For spinal injuries, common practice is to try and block as much of the inflammatory process as possible during the first few hours (the sooner the better - beyond 8 hours is too late). The idea is to reduce tissue damage due to free radical production. They use a glucocorticoid, methylprednisolone, and really load the patient up with high doses. This is a banned steroid, but is not anabolic.
As far as a track ban goes, my guess is one would get an exemption. But even if not, would you rather be able to run but not compete or be able to compete but not run? Cheers, Buck -----Original Message----- From: Bloomquist, Bret [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 12:21 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: Shorter clarification/Steroid question There was an interesting steroid tidbit that came up in the NFL earlier this year. Pittsburgh quarterback Tommy Maddox injured his head and neck and briefly lost all feeling in his limbs. As he was being rushed to the hospital, the emergency medical people on the ambulance pumped him full of steriods that are banned by the NFL. He ended up being OK, and of course he was not punished for being unconsious while medical people treated him. He's playing this week. What if this happened to a track athlete who had a drug test coming up? Are there common sense rules that would govern this, or just a bunch zero-tolerence, zero-flexibility rules that supercede reason?
