yeahright
Well-known member
- Awards
- 1
Question and answer about the effects of HGH
BY T.J. QUINN AND MICHAEL O'KEEFFE
New York Daily News
NEW YORK - The events of the past week were enough to make a molecular biologist's head spin, much less anyone who flipped to the back of the paper to read a box score. You may still have a few unanswered questions about the Jason Grimsley imbroglio and the fallout from the raid on his house Tuesday of last week. The New York Daily News offers this primer to help you digest this strange week in baseball.
WAS THE RAID ON GRIMSLEY'S HOUSE REALLY RELATED TO THE BARRY BONDS PERJURY INVESTIGATION?
According to Grimsley's lawyer, Ed Novak, it was. He says the feds wanted Grimsley to cooperate and even wear a wire, and raided his home when he refused. No one has explained how a wire would work if Grimsley is on a different team than Bonds, isn't friends with Bonds, and has to dress in front of teammates and news reporters every day. One veteran FBI investigator told the Daily News it wouldn't be hard to wire someone inconspicuously, even in a clubhouse - "We've wired guys in prisons," he said - but that he didn't see how Grimsley could get the IRS to Bonds. Whatever the case may be, whether the feds are after Bonds or are targeting Grimsley as a user or distributor, Novak successfully changed the frame of the story: in one day his client went from blubbering snitch to stand-up guy who refused to wear a wire, and Novak turned the focus back to Bonds. No comment from the feds, but they'll probably have the final word.
U.S. VS. BONDS: WILL BONDS BE INDICTED?
Baseball officials believe there's a good chance Bonds will be indicted, and lawyers following the case believe it even more. The first reason is the general, oft-quoted axiom that you can indict a ham sandwich if you want to. If the feds want an indictment, they'll get one, although it doesn't mean the case is necessarily a winner in court. But by subpoenaing Bonds' physician, his team trainer and his mistress, the U.S. attorney seems determined to bring Bonds to trial, and eventually to prison. Bonds could conceivably do more time for perjury than Victor Conte did for steroid trafficking.
WILL BASEBALL STRENGTHEN ITS TESTING PROGRAM AGAIN?
Possibly, but probably not without congressional prodding. Baseball's collective bargaining agreement expires after this season and MLB brass hopes to revisit revenue sharing and the luxury tax on payrolls. The owners pressured the union to revise the drug policy twice already, and they will be reluctant to expend any more leverage on the doping issue before the economic issues are settled. But if Congress rattles sabres, look for MLB to push for keeping urine samples longer and adding a provision that allows for blood testing in the event - and only in the event - that a viable test for HGH is established. Otherwise they're content to wait for the urine test that may or may not be created.
DOES MLB'S INVESTIGATION CONFLICT WITH THE GOVERNMENT'S PROBE INTO DOPING AND BONDS' POSSIBLE PERJURY/TAX EVASION CHARGES?
It sure looks like it. Barry Bonds' attorney Michael Rains says his client won't talk to former Sen. George Mitchell unless he can be assured that Bonds' statements won't later be used against him in a federal perjury investigation. The FBI has asked Bonds' former girlfriend Kimberly Bell, meanwhile, not to meet with Mitchell; the feds are afraid she'll say something that will contradict and discredit her previous statements. Other players and witnesses may also be reluctant to talk to Mitchell if they think their conversations could wind up as evidence in federal court.
HOW CAN SPORTS OFFICIALS CATCH HGH CHEATS IF URINE TESTS DON'T EXIST AND BLOOD TESTS ARE QUESTIONABLE?
By catching them with the goods. Most testing programs allow for "non-analytic positives," meaning a determination that someone had or took a banned substance, but without a positive drug test. In 2004, the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency suspended Olympic runner Alvin Harrison for four years even though he did not test positive for a performance-enhancing drug. Harrison was disciplined thanks to documents and other evidence obtained during the BALCO investigation. And Grimsley was suspended 50 games - though he no longer is on a team - for possessing HGH.
CAN PLAYERS FIND WAYS TO BEAT THE BAN ON AMPHETAMINES?
They can if they want. Don Catlin at the UCLA Olympic testing lab has already identified ``designer'' stimulants that have been modified to beat testing. Adrenaline is another alternative that is difficult to detect. And don't be surprised, as one player noted, if some players turn to an old favorite when they hit their first August dog days without mother's little helper: cocaine. MLB only tests for cocaine when it has probable cause.
WHY IS HGH HARD TO DETECT?
The body produces it naturally, for one thing, so it's already in your system. Artificial HGH looks almost identical, biochemically speaking. One test looks at the molecular weight of the GH in the body, and if there are two different weights present, it means some of it is probably artificial. But you have to catch an athlete right after it's been ingested to get a positive, and according to doping experts, most HGH and steroid use is done out of competition, when athletes can hide from testers. Steroids are easier to catch because users throw their testosterone/epitestosterone (T/E) ratios out of whack (steroids are artificial testosterone). BALCO beat that test, however, by adding both T and E to "the cream," which elevated the levels equally. The available science is also better at detecting fake testosterone.
WHAT ARE THE HEALTH RISKS OF TAKING HGH?
Some studies suggest that HGH supplements may boost your risk of cancer, especially prostate and breast cancer. Other studies have linked HGH use to breast enlargement in men. Supplemental HGH may also boost your risk of diabetes, raise your blood pressure, and cause abnormal growth of your hands, feet, and face. Former Yankee Jim Leyritz, who says he took amephetamines and used HGH briefly in 2000, saw first-hand the detrimental effects: "After surgery in 2000, I tried it. I have prostate cancer in my family and that's the first thing they tell you to be careful of if you're going to take something like that," Leyritz says. "And sure enough after two weeks . . . after two weeks of taking it, trying to heal faster, my PSA levels shot through the roof. I quit taking it."
BY T.J. QUINN AND MICHAEL O'KEEFFE
New York Daily News
NEW YORK - The events of the past week were enough to make a molecular biologist's head spin, much less anyone who flipped to the back of the paper to read a box score. You may still have a few unanswered questions about the Jason Grimsley imbroglio and the fallout from the raid on his house Tuesday of last week. The New York Daily News offers this primer to help you digest this strange week in baseball.
WAS THE RAID ON GRIMSLEY'S HOUSE REALLY RELATED TO THE BARRY BONDS PERJURY INVESTIGATION?
According to Grimsley's lawyer, Ed Novak, it was. He says the feds wanted Grimsley to cooperate and even wear a wire, and raided his home when he refused. No one has explained how a wire would work if Grimsley is on a different team than Bonds, isn't friends with Bonds, and has to dress in front of teammates and news reporters every day. One veteran FBI investigator told the Daily News it wouldn't be hard to wire someone inconspicuously, even in a clubhouse - "We've wired guys in prisons," he said - but that he didn't see how Grimsley could get the IRS to Bonds. Whatever the case may be, whether the feds are after Bonds or are targeting Grimsley as a user or distributor, Novak successfully changed the frame of the story: in one day his client went from blubbering snitch to stand-up guy who refused to wear a wire, and Novak turned the focus back to Bonds. No comment from the feds, but they'll probably have the final word.
U.S. VS. BONDS: WILL BONDS BE INDICTED?
Baseball officials believe there's a good chance Bonds will be indicted, and lawyers following the case believe it even more. The first reason is the general, oft-quoted axiom that you can indict a ham sandwich if you want to. If the feds want an indictment, they'll get one, although it doesn't mean the case is necessarily a winner in court. But by subpoenaing Bonds' physician, his team trainer and his mistress, the U.S. attorney seems determined to bring Bonds to trial, and eventually to prison. Bonds could conceivably do more time for perjury than Victor Conte did for steroid trafficking.
WILL BASEBALL STRENGTHEN ITS TESTING PROGRAM AGAIN?
Possibly, but probably not without congressional prodding. Baseball's collective bargaining agreement expires after this season and MLB brass hopes to revisit revenue sharing and the luxury tax on payrolls. The owners pressured the union to revise the drug policy twice already, and they will be reluctant to expend any more leverage on the doping issue before the economic issues are settled. But if Congress rattles sabres, look for MLB to push for keeping urine samples longer and adding a provision that allows for blood testing in the event - and only in the event - that a viable test for HGH is established. Otherwise they're content to wait for the urine test that may or may not be created.
DOES MLB'S INVESTIGATION CONFLICT WITH THE GOVERNMENT'S PROBE INTO DOPING AND BONDS' POSSIBLE PERJURY/TAX EVASION CHARGES?
It sure looks like it. Barry Bonds' attorney Michael Rains says his client won't talk to former Sen. George Mitchell unless he can be assured that Bonds' statements won't later be used against him in a federal perjury investigation. The FBI has asked Bonds' former girlfriend Kimberly Bell, meanwhile, not to meet with Mitchell; the feds are afraid she'll say something that will contradict and discredit her previous statements. Other players and witnesses may also be reluctant to talk to Mitchell if they think their conversations could wind up as evidence in federal court.
HOW CAN SPORTS OFFICIALS CATCH HGH CHEATS IF URINE TESTS DON'T EXIST AND BLOOD TESTS ARE QUESTIONABLE?
By catching them with the goods. Most testing programs allow for "non-analytic positives," meaning a determination that someone had or took a banned substance, but without a positive drug test. In 2004, the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency suspended Olympic runner Alvin Harrison for four years even though he did not test positive for a performance-enhancing drug. Harrison was disciplined thanks to documents and other evidence obtained during the BALCO investigation. And Grimsley was suspended 50 games - though he no longer is on a team - for possessing HGH.
CAN PLAYERS FIND WAYS TO BEAT THE BAN ON AMPHETAMINES?
They can if they want. Don Catlin at the UCLA Olympic testing lab has already identified ``designer'' stimulants that have been modified to beat testing. Adrenaline is another alternative that is difficult to detect. And don't be surprised, as one player noted, if some players turn to an old favorite when they hit their first August dog days without mother's little helper: cocaine. MLB only tests for cocaine when it has probable cause.
WHY IS HGH HARD TO DETECT?
The body produces it naturally, for one thing, so it's already in your system. Artificial HGH looks almost identical, biochemically speaking. One test looks at the molecular weight of the GH in the body, and if there are two different weights present, it means some of it is probably artificial. But you have to catch an athlete right after it's been ingested to get a positive, and according to doping experts, most HGH and steroid use is done out of competition, when athletes can hide from testers. Steroids are easier to catch because users throw their testosterone/epitestosterone (T/E) ratios out of whack (steroids are artificial testosterone). BALCO beat that test, however, by adding both T and E to "the cream," which elevated the levels equally. The available science is also better at detecting fake testosterone.
WHAT ARE THE HEALTH RISKS OF TAKING HGH?
Some studies suggest that HGH supplements may boost your risk of cancer, especially prostate and breast cancer. Other studies have linked HGH use to breast enlargement in men. Supplemental HGH may also boost your risk of diabetes, raise your blood pressure, and cause abnormal growth of your hands, feet, and face. Former Yankee Jim Leyritz, who says he took amephetamines and used HGH briefly in 2000, saw first-hand the detrimental effects: "After surgery in 2000, I tried it. I have prostate cancer in my family and that's the first thing they tell you to be careful of if you're going to take something like that," Leyritz says. "And sure enough after two weeks . . . after two weeks of taking it, trying to heal faster, my PSA levels shot through the roof. I quit taking it."
