brad culp
@bbculp
·
11h
In light of the fact that we’ll soon receive word of a pro triathlete testing positive for THC, just remember that it’ll be legal as soon Ironman has an official cannabis sponsor.
brad culp
@bbculp
·
11h
In light of the fact that we’ll soon receive word of a pro triathlete testing positive for THC, just remember that it’ll be legal as soon Ironman has an official cannabis sponsor.
…and yet I have an event this weekend where I could live large for a day or so in a pain free,Tramadol induced haze and WADA would say that is okay. I don’t understand their logic.
If this person was using CBD oil, certain brands have THC. Floyd’s of Leadville has THC. If you use something like IKOR (who actually sponsors athletes), it is THC free. I do not know about other brands, only these two, because of their wide availability in my area as the major players sold. Never did THC / pot but seems those I’ve seen who have, makes them sorta a little chill (you don’t want too chill during a race)…
Could this happen just by living in Boulder?!
Could this happen just by living in Boulder?!
Depends on who you hang out with but yes.
Could this happen just by living in Boulder?!
No. Now maybe you intended to ask that in pink but I’ll provide some more info just in case you were serious or if anyone else is interested.
What most people don’t understand is that the testing level for THC is so crazy high 150 ng/ml) that for most people it’s ridiculously hard to test positive unless you’re a seriously committed and habitual user.
By way of comparison most employment based testing (at least in the US) is done at a level of 50 ng/ml (some as low as 15). Most people will still test positive via a urine sample at this level for up to 72 hours, longer with a blood or hair test. Also, except for the rarest of circumstances, it’s been shown over and over again that it’s next to impossible to fail a drug test at the 50 ng/ml level. Think of intentionally hot boxing in a small confined space with exceptionally poor ventilation and immediately testing. Even in those circumstances it’s been shown that delaying the testing by just a few minutes brings the THC detectable levels well below a positive threshold.
If this person was using CBD oil, certain brands have THC. Floyd’s of Leadville has THC. If you use something like IKOR (who actually sponsors athletes), it is THC free. I do not know about other brands, only these two, because of their wide availability in my area as the major players sold. Never did THC / pot but seems those I’ve seen who have, makes them sorta a little chill (you don’t want too chill during a race)…
Idk, my wife could use some chill in the hours leading up to the race…
If this person was using CBD oil, certain brands have THC. Floyd’s of Leadville has THC. If you use something like IKOR (who actually sponsors athletes), it is THC free. I do not know about other brands, only these two, because of their wide availability in my area as the major players sold. Never did THC / pot but seems those I’ve seen who have, makes them sorta a little chill (you don’t want too chill during a race)…
This may be for a different post but just a quick primer:
And full spectrum should be at 0.3% THC
Could this happen just by living in Boulder?!
No. Now maybe you intended to ask that in pink but I’ll provide some more info just in case you were serious or if anyone else is interested.
What most people don’t understand is that the testing level for THC is so crazy high 150 ng/ml) that for most people it’s ridiculously hard to test positive unless you’re a seriously committed and habitual user.
By way of comparison most employment based testing (at least in the US) is done at a level of 50 ng/ml (some as low as 15). Most people will still test positive via a urine sample at this level for up to 72 hours, longer with a blood or hair test. Also, except for the rarest of circumstances, it’s been shown over and over again that it’s next to impossible to fail a drug test at the 50 ng/ml level. Think of intentionally hot boxing in a small confined space with exceptionally poor ventilation and immediately testing. Even in those circumstances it’s been shown that delaying the testing by just a few minutes brings the THC detectable levels well below a positive threshold.
In cycling my understanding is that THC is banned in competition only, and that’s why the threshold is quite high (pun unintended). Still, a few have managed…
The problem is… USADA has banned it in competition, but the 150 level is really doesn’t determine if someone is getting an affect from it during the event.
If you smoke everyday, your tolerance will go up and your blood levels will hover around 300-500 24 hours after use. If you eat thc, your blood levels will often be even higher. The only safe way to keep the levels below 150 is to stop about week out of a race if you are a regular user.
If they really want it banned solely in competition they need to develop a better method to determine if a given blood level is actually benefiting someone, the test right now is stupid and ineffective. Whether someone is a “habitual” user shouldn’t matter, we’re trying to determine if they have an effective dose in their system at the time of competition. Right now we’re likely just punishing people because they use it a lot outside of competition.
Few things jump out at me here:
1: why thc/cbd are banned substances. A safer and less harmful alternative to other similar drugs. ibuprofen, tramadol. Etc. which are legal.
2: it’s no more of a performance enhancing drug than those above. So it being banned seems Draconian- and behind current times.
3: if thc/cbd are not banned substances per-se, but illegal in competition- hence the higher threshold. I have serious concerns about the ability of tests to be accurate. Thc is one of the few substances that’s metabolized and stored within fat cells. So unlike cocaine- and a host of other recreational drugs which clear the blood steam in 72 hours- thc can stay in your system for over 30 days. I doubt, for that reason- that it’s just habitual users who could test positive. Yes- the threshold is high. But when you consider, even habitual use, out of competition could get you flagged- it stands to reason that the position makes little sense. You could use THC out of competition and weeks later still test positive. I would guess that this is exacerbated by the fact that tests are done- (usually ) post race. When an athlete is dehydrated and the chances of concentrations being abnormal.
4: not a great look for triathlon, or usada / WADA when American football is ahead of them on thc/cbd use. I’m trying to imagine a pro football player being banned for 3-6 months for marijuana…simply- my assumption is whoever this is: will be dropped by sponsors, ( if they have them) and can’t work for 3-6 months. Essentially ending , if not railroading their career. This is 2019. It’s time for change.
I agree with both of your concerns, but is there a way to test for active day-of use? I heard years ago about a saliva test, but never heard more about it.
it’s no more of a performance enhancing drug than those above.//
Sure it is, just depends on the sport. Shooting/biathlon/archery or any other sport where you have to calm yourself. Some of these try and shoot between heartbeats to keep the movement down, so certainly relaxing the body would be an enhancement.
But that is the rub, not all athletes are going to benefit, and many sports it would be a disadvantage to be stoned, a performance dehancer. May have to carve out some sport exceptions for some of the drugs on the list?
it’s no more of a performance enhancing drug than those above.//
Sure it is, just depends on the sport. Shooting/biathlon/archery or any other sport where you have to calm yourself. Some of these try and shoot between heartbeats to keep the movement down, so certainly relaxing the body would be an enhancement.
But that is the rub, not all athletes are going to benefit, and many sports it would be a disadvantage to be stoned, a performance dehancer. May have to carve out some sport exceptions for some of the drugs on the list?I agree in general, but feel there are valid reasons to punish in-competition THC use in sports like cycling where there are safety concerns associated the effects.
I agree in general, but feel there are valid reasons to punish in-competition THC use in sports like cycling where there are safety concerns associated the effects.//
You state this like it is a real thing. I actually believe it would be opposite. I have been in the middle of some pretty scary and crazy criterium packs, and would have been a lot better off if I had something to take that edge off. And of course if you are in the TT, not sure how being relaxed just a scootch, wouldn’t help you corner just a bit better, thus making it actually safer in both instances…I dont think there is a THC problem in cycling, best to keep resources where there are actual huge problems…But Curling, pop those bastards with a roach in their pockets…(-;
I think that it’s actually a full spectrum versus isolate issue. If you are using the isolate of any brand, it should not have THC.
There is a less than zero chance this is from a CBD product. The limit is too damn high for that to be the explanation.
my least favourite kind of tweet. either shit or get off the pot, brad.
Worth keeping in mind that cbd is non-active with out thc. So thc free products simply don’t work and are a marketing ploy.
I agree in general, but feel there are valid reasons to punish in-competition THC use in sports like cycling where there are safety concerns associated the effects.
i went round and round with travis tygart when i interviewed him about this. why is this on the banned list for triathlon? safety reasons. okay. is your mandate PEDs or also drugs that present a safety concern? if the latter then why limit this to THC? the discussion devolved from there. it was my sense at the time that WADA got itself into the morality business, and that’s the only reason THC is on the banned list.