Why is pac being crucified on saddo boxing?

[jerome01]

If you were a fighter () and you knew your opponent was without a doubt juicing and was bypassing the same old tests and getting away with it. Wouldn't you have the brains to ask for different tests? Wouldn't you have a problem if he refused and provided lame ass excuses as reasons? Seriously use your fukking head. The fact that this is even an issue shows Pacquiao is a dirty ass cheating fraud who's without hiding something

With all of the controversy surrounding this drug testing fiasco has anyone in this topic even offer a scientific explanation how an athlete can cheat an unlimited urine test?

It's been said before, urine and pre-scheduled drug tests are easy to beat (esp, for the #1 p4p fighter with unlimited resources). There are articles upon articles (you can start with the one by Conte, it's a fairly easy read for us non-scientists) and scientists and doctors that will testify to the fact. It's indisputable. The thing that makes Pacquiao look guilty aren't his physical oddities of the past couple years, not the numerical oddities, not even suspicious comments coming from his team. It's the fact that he's been so ridiculously opposed to the tests and with absolutely no good reason. He's scarred of needles? So am I. Needles (along with bee-stings) are my two biggest fears. Although, put 40million in front of me and I'll stick the sh*t through my eye.

I just read an article about Dr. Victor Conte and EPO. And its very informative.

But according to Dr. Catlin (the doctor credited with breaking the code that implicated the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative or Balco that was owned by the Victor Conte) director of the UCLA Olympic Analytical Laboratory in Los Angeles stated that EPO can be detected thru urine and it is sufficient. And blood test is just a screening procedure.

Excerpt of what i found on the net:

Question:
3) If the blood test doesn't have to be performed, then why does it exist? Not only do you say it is unnecessary, but it seems quite invasive and expensive to test athletes' blood when a simple urine test could be done.

Ans:

Believe it or not, the blood EPO test is much cheaper than the urine EPO test. The blood test costs somewhere in the ballpark of $60, whereas the urine test costs approximately $400 per test. The reason for this is that conducting the urine EPO test takes up a lot of the time of the technicians in the lab (sometimes up to two or three days) . Thus, the blood urine test can be used in situations to save money.

If would be very expensive to conduct a urine EPO tests on all athletes at $400 a pop. Thus the blood EPO test can be used to determine which athletes are most likely to be on EPO, and then the urine EPO test can be administered on this smaller sub sample.

For example purposes only, assume there are 100 athletes and only 1 has used EPO. It would cost $40,000 ($400 *100=$40,000) to test all of them for EPO using the urine EPO test. Instead if the blood test can be used on all the athletes to determine which 10 athletes are most likely to be EPO users, then the expensive urine test can be administered on the 10 suspect athletes and a lot of money can be saved. Combining the blood and the urine test only costs $10,000 ($60*100= $6,000 for the blood test on all the athletes and then 10 * $400= $4000 for the urine test on the 10 suspect athletes).Thus in this hypothetical example, using both the blood and urine test together would save approximately $30,000 as the blood and urine test combination costs only $10,000 versus the $40,000 it would cost to do the urine test on all the athletes.