twitter google

Phil Baroni might have gotten the shaft.

For everyone that assumed Phil Baroni was guilty as sin and got off easy on his steroid case, take a listen to this video over at Sherdog. I have to admit, I was one of the people that basically assumed Baroni was guilty as sin. The dude goes from being washed up and out of shape to Adonis and back twice a year, it seems. Add to that his past affiliation with highly suspected fight team Hammer House (of Kevin “My organs shut down for some mysterious reason” Randleman fame), and I had him pegged as a user through and through.

However, the information presented by Phil’s people at the hearing was interesting to say the least. Out of several samples taken, only one sample tested positive for steroids. Baroni’s team wanted a DNA test to be done on the positive sample, because they were convinced that sample must not have been his. Of course, the CSAC being the morons they are, they never looked at any of the requests or information put together by Baroni’s team prior to the hearing.

An initial vote to clear Baroni garnered two votes from the CSAC. The final vote for a 6 months / $2500 vote passed with 3 votes in favor, 2 against, and 1 voting for an extension.

Makes you wonder about the validity and accuracy of the testing procedure, huh? I’m also amazed at the shoddy coverage of the details in Baroni’s case by the majority of other MMA websites. Why the fuck am I stuck having to report the bullshit details on this? My fucking anus is leaking. This sucks.

  • ilostmydog says:

    I’m not a chemistry or genetics major, but I seem to remember that if you don’t treat urine with certain chemical compounds soon after acquiring it, any DNA in it (the levels of which are normally very low unless you’ve got some sort of serious illness) will be degraded by the nucleases in urine. That would make any DNA test impossible.

  • I will admit I am not a urine expert myself … I spent some time on steroids and nandrolone research but I refuse to start researching piss.

  • I agree, I’ve studied forensics a bit and believe urine is hard to type for DNA.

  • Matt says:

    WTF how can you have a 3 to 2 to 1 vote? First of all it’s an even number, how can you have that. Also you can’t have a fucking maybe as a vote selection. It’s either YES or NO. Jackasses

  • intenso says:

    “DNA testing of urine is becoming common to establish whether a particular individual is truly the source of the specimen in which illegal drugs have been identified.”

  • Intenso is a urine expert.

  • intenso says:

    just trying to pick up your slack!

  • ilostmydog says:

    That’s all nice and dandy, but one sentence in a review paper from 1998 is not indicative of much. I’ve found a few cases where athletes have had urine matched (or not matched in the case of a trio of drug cheats that supplied the same person’s urine) for DNA, but I haven’t really found anything about the limitations or special procedures one would have to undertake for this.

  • Here’s my suggestion: Armando should take a swig of the dope piss, swish, and spit. Repeat with a fresh piss direct from Baroni’s tap. Swish, spit. Compare taste, texture, and dryness. I am confident Garcia is up to the challenge.

  • intenso says:

    It’s indicative that it’s not impossible to get and test DNA from a urine sample.
    When I googled, it brought up a lot of references of testing DNA from urine samples.

    The thing is, the CSAC didn’t refuse the test because testing urine is impossible/cost prohibitive/or anything else. They just suck.