSWER MY 6 QUESTIONS AND STOP DUCKING THEM!

SO YOU DEFLECTED AGAIN! What a surprise ... NOT!


It was a negotiation where they were off by about 7 days. Neither side gave in.



If you were around back then, there was a poll in which many Manny fans stated that to get the fight on, Manny should just take the 14 day cut off ...

Later when Manny accepted 14 days and even 7 days cutoff, Floyd fans had a change of heart. Then it was no longer about getting the fight on.

Even when Manny accepted no cutoffs, Floyd and his fans had a chance of heart .... then their new blockade was that Manny had to accept a flat fee .... which we all know now, but we told you then, was nonsense!!!

[BoxingTrav]

SO YOU DEFLECTED AGAIN! What a surprise ... NOT!


It was a negotiation where they were off by about 7 days. Neither side gave in.



If you were around back then, there was a poll in which many Manny fans stated that to get the fight on, Manny should just take the 14 day cut off ...

Later when Manny accepted 14 days and even 7 days cutoff, Floyd fans had a change of heart. Then it was no longer about getting the fight on.

Even when Manny accepted no cutoffs, Floyd and his fans had a chance of heart .... then their new blockade was that Manny had to accept a flat fee .... which we all know now, but we told you then, was nonsense!!!

Didn't Freddy admit it was there fault the first time around? Why is it being debated still?

[travestyny]

Why are they Screening? To check if something comes back positive?

They told you why they are screening. To see if anything remotely was a prohibited substance.

Did QUEST's screening result come back positive? YES, So they did a confirmation test.


Did SMRTL's screening result come back positive? NO, So they did NOT do a confirmation test.

What information do you have that the screening came back negative? Please tell me.

So for marijuana, if the user has marijuana in his system but its below a certain threshold then there is no reason to report the number associated to the screening process. They will just report back that its NEGATIVE, as SMRTL pointed out to you.

WADA labs NEVER report the results of a screen! What the hell??? Go look up their documents about reporting. There is no mention of a screen EVER! What you are not understanding is that to get the quantitative amount, they have to do confirmation testing.

BUT since there was a request, QUEST provided their qualitative number which going by memory was around 1.4 or 1.5. Anything above 1 meant positive result.

From memory? Bullshlt. I posted the video where they clearly state it. Come on. Stop being full of shlt.

SMRTL uses GC/MS so they can provide a numerical concentration level as per their screening since their equipment can do that!!!

Once again, the initial screen is a number of prohibited substances, NOT for a single marijuana metabolite! It is not optimized for that!

IF SMRTL's screening came back with a POSITIVE result then they would be doing more extensive testing on another aliquot taken from Sample A.

Quest told you that the more extensive testing confirms identity of the metabolite and quantifies it. THIS IS WHAT WADA PROVIDED. WHY CAN'T YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?

SMRTL did not do their extensive and more rigorous testing since the result came back NEGATIVE ..... If they did, let me know where SMRTL says that that is what they did!!!!

Sure. I've been providing this to you.

1. They got the quantitative amount. Obviously this was a confirmatory test.

2. Eichner: "THE MASS SPECTROMETRY DATA THAT WE DO FOR THE CONFIRMATION SHOULD DEFINITELY BE CONSISTENT WITH THAT OF OTHER REGULATED PROGRAMS LIKE QUEST"?

He just told you that it was confirmatory testing. If not, why the hell would he be bringing this up? Do you think he is saying, "Our lab got this wrong. But if we had done confirmation testing, we would have gotten it right, too." USE YOUR BRAIN!

BTW - I explained it already. What I said was that the Screening was done on an aliquot of sample A for urine testing. While the Confirmation testing was done on a separate aliquot from Sample A .... in Quest's case. SMRTL didn't do that since it turned up negative on their screening test!

Dude, I don't want to argue about this. You said it was done on a completely different urine sample. I quoted you specifically. If by completely different urine sample, you meant the same urine sample but a different sample of the same sample of the urine sample (this is ******ed), then whatever floats your boat.

I said it enough times that ironically even a moron should have understood by now! But you didn't!!!

How can you be this stupid? Seriously? I've explained this to you a billion times.

I gave you various quotations proving you are wrong, but you still can't handle it.

I gave you quotations directly from SMRTL. Even gave you quotations from Quest. Gave you quotations from others..

Yet you still get this wrong....only based on your falsifying quotations and misunderstanding of what was said in a video.

I even posted the video up for you...you still can't understand.

I told you that for WADA labs, the screening doesn't check for individual compounds. You can't understand.

You claim SMRTL's screening came back negative, yet you can't explain this being that the screening was not optimized to check for just the marijuana metabolite.

So....I have a solution since you can't get it. Do me a favor. Let's find 3 unbiased people. We will offer them points to get this done. We'll present our information...they will vote and see which side they agree with, and this will finally be over. We don't have to bet sigs. We don't have to bet anything at all if you don't want (though if you want to, that's fine with me). The only reason we can discuss points is to convince any posters to want to judge and read through this bullshlt, which I imagine would be difficult because no one wants to read through our bullshlt even now. But anyway, I know I'm right. You believe you are right. No one is going to change anyone's mind. Let's finally get it over. It can be a thread here or elsewhere on this site. Let's get 1-3 judges that we agree upon, present our side, and accept the outcome.

What do you think? Will you accept this? I just want to know yes or no. If no, then please explain why.

ps. You still completely ducked the 6 questions I asked you. You won't go near them. Why?

[travestyny]

SO YOU DEFLECTED AGAIN! What a surprise ... NOT!


It was a negotiation where they were off by about 7 days. Neither side gave in.



If you were around back then, there was a poll in which many Manny fans stated that to get the fight on, Manny should just take the 14 day cut off ...

Later when Manny accepted 14 days and even 7 days cutoff, Floyd fans had a change of heart. Then it was no longer about getting the fight on.

Even when Manny accepted no cutoffs, Floyd and his fans had a chance of heart .... then their new blockade was that Manny had to accept a flat fee .... which we all know now, but we told you then, was nonsense!!!

Come on, man. They had to go to arbitration over the 14 day cut off. And like a poster below you said, even Roach admit that it was their fault. And what was the only hold up???? Blood testing.

You actually believe he was affected 2 days later by giving blood? Yet you go off on Mayweather because his manager said, "And remember, he's giving blood, he's giving urine." That's literally all the guy said, and you are trying to make it seem like he's saying these are the main reasons for his dehydration. Just stop already.

[ADP02]

Didn't Freddy admit it was there fault the first time around? Why is it being debated still?

The discussion was NOT about who was at fault. This is about Manny stating that he had a concern about giving blood but Floyd and his fans calling it all BS ....

Then on May 1st, the same Floyd stating that we need to believe when he says that giving <1 tbsp. of blood 10 days beforehand, affected him so much that he was severely dehydrated and that he required an IV. Now those same Floyd fans are not calling out Floyd's BS statement.

So do you believe Floyd's BS statement?

[ADP02]

They told you why they are screening. To see if anything remotely was a prohibited substance.



What information do you have that the screening came back negative? Please tell me.



WADA labs NEVER report the results of a screen! What the hell??? Go look up their documents about reporting. There is no mention of a screen EVER! What you are not understanding is that to get the quantitative amount, they have to do confirmation testing.



From memory? Bullshlt. I posted the video where they clearly state it. Come on. Stop being full of shlt.



Once again, the initial screen is a number of prohibited substances, NOT for a single marijuana metabolite! It is not optimized for that!



Quest told you that the more extensive testing confirms identity of the metabolite and quantifies it. THIS IS WHAT WADA PROVIDED. WHY CAN'T YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?



Sure. I've been providing this to you.

1. They got the quantitative amount. Obviously this was a confirmatory test.

2. Eichner: "THE MASS SPECTROMETRY DATA THAT WE DO FOR THE CONFIRMATION SHOULD DEFINITELY BE CONSISTENT WITH THAT OF OTHER REGULATED PROGRAMS LIKE QUEST"?

He just told you that it was confirmatory testing. If not, why the hell would he be bringing this up? Do you think he is saying, "Our lab got this wrong. But if we had done confirmation testing, we would have gotten it right, too." USE YOUR BRAIN!



Dude, I don't want to argue about this. You said it was done on a completely different urine sample. I quoted you specifically. If by completely different urine sample, you meant the same urine sample but a different sample of the same sample of the urine sample (this is ******ed), then whatever floats your boat.



How can you be this stupid? Seriously? I've explained this to you a billion times.

I gave you various quotations proving you are wrong, but you still can't handle it.

I gave you quotations directly from SMRTL. Even gave you quotations from Quest. Gave you quotations from others..

Yet you still get this wrong....only based on your falsifying quotations and misunderstanding of what was said in a video.

I even posted the video up for you...you still can't understand.

I told you that for WADA labs, the screening doesn't check for individual compounds. You can't understand.

You claim SMRTL's screening came back negative, yet you can't explain this being that the screening was not optimized to check for just the marijuana metabolite.

So....I have a solution since you can't get it. Do me a favor. Let's find 3 unbiased people. We will offer them points to get this done. We'll present our information...they will vote and see which side they agree with, and this will finally be over. We don't have to bet sigs. We don't have to bet anything at all if you don't want (though if you want to, that's fine with me). The only reason we can discuss points is to convince any posters to want to judge and read through this bullshlt, which I imagine would be difficult because no one wants to read through our bullshlt even now. But anyway, I know I'm right. You believe you are right. No one is going to change anyone's mind. Let's finally get it over. It can be a thread here or elsewhere on this site. Let's get 1-3 judges that we agree upon, present our side, and accept the outcome.

What do you think? Will you accept this? I just want to know yes or no. If no, then please explain why.

ps. You still completely ducked the 6 questions I asked you. You won't go near them. Why?

I responded to your questions. YOU ARE WRONG and told you why!!! So you saying "stupid, moron,..." does not make you right. It makes you look like a fool because you are wrong!

Look bud. Its as clear as it was with the other discussions. You just do not want to hear that you are wrong.


This should clear it up ..... even for YOU!

Diaz lawyer: You mentioned you do not do the immunoassay screening for the metabolites. You go straight to the GC/MS test?
SMRTL: That is correct.
Diaz lawyer: Is that a 150 confirmation cutoff of the THC metabolite
SMRTL: .... Marijuana has a prohibited threshold of 150 ng/ml. So that would be the screening cutoff as well.

What did Dr Eichner say? 150 ng/ml would be the screening cutoff as well!!! How can that be Travestyny? You said that SMRTL's screening cannot do that .....

I told you ...... YOU ARE WRONG!!!