August 8, 2009

MLBPA on Oritz

David Ortiz holds a press conference today at 12:30 to discuss his positive steroid test, but the MLBPA issued a press release that indicates Ortiz is not going to tell us much:

“The sealing orders, which were appropriately issued by the various courts to maintain the collectively-bargained confidentiality of the testing, prevent the Association from supplying a player with specifics regarding his 2003 test results, or from discussing those specifics publicly. The practical effect of the sealing orders, if that confidentiality is to be maintained, is to further preclude the Players Association from confirming or denying whether a player’s name appears on any list which purportedly discloses the 2003 test results. The result is that any union member alleged to have tested positive in 2003 because his name supposedly appears on some list — most recently David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez – finds himself in an extremely unfair position; his reputation has been threatened by a violation of the court’s orders, but respect for those orders now leaves him without access to the information that might permit him to restore his good name.

“Unlike those anonymous lawyers who have violated the court orders — and The New York Times, which has authorized an active and willful pursuit of those violations — the Association will respect the courts’ rulings. But we can legally say the following, each of which we suggest must be considered in assessing any and all newspaper reports stating a player has “tested positive for steroids in 2003.”

“First, the number of players on the so-called “government list” meaningfully exceeds the number of players agreed by the bargaining parties to have tested positive in 2003. Accordingly, the presence of a player’s name on any such list does not necessarily mean that the player used a prohibited substance or that the player tested positive under our collectively bargained program.

“Second, substantial scientific questions exist as to the interpretation of some of the 2003 test results. The more definitive methods that are utilized by the lab that administers the current Drug Agreement were not utilized by the lab responsible for the anonymous testing program in 2003. The collective bargaining parties did not pursue definitive answers regarding these inconclusive results, since those answers were unnecessary to the administration of the 2003 program.

“Third, in 2003, legally available nutritional supplements could trigger an initial “positive” test under our program. To account for this, each “test” conducted in 2003 actually consisted of a pair of collections: the first was unannounced and random, the second was approximately 7 days later, with the player advised to cease taking supplements during the interim. Under the 2003 program, a test could be initially reported as “positive”, but not treated as such by the bargaining parties on account of the second test. “

That should be sufficient cover for Ortiz to say he’s clean.

2 thoughts on “MLBPA on Oritz

  1. Bob Tufts

    From Michael Schmidt NYT column…

    “Officials in the commissioner’s office and the players union have said they believe at least 8 of the roughly 100 players who tested positive for a performance-enhancing drug in 2003 were using the supplement 19-norandrostenedione, which was sold over the counter at the time and contained a powerful steroid. If Ortiz was among those eight players, he could contend that his positive test was caused by an over-the-counter supplement. ”

    19-norandrostenedione doesn’t “contain(ed) a powerful steroid – it is a precursor to nandrolone and wasn’t declared a Schedule III controlled substance until 2005.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/19-Norandrostenedione

    And a study published by JAMA (done by Don Catlin) that discusses positve tests..
    http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/284/20/2618

    “Conclusion Our study suggests that trace contamination of androstenedione with 19-norandrostenedione is sufficient to cause urine test results positive for 19-norandrosterone, the standard marker for nandrolone use. Oral steroid doses as small as 10 µg are absorbed and excreted in urine. Some brands of androstenedione are grossly mislabeled. Careful analysis of androstenedione preparations is recommended in all studies of its biological effects. ”

    Legal (at the time) substances, retesting of substances (Bonds and THG)….WTF? Are players going to be banned on ex post facto law?

    ReplyReply
  2. Bob Tufts

    and more…More Schmidt inaccuracies…

    “All players who tested positive in 2003 were told that their tests had been seized by the government, according to the report presented to Major League Baseball by George J. Mitchell, who headed an investigation into the use of performance-enhancing drugs”.

    Mitchell said it, but fact checking would also show this…

    From Don Fehr leteer to Waxman and Davis….page 6 of 10
    http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20080703114405.pdf

    “Two important points need to be made about these conversations. First, players were not told that they had tested positive in 2003; they were told that they were named on a list of players whose records the government was targeting. They also were told that, as reported in the press, the government had seized testing records in April, that in May the government had issued a grand jury subpoena with a list of player names attached, and that their name was included. The players were not told, however, what their 2003 test results were. Indeed, the MLBPA attorneys who spoke to the players had not seen the 2003 test results.”

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *