• Keep up to date with Ausbb via Twitter and Facebook. Please add us!
  • Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

    The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.

    Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.

Robert Wilkes Capo

i think urine tests are still more effective for anabolic steroids, or perhaps they are cheaper.

It would be great if blood tests were the norm, i have always dreaded some dude staring at me. Still have not got over my mates when i was 16 making fun of my dick. Fortunately some nice observations since have tempered my mental damage.
 
Last edited:
Urine is easier to collect, cheaper and still picks up most stuff. Nicer for athletes too.

Blood testing is necessary for the hGH test and EPO.
 
Urine is also easier to manipulate and the testing procedure (HPLC) is also not the greatest method for detecting very small amounts and/or unknown compounds. I think it should be one or the other, not both.
 
SP, if they told you that does not say much about ASADA.

Perhaps they should say something intelliegent like the literature demonstrates that the most effective time to test for GH is in the morning.

Referring to the source,if it was AusBB, is rather stupid.
 
lkt004 said:
Urine is also easier to manipulate and the testing procedure (HPLC) is also not the greatest method for detecting very small amounts and/or unknown compounds. I think it should be one or the other, not both.
Click to expand...

Its not easy to manipulate if the system is a good one and maintains a proper chain of custody.

If you have seen how ASADA do it, there is no way you can manipulate it by using a colostomy bag or any of those stories that used to circulate. At worst, it is no more suspectible to manipulation that taking a blood sample.
 

I am more talking about manipulation in terms of urine in the body, not so much at the time of testing. I am not going to go into details as to not provoke the testers but i am sure they know it already. I just thought by now someone would have come up with better testing methods and protocols (blood only).

But then there is probably a whole lot more money in concealing than revealing!
 

Ah ok, got you. One thing ASADA does now is test for specific gravity of the sample on the spot. This means that if you are overly diluted, the ASADA testers hang around with you until you can produce urine of sufficient quality. One friend was telling me that post comp he had to do a test, but because he sauna'd so hard to make weight, and then rehydrated, he was pissing clear for hours. The testers stayed with him until 3am from memory until he was able to produce a proper sample. This is obviously a weakness of urine testing.
 
Well if that is happening, reinforces my view that public funding of tests will come under review.

Good stuff guys, keep it coming. All useful points.
 
Jealousy is a funny thing, i wonder if those issues have anything to do with some high profile PA lifters moving into other Feds?
 
For fucks sake (excuse my french), people are so annoying and petty. Sucks that you have to put up with that, imagine if you came to a GPC/CAPO meet to watch, it would be the controversy of the century!

Just keep lifting stuff and promoting, you'll keep getting stronger, they will keep getting weaker!
 
spartacus said:
Well if that is happening, reinforces my view that public funding of tests will come under review.

Good stuff guys, keep it coming. All useful points.
Click to expand...

spartacus, have you read the Crawford Report? The government has already looked at sports funding in considerable detail. The recommendation was to increase funding for sports overall, but look at allocation of funding individual sports on merit and participation numbers, and not favour olympic sports. It was ignored. While some olympic sports like swimming got less, this was a result of the poor showing at the London olympics rather than policy.


They won't review public funding of testing. In fact, you're a bit late with your prediction, because about 5 days ago the Federal Government announced a $3.5million injection to ASADA and will beef up its investigative powers (which will no doubt mean they can now compel interrogation of non-athletes/support personnel).

It might be your view that public funding should come under review, which is a perfectly valid opinion, but IMO, not a very good gauge of the current political environment.


ASADA itself came under parliamentary review in 2009 by DoHA. The review did not make any recommendations on funding, but rather that it's corporate governance needed improvement. Look at the language of both sides of parliament when they introduced the amendment bill: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/ministers/publishing.nsf/Content/sp-yr09-ke-kesp160909.htm
http://www.andrewsouthcott.com.au/Media/Speeches/tabid/76/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/628/Australian-Sports-Anti-Doping-Authority-Amendment-Bill-2009.aspx


They will not go to a user-pay system. $12-15 million is nothing in the federal budget and a perception of a strong stance on anti-doping resonates with the electorate. In the wake of the ACC report, both sides of politics will look to take advantage of the public mood and beef up funding of ASADA. They are completely bi-partisan on this issue. Many guys here will not agree, but rightly or wrongly I don't think the views here are reflective of public sentiment.

You might find it useful to review the ASADA annual reports. If you don't think they aren't transparent enough, the formal channel to get research material is FOI as it is a government agency.
 
*Deleted Quote*

Just have to take it as a compliment. No one gives a shit about the people who are coming last.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Again, i dont care if they do or not.

But lets look at the scoreboard, no. of tests for PA appears to be going down and no. of user pay going up as a proportion of total sports tests. Remember i am focusing on powerlifting.

I have already pointed to extra attenion on drugs in sport, but dont think this necesarily implies more drug testing.

My opinion is that any paper on powerlifting should indeed include a focus on what heppens elsewhere, especially if goal is to promote possible use of drug testing throughout sport.

Dont worry, i will be thorough, certainly more than someone i know.

I also think ASADA should again publish the no. of tests per sport, and that PA should publish the names of who is tested. The public and PA members have a right to know. Ask them, and see if they wish that happened.

I note that few Oceania lifters get tested by their national feds, although a few get tested when competing in Australia (IPF).
 
Last edited:
Sweden has relevance to Australia given my throught over whether it would be possible to support GPC or CAPO, or whether events may allow certain individuals to destroy other feds through negative attention.

Answer, thankfully, is all can survive, although i pity those who dont seek to protect each in the coming onslaught that may have begun. Sweden is strict, but has all three (IPF, WPC and GPC).

Sweden Powerlifting - Federations and Gyms | Violent Hero

You see what i mean about the possibility of a different and better culture for powerlifting. Sweden shows that such a possibility exists in line with the sentiment of most forum members.
 
Last edited:
no i realise that, worth noting though.

If one wants to help other feds, assuming they want to be helped, then all evidence is useful.
 
Sweden isn't listed as an affiliate on the GPC website.

Sweden is listed as a WPC affiliate, but I was unable to find reference to any WPC event being held there ever. There is no website. I found one Swede competed in the WPC worlds in 2000, Unto Raatiniemi. That's it. He had apparently failed drug tests so was refused membership to IPF sweden, so went to compete with WPC Finland, which it appears is what Swedes who want to compete in non-drug tested competition have to do: Google Translate

One Swedish woman competed in the 2012 GPA european champs.

Apart from a website extolling the choices available, I'm not sure you can say that there is any realistic alterantive to IPF in Sweden.

FWIW Norway isn't in GPC or WPC either.
 
Maybe, i will have to have a close look at other feds. I got excited for a moment.

I have plenty of material already, in any case.

Strong enough, can you tell me why certain countries are in Oceania (IPF) but dont have drug testing please and why they are invited to lift in Australia?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register