Author Topic: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?  (Read 10490 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 31944
  • Hell yes!
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #100: December 12, 2011, 09:04:45 AM »
I wonder how high the bar is to show that? If the ban is up held and he goes after the tester, I wonder if they are insured enough to cover 50 games of his salary + lost endorsements

It is routine that specimens are collected, then progress through the chain of custody to testing.  The remaining sample is set aside in case additional testing is needed, which in this case it was.  It is tested again to corroborate the original finding, and that is that.

When Braun provided the sample, he signed a seal that was placed on the container to confirm that it was his specimen, and when it was received by the testing company they would have observed and recorded that the seal was intact.  The chain of custody HAS to be airtight because this is an obvious place for lawyers for Braun (in this case) to attack. 

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 18760
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #101: December 12, 2011, 09:26:18 AM »
Beyond chain of custody, if the sample really was over twice the highest level ever tested, you have to wonder about the actual equipment used in the test. I think mlb has to pursue this because if the admit they test was flawed, every positive now comes into question, but if I'm braun, I ready a libel/slander filing against the testing company and let a jury (in state court in milwaukee) decide

Offline MarquisDeSade

  • Posts: 14880
  • I am Djour Djilios.
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #102: December 12, 2011, 09:34:17 AM »
I think mlb has to pursue this because if the admit the test was flawed, every positive now comes into question

That's something I said earlier that I think got overlooked.  If I'm MLB this is the worst possible scenario to be in - if the first test was right you've got a guy juicing for a team the Used Car Salesman [Selig] was/is a part of the ownership group.  If the first test is proven to be a false-positive the whole system comes under attack.  The best possible outcome for all parties (except for the testing contractor) is for the chain of custody to be broken on both samples and the testing company be the fall guy.  For some reason I don't see that happening though.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 18760
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #103: December 12, 2011, 09:37:55 AM »
Even if the testing company is the fall guy, everyone else who tests positive now has a built in defense. I think best outcome for MLB is the test proves to be within normal juicer ranges (not twice the highest ever tested), braun's excuse is bs (ie blaming a supplement) and the suspension is upheld

Offline MarquisDeSade

  • Posts: 14880
  • I am Djour Djilios.
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #104: December 12, 2011, 09:51:15 AM »
Even if the testing company is the fall guy, everyone else who tests positive now has a built in defense.

Only if the next contractor is sloppy with chain of custody and testing methodologies and equipment. 

I think best outcome for MLB is the test proves to be within normal juicer ranges (not twice the highest ever tested), braun's excuse is bs (ie blaming a supplement) and the suspension is upheld

Braun using the supplement excuse is only going to get him into more trouble and looks moronic for a guy that just signed a ridiculous extension.  Doesn't he remember the JC Romero saga? 

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 31944
  • Hell yes!
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #105: December 12, 2011, 01:51:51 PM »
Jay Jaffe (BP) with a detailed discussion of the situation.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=15654

I think this article is open to non-subscribers, let me know if found otherwise.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35048
  • Champs!
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #106: December 12, 2011, 01:59:37 PM »
It's open to non-subscribers.

Offline MarquisDeSade

  • Posts: 14880
  • I am Djour Djilios.
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #107: December 12, 2011, 02:01:19 PM »
Jay Jaffe (BP) with a detailed discussion of the situation.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=15654

I think this article is open to non-subscribers, let me know if found otherwise.

I didn't read the whole thing because I don't really care, but is the test from 2007 the same as the test that Braun was a positive for or not?  False positives happen, but a 9% failure rate isn't really odd for what I can only assume is a small sample size of men putting their bodies through hell.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35048
  • Champs!
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #108: December 12, 2011, 02:07:43 PM »
I didn't read the whole thing because I don't really care, but is the test from 2007 the same as the test that Braun was a positive for or not?  False positives happen, but a 9% failure rate isn't really odd for what I can only assume is a small sample size of men putting their bodies through hell.

Quote
As accurate as the second test may be, the sheer volume of the testing still creates the possibility of false positives. According to the Associated Press' Ronald Blum, MLB conducted 3,868 in-season tests in 2011, up from 3,747 tests in 2010. Supposing a nine percent false positive on the first test, that would be 348 false positives in 2011...

Offline blue911

  • Posts: 17617
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #109: December 12, 2011, 02:09:14 PM »
Will Carroll will be on Clubhouse Confidential tonight (5:30EST)

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 31944
  • Hell yes!
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #110: December 12, 2011, 02:11:41 PM »
I didn't read the whole thing because I don't really care, but is the test from 2007 the same as the test that Braun was a positive for or not?  False positives happen, but a 9% failure rate isn't really odd for what I can only assume is a small sample size of men putting their bodies through hell.

Quote
• On Twitter, many people, including our own Colin Wyers, spent time on Sunday discussing the possibility of a false positive in the testing; one scientific journal article Wyers came across suggested that the false positive rate of the initial urinary testosterone/epitestosterone (T/E) test could be as high as nine percent.

Under MLB’s testing process, any player's sample where the T/E ratio is higher than 4/1 undergoes a second test that is considerably more accurate. Will Carroll, who discussed the process and logistics of testing at SI.com, weighs in at his Tumblr with a note about the misconception of false positives once the second round of testing is complete:

The ratio test isn’t very accurate, which is why it is no longer used as a standalone. It used to be, until the secondary test (gas chromatography and isotope ratio) became widely available. But having a high ratio proves NOTHING; it simply triggers the more accurate test.

So why do the ratio test at all? The GC-IRMS test is expensive and time consuming. You (and the lab techs in Montreal) don’t want to do hundreds of them. The ratio test is simply a way to spend time and resources on the cases that need that kind of time and attention.

So to summarize: T/E ratio is pretty accurate, but not to be relied on. Good enough to use as a trigger. Second test? Very, very, very accurate. False positives, like masking agents, remain one of the red herrings of drug testing.

As accurate as the second test may be, the sheer volume of the testing still creates the possibility of false positives. According to the Associated Press' Ronald Blum, MLB conducted 3,868 in-season tests in 2011, up from 3,747 tests in 2010. Supposing a nine percent false positive on the first test, that would be 348 false positives in 2011. If the false positive rate of the GC-IRMS is even one percent, that's still roughly three players per year getting popped. If it's 0.3 percent, that's one player per year — one unlucky SOB. Braun and company aren't claiming that's what happened in this case, but in the general discussion of the process, it's worth bearing that in mind.


Offline MarquisDeSade

  • Posts: 14880
  • I am Djour Djilios.
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #111: December 12, 2011, 02:17:25 PM »
Then why an automatic suspension if they don't have fail in the first test being reliably accurate?

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 31944
  • Hell yes!
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #112: December 12, 2011, 02:21:28 PM »
Then why an automatic suspension if they don't have fail in the first test being reliably accurate?

They don't do the suspension until the 2nd test is performed.  At that point the 1st test is disregarded entirely.  Its whole purpose is to indicate that a 2nd test is necessary.

Offline MarquisDeSade

  • Posts: 14880
  • I am Djour Djilios.
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #113: December 12, 2011, 02:27:32 PM »
They don't do the suspension until the 2nd test is performed.  At that point the 1st test is disregarded entirely.  Its whole purpose is to indicate that a 2nd test is necessary.

Color me confused.  Is Braun saying they used the B-sample of the second test (the confirmatory) test and that it was negative?  This process sounds very similar to the one the District has for HIV testing - OraQuicks are used to determine is certain antibodies are present and, if so, patients are given a confirmatory blood draw (western blot) to determine whether or not they are HIV positive.  Of course, if you have high number of false positives it's possible there are false negative as well.  :stir:

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37378
  • LAC 8)
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #114: December 12, 2011, 03:44:41 PM »
Will Carroll will be on Clubhouse Confidential tonight (5:30EST)

isn't he also the one that expected most of the top FA's to land with the Nats last week during the meetings?

Offline blue911

  • Posts: 17617
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #115: December 12, 2011, 03:52:46 PM »
isn't he also the one that expected most of the top FA's to land with the Nats last week during the meetings?

IDK, Carroll's area of expertise is medical issues  (injuries,PED,etc...)

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 66846
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #116: December 12, 2011, 04:43:51 PM »
The dreaded "I could have taken something and not known what it was" excuse.  Enjoy your suspension if that's the best explanation you can muster.

Whenever they trot out this excuse you know they're guilty.

Offline imref

  • Posts: 24374
  • 1B: The New Hot Corner
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #117: December 12, 2011, 04:51:24 PM »
Weird fact of the day: Four major league players who played for the Huntsville Stars (currently the AA team for the Brewers) have gone on to win the MVP.

They are: Ryan Braun, Jose Canseco, Jason Giambi, and Miguel Tejada.

All have been linked to PEDs.

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 31944
  • Hell yes!
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #118: December 12, 2011, 06:39:39 PM »
Color me confused.  Is Braun saying they used the B-sample of the second test (the confirmatory) test and that it was negative?  This process sounds very similar to the one the District has for HIV testing - OraQuicks are used to determine is certain antibodies are present and, if so, patients are given a confirmatory blood draw (western blot) to determine whether or not they are HIV positive.  Of course, if you have high number of false positives it's possible there are false negative as well.  :stir:

The same sample can be used for multiple tests.  They draw some of it, do a test, store the rest in case further testing is required.  In this case, they ran another, more accurate test off the same sample and it confirmed the initial screening result.

Apparently there was yet another sample given by Braun that was tested (it is not clear by whom) and was reportedly negative, but how much time had elapsed, what the duration of the drug in the system is, etc leaves more questions than answers.  As mentioned by Jaffe, a negative test of a second specimen does not negate the initial sample results.

Offline MarquisDeSade

  • Posts: 14880
  • I am Djour Djilios.
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #119: December 12, 2011, 07:27:03 PM »
Just so we're clear - it's being reported the second non-positive test was from a different sample, correct?  We're not talking about a situation where they ran the remaining sample from the confirmatory test and found it to be negative, correct?  In that case, I'm not really sure what Braun hopes to accomplish.

Offline Squab

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 4256
  • I'm feeling a tear coming on.
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #120: December 12, 2011, 08:12:25 PM »
Quote from: @ReggieMillerTNT
Just spoke with my neighbor Ryan Braun, he says test is bogus, can only believe a man for his word.. Truth will always come out..

Offline mitlen

  • Posts: 52204
  • We had 'em all the way.

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 31944
  • Hell yes!
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #122: December 12, 2011, 08:45:46 PM »
MDS- correct.

Offline MarquisDeSade

  • Posts: 14880
  • I am Djour Djilios.
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #123: December 12, 2011, 09:42:49 PM »
MDS- correct.

Thanks, just wanted to make sure the test Braun "passed" wasn't done by the same folks using the same equipment and methodology as the confirmatory positive test.

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 31944
  • Hell yes!
Re: Ryan Braun is a Juicer?
« Reply #124: December 12, 2011, 10:08:41 PM »
Thanks, just wanted to make sure the test Braun "passed" wasn't done by the same folks using the same equipment and methodology as the confirmatory positive test.

Regardless, enough time had elapsed as to render the 2nd one meaningless anyway, depending on the drug found in the first specimen.

But yeah, we're still not getting very solid facts.  Jaffe was ripping the various press for deficiencies in their reporting - raising as many questions as they've resolved as it seems reporters are generally pretty damn dumb about this stuff.