Hans Knauss flunks

Hans Knauss tests positive for some banned substance. More testing to
be done to confirm the result.

http://www.skiracing.com/news/news_d...hp/2034/ALPINE


--
Mary Malmros
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.

Mary Malmros wrote:
Hans Knauss tests positive for some banned substance. More testing to
be done to confirm the result.

http://www.skiracing.com/news/news_d...hp/2034/ALPINE

I hope he's cleared - I like watching him ski...

lal_truckee wrote:
Mary Malmros wrote:
Hans Knauss tests positive for some banned substance. More testing to
be done to confirm the result.

http://www.skiracing.com/news/news_d...hp/2034/ALPINE

I hope he's cleared - I like watching him ski...

I hope it's not pot. The only way pot is a performance enhancing drug
is if you have twinkies waiting at the finish line. Like everything, the whole
drug testing thing has gone *way* overboard.

-klaus

klaus wrote:

lal_truckee wrote:

Mary Malmros wrote:

Hans Knauss tests positive for some banned substance. More testing to
be done to confirm the result.

http://www.skiracing.com/news/news_d...hp/2034/ALPINE


I hope he's cleared - I like watching him ski...


I hope it's not pot. The only way pot is a performance enhancing drug
is if you have twinkies waiting at the finish line. Like everything, the whole
drug testing thing has gone *way* overboard.

Not least of all in the workplace. But that's the subject of another rant.

Anyway, it wasn't pot. Seems it was a very low level of nandrolone, an
anabolic steroid. See
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...ng_doping_dc_3

They are going to do another test to figure out what's up, and nobody
really knows, but I'm inclined to agree with where the Austrian team
officials seem to be going: that is, if you were going to take a
performance-enhancing substance and risk getting caught, whynt you take
it in a quantity where it might do some good? To which, I suppose, the
counter-argument is that maybe he was taking the stuff, tried to get
cleaned for the test, and didn't get as clean as he thought he would.
But taking the statements of Knauss and his team's representatives at
face value, they seem pretty determined to track down the source, so...

--
Mary Malmros
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.

klaus wrote:
lal_truckee wrote:

Mary Malmros wrote:

Hans Knauss tests positive for some banned substance. More testing to
be done to confirm the result.

http://www.skiracing.com/news/news_d...hp/2034/ALPINE


I hope he's cleared - I like watching him ski...


I hope it's not pot. The only way pot is a performance enhancing drug
is if you have twinkies waiting at the finish line. Like everything, the whole
drug testing thing has gone *way* overboard.

-klaus


I would respectfully disagree. Pot smoking snow sliders endanger both
themselves and everyone else around them. Doesn't matter if it's a ski
racer or a recreational skier/boarder.
--
To reply by email remove "_nospam"

Chuck wrote:
snip

I hope it's not pot. The only way pot is a performance enhancing drug
is if you have twinkies waiting at the finish line. Like everything,
the whole
drug testing thing has gone *way* overboard.

-klaus


I would respectfully disagree. Pot smoking snow sliders endanger both
themselves and everyone else around them. Doesn't matter if it's a ski
racer or a recreational skier/boarder.

Out of curiosity, do you feel the same way about someone who's had a
beer or glass of wine at lunch? I'm not talking a pitcher or bottle but
a single serving.
I feel either substance can be combined with skiing in moderation, but
would agree with your statement in cases of excess.

Also, if someone tests positive for pot it means they have used it
sometime in the past 3-4 weeks. Do you really think someone who smoked
(or ate) pot three weeks ago is a danger?

Matt

MattB wrote:
Chuck wrote:
snip

I hope it's not pot. The only way pot is a performance enhancing drug
is if you have twinkies waiting at the finish line. Like everything,
the whole
drug testing thing has gone *way* overboard.

-klaus


I would respectfully disagree. Pot smoking snow sliders endanger both
themselves and everyone else around them. Doesn't matter if it's a ski
racer or a recreational skier/boarder.


Out of curiosity, do you feel the same way about someone who's had a
beer or glass of wine at lunch? I'm not talking a pitcher or bottle but
a single serving.

Depends on the person. In most cases one glass of wine or one beer is
not going to affect their judgment enough to make them a danger. One
bowl, joint, blunt, etc of today's marijuana however severely affects a
persons judgment. It's hard to use today's marijuana in moderation
because it's so potent. It's not like the stuff that was around back in
the 70's.

I feel either substance can be combined with skiing in moderation, but
would agree with your statement in cases of excess.

Also, if someone tests positive for pot it means they have used it
sometime in the past 3-4 weeks. Do you really think someone who smoked
(or ate) pot three weeks ago is a danger?

No, and that is a problem with testing urine for THC. Blood tests would
be much better. I don't care if someone smoked three weeks ago. But if
they're still buzzin', I don't want them anywhere near me or my family
on the slopes.
--
To reply by email remove "_nospam"

Chuck wrote:

klaus wrote:
[snip]
I hope it's not pot. The only way pot is a performance enhancing drug
is if you have twinkies waiting at the finish line. Like everything,
the whole
drug testing thing has gone *way* overboard.

-klaus


I would respectfully disagree. Pot smoking snow sliders endanger both
themselves and everyone else around them. Doesn't matter if it's a ski
racer or a recreational skier/boarder.

Non sequitur, Chuck. Klaus said that pot is not a
_performance-enhancing drug_. In fact, your response gives a lot of
weight to his implied criticism: that drug testers no longer provide
adequate justification for their tests. In any context whatsoever, a
drug test _is_ an invasion of privacy. You may argue for its necessity
in some situations, but it _must_ be justified. The justification that
is provided for testing airline pilots is that there is a compelling
safety interest to know if a pilot is under the influence of a drug that
could cause him/her to be unable to safely fly an aircraft. The
justification that is provided for testing athletes is to prevent them
from taking substances that are harmful _to the user_, but that there is
an incentive to use anyway because they enhance athletic performance.
Clearly, there are drugs that fall into the former category but not the
latter, and vice versa. Now, if you're a drug-testing bureaucrat, and
you've become a wee bit complacent about that tiresome justification
thing -- or, gosh, maybe you've got an interest in doing as much testing
as possible, because drug tests are making you money -- you might make
just such a sloppy mistake as to test an athlete for a
non-performance-enhancing drug such as marijuana, when in fact you have
no business at all testing for any such thing. Such a test is outside
the scope of your mandate, and there is no justification for it.

--
Mary Malmros
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.

Mary Malmros wrote:
Chuck wrote:

klaus wrote:

[snip]

I hope it's not pot. The only way pot is a performance enhancing drug
is if you have twinkies waiting at the finish line. Like everything,
the whole
drug testing thing has gone *way* overboard.

-klaus


I would respectfully disagree. Pot smoking snow sliders endanger both
themselves and everyone else around them. Doesn't matter if it's a ski
racer or a recreational skier/boarder.


Non sequitur, Chuck. Klaus said that pot is not a
_performance-enhancing drug_.

Sequitur. If it were still in his system and affecting his ability to
ski, it could cause a crash that injures both himself and spectators.

Sequitor even if it were not in his system. It encourages others to
use, again endangering themselves and others around them.
--
To reply by email remove "_nospam"