Chavis Suspended 80 Games

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
I'll give him the benefit the doubt just like so many have given Papi the same. We will never know for sure
Whether you believed Papi’s explanation or not, it was more plausible in that case than in this one. FDA regulation of the manufacture of supplements has come a long way in the past 15 years, and there’s no obvious reason why an American-born player like Chavis would be using foreign-source supplements.

More fundamentally, the rules changed in 2004; players are now responsible for what they put into their bodies. In addition to making Chavis liable to suspension for a positive test, that changes the moral and ethical calculus of turning a blind eye to what the actual ingredients in a purportedly legal supplement might be.
 

bstoker7

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2006
150
South Jordan, UT
Supplements aren't regulated by the FDA or anyone else and they routinely have ingredients that only remotely resemble what they claim to have.
My company manufactures dietary supplements for some of the biggest brands in the world and I can assure you the bolded is incorrect. Supplements are regulated as stated in 21 CFR sub-parts 110 and 111. That's an extraordinarily boring read, but it's there if you're so inclined.

Our facilities are visited regularly by the FDA and USDA, not to mention various other regulatory agencies assuring products comply with specifications. We're required by law to test every lot we ship from our facility to ensure compliance and food safety.

Whether you believed Papi’s explanation or not, it was more plausible in that case than in this one. FDA regulation of the manufacture of supplements has come a long way in the past 15 years, and there’s no obvious reason why an American-born player like Chavis would be using foreign-source supplements.
This is correct. There are some smaller, U.S.-based brands that fly under the FDA radar and illegally use banned materials in their products; however, these have become extremely rare in the past five years. People that seek out such brands know what they're looking for and know they can't get these types of supplements from reputable companies.

Chavis absolutely could have taken a supplement that, unbeknownst to him, contained a banned substance. The people that manufactured, sold and purchased the supplement almost assuredly knew what they were doing.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
23,721
Miami (oh, Miami!)
I'm not really up on the reality of life in the minor leagues today.

However, if I were in charge of a MLB club, I'd create some kind of system to feed and train my prospects in the off-season, to the extent where they shouldn't be ingesting anything (not bought at the supermarket) that does not have pre-approval from the club.

I'm sure some teams turn a blind eye and figure for every Chavis that gets caught, someone else gets "a late growth spurt" so that it all comes out in the wash.

But the closer the teams get to parity re: drafting, the more they should protect what they select in the draft.

Can anyone guess at the dollar value something like Chavis's suspension might cost the club?
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,312
The other thing I’d note is that in the past when there were tainted supplements, there’d be multiple instances where the same product would come up red.

I remember a bunch of Jack3d and Nitro-tech led to failed tests. The idea that one bottle or one athlete would be affected is nonsensical.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,622
My company manufactures dietary supplements for some of the biggest brands in the world and I can assure you the bolded is incorrect. Supplements are regulated as stated in 21 CFR sub-parts 110 and 111. That's an extraordinarily boring read, but it's there if you're so inclined.

Our facilities are visited regularly by the FDA and USDA, not to mention various other regulatory agencies assuring products comply with specifications. We're required by law to test every lot we ship from our facility to ensure compliance and food safety.



This is correct. There are some smaller, U.S.-based brands that fly under the FDA radar and illegally use banned materials in their products; however, these have become extremely rare in the past five years. People that seek out such brands know what they're looking for and know they can't get these types of supplements from reputable companies.

Chavis absolutely could have taken a supplement that, unbeknownst to him, contained a banned substance. The people that manufactured, sold and purchased the supplement almost assuredly knew what they were doing.

What are some reputable brands? I just bought a bunch of Thorne stuff because they looked legit.
 

In my lifetime

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
959
Connecticut
I'm not really up on the reality of life in the minor leagues today.

However, if I were in charge of a MLB club, I'd create some kind of system to feed and train my prospects in the off-season, to the extent where they shouldn't be ingesting anything (not bought at the supermarket) that does not have pre-approval from the club.

I'm sure some teams turn a blind eye and figure for every Chavis that gets caught, someone else gets "a late growth spurt" so that it all comes out in the wash.

But the closer the teams get to parity re: drafting, the more they should protect what they select in the draft.

Can anyone guess at the dollar value something like Chavis's suspension might cost the club?
2 different issues here

1. Feeding and training minor leaguers.
If what we here in the media (mostly from MLBPA types) true about the food allowance, etc; then it is really short-sighted and cheap of the parent clubs. Multiple reports that these guys have a hard time eating properly.
You would think it makes sense for every minor league team to feed their team in one group and feed them well.
Probably negotiations may make this impossible -- negotiating for per diem instead of just providing them with food.

You can add legal supplements to #1 as well. Supply protein and whatever else the team deems safe, clean.
Of course, liability may be an issue here. A player getting caught testing positive then blaming it on the team's protein supplements, etc.

2. Teams turning a blind eye
The problem here is that there is really very little incentive for teams to care about minor league PED use. The teams can't be involved in hiding it, but not much disincentive to looking the other way. If it helps them, then they upgrade a prospect (and even better if they suspect, since they can trade the prospect). If they get caught (as long as not a can't miss type of prospect) they probably don't care much other than downgrading the prospect's value to them.

You would think that this all could change
1. Mandating that teams provide food for the players.
2. Penalizing teams minor league signing money every time a player tests positive for PEDs

I understand there are quite a few road-blocks to both of those, but still it would be nice if the MLB teams showed they cared about their players' physical well being both on and off the field and during and after their career.

I have a lot more sympathy for the minor leaguers subsistence vs. the major leaguers quandary of why there were no 30MM contracts this year.
 

bstoker7

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2006
150
South Jordan, UT
The other thing I’d note is that in the past when there were tainted supplements, there’d be multiple instances where the same product would come up red.

I remember a bunch of Jack3d and Nitro-tech led to failed tests. The idea that one bottle or one athlete would be affected is nonsensical.
Exactly. Depending on the product, one blend batch can yield thousands of units that get sold individually. One tainted unit would trigger a full-scale investigation. Positive results would then trigger a recall and FDA sanctions.
 

bstoker7

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2006
150
South Jordan, UT
What are some reputable brands? I just bought a bunch of Thorne stuff because they looked legit.
I don’t know much about Thorne, but I noticed they tout NSF Sport Certification and any product that qualifies as NSF Sport Certified is most likely legitimate. That particular certification requires extensive raw material qualification and NSF Sport is picky on the material suppliers they allow.

My company only makes powders and bars, so I can’t speak nearly as intelligently on capsules and tablets. That said, reputable companies likely conform across all platforms. We’re heavy on sports nutrition in the powder side, which is where I work, so I know more about sports nutrition than anything.

Full disclosure — we manufacture for some of the following brands. Anything from these guys should be safe:

Optimum Nutrition
BSN
AdvoCare (they’re an MLM)
Cytosport
Cellucore
Scivation
Muscletech (Marciano mentioned an issue they had with Nitro-Tech, but that was more than 10 years ago and actually inspired huge changes within their parent company who now happens to be the biggest sports nutrition brand in the world)

Honestly, any brand you find in Costco or Walmart or the like is going to be safe. Well, as safe as supplements can be. Most sports nutrition products outside of protein don’t necessarily have a ton of information on their long-term effects on the human body.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,622
I don’t know much about Thorne, but I noticed they tout NSF Sport Certification and any product that qualifies as NSF Sport Certified is most likely legitimate. That particular certification requires extensive raw material qualification and NSF Sport is picky on the material suppliers they allow.

My company only makes powders and bars, so I can’t speak nearly as intelligently on capsules and tablets. That said, reputable companies likely conform across all platforms. We’re heavy on sports nutrition in the powder side, which is where I work, so I know more about sports nutrition than anything.

Full disclosure — we manufacture for some of the following brands. Anything from these guys should be safe:

Optimum Nutrition
BSN
AdvoCare (they’re an MLM)
Cytosport
Cellucore
Scivation
Muscletech (Marciano mentioned an issue they had with Nitro-Tech, but that was more than 10 years ago and actually inspired huge changes within their parent company who now happens to be the biggest sports nutrition brand in the world)

Honestly, any brand you find in Costco or Walmart or the like is going to be safe. Well, as safe as supplements can be. Most sports nutrition products outside of protein don’t necessarily have a ton of information on their long-term effects on the human body.

Thx man
 

shaggydog2000

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2007
11,483
Honestly, any brand you find in Costco or Walmart or the like is going to be safe. Well, as safe as supplements can be. Most sports nutrition products outside of protein don’t necessarily have a ton of information on their long-term effects on the human body.
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but the understanding I had was that supplements are regulated like food items, not drugs. So a company would have to show the products contain what is on the label, the labels comply with a federal standard, and that it's handled in a food safe manner, but not required to do testing for side effects or efficacy. I think early on after the deregulation 25 years ago, a lot of products that were really dangerous in uncontrolled doses like ephedra were getting tossed into pills left and right, and weight lifting supplements were being randomly spiked with actual drugs to establish a reputation. Now it seems like most of the products are safe but just don't have any proof they do anything for the vast majority of human beings (other than Creatine, protein powder, and some vitamins), and side-effects are just not looked into or communicated unless they're really bad and the media finds out. I understand the latter part, there is just no way a company can go through an FDA drug approval level of expense to prove the safety of a supplement they won't be able to patent and have exclusive control over, because it's a vitamin C pill, or whatever the case is.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,051
Florida
The other thing I’d note is that in the past when there were tainted supplements, there’d be multiple instances where the same product would come up red.

I remember a bunch of Jack3d and Nitro-tech led to failed tests. The idea that one bottle or one athlete would be affected is nonsensical.
Even then those were centered around amphetamines.

For tbol in particular, you might as well just skip right past the "tainted supplement" defense and go straight to the Jon Jones camp claim that somebody must have purposely slipped a dose in to set him up.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,312
Would tbol even be bioavailable or whatever it’s called ingested like that?
 

bstoker7

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2006
150
South Jordan, UT
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but the understanding I had was that supplements are regulated like food items, not drugs. So a company would have to show the products contain what is on the label, the labels comply with a federal standard, and that it's handled in a food safe manner, but not required to do testing for side effects or efficacy. I think early on after the deregulation 25 years ago, a lot of products that were really dangerous in uncontrolled doses like ephedra were getting tossed into pills left and right, and weight lifting supplements were being randomly spiked with actual drugs to establish a reputation. Now it seems like most of the products are safe but just don't have any proof they do anything for the vast majority of human beings (other than Creatine, protein powder, and some vitamins), and side-effects are just not looked into or communicated unless they're really bad and the media finds out. I understand the latter part, there is just no way a company can go through an FDA drug approval level of expense to prove the safety of a supplement they won't be able to patent and have exclusive control over, because it's a vitamin C pill, or whatever the case is.
You’re partially correct. It all depends on if the product label contains “nutrition facts” or “supplement facts.” Most proteins and meal replacements use nutrition facts and are regulated similarly to foods as they are considered food substitutes.

Products with supplement facts are regulated more strictly than foods precicesly because of the issues with ephedra and substances like 1,3-dimethylamylamine (DMAA). Pre-workouts, BCAA products, etc., almost exclusively claim supplement facts. Some proteins have creatine or other materials added and are required to change to supplement facts.

It’s important to remember that while supplements are regulated more strictly than foods, supplements aren’t regulated as strictly as drugs. They fall in the space between food and drug, and that’s a pretty large space. We’re absolutley required to test for efficacy. We’re required to test inbound raws and outbound finished-goods. 10-15 years ago a simple eye test comparing inbound ingredients to whatever was left on hand was good enough. Companies like mine and the brands we service must now be able to trace every lot of raw material we use back to the original manufacturer as well as prove efficacy, etc. Oversight has pushed many smaller manufacturers to either merge or sell outright, and the same is now happening on the brand side.

You’ll also notice that, outside of a few large companies or MLMs, most protein or supplement providers peddle similar, if not the same, ingredients. Beta-alanine is used to give people the feeling of a better “pump” while they workout. Caffeine is used to create energy. Other ingredients are used to create focus or muscle recovery. The difference is mainly in concentration or mix of ingredients and flavor.

Outside of the ingredients on the banned substance list, popular materials haven’t shown many, if any, side-effects. To me, the risk is much less in what immediate side-effects a consumer will experience and much more in what these supplements will do to the kidneys or liver in 20-30 years. For the most part, the industry is too new for anyone to know for sure.
 

Sampo Gida

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 7, 2010
5,044
I feel some perhaps overstate what FDA can do in terms of enforcement of product safety and what NSF can offer in terms of guarantees every batch of a product is uncontaminated

From a link I provided above

"Quality control testing of supplements has increased over the years.[15] In a recent publication, the results of the first three years of a system targeted at providing elite athletes with confidence in specific products was described.[16] One of the conclusions was that a standard manufacturing quality system in itself could not prevent the release of potentially contaminated materials. This represents a logical approach given that most suppliers do not, and cannot, have complete control of the total supply chain. However, due to the limited amount of testing that can be reasonably undertaken for dietary supplements and the potential for point contamination even within a batch, periodic or ad hoc analysis of supplements alone cannot ensure the purity of a supplement"

Sure, FDA my visit factories from time to time, but they dont do any testing on a products purity. NSF may conduct testing but it certainly would not be on every batch a manufacturer produced which included inhredients from a multitude of suppliers who may change and have their own suppliers .

Been an awful lot fringe guys and minor leaguers nabbed for taking steroids nobody in their right mind takes , nobody who who gets tested anyways.

Maybe Chavis did not use a reputable or approved supplement out of carelessness or economic need. He will pay the price for that. But we should not label him a cheat over one test.

As for other users of the contaminated product, unless they are tested they wont know. If they are tested then its a question of which supplement. Athletes probably go through them pretty quick and by the time they get a positive test that product from a contaminated batch may be gone or they are using something else. Little risk for the smaller manufacturers.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,472
Somewhere
If supplements are genuinely a cause of failed drug tests, how about not taking supplements? Assuming they are "clean", they probably won't do anything.
 

southshoresoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,249
Canton MA
I had no idea there was still so much hysteria/confusion around the supplement industry. This reminds me of back in the day when people thought creatine was a steroid.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,243
I had no idea there was still so much hysteria/confusion around the supplement industry. This reminds me of back in the day when people thought creatine was a steroid.
I think it seems from the fact that as recently as 10-15 years ago, your workout powder might: 1) not have what the label says it has, or in the same amounts; 2) might have stuff in it it not on the label, which stuff might be bad for you; and 3) might not actually do anything.
I think it was Orrin Hatch that was big into pushing it toward food rather than drug type FDA regulation. It has probably lessened 1 and 2 to a large degree. 3 is no different than whatever colon blow is infomercialed on Sunday afternoon on channel 62.
 

In my lifetime

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
959
Connecticut
BStoker thanks for the outstanding information presented in a fair light. It is refreshing to have someone within an industry be so balanced in a discussion. I think the for users that two of the most important points that you made among many are:

Most sports nutrition products outside of protein don’t necessarily have a ton of information on their long-term effects on the human body.

the risk is much less in what immediate side-effects a consumer will experience and much more in what these supplements will do to the kidneys or liver in 20-30 years. For the most part, the industry is too new for anyone to know for sure.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Can anyone guess at the dollar value something like Chavis's suspension might cost the club?
This is a hard question to answer because I'm not sure what it's asking. Are you asking how much money they lost in development costs and the like or are you asking what a prospect like Chavis is worth? I couldn't answer the former but I'd guess the latter is maybe a couple million.

If he were a top 20 or top 50 prospect, that would change drastically.
 

tonyarmasjr

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2010
1,120
Has there been any word on his placement? I believe he's eligible to come back next week. Hopefully, he can jump back on track as a real prospect. Even a month of strong performance could turn him into our most useful/disposable deadline trade chip.