February 3, 200917 yr Any prescription could cause immediate death when mixed with other drugs. Well thats not exactly true. Not every prescription drug can cause immediate death due to synergistic effects with another drug. (Im not a pharmacist or dr so im starting to get into areas that are not my expertise). I agree that if there is a significant risk of drug interaction that getting a Dr's prescription for your own safety may be necessary. But, Bonds was being given the drug by Dr's with licenses who were probably monitoring his health and the interactions of the drug far better than most Dr's monitor regular patients. Im just feel that people should be able to make their own decisions on what type of risks they are willing to assume to be successful in life.
February 3, 200917 yr QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 3, 2009 -> 04:00 PM) Well thats not exactly true. Not every prescription drug can cause immediate death due to synergistic effects with another drug. (Im not a pharmacist or dr so im starting to get into areas that are not my expertise). I agree that if there is a significant risk of drug interaction that getting a Dr's prescription for your own safety may be necessary. But, Bonds was being given the drug by Dr's with licenses who were probably monitoring his health and the interactions of the drug far better than most Dr's monitor regular patients. Im just feel that people should be able to make their own decisions on what type of risks they are willing to assume to be successful in life. But then the problem is, how will a random person know that it's necessary unless a doctor tells them? Isn't it then easier to control the substance and prescribe it as needed rather than letting anyone use? I understand what you "feel." But in reality it doesn't work.
February 4, 200917 yr Government unsealed a lot of the Bonds evidence today. One interesting thing I noticed was the results for the 2000 and 2001 tests he took which tested positive for various steroids, tests which are key to the government case. The interesting thing was...I don't recall anyone ever describing Bonds taking the drugs he tested positive for. In the court documents, prosecutors say Bonds tested positive in 2000 and 2001 for the steroids methenelone and nandrolone. Prosecutors want to use those test results to show Bonds lied when he told a grand jury in December 2003 that he never knowingly used steroids. In addition, a government-retained scientist said he found evidence that Bonds used the designer steroid THG upon retesting a urine sample Bonds supplied as part of baseball's anonymous survey drug testing in 2003. According to the books that are out there, Bonds's steroid use started after the 1998 home run challenge between McSteroid and Steroidosa. The stuff he supposedly started taking was Winstrol, the drug Palmeiro tested positive for, which led to his tearing of his bicep in '99. And then after that, he switched to the THG program from BALCO. I don't believe anyone has outlined a part of the story yet where those drugs fit in. Thus, once again adding to my contention that you have to question the man's whole bloody career, because you just don't have a clue what he started taking when.
February 4, 200917 yr QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 4, 2009 -> 04:16 PM) Government unsealed a lot of the Bonds evidence today. One interesting thing I noticed was the results for the 2000 and 2001 tests he took which tested positive for various steroids, tests which are key to the government case. The interesting thing was...I don't recall anyone ever describing Bonds taking the drugs he tested positive for. According to the books that are out there, Bonds's steroid use started after the 1998 home run challenge between McSteroid and Steroidosa. The stuff he supposedly started taking was Winstrol, the drug Palmeiro tested positive for, which led to his tearing of his bicep in '99. And then after that, he switched to the THG program from BALCO. I don't believe anyone has outlined a part of the story yet where those drugs fit in. Thus, once again adding to my contention that you have to question the man's whole bloody career, because you just don't have a clue what he started taking when. the tape of anderson talking with bonds in my opinion is absoultely enough evidence to convict....
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.