Topic: Anderson Silva
Anderson Silva Fails Pre-Fight Drug Test for Anabolic Steroids
Forum Home | Topic Page | Fighter Page Help
Anonymous Mode
You are not logged in to Tapology. When browsing anonymously, profanities and images are automatically removed from the forum.
02.03.2015 | 9:01 PM ET
UFC Statement
So, can we just give GSP the GOAT moniker now? I mean, come on now.
Oh, and Diaz failed a post-fight test for weed, which is irrelevant.
So, can we just give GSP the GOAT moniker now? I mean, come on now.
Oh, and Diaz failed a post-fight test for weed, which is irrelevant.
"When a game cannot be won, change the game."
Fighter Details
- Given Name: Anderson da Silva
- Pro MMA Record: 34-11-0, 1 NC (Win-Loss-Draw)
- Nickname: The Spider
- Current Streak: 3 Losses
- Age: 1975-04-14 | Date of Birth: 1975.04.14
- Last Fight: October 31, 2020 in UFC
- Weight Class: Middleweight | Last Weigh-In: 184.0 lbs
- Affiliation: N/A
- Height: 6'2" (188cm) | Reach: 77.5" (197cm)
- Career Disclosed Earnings: $4,857,000 USD
- Born: Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil
- Fighting out of: Curitiba, Parana, Brazil
- College: N/A
- Foundation Style: Muay Thai
-
Fighter Links:
-
Personal Links:
Responses Page 10
06.27.2015 | 9:28 AM ET
I honestly don't think this means anything. For example does anyone have any evidence that you can have false positives? I mean I am not expert, but seems pretty far fetched that you can test positive for substances that you never took.............. Also do we know a positive sample is not tested several times? Im pretty sure a standard urine sample has enough substance to be tested more then once. Also Anderson having one clean sample back, is not that surprising. There stuff you can take to dilute your urine on initial sample and can trick tests, which is why they have people give at least two samples.
edit
Looks like CT might have answer/beat me to some of my questions/statements
edit
Looks like CT might have answer/beat me to some of my questions/statements
* Edited at 06.27.2015, 9:41 AM ET *
"here I come to save the day"
06.27.2015 | 9:45 AM ET
Mass spec is for sure the way to go. Something else it's able to do that's extremely helpful is with certain drugs like cocaine that only stays in your system for 48-72 hours (I believe) is pick up the metabolites that the body turns cocaine into, giving them a much longer period in order to bust someone using that. It's pretty pinpoint, I take Fentanyl for extreme back pain and if the level of Fentanyl in my urine samples doesn't match up the way it should I would be pulled from my medication and no longer seen by the physicians in the clinic. They've made it basically impossible to abuse the medication they prescribe you or to take things that aren't prescribed to you. Again, with me being just a regular joe I'm confused as to why these methods are used on me and not used on guys who fight for a multi-billion dollar company. And if the samples fighters give are sent to a lab with a mass spectrometer I have no idea how there's any debate to the conclusion of the tests. It makes me question if the UFC really want to catch everyone under their roster that's on PEDs? It's a little bit suspicious to me that Anderson tests positive now, in the twilight of his career, unless this was a one time thing related to his gruesome leg injury.
Edit: Also, you don't really get false positives when using a mass spectrometer. Now when you're using a standard qualitative drug testing machine that just says "positive" or "negative" in regards to substances that's when you start getting false positives. I tested positive for cocaine on a qualitative machine and then looked up a list of medications that would cause a false positive for cocaine and buspirone (which I'm prescribed) is one of the medications. Completely different and FAR less reliable than mass specs.
Edit: Also, you don't really get false positives when using a mass spectrometer. Now when you're using a standard qualitative drug testing machine that just says "positive" or "negative" in regards to substances that's when you start getting false positives. I tested positive for cocaine on a qualitative machine and then looked up a list of medications that would cause a false positive for cocaine and buspirone (which I'm prescribed) is one of the medications. Completely different and FAR less reliable than mass specs.
* Edited at 06.27.2015, 9:58 AM ET *
This user is suspended from posting until 1 year, 5 months, 3 weeks, 2 days, 10 hours, and 2 minutes from now.
06.27.2015 | 11:25 AM ET
@CT
oh true, I was not even thinking of recreational drugs. Forgot about that. I was thinking about only from PEDS/steriods perspective. I don't think or know of any thing that can cause false positive from such substances. Does anyone know of anything? From a peds stand point I feel like there virtually no chance that you could have a false positive while taking legal substances, unless there some info out there I am unaware of.
oh true, I was not even thinking of recreational drugs. Forgot about that. I was thinking about only from PEDS/steriods perspective. I don't think or know of any thing that can cause false positive from such substances. Does anyone know of anything? From a peds stand point I feel like there virtually no chance that you could have a false positive while taking legal substances, unless there some info out there I am unaware of.
* Edited at 06.27.2015, 11:25 AM ET *
"here I come to save the day"
06.27.2015 | 1:10 PM ET
@Franklin - Designer supplements come out all the time, just as quickly as previous ones are made illegal, that share things in common with anabolic steroids. Until the new designer supplement/steroid becomes illegal (which it will, they just can't know in advance as all these new supps are created), a legal product can give you a positive for an illegal one.
Just to give an example from a few years back, a sample from someone using ATD (androsta-1,4,6-triene-3,17-dione), which has since been made illegal, run through a gas chromatography/mass spectrometry machine will produce a positive for the flagged known Boldenone metabolite (17beta-hydroxy-5beta-androst-1-en-3-one) just as if you were taking the anabolic steroid Boldenone (17beta-hydroxyandrosta-1,4-dien-3-one). If the person can provide a full list of all things taken and ATD was legal at the time they took it and cross-referenced with Boldenone, the testing agency would be able to tell based on looking through all the metabolites that ATD was taken, not Boldenone, even though they share the metabolite that flagged their sample. If that person didn't provide ATD as a supplement they were taking, there'd be no way to try and cross-reference to show innocence and they'd get the punishment for taking Boldenone. So it's good to know every supp taken, because in that scenario if the person couldn't remember the ATD, they'd really get a suspension for Boldenone and honestly never have used it. If a new legal supplement is producing the same metabolites as a banned PED though, it's only not banned yet because it was as of then unknown and will quickly also be banned. But in a situation like that, it's possible someone is telling the truth.
I don't know that it'd be considered a "false positive" per se though, since you really did have a known anabolic steroid metabolite in your sample. You just had it in your system by taking something that was legal at the time taken and happens to appear on a PED screen as if it were a known anabolic steroid via a shared metabolite.
Just to give an example from a few years back, a sample from someone using ATD (androsta-1,4,6-triene-3,17-dione), which has since been made illegal, run through a gas chromatography/mass spectrometry machine will produce a positive for the flagged known Boldenone metabolite (17beta-hydroxy-5beta-androst-1-en-3-one) just as if you were taking the anabolic steroid Boldenone (17beta-hydroxyandrosta-1,4-dien-3-one). If the person can provide a full list of all things taken and ATD was legal at the time they took it and cross-referenced with Boldenone, the testing agency would be able to tell based on looking through all the metabolites that ATD was taken, not Boldenone, even though they share the metabolite that flagged their sample. If that person didn't provide ATD as a supplement they were taking, there'd be no way to try and cross-reference to show innocence and they'd get the punishment for taking Boldenone. So it's good to know every supp taken, because in that scenario if the person couldn't remember the ATD, they'd really get a suspension for Boldenone and honestly never have used it. If a new legal supplement is producing the same metabolites as a banned PED though, it's only not banned yet because it was as of then unknown and will quickly also be banned. But in a situation like that, it's possible someone is telling the truth.
I don't know that it'd be considered a "false positive" per se though, since you really did have a known anabolic steroid metabolite in your sample. You just had it in your system by taking something that was legal at the time taken and happens to appear on a PED screen as if it were a known anabolic steroid via a shared metabolite.
* Edited at 06.27.2015, 1:14 PM ET *
"I Stab Waterbeds!"
06.27.2015 | 2:36 PM ET
@Krpo
I did know that, but I still appreciate you going into detail about it . That would still in terms of UFC drug testing be a failed test even if you provided ATD would it not? Since you are still using performance enhancer despite if you did not know it or not. It just legal to buy, but in terms of competition would it not still count as failed drug test? I believe Nate M failed a drug test before while on something that was legal but ended up containing performance enhancers.
I did know that, but I still appreciate you going into detail about it . That would still in terms of UFC drug testing be a failed test even if you provided ATD would it not? Since you are still using performance enhancer despite if you did not know it or not. It just legal to buy, but in terms of competition would it not still count as failed drug test? I believe Nate M failed a drug test before while on something that was legal but ended up containing performance enhancers.
"here I come to save the day"