Palmerio DID take an anabolic steroid

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Both my brother and wife are pharmacists. My brother used to lift weights and he is pretty knolwedgeable on these subjects. I spoke with him a little bit a go and he offered this information.

 

First he said Winstrol would be a steroid you would take if you wanted some strength without the abundant bulk. That would explain why Palmeiro never looked like a "user."

 

Secondly, he echoed what has been said numerous times in this thread and elsewhere and that's there no way someone accidentially injests Wintrol through some "supplement."

 

I also found this, that I found informative.

 

Next to Deca and D-bol the third most abused substance among athletes is stanozolol, as documented by the many positive drug tests

 

There's a lot more there for those who are interested.

[10man]

I believe that for now Raffy is employing the Bill Clinton technique for deniability which is:

 

If you haven't been caught, speak vehemently against it.

If you get caught, vehemently deny it.

If you get caught lying about it, just be vehement.

[Cubzfan64]

One last little comment - if anyone who is truly found guilty of using steroids ever has a chance to get into the HOF, Pete Rose should be voted in first.

Apples and Oranges really. But, I'll disagree. With whatever you want to say about taking steroids, the ultimate point was to win. There is never any potential to throw a game. When betting on your own team, there is that potential.

 

That's why Shoeless Joe isn't in the HOF, and that's why Rose will never be either.

 

Although they are certainly not the same things, I equate them both in my mind when I consider a person's character and being deserving of the HOF. I would never vote a person into the baseball HOF if I knew they had used steroids - ESPECIALLY someone who stood in front of millions of people and said they had never used them. I don't care that they may have used them to try to win - that's a terrible argument in my mind. It's cheating any way you stretch it, and it ruins the game imho.

 

Personally I believe in my heart that the use of steroids in baseball has had a much much more detrimental affect on the sport than anything Pete Rose did while gambling. How many young kids who didn't use steroids never made it to the big leagues because of those who did? How many game results were affected by guys who were using steroids? How many championships, MVP's, batting titles, Cy Young awards etc... were affected because of the use of steroids?

 

I just believe that if you're going to forgive someone who is a proven user and allow them into the HOF, you should forgive Pete Rose and allow him in as well.

 

It will be up to the sportswriters to determine if Raffy is going to get into the hall and unlike any of the other sports, baseball has listed character as a determining factor as to whether or not a vote may be cast for someone. Pete Rose has been banned from baseball while Raffy has not and until the penalty for Steroids is a lifetime ban then players that are caught using, still have a chance to get in.

 

Yup - I understand the difference between the two, and I do understand that it will be up to the sportswriters to make or not make the choice, I guess I'm just stating my personal opinion that I would find it hypocritical and it would personally taint the HOF in my eyes for someone who has been caught using steroids to be allowed in, while Pete Rose is not. Again, me personal opinion (and all these are personal opinions) is that neither one of them deserve to be in the HOF, I just think it would be wrong for one to get in while the other does not.

 

As an aside - how is Madison these days? My wife and I both went to college there and if we had been able to find good paying jobs there in our fields of interest we'd still be there! We both LOVED the city and campus!

[badgercub]

One last little comment - if anyone who is truly found guilty of using steroids ever has a chance to get into the HOF, Pete Rose should be voted in first.

Apples and Oranges really. But, I'll disagree. With whatever you want to say about taking steroids, the ultimate point was to win. There is never any potential to throw a game. When betting on your own team, there is that potential.

 

That's why Shoeless Joe isn't in the HOF, and that's why Rose will never be either.

 

Although they are certainly not the same things, I equate them both in my mind when I consider a person's character and being deserving of the HOF. I would never vote a person into the baseball HOF if I knew they had used steroids - ESPECIALLY someone who stood in front of millions of people and said they had never used them. I don't care that they may have used them to try to win - that's a terrible argument in my mind. It's cheating any way you stretch it, and it ruins the game imho.

 

Personally I believe in my heart that the use of steroids in baseball has had a much much more detrimental affect on the sport than anything Pete Rose did while gambling. How many young kids who didn't use steroids never made it to the big leagues because of those who did? How many game results were affected by guys who were using steroids? How many championships, MVP's, batting titles, Cy Young awards etc... were affected because of the use of steroids?

 

I just believe that if you're going to forgive someone who is a proven user and allow them into the HOF, you should forgive Pete Rose and allow him in as well.

 

It will be up to the sportswriters to determine if Raffy is going to get into the hall and unlike any of the other sports, baseball has listed character as a determining factor as to whether or not a vote may be cast for someone. Pete Rose has been banned from baseball while Raffy has not and until the penalty for Steroids is a lifetime ban then players that are caught using, still have a chance to get in.

 

Yup - I understand the difference between the two, and I do understand that it will be up to the sportswriters to make or not make the choice, I guess I'm just stating my personal opinion that I would find it hypocritical and it would personally taint the HOF in my eyes for someone who has been caught using steroids to be allowed in, while Pete Rose is not. Again, me personal opinion (and all these are personal opinions) is that neither one of them deserve to be in the HOF, I just think it would be wrong for one to get in while the other does not.

 

As an aside - how is Madison these days? My wife and I both went to college there and if we had been able to find good paying jobs there in our fields of interest we'd still be there! We both LOVED the city and campus!

 

Madison is good. Heading down to the Memorial Union Terrace for a few beers tonight in fact. When did you go to school here? I was a student for '89 to '94?

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Based on this test and other suspicions, if I were a writer, I would withold my vote for Palmeiro. I wouldn't vote for him on the first ballot and I wouldn't vote for him on the fifthteenth ballot. I'd leave him at the mercy of the veterans committee.

[Blueheart05]

yeah, I think he quit, but then when he got off to that awful start (i released him on my fantasy team) he started taking them (again?).

 

I don't see how steroids can make that big of a difference in your game from one month off them to one month on them.

 

The steroid he has reportedly been caught taking stays in the body for 2-3 months or longer. It isn't something that the body releases as soon as it is no longer administered.

Edited August 3, 2005 by Blueheart05

[badgercub]

Based on this test and other suspicions, if I were a writer, I would withold my vote for Palmeiro. I wouldn't vote for him on the first ballot and I wouldn't vote for him on the fifthteenth ballot. I'd leave him at the mercy of the veterans committee.

 

I agree, without the power numbers Raffy would have been nothing special as a corner OF/1B/DH. In fact his career may have ended by now.

[Blueheart05]

Both my brother and wife are pharmacists. My brother used to lift weights and he is pretty knolwedgeable on these subjects. I spoke with him a little bit a go and he offered this information.

 

First he said Winstrol would be a steroid you would take if you wanted some strength without the abundant bulk. That would explain why Palmeiro never looked like a "user."

 

Secondly, he echoed what has been said numerous times in this thread and elsewhere and that's there no way someone accidentially injests Wintrol through some "supplement."

 

I also found this, that I found informative.

 

Next to Deca and D-bol the third most abused substance among athletes is stanozolol, as documented by the many positive drug tests

 

There's a lot more there for those who are interested.

 

Very informative, thank you for sharing. I find this to be rather insightful:

 

As many, including Ben Johnson, did not take into account it can be detected for quite some time after last use so its not advisable for drug tested athletes. Many have assumed otherwise due to the short half-life, but apparently some inactive metabolites are easily esterified, so they can be found up to 5 months after the last injection.

[cubweiser03]

Only theorizing here:

March 20: New steroid policy takes effect. "The key issue was a provision allowing for fines instead of suspensions. Under the draft, a first offense could cost a player $10,000 and/or a 10-day suspension without pay. Prior to this revelation, MLB and the union never mentioned the "and/or" provision."

 

Raffy was on Winny during spring training, about 1 to 2 months pass before he is tested in May. During the time he was on Winny he thought all he would get was the 10k fine and no one would hear of it.... so shoot up, and then boom comes this surprise change in the language. 1.5- 2 months passes, not enough time for it to clear his system and he gets caught using Winstrol. At the time he administered Winny he thought 10k at the time of detection 10 days suspension. Ooops.

 

One more thing about Winstol. It is probably the only anabolic steroid that will effect your fast twitch muscles. Track athletes love it for the strength gains without the weight gain but also because you literally can run faster. For baseball i could see one probably having an improved bat speed while on Winstrol. Its also used by AIDS patient to help them maintain muscle mass without all those nasty side effects as other anabolic steroids, and also you can be on Winstrol much longer than other steroids because of the side effect profile. 6 months (a season wouldnt be too long).

[Blueheart05]

So says this NY Times article (registration reguired):

 

The positive drug test that has left Rafael Palmeiro's legacy in doubt involved the potent anabolic steroid stanozolol, a person in baseball with direct knowledge of the sport's drug-testing program said yesterday.

 

Stanozolol, known by its brand name, Winstrol, was most notably linked to the Olympic sprinter Ben Johnson of Canada, who was stripped of a gold medal in 1988 after testing positive for that steroid.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/03/sports/baseball/03steroids.html?oref=login

According to this website

http://www.steroidtips.com/detection.htm

oral Winnie stays in your system for 3 week. Injectable Winnie stays in your system for 2 months. Either way, Raffy's been juicing during the season.

 

I doubt that it only stays in the body for 3 weeks. In fact, there is evidence to the contrary both medically and empirically. Some athletes mistakenly assume the drug is out of their system when it is housed within their fat tissue (not unlike other medications). This may be what happened in Palmerio's case. Perhaps he ended his doping prior to Spring Training but the evidence of the act was still detectable. Or, he brazenly decided to use steroids during the regular season. In either case, he has been exposed.

[Cubzfan64]

One last little comment - if anyone who is truly found guilty of using steroids ever has a chance to get into the HOF, Pete Rose should be voted in first.

Apples and Oranges really. But, I'll disagree. With whatever you want to say about taking steroids, the ultimate point was to win. There is never any potential to throw a game. When betting on your own team, there is that potential.

 

That's why Shoeless Joe isn't in the HOF, and that's why Rose will never be either.

 

Although they are certainly not the same things, I equate them both in my mind when I consider a person's character and being deserving of the HOF. I would never vote a person into the baseball HOF if I knew they had used steroids - ESPECIALLY someone who stood in front of millions of people and said they had never used them. I don't care that they may have used them to try to win - that's a terrible argument in my mind. It's cheating any way you stretch it, and it ruins the game imho.

 

Personally I believe in my heart that the use of steroids in baseball has had a much much more detrimental affect on the sport than anything Pete Rose did while gambling. How many young kids who didn't use steroids never made it to the big leagues because of those who did? How many game results were affected by guys who were using steroids? How many championships, MVP's, batting titles, Cy Young awards etc... were affected because of the use of steroids?

 

I just believe that if you're going to forgive someone who is a proven user and allow them into the HOF, you should forgive Pete Rose and allow him in as well.

 

It will be up to the sportswriters to determine if Raffy is going to get into the hall and unlike any of the other sports, baseball has listed character as a determining factor as to whether or not a vote may be cast for someone. Pete Rose has been banned from baseball while Raffy has not and until the penalty for Steroids is a lifetime ban then players that are caught using, still have a chance to get in.

 

Yup - I understand the difference between the two, and I do understand that it will be up to the sportswriters to make or not make the choice, I guess I'm just stating my personal opinion that I would find it hypocritical and it would personally taint the HOF in my eyes for someone who has been caught using steroids to be allowed in, while Pete Rose is not. Again, me personal opinion (and all these are personal opinions) is that neither one of them deserve to be in the HOF, I just think it would be wrong for one to get in while the other does not.

 

As an aside - how is Madison these days? My wife and I both went to college there and if we had been able to find good paying jobs there in our fields of interest we'd still be there! We both LOVED the city and campus!

 

Madison is good. Heading down to the Memorial Union Terrace for a few beers tonight in fact. When did you go to school here? I was a student for '89 to '94?

 

*sigh* Memorial Union Terrace and a beer - there's nothing quite that good!!

 

I went to the UW Steven's Point in 83-84 then transferred to the UW Madison where I graduated with a BS in chemistry in 86. My wife went there from 84-87 - I transferred to Madison because it got to the point eventually where I was skipping Thursday and Friday classes to road trip down to see her, then skipping Monday classes cause I didn't want to leave - seemed like I might as well just transfer :-).

 

I lived in some apartments right off State Street for a couple years and then we moved out to the West side of town when I graduated.

 

Since we got married, we've lived in Madison, Cottage Grove, Port Washington, Milwaukee, Champaign IL, Newman IL, Decatur IL and now a couple years ago moved to Londonderry, NH (about 40 miles N of Boston).

 

We both miss Wisconsin plenty, but it's nice to have distance from family a bit too :-). After a bunch of years in IL, it's also very nice to move to a state that has hills, trees and water much like WI - IL was nothing but corn and beans as far as you could see :-(.

 

Of all the college campuses I've seen, Madison's is by far the most fun and the nicest. Glad to say hi to a fellow Badger :-)

[badger1679666666]

I'm still in Madison 8), but maybe not for long :(

[Cubzfan64]

Based on this test and other suspicions, if I were a writer, I would withold my vote for Palmeiro. I wouldn't vote for him on the first ballot and I wouldn't vote for him on the fifthteenth ballot. I'd leave him at the mercy of the veterans committee.

 

I agree with you wholeheartedly - I would leave it up to his "peers" and fellow ballplayers to decide if he's worthy.

[CuseCubFan69]

Based on this test and other suspicions, if I were a writer, I would withold my vote for Palmeiro. I wouldn't vote for him on the first ballot and I wouldn't vote for him on the fifthteenth ballot. I'd leave him at the mercy of the veterans committee.

 

I agree with you wholeheartedly - I would leave it up to his "peers" and fellow ballplayers to decide if he's worthy.

 

And who is to say they won't be a bunch of ex-steroid users?

[Cubzfan64]

Based on this test and other suspicions, if I were a writer, I would withold my vote for Palmeiro. I wouldn't vote for him on the first ballot and I wouldn't vote for him on the fifthteenth ballot. I'd leave him at the mercy of the veterans committee.

 

I agree with you wholeheartedly - I would leave it up to his "peers" and fellow ballplayers to decide if he's worthy.

 

And who is to say they won't be a bunch of ex-steroid users?

 

So be it - if that's the case and they feel a player deserves to be in the HOF, who am I to disagree?

[erik316wttn]

One last little comment - if anyone who is truly found guilty of using steroids ever has a chance to get into the HOF, Pete Rose should be voted in first.

Apples and Oranges really. But, I'll disagree. With whatever you want to say about taking steroids, the ultimate point was to win. There is never any potential to throw a game. When betting on your own team, there is that potential.

 

That's why Shoeless Joe isn't in the HOF, and that's why Rose will never be either.

 

Although they are certainly not the same things, I equate them both in my mind when I consider a person's character and being deserving of the HOF. I would never vote a person into the baseball HOF if I knew they had used steroids - ESPECIALLY someone who stood in front of millions of people and said they had never used them. I don't care that they may have used them to try to win - that's a terrible argument in my mind. It's cheating any way you stretch it, and it ruins the game imho.

 

Personally I believe in my heart that the use of steroids in baseball has had a much much more detrimental affect on the sport than anything Pete Rose did while gambling. How many young kids who didn't use steroids never made it to the big leagues because of those who did? How many game results were affected by guys who were using steroids? How many championships, MVP's, batting titles, Cy Young awards etc... were affected because of the use of steroids?

 

I just believe that if you're going to forgive someone who is a proven user and allow them into the HOF, you should forgive Pete Rose and allow him in as well.

 

It will be up to the sportswriters to determine if Raffy is going to get into the hall and unlike any of the other sports, baseball has listed character as a determining factor as to whether or not a vote may be cast for someone. Pete Rose has been banned from baseball while Raffy has not and until the penalty for Steroids is a lifetime ban then players that are caught using, still have a chance to get in.

 

Yup - I understand the difference between the two, and I do understand that it will be up to the sportswriters to make or not make the choice, I guess I'm just stating my personal opinion that I would find it hypocritical and it would personally taint the HOF in my eyes for someone who has been caught using steroids to be allowed in, while Pete Rose is not. Again, me personal opinion (and all these are personal opinions) is that neither one of them deserve to be in the HOF, I just think it would be wrong for one to get in while the other does not.

 

As an aside - how is Madison these days? My wife and I both went to college there and if we had been able to find good paying jobs there in our fields of interest we'd still be there! We both LOVED the city and campus!

 

Madison is good. Heading down to the Memorial Union Terrace for a few beers tonight in fact. When did you go to school here? I was a student for '89 to '94?

 

*sigh* Memorial Union Terrace and a beer - there's nothing quite that good!!

 

I went to the UW Steven's Point in 83-84 then transferred to the UW Madison where I graduated with a BS in chemistry in 86. My wife went there from 84-87 - I transferred to Madison because it got to the point eventually where I was skipping Thursday and Friday classes to road trip down to see her, then skipping Monday classes cause I didn't want to leave - seemed like I might as well just transfer :-).

 

I lived in some apartments right off State Street for a couple years and then we moved out to the West side of town when I graduated.

 

Since we got married, we've lived in Madison, Cottage Grove, Port Washington, Milwaukee, Champaign IL, Newman IL, Decatur IL and now a couple years ago moved to Londonderry, NH (about 40 miles N of Boston).

 

We both miss Wisconsin plenty, but it's nice to have distance from family a bit too :-). After a bunch of years in IL, it's also very nice to move to a state that has hills, trees and water much like WI - IL was nothing but corn and beans as far as you could see :-(.

 

Of all the college campuses I've seen, Madison's is by far the most fun and the nicest. Glad to say hi to a fellow Badger :-)

 

That's why we Wisconsinites call Illinois people "flatlanders".

[Balsa]

A quote from Dusty regarding Palmiero:

 

Baker was asked about the 10-day suspension levied against Baltimore's Rafael Palmeiro for violating Major League Baseball's drug policy. "I wouldn't use disappointment," Baker said. "Probably surprise. If anything else, I'm disappointed for him, not baseball. Here's a guy where baseball has been his whole life for a long period of time. This guy has accomplished big things. This is a guy who has put in hours and hours of work in his job. Like I said, I'm disappointed for him."

 

Uh....WTF? :x

 

He lied to Congress, to baseball fans everywhere that took him at his word, he sullied MLB, he played everyone for the fool, and you're "disappointed for him"?!?!!?

 

Yeah, he put in hard work, but with the edge of steroids Dusty. Although I suppose you've already prepared your statement for Bonds...

[WindyCity]

Both my brother and wife are pharmacists. My brother used to lift weights and he is pretty knolwedgeable on these subjects. I spoke with him a little bit a go and he offered this information.

 

First he said Winstrol would be a steroid you would take if you wanted some strength without the abundant bulk. That would explain why Palmeiro never looked like a "user."

 

Secondly, he echoed what has been said numerous times in this thread and elsewhere and that's there no way someone accidentially injests Wintrol through some "supplement."

 

I also found this, that I found informative.

 

Next to Deca and D-bol the third most abused substance among athletes is stanozolol, as documented by the many positive drug tests

 

There's a lot more there for those who are interested.

 

 

 

Time for Raffy to try some NoHOFforyoulol. :lol:

[Cubzfan64]

If I recall correctly, we Wisconsinites also called people from Illinois FIB's - but that's a whole different meaning :-P.

[erik316wttn]

Apparently, the steroid Raffy took is very easy to detect. So easy, in fact, that no known masking agent can cover it up.

 

Also,

 

-- It takes 6-8 weeks for the drug to have any effect

 

-- It's very difficult to find in the US

 

-- the pill form lingers in your body for up to a month, the injection for several months

 

-- 11 of the 12 positive drug tests in MLB in 2004 tested positive for Stanzonol, probably because you can get strength from it, but it doesn't bulk you up.

 

-- It's primarily used by vets to help large animals like horses recover from surgery. Athletes like it because it can help them prevent serious injury.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050804/ap_on_sp_ba_ne/bba_drugs_palmeiro

[Blueheart05]

A quote from Dusty regarding Palmiero:

 

Baker was asked about the 10-day suspension levied against Baltimore's Rafael Palmeiro for violating Major League Baseball's drug policy. "I wouldn't use disappointment," Baker said. "Probably surprise. If anything else, I'm disappointed for him, not baseball. Here's a guy where baseball has been his whole life for a long period of time. This guy has accomplished big things. This is a guy who has put in hours and hours of work in his job. Like I said, I'm disappointed for him."

 

Uh....WTF? :x

 

He lied to Congress, to baseball fans everywhere that took him at his word, he sullied MLB, he played everyone for the fool, and you're "disappointed for him"?!?!!?

 

Yeah, he put in hard work, but with the edge of steroids Dusty. Although I suppose you've already prepared your statement for Bonds...

 

I'm not sure that I disagree with Dusty here. Pamlerio disgraced himself (and his family). Oddly, MLB comes off looking good because outing Palmerio proves that they are able to police themselves as it relates to steroid abuse (it says nothing for HGH usage throughout the league). I think this is Dusty's way of saying Pamlerio ruined his reputation without actually coming out and saying it directly. However, when Dusty says he's "surprised" I think that speaks volumes about Palmerio's ability to lie (and look believeable).