BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: SoSD: Zeigler: ‘Tainted supplement’ excuse outmoded

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, November 01, 2007

SoSD: Zeigler: ‘Tainted supplement’ excuse outmoded

Victor Conte...the tower of IQ power.

Blaming a tainted nutritional supplement might be a plausible explanation for a positive urine test for a banned stimulant.

Five years ago.

But anti-doping experts say the already slim chances of a supplement triggering a positive for a stimulant, as Padres outfielder Mike Cameron suggested yesterday, have dwindled significantly since the Federal Drug Administration barred the popular stimulant ephedrine from supplements in 2005.

“It’s not a very high likelihood it’s from a contaminated substance,” said Victor Conte, the founder of the BALCO lab that supplied dozens of elite athletes with performance-enhancing substances. “It’s certainly possible that some of these products still have a kick in them, but most of these are loaded up with caffeine or synephrine, neither of which is banned by baseball.”

...“This isn’t drug testing, this is IQ testing,” Conte said. “All you have to do is look at the list and find one of the 30 that’s not on the list and use that. This guy (Cameron) didn’t fail a drug test. He failed an IQ test.”

Repoz Posted: November 01, 2007 at 09:29 AM | 14 comment(s)
Related News: General, San Diego, Steroids

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 1 pages

1. Craig Calcaterra Posted: November 01, 2007 at 09:39 AM (#2602333)

I find it odd that the press continually goes to Conte for quotes on this stuff. I mean, yeah, I suppose he's interesting in his own right, but doesn't using him as a source undermine the holier-than-thou/somebody think of the children tone that so many writers had worked so hard to acheive in the past few years?

2. Shooty: Now rated AAA by Moody's and S&P! Posted: November 01, 2007 at 09:40 AM (#2602334)

...“This isn’t drug testing, this is IQ testing,” Conte said. “All you have to do is look at the list and find one of the 30 that’s not on the list and use that. This guy (Cameron) didn’t fail a drug test. He failed an IQ test.”

He failed it twice!

Seriously, is Conte going to be the resident PED expert for the media now?

3. Justin Zeth Posted: November 01, 2007 at 10:04 AM (#2602376)

That, or Mike Cameron wants you to think he was stupid, because the alternative--that Cameron knew exactly what he was taking, and did it multiple times, and continued doing it after being alerted that he had tested positive--is worse for his coming new contract.

From my post on my site this morning: "Well, it wasn’t actually greenies, at least if you believe Mike Cameron; he “thinks he took a tainted supplement.” Twice, Mike; you only get suspended for your second failed stimulant test. Mike, maybe you should pay attention to what you’re putting in your body? If you’re not intentionally putting stimulants in your body, that is."

Color me skeptical.

4. flournoy Posted: November 01, 2007 at 10:21 AM (#2602417)

Seriously, is Conte going to be the resident PED expert for the media now?

Well I reckon he does have the credentials. Which is not to say that his opinion is particularly interesting or trustworthy.

5. seeking a clever screen name since 1999 Posted: November 01, 2007 at 11:21 AM (#2602515)

but doesn't using him as a source undermine the holier-than-thou/somebody think of the children tone that so many writers had worked so hard to acheive in the past few years?

But if you want to know how someone would go about beating the testing program, who better to ask? I mean, if somebody was going to write If I did it, who has more credibility than OJ?

Twice, Mike; you only get suspended for your second failed stimulant test. Mike, maybe you should pay attention to what you’re putting in your body? If you’re not intentionally putting stimulants in your body, that is.

Who says it was the same stimulant both times? I mean, maybe the first time was actual cheating, and only the second was stupidity. Or the other way around.

6. Jimmy P Posted: November 01, 2007 at 11:26 AM (#2602520)

Well I reckon he does have the credentials. Which is not to say that his opinion is particularly interesting or trustworthy.

I think his quotes are interesting. What 'expert' would say someone failed an IQ test? Yeah, that's what I immediately think when I see an athlete fail a drug test, but have you ever heard anyone say it in the media?

7. ronh Posted: November 01, 2007 at 11:49 AM (#2602565)

Figures from the Montreal lab that handles MLB's testing, however, indicate far more players have had at least one stimulant positive.

In previous years, the Montreal lab reported about 20 annual positives for banned stimulants; in 2006, the first year MLB began stimulant testing there, the number jumped to 104.

104 have already had their first positive?

8. TWO!-OH!-OH!-OH! CLAP!-CLAP!-CLAP!CLAP!CLAP! Posted: November 01, 2007 at 12:05 PM (#2602598)

I find it odd that the press continually goes to Conte for quotes on this stuff.

I got some friends
Who like to stay high
Think of the tax potential
If it was legal to buy

But instead the heat is forced
To bust on victimless crimes
Just a low class bust
Worth nickels and dimes

It's not the crime
And it's not the thought
It ain't the deed
It's if you get caught

9. seeking a clever screen name since 1999 Posted: November 01, 2007 at 12:12 PM (#2602617)

In previous years, the Montreal lab reported about 20 annual positives for banned stimulants; in 2006, the first year MLB began stimulant testing there, the number jumped to 104.

Huh? They were getting 20 positives a year for something they weren't testing for?

How does this makes sense? Were they testing other athletes for the same panel of stimulants before MLB added stimulants to their testing program? If that's the case, then it's hard to draw any conclusions without knowing how many non-MLB tests they're doing. Or were they testing the MLB samples for stimulants even though there was no agreement with the MLBPA to test for these substances? That would mean that use increased when testing began, which is kind of loopy.

10. John Brill's #1 Fan (JMN) Posted: November 01, 2007 at 12:19 PM (#2602628)

Figures from the Montreal lab that handles MLB's testing, however, indicate far more players have had at least one stimulant positive.

Revenge for the death of the Expos!

11. Red Juice Posted: November 01, 2007 at 12:36 PM (#2602660)

Well I reckon he does have the credentials. Which is not to say that his opinion is particularly interesting or trustworthy

I may be off here, but hasn't everybody Conte fingered been proven to have been a user. Some of them even threatened him with lawsuits. Still, over time, the truth came out.

12. Van Lingle Mungo Jerry Posted: November 01, 2007 at 12:42 PM (#2602666)

I hear Leo will star as Conte in Catch Me If You Can 2.

13. The Polish Sausage Racer Posted: November 01, 2007 at 01:04 PM (#2602702)

Considering the supplement industry is almost entirely unregulated, slipping a little something extra in wouldn't be very surprising at all. Someone figures it out and sues? Set up the next shell company and move on.

14. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: November 01, 2007 at 04:42 PM (#2602714)

I may be off here, but hasn't everybody Conte fingered been proven to have been a user. Some of them even threatened him with lawsuits. Still, over time, the truth came out.

he's the civilian version of Jose Canseco

Page 1 of 1 pages

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Thursday, November 01, 2007

SoSD: Zeigler: ‘Tainted supplement’ excuse outmoded

Reader Comments and Retorts

Support BBTF

My Bookmarks

Hot Topics