Urine TKOs blood in Nevada boxing drug testing debate

I listened to over three hours of testimony over a telephone hookup Wednesday presided over by NSAC Chairwoman Pat Lundvall and including the other four governor appointed members of the Silver State's boxing board.

Travis Tygart, lawyer and publicity flack for the USADA, seemed to me to be a loser of a "split decision" to two speakers who preceded him, longtime Olympic boxing physician and Las Vegas resident Dr. Robert Voy and NSAC physician David Watson.

Need to know "background" to all this is that the Nevada interests are still "frosted" that the blood testing arrangements for the May 1 Mayweather-Sugar Shane Mosley bout in Las Vegas were strictly a private, contractual matter btween two Golden Boy promoter fighters and did not involve the state boxing board in any manner or form. It's my understanding that only the always negative results and test dates were casually reported to Nevada.

Can you say let's go around the NSAC?

The testimony of the two doctors, taken in whole and in part, favored totally random urine testing as the most practical and, more important, most efficient way of deterring Pacman, Mayweather and any other boxer who might seek to use banned substances in connection with a boxing match.

Try as he might, and he was certainly quite glib, Tygart did not seem to persuade the commissioners that BOTH blood and urine random test must be put into effect for what Tygart kept repeating as "the protection for clean athletes."

If it was a battle between blood versus urine, I'd say urine was the winner but we'll have to see what the budget strained boxing board does next.

Just thinking out loud, but the commission's less than overwhelming response to highly critical Tygart might be a reason for the Pacquiao side to push even harder for a Nov. 13 but, conversely, cause the Mayweather side to seek to delay the inevitable bout into next year.

A fourth speaker was New Jersey boxing lawyer Patrick English who put in what came off as a suggestion that Nevada should enlist UCLA's highly respected Olympic drug expert, Dr. Donald Caitlin, to reform and/or expand its drug testing protocol. English did point out that that some experts are scientifcally uncomfortable because the USADA medical records have not been "published or peer reviewed."

Certainly, inserting Dr. Caitlin into the Big Fight mix is a solid idea. Unlike Tygart, he doesn't come off as an advocate for Mayweather and an enemy of Pacquiao. He would be regarded as properly neutral and impartial as to both boxers.

The banned susbtances most often mentioned were HGH and EPO.

Voy, former Chief Medical Office of the USOC, said current blood testing as to HGH is "ureliable and impractical."

He also said, "HGH is out there and there's not much we can do about it."

As far as EPO testing, Voy said, "I'm of the opinion that EPO is not a performance enhancer in boxing or that it gives you more endurace although that is the perception."

Regarding urine testing, Voy said it should be random and "closer to the event, the better."

Voy also said that while tiny amounts of blood are drawn for testing "it can be dangerous."

That was theme Dr. Watson chimed in on, saying, "I believe that urine is the best substance to test. I agree with Dr. Voy that urine (random testing) is what we should require and that blood is not necessary.

"I agree with Dr. Voy that there are theoretical and real risks to blood testing one of which is a (boxer getting) a hematoma on the elbow or a clot from missing a vein. There are also HIV and Hepatitis C risks."

Dr. Watson said blood testing should be curtailed "within three to four weeks before (a fight) so that the hemotoma risk does not put a fighter at a disadvantage."

Dr. Watson even patted himself and the commission on their collective backs, saying, "We're doing a great job."

click here for complete article