Re: Baby Bonds exposed yet again - yawn...
- From: WJR <abcofficialsunlimited@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 15:47:09 -0500
On 8 Mar 2006 10:43:02 -0800, Ron Johnson wrote:
What we can verify is that he was tested last season, and we can
also verify that he tested negative. If he's on steroids, what is the
explanation for that?
That's easy. It's likely that a certain number of athletes will
be ahead of the testers.
Only the truly clueless do not know how to beat the testing systems and the
systems that are used (which include frequency, notification,
methodologies, etc) in MLB are about as state of the art as 4 cycle
engines.
When designing a chemical testing system for humans, one must consider the
consequences of that system. Really, do you want to catch every weed tooter
in your warehouse? Do you ever want to ship anything?
Is there anyone here who believes that MLB's systems weren't designed for
minimal detections?
--
Drop the abc and xyz for email
www.officials-unlimited.com/forum
.
- References:
- Baby Bonds exposed yet again - yawn...
- From: Ronald Matthews
- Re: Baby Bonds exposed yet again - yawn...
- From: alcarm1964
- Re: Baby Bonds exposed yet again - yawn...
- From: Chris Cathcart
- Re: Baby Bonds exposed yet again - yawn...
- From: Wunnuy
- Re: Baby Bonds exposed yet again - yawn...
- From: Chris Cathcart
- Re: Baby Bonds exposed yet again - yawn...
- From: Wunnuy
- Re: Baby Bonds exposed yet again - yawn...
- From: Raymond DiPerna
- Re: Baby Bonds exposed yet again - yawn...
- From: Wunnuy
- Re: Baby Bonds exposed yet again - yawn...
- From: Raymond DiPerna
- Re: Baby Bonds exposed yet again - yawn...
- From: M. Zaiem Beg
- Re: Baby Bonds exposed yet again - yawn...
- From: Ron Johnson
- Baby Bonds exposed yet again - yawn...
- Prev by Date: Re: What WILL Bonds say?
- Next by Date: Re: What Bonds Contains
- Previous by thread: Re: Baby Bonds exposed yet again - yawn...
- Next by thread: Re: Baby Bonds exposed yet again - yawn...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|