Per ESPN: Braun Tests Positive, May Face 50 Game Suspension (Part 2)

[prophet]

I know that as Brewer's fans we're hoping that Braun is innocent and this is all just something that will go away and the season will go on. But, seriously, this is what we're pinning our hopes on now? Rumors created by faceless internet bloggers? Guys who live in their parents basement making up stuff about medicine for an STD screwing up the test? Or "sources" that are basically nothing more than "a guy, that knows a guy, that knows another guy"? Seriously, I got really excited when I read Invader's initial post, because I always respected his opinion, but, dude, if your sources are just these blogs about herpes that I've been reading about for a couple days now, and dismissed the second I read them, then you need some better sources. If I'm wrong, and you have better, more reliable sources, then my apologies. Otherwise, this forum is basically turning into TMZ plus National Enquirer, shake it up, and pour it on the screen.

[prophet]

On another note, he has Aaron Rodgers in his corner still.

 

 

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/n...IRI5nYcB?urn=nfl-wp13843

[Invader3K]

I heard what I heard from a couple different people, one of whom cited Brewers employees. These weren't just blogs I read.

[TooLiveBrew]

I would consult Chris Carpenter before explaining slumpbusters to my kids (if I had kids).

Shut the thread down. Nothing will top this.

Man. On a different kind of forum that could be a decent signature.

It was about to become mine. Rats.

[prophet]

I heard what I heard from a couple different people, one of whom cited Brewers employees. These weren't just blogs I read.

I'm glad to hear that, because I always appreciate your posts and insight. The way the thread went after your comment, just seemed like that's where it was coming from. I've been reading those blogs for a couple days, mainly for the comments afterwards, and they are very entertaining fiction. Chomping at the bit to hear whether or not what you say is true though. Any way your sources could come on here and fill the fans in? Just kidding man.

[hawing]

hawing wrote:

---

Man. On a different kind of forum that could be a decent signature.

It was about to become mine. Rats.

OK, I'll rephrase. If I were a radically different kind of poster, that could be a decent signature for me. I won't speak for every moderator, but I won't stop you.

[hawing]

prophet]this forum is basically turning into TMZ plus National Enquirer, shake it up, and pour it do a spit-take on the screen.

Fixed that for you.

[prophet]

Thanks bro, appreciate that.

[DatHoser]

Thanks bro sis, appreciate that.

Fixed that, for you and Hawing. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[prophet]

HA! appreciate that even more then Hoser. No offense intended to Hawing. Never knew.

[brwrsfan]

So let's just say that the rumors are in fact true and that Braun has herpes and some sort of medication gave him the positive result. Is this a reasonable offense? If he was taking a legal drug that he had a prescription for, shouldn't he have just indicated to MLB he was getting that and be done with it? Or is there something I'm missing here? He can't be the only MLB player that has herpes, I just don't believe that.

 

And if it really is his medication, how exactly would he prove that those meds caused his results and not something else? Shouldn't his second test have been positive too, or is that a medication that only is needed in the event of a flare up? I'm not an expert on this by any means but this defense seems very, very odd to me. I just hope it's somehow enough to get the suspension nixed and to clear his name.

[Jarjohm]

This is 100-percent speculation and I have no inside sources, but I've seen Graves Disease, or the treatment of it, mentioned as a possibility a few times since the news of Braun's positive test broke. After a quick search, I found that the disease causes the thyroid gland, which helps maintain natural testosterone levels, to become overactive. This can lead to wildly fluctuating levels of testosterone, although in men it seems to typically lower testosterone levels. Those pointing to Graves as a possibility have also mentioned that it often causes "protrusion" of the eyes, which can cause them to bulge out and appear larger.

I'm no doctor (and I'm still not sure how this would explain the synthetic testosterone), but it at least seems a bit more plausible than the herpes theory. Any doctors out there who can add more or rule Graves Disease out?

[lbb020]

this is getting obnoxious, but...I have second-hand knowledge of someone getting herpes not long after 'hanging out' with Braun (and this goes back long before the positive test result). I hate posting things like this, but it is interesting.

[UeckerAddict]

I really want to believe Braun is innocent, but that fact has to be proven to me first.

 

Wow. Guilty until proven innocent, and he hasn't even been suspended.

I won't condemn him until he is proven guilty at all, but as far as the "innocent until proven guilty" clause goes, that is the creed of the American justice system. It has zero value when it comes to MLB and public opinion.

[bullox]

Not to mention that guilt has already been handed down in the form of the failed test. The onus is on Braun to prove his innocence via appeal.

[Nottso]

I won't condemn him until he is proven guilty at all, but as far as the "innocent until proven guilty" clause goes, that is the creed of the American justice system. It has zero value when it comes to MLB and public opinion.

You are, of course, 100% correct in this assertion; which is what's really troubling about it. It's a LONG way from "innocent until proven guilty" to "guilty until proven innocent." Sadly, many Americans today won't be able to grasp that.

 

Not to mention that guilt has already been handed down in the form of the failed test. The onus is on Braun to prove his innocence via appeal.

Nope. Braun hasn't failed anything at this point and he isn't even "guilty" in the strict eyes of MLB as yet. He has tested initially positive for a banned substance but that's all. It's an ongoing process. If/when he is found guilty, he'll be suspended. Then, and only then, will the onus be on Braun. I don't know that he will or will not be found guilty, but unless and until he is, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt; much as I'd hope to be given the benefit of the doubt if similarly bad allegations were made against me.

 

Otherwise, this forum is basically turning into TMZ plus National Enquirer, shake it up, and pour it on the screen.

 

Indeed. Between this thread and the "Greinke switched agents" thread, BF.Net looks of late much like the reader's comments on a JSOnline blog. WELL below normal standards; and that isn't on the mods- that's on all of us.

[dlk9s]

Rumors created by faceless internet bloggers? Guys who live in their parents basement

It's the year 2011. We still think bloggers are losers with no friends who live in their parents' basements?

 

Also, to the question of how to explain STD's to one's kids, just don't do it. If you really want to explain it in a way that's truthful, just say (if the rumors are true, obviously) that Braun was sick and taking medicine. If the kid asks what he was sick with, just say that he didn't say, but that he's all better now. Then say, "WHO WANTS M&M'S??!!!"

[Patrick425]

pebadger[/b]]

So, let's assume Braun is indeed taking some sort of medication. Since a positive has been declared it will still be up to him to prove that he didn't violate the drug agreement. In fact, he may well have to prove that not only is this drug capable of causing the positive, he might still be required that there was no other way he could have tested positive. We already know he has presented a subsequent "negative" sample. If I'm representing MLB, I'd ask why that second test came up negative when he's presumably still taking the medication. So then Braun would have to prove why one test was positive and one was negative, in addition to proving that the first one was positive only because he was taking the medication.

So, couldn't he A) take the test again showing he is clean then B) have a witness(es) watch him take the medication then C) take the test again to show that it will yield the same results as the initial test that showed elevated levels of synthetic T as a result of taking the medication?

 

 

Jarjohm[/b]]This is 100-percent speculation and I have no inside sources, but I've seen Graves Disease, or the treatment of it, mentioned as a possibility a few times since the news of Braun's positive test broke. After a quick search, I found that the disease causes the thyroid gland, which helps maintain natural testosterone levels, to become overactive. This can lead to wildly fluctuating levels of testosterone, although in men it seems to typically lower testosterone levels. Those pointing to Graves as a possibility have also mentioned that it often causes "protrusion" of the eyes, which can cause them to bulge out and appear larger.

I'm no doctor (and I'm still not sure how this would explain the synthetic testosterone), but it at least seems a bit more plausible than the herpes theory. Any doctors out there who can add more or rule Graves Disease out?

That would not explain the elevated synthetic T levels.

 

 

 

 

[Invader3K]

Someone just pointed out to me that Trenni Kusnierek apparently shot this rumor down on Twitter yesterday.

[Jarjohm]

That would not explain the elevated synthetic T levels.

Yep, mentioned that in the same paragraph you quoted.

[Patrick425]

That would not explain the elevated synthetic T levels.

Yep, mentioned that in the same paragraph you quoted.

 

Oh..sorry..didn't see that.

[Invader3K]

Trenni with some further insight if you look at her recent timeline:

 

@BrewerGirl823, I've talked w/ numerous ppl w/ the team, a half dozen national writers incl an expert on the testing process & all laughed.

[hawing]

Between this thread and the "Greinke switched agents" thread, BF.Net looks of late much like the reader's comments on a JSOnline blog. WELL below normal standards; and that isn't on the mods- that's on all of us.

In our collective defense (all of us, not only staff), the Braun issue is about as negatively world-rocking as you can get for people who care about the Brewers. It would be disappointing (at least) to have this story break about any Brewer player, but having Ryan be the subject multiplies the emotions for all of us.

 

The rumor that has become the latest tangent is something we'd normally discourage as a forum topic, but for better or worse it has become part of "the story." The Greinke issue seems like an instance of unfortunate timing, having broken just as most of us were still reeling from the Braun thing. I know I was reading tweets about Zack changing agents and thinking, "oh, NOW what?"

 

However Ryan's issue turns out, my hope is that we all look at controversial breaking news about MLB players differently going forward. I am pretty sure that if this weekend's story had been about, say, Matt Holliday instead of Ryan, I just might have found it hilarious, or at least allowed myself to enjoy some schadenfreude. (DISCLAIMER: I know nothing fishy about Matt Holliday; I just plucked a name out of midair for someone many of us at least mildly dislike.) Since this weekend, if we have a semi- or flat out-celebratory response to another player's misfortune, we're pretty much chucking stones in glass houses.

 

I've hoped for a long time that we might avoid knowing what it feels like to have one of our own under suspicion. Now we're getting an idea. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/frown.gif

[brwrsfan]

While the herpes thing is probably a longshot, I wouldn't take anything Trenni says as denying it. First off, nobody on the team is going to speak to it, they can't. Secondly, I would hardly call her an investigative reporter or really not much more than a sideline person. She might have sources but her saying it's not true means virtually nothing to me.

 

Like I said, it's probably not true but until the Braun camp actually denies it, I think it's going to carry some merit. It does at least fall under the "highly unusual circumstances".

[Patrick425]

Perhaps some of the reports are coming from this guy: