PantherDave Posted February 22, 2006 Author Share Posted February 22, 2006 "Holistic" is a very generalized term for any treatment or approach that considers man as a functioning whole. MANY substances fall into this category. Unless the person using a holistic med actually sees the med being processed, he won't really know what he's taking. There are few, if any, controls on what goes in a holistic med, so it's "buyer beware"!!! Just about anything, including Josh Gordon, could be in it. 1335412[/snapback] Thanks Doc, as I was hoping you'd reply -very interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikesVikes Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 (edited) I'm guessing that it had 11 different herbs and spices, many of which can be bought by the ounce if you have the right connections. 1335247[/snapback] So is that why my wife wants to eat at KFC all the time? Edited February 22, 2006 by MikesVikes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chargerz Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 So is that why my wife wants to eat at KFC all the time? 1335583[/snapback] Yep. That's right! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 Kind of makes you wonder why Ricky really got into holistic med. to begin with. Self medicating does have it's advantages. He's a Doc now isn't he? Who's the NFL to tell him what's right or wrong? 1335419[/snapback] Many are stantardized many aren't. A lot of naturopathic medicines and homeopathic are regulated, but other herbs aren't. They aren't controlled as much as meds by the FDA, but it depends where you get them from. The Doc may be towing the company line(FDA and AMA). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chargerz Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 The Doc may be towing the company line(FDA and AMA). 1335597[/snapback] Nope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Front Row Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 Perhaps it was just a little harmless salvia? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gdawg Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 KFC, it's toad lickin' good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 (edited) Nope. 1335746[/snapback] I don't take them but I know several homeopathic doctors that only use meds that are subject to strict control of manufacture. There is a huge difference between them and herbalists that use items that aren't regulated. Edited February 22, 2006 by Randall Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junebugz Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 What if he just had some poppyseed muffins the morning before the drug test? Why is everyone so quick to judge? Don't people learn anything from those Ameriquest commercials? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chargerz Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 I don't take them but I know several homeopathic doctors that only use meds that are subject to strict control of manufacture. There is a huge difference between them and herbalists that use items that aren't regulated. 1335928[/snapback] I'm sorry if I misled you. I'm not a big fan of the AMA or FDA, but at least the FDA tries (not perfectly) to make the manufacturers prove that their products do what they say they do. I AM a big fan of the scientific method whereby prospective double-blind controlled studies are used to show reproducible results. I don't even mind retrospective studies or case studies if they are well presented. What I DO have a problem with is manufacturers that make claims about their products that are not evidence-based. I'm not sure what constitutes "strict control" by a manufacturer (and it probably varies with each product), but I HAVE, in fact, used some treatments in the past that were not FDA-approved when I thought the manufacturer had made a good case for its safety and efficacy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 I'm sorry if I misled you. I'm not a big fan of the AMA or FDA, but at least the FDA tries (not perfectly) to make the manufacturers prove that their products do what they say they do. I AM a big fan of the scientific method whereby prospective double-blind controlled studies are used to show reproducible results. I don't even mind retrospective studies or case studies if they are well presented. What I DO have a problem with is manufacturers that make claims about their products that are not evidence-based. I'm not sure what constitutes "strict control" by a manufacturer (and it probably varies with each product), but I HAVE, in fact, used some treatments in the past that were not FDA-approved when I thought the manufacturer had made a good case for its safety and efficacy. 1337074[/snapback] Yes and the lack of standards and control by a certifying agancy makes it hard. You have to find a company you trust and there are many that do make claims they shouldn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Cid Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 <Beavis> Here toady, toady...</Beavis> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantasy Jesus Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 Dolphins | Williams says test can't be accurate Thu, 23 Feb 2006 06:26:07 -0800 Harvey Fialkov, of the Sun-Sentinel, reports despite unconfirmed reports that he tested positive on another drug test, Miami Dolphins RB Ricky Williams has told his agent that it couldn't be accurate. "First of all, he vehemently denies he used drugs," agent Leigh Steinberg said during a radio interview on ESPN-1400 (WFLL-AM) Wednesday, Feb. 22. "He's worked too hard to get back in a position where he was at one with his teammates." Steinberg wouldn't go into specifics about his reported appeal of the failed test, but he was confident that Williams would be cleared. If not, Williams, a three-time offender of the league's substance-abuse policy, faces a minimum one-year suspension. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 Dolphins | Williams says test can't be accurateThu, 23 Feb 2006 06:26:07 -0800 Harvey Fialkov, of the Sun-Sentinel, reports despite unconfirmed reports that he tested positive on another drug test, Miami Dolphins RB Ricky Williams has told his agent that it couldn't be accurate. "First of all, he vehemently denies he used drugs," agent Leigh Steinberg said during a radio interview on ESPN-1400 (WFLL-AM) Wednesday, Feb. 22. "He's worked too hard to get back in a position where he was at one with his teammates." Steinberg wouldn't go into specifics about his reported appeal of the failed test, but he was confident that Williams would be cleared. If not, Williams, a three-time offender of the league's substance-abuse policy, faces a minimum one-year suspension. 1338179[/snapback] I really hope that this is true, but that's the prepackaged response when a guy tests positive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 I really hope that this is true, but that's the prepackaged response when a guy tests positive. 1338225[/snapback] That's true but if his agent is right and he has turned his life around and has been clean for over a year(a good sign) I hope they cut him some slack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantasy Jesus Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 I really hope that this is true, but that's the prepackaged response when a guy tests positive. 1338225[/snapback] Understood. Ricky is a lot of things . . . Weirdo Freak Pothead Quitter But after following his whole career he has always told the truth with and without his helmet on. For some strange reason (could be the Dolphin homer in me) I don't think he's getting suspended for an entire year this time around. Something is fishy with this whole ordeal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 I think he did test positive - but not for something he willingly took or was trying to be sneaky with. I would bet that it is an extra ingrediant in something else - that he did not know was in there, or did not know was illigal. Unfortinately, players have been suspended for taking cold medication with ephedra in it (even when not listed as an active ingrediant). I don't think the 'mistake' excuse or 'ignorance' will save him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 personally - I think that the league should lay off with its testing... I can see why you'd test for performance enhancing stuff... but everything else is lame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junebugz Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 personally - I think that the league should lay off with its testing... I can see why you'd test for performance enhancing stuff... but everything else is lame. 1338378[/snapback] gotta be the whole role model thing .. they should obviously cut some slack to those that can link the results with something which should not be an offense (the ephedra, et al) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgcoach Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 personally - I think that the league should lay off with its testing... I can see why you'd test for performance enhancing stuff... but everything else is lame. 1338378[/snapback] You're serious? Pot-coke-crack-heroin ok? Steroids aren't. The logic escapes me. I'd let the roids go and test for the others. But, I guess everyone has an opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 You're serious? Pot-coke-crack-heroin ok? Steroids aren't. The logic escapes me. I'd let the roids go and test for the others. But, I guess everyone has an opinion. 1338936[/snapback] I believe that that all drug testing for jobs is bogus. The only exception that I can see is folk who work with machinery, construction, cops or maybe in hospitals. If somebody is doing his or her job, who cares. Its not any of the company's business. Enforcement is the governments job and the only reason that there is all this testing out there is because Dubya's daddy was invested in a whole bunch of testing companies. I say performance enhancing things because it causes an uneven playing field and can almost cause others to use to keep up. It ruins the integrity of the game. I can see the rolemodel end though - but that did not stop Snoop from hosting the Kids Choice awards and going on Seseme Street As an aside - I wonder if Ricky can argue that this is a religious thing - whatever he was busted with (apparently not a street drug)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.