I think the OP is generally a great poster but I gotta be honest, the premise of this thread is weak as *** and only hurts his credibility. This is as low quality as something Spoon or Maxi would post.
Pacquiao took PEDS and is a cheat = FACT
Collapse
-
Comment
-
Some still threatened by PAC even though he's koed by jmm and lost on paper to Floyd.
Too right they should be threatened by best of eraComment
-
Comment
-
he never admitted to using peds. he said he's smoke meth when he was a teen but stopped when he realized it wasnt good for the body, this was in 2016-2017. he's been accused of using peds since 2009. floyd is still smoking weed.Comment
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
The amphetamines can enhance athletic performance. That much seems clear from the literature, some of which is reviewed here. Increases in endurance have been demonstrated in both humans and ****. Smith and Beecher, 20 years ago, showed improvement of running, swimming, and weight throwing in highly trained athletes. Laboratory analogs of such performances have also been used and similar enhancement demonstrated. The amount of change induced by the amphetamines is usually small, of the order of a few percent. Nevertheless, since a fraction of a percent improvement can make the difference between fame and oblivion, the margin conferred by these drugs can be quite important.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7286248Comment
-
Cannabis is considered to be in violation of all three main disqualifying criteria. It violates the first (performance enhancement) because of its ability to decrease anxiety and fear, and potentially to improve some types of oxygenation and concentration. It violates the second (health risk) because it can result in, among other things, "decreased cognitive performance" and "pulmonary toxicity." It violates the third (spirit of sport) because of the drug's widespread illegality and conflicts with the "role model of athletes in modern society," along with "negative reactions by the public, sponsors, and the media."The amphetamines can enhance athletic performance. That much seems clear from the literature, some of which is reviewed here. Increases in endurance have been demonstrated in both humans and ****. Smith and Beecher, 20 years ago, showed improvement of running, swimming, and weight throwing in highly trained athletes. Laboratory analogs of such performances have also been used and similar enhancement demonstrated. The amount of change induced by the amphetamines is usually small, of the order of a few percent. Nevertheless, since a fraction of a percent improvement can make the difference between fame and oblivion, the margin conferred by these drugs can be quite important.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7286248
On Monday, American judo competitor Nick Delpopolo was expelled from the Olympics for doping with cannabis. (He says he accidentally ate a pot brownie.) The key word here is "doping"--if the situation were different, Delpopolo might just have been "using." Cannabis is on the Prohibited List, a catalogue of banned drugs maintained by the World Anti-Doping Agency, or WADA. Test positive for a drug on WADA's list? You're doping, and face dismissal from the Games. Test positive for anything else, even if it's illegal? No worries--you're free to compete. This is one powerful list. But why is cannabis, the users of which are not necessarily renowned for their athletic ability, on it?Comment
-
this explains why floyd has no fear of conor and is talking about going to war.
Cannabis is considered to be in violation of all three main disqualifying criteria. It violates the first (performance enhancement) because of its ability to decrease anxiety and fear, and potentially to improve some types of oxygenation and concentration. It violates the second (health risk) because it can result in, among other things, "decreased cognitive performance" and "pulmonary toxicity." It violates the third (spirit of sport) because of the drug's widespread illegality and conflicts with the "role model of athletes in modern society," along with "negative reactions by the public, sponsors, and the media."Comment

Comment