Ray Lewis PED Allegations (Merged)

[alienrace]

Thanks to the CBA, they couldn't up until this recent negotiation. And even now, they don't have a test.

The league has been waiting a test for years now.

Talking about the spray itself, not blood tests.

[HoustonRaven]

Talking about the spray itself, not blood tests.

Don't they simply use USADA's findings?

I don't recall the NFL ever doing their own commission. Could be wrong though.

[alienrace]

Don't they simply use USADA's findings?

I don't recall the NFL ever doing their own commission. Could be wrong though.

This - from the Hopkins guy:

Nieves, who studied nutrition, food and exercise science at Florida State, is the first to extol the virtues of deer velvet, a supplement that has been used in China for thousands of years. His company mentions IGF-1 prominently in its marketing material but only because it is integral to the yearly re-growth of antlers, he said. By the time the harvested antlers are broken down and processed to be sold the substance is essentially an uncomplicated, “super-concentrated” and natural protein.

“We registered our product with the FDA as a food product, it's that natural,” Nieves said. “It is just packed with nutrients.”

http://www.baltimoresun.com/business...,7725655.story

I'd suggest reading the article. This is why SI should have been more thorough.

[Teavo]

That's the legal standard, not the standard in the media. So are you on record now that Ben is not a rapist? Because he was never proven guilty.

That is a poor analogy. The difference is not in the judgement but in the evidential quality of the allegations.

In Ben's case, there was a reasonably credible accuser who contacted authorities and presented evidence. One can debate whether that evidence was substantial enough to proceed with a case, and IIRC the prosecutor decided it was not. That's fine, but it was clearly substantial enough to merit investigation and consideration.

You're correct that in the judgement of the law, Ben is not a rapist. That doesn't mean the allegations were without merit. It means they were deemed not provable to a legal standard.

In Ray's case there is a single accuser, not credible in the slightest, who, beyond saying "he did it", has presented no corroboration or other evidence whatsoever, not even circumstantial. It has not even been verified that the substance in question contains a banned substance in the first place. In short, the allegations are not merely short of legal standards, they are a sham.

There are three distinct categories to consider, and you have mistakenly conflated the latter two:

• Guilty: Proven guilty by due process.
• Not guilty/not charged: A case existed but was deemed short of proof (e.g. Pig Ben).
• No case at all: Deer Antler Juice Sold by an Ex-Stripper

[HoustonRaven]

This - from the Hopkins guy:


http://www.baltimoresun.com/business...,7725655.story

I'd suggest reading the article. This is why SI should have been more thorough.

Ok.

What does that have to do with your point and my question?

You claimed the NFL should / does commission drug studies. The NFL doesn't commission studies that I'm aware of. They use data from USADA.

[HoustonRaven]

That is a poor analogy. The difference is not in the judgement but in the evidential quality of the allegations.

In Ben's case, there was a reasonably credible accuser who contacted authorities and presented evidence. One can debate whether that evidence was substantial enough to proceed with a case, and IIRC the prosecutor decided it was not. That's fine, but it was clearly substantial enough to merit investigation and consideration.

You're correct that in the judgement of the law, Ben is not a rapist. That doesn't mean the allegations were without merit. It means they were deemed not provable to a legal standard.

In Ray's case there is a single accuser, not credible in the slightest, who, beyond saying "he did it", has presented no corroboration or other evidence whatsoever, not even circumstantial. It has not even been verified that the substance in question contains a banned substance in the first place. In short, the allegations are not merely short of legal standards, they are a sham.

There are three distinct categories to consider, and you have mistakenly conflated the latter two:

• Guilty: Proven guilty by due process.
• Not guilty/not charged: A case existed but was deemed short of proof (e.g. Pig Ben).
• No case at all: Deer Antler Juice Sold by an Ex-Stripper

That's your opinion on the degree of the evidence and its supposed value.

But the analogy within the context of my quote still stands.

I can just easily say, as many Steelers fans like to, that the credibility of both accusers is very shaky.

The point still remains both are circumstantial yet some fans are hell bent to say Ben is in fact a rapist while readily pointing out the circumstantial nature of Ray allegedly buying a PED.

[Phantoom]

The point still remains both are circumstantial yet some fans are hell bent to say Ben is in fact a rapist while readily pointing out the circumstantial nature of Ray allegedly buying a PED.

But don't you see? That was different because he was a Steeler. When Ravens get accused of wrongdoing, we must apply every level of scrutiny.

/s

[Teavo]

That's your opinion on the degree of the evidence and its supposed value.

But the analogy within the context of my quote still stands.

I can just easily say, as many Steelers fans like to, that the credibility of both accusers is very shaky.

The point still remains both are circumstantial yet some fans are hell bent to say Ben is in fact a rapist while readily pointing out the circumstantial nature of Ray allegedly buying a PED.

You are missing the point. Not all circumstantial evidence is created equal.

Again, you are confusing quality of evidence with judgement which is why your analogy is poor.

Fact, not opinion: The Georgia prosecutor thought the allegations in the Pig Ben case were worthy of further investigation. We know this because investigation occurred and was reported.

Steelers fans can say what they like, but the above fact remains. The evidence was serious enough to merit official scrutiny.

To my knowledge there has been no evidence presented in the deer antler issue that's even worthy of taking seriously. If there has been, please tell me what it is.

[working_man]

Another asshat weighs in....

So guilty until proven innocent is now the order of the day....wow

[Phantoom]

Fact, not opinion: The Georgia prosecutor thought the allegations in the Pig Ben case were worthy of further investigation. We know this because investigation occurred and was reported.

Steelers fans can say what they like, but the above fact remains. The evidence was serious enough to merit official scrutiny.

To my knowledge there has been no evidence presented in the deer antler issue that's even worthy of taking seriously. If there has been, please tell me what it is.

I'm not sure you want to defend Ray Lewis by pointing out what Georgia prosecutor's do and do not think is worthy of further investigation".

[Raveninwoodlawn]

That is a poor analogy. The difference is not in the judgement but in the evidential quality of the allegations.

In Ben's case, there was a reasonably credible accuser who contacted authorities and presented evidence. One can debate whether that evidence was substantial enough to proceed with a case, and IIRC the prosecutor decided it was not. That's fine, but it was clearly substantial enough to merit investigation and consideration.

You're correct that in the judgement of the law, Ben is not a rapist. That doesn't mean the allegations were without merit. It means they were deemed not provable to a legal standard.

In Ray's case there is a single accuser, not credible in the slightest, who, beyond saying "he did it", has presented no corroboration or other evidence whatsoever, not even circumstantial. It has not even been verified that the substance in question contains a banned substance in the first place. In short, the allegations are not merely short of legal standards, they are a sham.

There are three distinct categories to consider, and you have mistakenly conflated the latter two:

• Guilty: Proven guilty by due process.
• Not guilty/not charged: A case existed but was deemed short of proof (e.g. Pig Ben).
• No case at all: Deer Antler Juice Sold by an Ex-Stripper

Well, the accuser didn't necessarily even say Ray "did it"

It was acknowledged by Ray that there was a conversation with the guy AND he received a package from him. While the actual quotes in the story may be up for debate, there was a conversation and Ray did accept stuff from him. And considering that in the 2 year old story that Ray had his testimonial video taken down leads me to believe that Ray knew he shouldn't be associating with that guy.

I totally agree that there is a question as to whether the spray actually has the IFG or whatever stuff in it and if it does, the amount, but I just don't get this idea from so many people here that it is unreasonable to think that Ray may have sprayed some of the stuff on himself.

It's logical to think that there is a strong possibility that he did.

In the end, does it matter because the the stuff didn't have what they claimed it does? Maybe, maybe not.

But holy cow...the way some are acting as if it is absolutely ludicrous to think that Ray could have used the spray is baffling to me.

[NCRAVEN]

You are missing the point. Not all circumstantial evidence is created equal.

Again, you are confusing quality of evidence with judgement which is why your analogy is poor.

Fact, not opinion: The Georgia prosecutor thought the allegations in the Pig Ben case were worthy of further investigation. We know this because investigation occurred and was reported.

Steelers fans can say what they like, but the above fact remains. The evidence was serious enough to merit official scrutiny.

To my knowledge there has been no evidence presented in the deer antler issue that's even worthy of taking seriously. If there has been, please tell me what it is.

There isn't any. Even if Ray took it, the shit is a placebo.

Claiming snake oil has something that is banned in it and saying a guy took it and every idiot in the world wants to report "Ray Lewis linked to a banned substance" is hack-journalism at it's finest. Any thing for clicks and viewership.

[HoustonRaven]

Another asshat weighs in....

So guilty until proven innocent is now the order of the day....wow

Please show me where he says Ray is guilty.

He's weighing both sides of the issue.

[HoustonRaven]

You are missing the point. Not all circumstantial evidence is created equal.

Again, you are confusing quality of evidence with judgement which is why your analogy is poor.

Fact, not opinion: The Georgia prosecutor thought the allegations in the Pig Ben case were worthy of further investigation. We know this because investigation occurred and was reported.

Steelers fans can say what they like, but the above fact remains. The evidence was serious enough to merit official scrutiny.

To my knowledge there has been no evidence presented in the deer antler issue that's even worthy of taking seriously. If there has been, please tell me what it is.

Stopped reading at "Pig Ben" since that proved my point.

[NCRAVEN]

But holy cow...the way some are acting as if it is absolutely ludicrous to think that Ray could have used the spray is baffling to me.

I could say the same about the press the story is getting from people wondering if he took it.

Hell just a few post up there is a link of a guy saying he should sit out the Super Bowl cause he might have taken this stuff that may or may not work (but he doesn't say that, he just says Deer antler contains IGF-1, so much for investigating your story).

[NCRAVEN]

Please show me where he says Ray is guilty.

He's weighing both sides of the issue.

He does not ay Ray is guilty, he does qualify each statement with "If".

But he is not weighing both sides. He says his denials are BS because Lance Armstrong did the same. And saying he couldn't have recovered without PED's because Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens found the fountain of youth via PED's.

Seems like a hit job if you ask me.

[Justlovemybirds]

I'm guessing this is from todays open media session

Ian Rapoport ‏@RapSheet
Ray Lewis is railing on Mitch Ross: Says he "never" took what Ross said. Called it "embarrassing" and calls it an "attack" and "BS"

Ian Rapoport ‏@RapSheet
Lol. Ok RT @KevinScarbinsky Mitch Ross on Smashmouth: It's not about money with me. I want to help people. I want kids to stay off drugs.

[working_man]

Please show me where he says Ray is guilty.

He's weighing both sides of the issue.

Hmm, how about the first line:

"In light of recent made-for-TV athlete confessions, it’s hard to take Baltimore Ravens future Hall of Fame linebacker Ray Lewis at his word this morning."

So guilt by association, okay.

Then we have:

"- Point being, if Mr. Lewis has been using IGF-1 over the last few months to recuperate, and if it is a banned substance (which it is), then he has cheated the system…and should not be allowed to compete in Super Bowl XLVII."

It is not clear based on all the folks now rushing to weigh in (including people from the medical field who know of such things) that Deer Antler spray contains ANY IGF-1. Last I checked the only thing that is being cast around is that Ray "might" have used Deer Antler Spray. So this guy is making the leap from some unknown deer antler spray to "using IGF-1 over the last few months".

You really do love the role of contrarian don't you?

[myfavoriteboxer]

Even if Ray took it, the shit is a placebo.

The whole story reminds me of baseball players and their titanium "energy necklaces."

[RavenScallywag]

Houston, I have to ask...

Do you want Ray to be suspended for the game? I mean, I get it, many of us are flat out looking for any and all evidence that this is BS, but certainly SOMETHING went on here it seems...So I get it that you want to point out the double standard (I've stopped calling Big Ben by the rapist moniker. He might've been dumb about the way he acted, but he did not rape anyone. MANY more things we can make fun of him for)

but, it's becoming obvious in many circles that this deer antler spray, IGF, and SWATS is all a convoluted mess. And that convoluted piece means, in the end, nothing is going to happen with Ray officially. In the media, sure, I'll be many writers will try to tee off and claim this nullifies his whole career and proves his character was never truly "Righted" as he claimed.

But why should WE care about that? As seen yesterday, Dave Demeshek "apologized" to Joe Flacco for his hounding of him, and then suggested he might've motivated Joe to play better, then threw in another dig at him. Now, I know he's more a comedy guy, but again, do we REALLY care what the media thinks of Joe?

I'm betting:

1. Ray Lewis plays Sunday
2. Nothing from this season is taken away by the NFL from the Ravens
3. Ray Lewis will still be a first ballot Hall of Famer

So, what is your point of view on this? What do you hope happens? Ray has now come out and directly denied using it. So, while denial does not equal innocence, it seems to have addressed your initial worry.