[quote]BlackLabel wrote:
threewhitelights wrote:
BlackLabel wrote:
As long as it’s someone who knows what they’re doing, Im fine with it. I dont want AIDS.
It’s not like you can get more AIDS dude.
Haven’t you ever heard of SUPER AIDS?
[/quote]
Damn, there goes that joke.
I’d much rather give a blood sample than a urine sample. Trying to piss with a creepy official watching (what is he thinking about?) while I’m dehydrated…
Just make sure they use a sterile needle straight out of the packet. You can refuse the test if you don’t see them use proper hygiene.
I believe IPF are bound to allow whatever WADA deems fair, and IPF are bound to WADA because that is the only way PL will ever have a chance at becoming an Olympic sport.
I’ve had blood taken before. I’m unsure if they tested it, or if it was being stored to be tested at a later date (there’s a policy in some sports now where they’ll store a sample for a few years and then test it.)
In any case, it was done by a professional with a sterile needle. The amount they took was small. It made the whole drug testing thing go on for a bit longer than normal, but that was about it. The procedure was exactly the same as the dozen or so times I’ve had a blood test for normal medical reasons.
I honestly don’t know why people are getting upset about it. These are the organisations we’re trusting to perform our drug tests, yet we can’t trust them to take blood? Every olympic athlete is subjectable to a blood test, by the same drug testing groups the IPF uses. They all need to follow the procedures set out by WADA, with medical professionals, from labs (again, the same ones approved and used by WADA).
I understand that it is a pain in the arse, and no-one wants to get stuck with a needle or have someone watch them pee into a cup; but when you enter a drug-tested sport you have to accept it as a possibility. Olympic athletes and athletes in olympic sports have been dealing with for over a decade. The sprinters, basketballers and baseballers have a hell of a lot bigger profile than any powerlifter, and are worth a hell of a lot more money. So far, none of them have had any complications from the testing, so why are we so special?
I REALLY don’t see what the big deal is. As far as I’m aware it’s only gonna happen at world events anyway?? And c’mon… who here is honestly even near the level that they could podium at an IPF international event?
It’s not like they’re going to slit your wrist and drain you dry… they’d have to have a doctor or phlebotomist to do it anyway, so it’s not just like some random dude with a pack of needles poking holes in you.
For people never even likely to face it there’s a hell of a lot of strong opinions out there!
[quote]DragnCarry wrote:
I’d much rather give a blood sample than a urine sample. Trying to piss with a creepy official watching (what is he thinking about?) while I’m dehydrated…
True that. For those of you who haven’t been tested (yet) the WADA rules require the athlete to be uncovered from the bottom of the chest to the knees, and the DCO must observe the “sample” pass from the athletes body into the cup. A jab in the arm with a horse syringe doesn’t all that invasive after that, especially seeing as i give blood three times a year anyway.
Just make sure they use a sterile needle straight out of the packet. You can refuse the test if you don’t see them use proper hygiene.
I believe IPF are bound to allow whatever WADA deems fair, and IPF are bound to WADA because that is the only way PL will ever have a chance at becoming an Olympic sport.[/quote]
Again, for those who don’t know, two years ago the IPF was refused Olympic accreditation (the first step for a sport to be included in the games) in part because the extremely high number of positive tests returned for performance enhancing substances.