Wednesday, June 15, 2016 - Please bear with us -- we have migrated our servers to continue providing access to our site while a prolonged network downage, not under our control, is corrected. Forum access may be limited while we configure the new servers. Details will be posted as time provides. Admin and Member logins now work again.

VoyUser Login optional ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 12345678 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 10:02:04 07/27/06 Thu
Author: House
Subject: Re: i dont think so
In reply to: sundaymorning 's message, "i dont think so" on 09:58:12 07/27/06 Thu

>>Saw this on a tri forum:
>><a rel=nofollow target=_blank href=""></a>
>>"Effect of ethanol on the ratio between testosterone
>>and epitestosterone in urine.
>>Falk O, Palonek E, Bjorkhem I.
>>Department of Clinical Chemistry, Huddinge Hospital,
>>The testosterone/epitestosterone weight ratio in urine
>>is used to detect cases of doping when an athlete has
>>treated himself with exogenous testosterone. When this
>>ratio exceeds 6, it is considered evidence of
>>testosterone doping. We show here that intake of
>>ethanol can affect this ratio. Ingestion of 110-160 g
>>of ethanol, about 2 g per kilogram body weight,
>>increased the ratio between testosterone and
>>epitestosterone in urine from 1.14 +/- 0.07 to 1.52
>>+/- 0.09 in four healthy male volunteers. The increase
>>ranged from 30% to 90% in the different subjects
>>studied (mean 41%). In cases where doping with
>>testosterone is suspected, the possibility should be
>>considered that at least part of an observed increased
>>testosterone/epitestosterone ratio in urine is
>>ascribable to previous ingestion of ethanol.
>>PMID: 3390919 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]"
>that study is from 1988. there's a new method that is
>being used now (assuming the lab is using the more
>recent method)which makes the alcohol false positive
>possibility very improbable. dennis mitchell escaped a
>ban using this excuse in 98 (i think) but i don't
>think it will fly now.

Just throwing out one of a number of things that could cause a false positive. Essentially just providing those that have already sentenced Landis before any B result or response from Floyd something to think about.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]


VoyUser Login ] Not required to post.
Post a public reply to this message | Go post a new public message
Message subject (required):

Name (required):

  Expression (Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)

  E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:

Choose Message Icon: [ View Emoticons ]

Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2016 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.