5 ms·

Any even remotely WADA compliant drug testing uses chromatography, this story is most likely false.

hotpotamus 3y ago
I don't really know the details, but I assume chromatography can detect meth no problem, so I assume that's not the problem with the story. The skepticism on GP's part is mostly that the meth was consumed unwittingly; perhaps that's just the story the players tell. But it seems plausible at least.
- ta988 3y ago
  Yes a 3-5 min UHPLC/MS (and even a UHPLC/UV which is cheaper) can tell you that. Cost of experiment? $10 (not including human cost) Cost of equipment $200k-$400k for this kind of things. One machine and one operator can analyze hundreds of samples a day (once the sample is ready you don't have to stay in front it is fully automated). For just detecting Meth there are much faster and cheaper methods. But the one I am talking about has the advantage to also allow for detection of other things like steroids (extremely common in supplements), opioids (same) etc The only thing it will not work well for is anything inorganic, so if they put lead or chrome salts you will not see them and really small (solvents for example) and really large (proteins, large sugars etc)
baby-yoda 3y ago
As of a couple years ago the NFLPA doesn’t comply with WADA (the current CBA runs until 2030) https://journals.library.columbia.edu/index.php/lawandarts/article/view/7824 https://journals.library.columbia.edu/index.php/lawandarts/a...
jdietrich 3y ago
The (intentional or unintentional) contamination of dietary supplements with performance-enhancing drugs is a widespread problem. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5691710/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5691710/ https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fspor.2022.868228/full https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fspor.2022.8682...
stefan_ 3y ago
That's the joke, they are non-WADA compliant on purpose - American NFL and other sports leagues are rotten with steroid abuse and more. And the reason the teams run their own "anti-doping" is so they can know about it before, not because they are beacons of purity.

I don't really know the details, but I assume chromatography can detect meth no problem, so I assume that's not the problem with the story. The skepticism on GP's part is mostly that the meth was consumed unwittingly; perhaps that's just the story the players tell. But it seems plausible at least.

ta988 3y ago
Yes a 3-5 min UHPLC/MS (and even a UHPLC/UV which is cheaper) can tell you that. Cost of experiment? $10 (not including human cost) Cost of equipment $200k-$400k for this kind of things. One machine and one operator can analyze hundreds of samples a day (once the sample is ready you don't have to stay in front it is fully automated). For just detecting Meth there are much faster and cheaper methods. But the one I am talking about has the advantage to also allow for detection of other things like steroids (extremely common in supplements), opioids (same) etc The only thing it will not work well for is anything inorganic, so if they put lead or chrome salts you will not see them and really small (solvents for example) and really large (proteins, large sugars etc)

baby-yoda 3y ago

As of a couple years ago the NFLPA doesn’t comply with WADA (the current CBA runs until 2030) https://journals.library.columbia.edu/index.php/lawandarts/article/view/7824 https://journals.library.columbia.edu/index.php/lawandarts/a...

jdietrich 3y ago

The (intentional or unintentional) contamination of dietary supplements with performance-enhancing drugs is a widespread problem. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5691710/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5691710/ https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fspor.2022.868228/full https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fspor.2022.8682...

stefan_ 3y ago

That's the joke, they are non-WADA compliant on purpose - American NFL and other sports leagues are rotten with steroid abuse and more. And the reason the teams run their own "anti-doping" is so they can know about it before, not because they are beacons of purity.