PDA

View Full Version : Brian Cushing: What we know, don't know.


Texans_Chick
05-16-2010, 11:33 AM
Sorry I've been keeping a low profile here but I've been busy. And really, I don't much care for speculative stuff so MB can sometimes be hard for me, though this one is much better than most.

In any event, I put together in one place something that hopes to straighten out what we know from what we don't know about the Cushing thing. I am going to use it as a link in the future to refer people to who get things a little wrong, and I hope that you feel free to do so as well.

I think that there's just a ton of misinformation out there due to the nature of how things happened. Friday night release of info, short Cushing statement, the AP went nuts without hearing any facts, limited release of anonymous sourced info and plenty of gossip, a press conference that asked mostly the wrong questions and then a small amount of information released by Cushing's attorney.

So I tried to straight everything out the best I could given what we know and don't know, and I hope this helps:

Brian Cushing, confirmation bias and caring about real facts (http://blogs.chron.com/texanschick/2010/05/brian_cushing_confirmation_bia.html)

If you have any additional facts, questions or corrections, please let me know and I will update the post.

Thanks!

Brisco_County
05-16-2010, 02:29 PM
If he tested positive for hCG twice early in the season, why didn't this continue to happen if this happened naturally?

This is the big question for me. It's really the only piece of evidence that would lend to Cushing's case at this point.

I'm also wondering how many documented cases there are of male athletes who have undulating levels of hCG due to unidentifiable natural causes. I'm guessing none.

BigTimeTexanFan
05-16-2010, 04:20 PM
I GOT IT!!! He's a Hermaphrodite. He's got both male and female parts. Maybe that was the "compelling medical and scientific" data he presented to the league.

http://dailycontributor.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Caster_Semenya.jpg

Texans_Chick
05-16-2010, 06:17 PM
This is the big question for me. It's really the only piece of evidence that would lend to Cushing's case at this point.

I'm also wondering how many documented cases there are of male athletes who have undulating levels of hCG due to unidentifiable natural causes. I'm guessing none.

Let's assume that Cushing is telling the truth. He likely has a unique health situation.

How often do men with no symptoms of any kind get their hCG detected at low levels? Don't know the nature of his pituitary issue, but it may be that people with Cushing's medical history aren't in a position to get randomly tested for that hormone. Why would anyone study the natural production of hCG in an otherwise appearing healthy man?

CloakNNNdagger
05-16-2010, 07:50 PM
Let's assume that Cushing is telling the truth. He likely has a unique health situation.

How often do men with no symptoms of any kind get their hCG detected at low levels? Don't know the nature of his pituitary issue, but it may be that people with Cushing's medical history aren't in a position to get randomly tested for that hormone. Why would anyone study the natural production of hCG in an otherwise appearing healthy man?

Steph

Your PM box is full. Please PM me when its clear.

HJam72
05-16-2010, 08:08 PM
All this talk of the pituitary has me wondering if HGH or HGH releasers have anything to do with this.

CloakNNNdagger
05-16-2010, 08:40 PM
All this talk of the pituitary has me wondering if HGH or HGH releasers have anything to do with this.

HGH or HGH releasers do not increase HCG.

Corrosion
05-16-2010, 11:31 PM
:deadhorse:


:strangle:

Norg
05-17-2010, 01:01 AM
iam so sick of this Cushing story to were it has gotten to the point WHo CARES !!!! can we plz talk about something else

barrett
05-17-2010, 02:47 AM
TC thank you again for being fact based. Not as exciting as the knee jerking but at least it's based on what we know. (Which isn't much.)

Texans_Chick
05-17-2010, 11:07 AM
:deadhorse:


:strangle:

This is not beating a dead horse.

Peter King in today's MMQB states "I don't believe Cushing's tumor defense."

He never said he had a tumor defense.

If a NFL writer can't get basic facts about the matter correct, then who will?

Just because Cushings attorney/agents botched the PR on this, doesn't mean that Texan fans don't deserve to understand basic facts about this. This is a guy who is suspended for 4 games and the Texans have money invested in him.

I'm not debating Cushing guilt or innocence. I am just trying to sort out facts.

Ole Miss Texan
05-17-2010, 11:15 AM
This is not beating a dead horse.

Peter King in today's MMQB states "I don't believe Cushing's tumor defense."

He never said he had a tumor defense.

If a NFL writer can't get basic facts about the matter correct, then who will?

Just because Cushings attorney/agents botched the PR on this, doesn't mean that Texan fans don't deserve to understand basic facts about this. This is a guy who is suspended for 4 games and the Texans have money invested in him.

I'm not debating Cushing guilt or innocence. I am just trying to sort out facts.
Exactly. Cushing said his "source" (assuming to be a doctor) told him that his situation could be caused by injection or a tumor. Cushing then said, he knows he never injected or ingested this stuff so he played the rest of the season thinking he had a tumor. He never said he had a tumor. He never said a tumor was causing this. All he said is that based on the two options the source gave him, he was scared it was a tumor. He says he doesn't know what is causing this, just that he was told a tumor may have been the culprit and at that time he was running on the assumption that's what it could have been.

There is way too much "twisting of words" here that peoples' opinions are now becoming 'facts'. Thanks for your part in sorting this out TC.

Texans_Chick
05-17-2010, 11:32 AM
Exactly. Cushing said his "source" (assuming to be a doctor) told him that his situation could be caused by injection or a tumor. Cushing then said, he knows he never injected or ingested this stuff so he played the rest of the season thinking he had a tumor. He never said he had a tumor. He never said a tumor was causing this. All he said is that based on the two options the source gave him, he was scared it was a tumor. He says he doesn't know what is causing this, just that he was told a tumor may have been the culprit and at that time he was running on the assumption that's what it could have been.

There is way too much "twisting of words" here that peoples' opinions are now becoming 'facts'. Thanks for your part in sorting this out TC.

I liked what Adam Wexler said about the situation on Twitter. That it was easier to sort out the final season of Lost.

HuttoKarl
05-17-2010, 11:40 AM
The source of the tumor thing is from the NFL. It sends out a letter stating that hCG spikes can be caused by tumors. Cushing never said he had a tumor. Peter King can hardly do anything but drool...it's not surprising that fat loaf can't read.

Texans_Chick
05-17-2010, 12:20 PM
The source of the tumor thing is from the NFL. It sends out a letter stating that hCG spikes can be caused by tumors. Cushing never said he had a tumor. Peter King can hardly do anything but drool...it's not surprising that fat loaf can't read.

Email his letter bag. Everyone. If you are on Twitter, tweet him. Politely correct him. Politely ask him to report more basic details from Cushing's attorney. That information might not be accurate, but at least it would be Cushing's actual defense.

I suggest you be polite because you are more likely going to get an answer than if you call him a coffee-chugging fatass or something.

Stay classy, but definitely email him to correct the MMQB. Show that you care that he gets facts correct. We don't know all the details of what went on but what we do know is that his defense wasn't based on tumors:


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/05/16/ranking/index.html (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/05/16/ranking/index.html)

The email link is at the top of the column and the Cushing thing is on Page 5.

badboy
05-17-2010, 12:36 PM
I realize it is unfair for me to think Cush would act as I would in this type of situation but here are questions I have.

1. Having a history of allegations of a history of abuse, why did he not submit to NFL everything he admits to putting in his body "just in case" prior to game one? At least he could show an attempt to work within guidelines even though HCG would not have been on the list as he did not use it.

2. Why did you allow McNair and Kubiak to get blindsided by this? Your agent works for you. Maybe Texans could have made suggestions. Even if your guys are telling you that the appeal will be in your favor, a heads up would have been appreciated.

3. As the test results were pretty vague and if one NFL doctor said Cushing's position was plausible, why the 4 game suspension. We do not know if NFL agrees with Cushing's assertion on doctor's disagreement.

HuttoKarl
05-17-2010, 12:40 PM
Email his letter bag. Everyone. If you are on Twitter, tweet him. Politely correct him. Politely ask him to report more basic details from Cushing's attorney. That information might not be accurate, but at least it would be Cushing's actual defense.

I suggest you be polite because you are more likely going to get an answer than if you call him a coffee-chugging fatass or something.

Stay classy, but definitely email him to correct the MMQB. Show that you care that he gets facts correct. We don't know all the details of what went on but what we do know is that his defense wasn't based on tumors:


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/05/16/ranking/index.html (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/05/16/ranking/index.html)

The email link is at the top of the column and the Cushing thing is on Page 5.

I have emailed him and let him know that the media is putting words into Cushing's mouth and that he never said he had tumors but feared he may have tumors. Big difference. I wouldn't expect him to say anything that might be construed as being sympathetic towards Cushing or giving him any iota of benefit of the doubt though.

Texans_Chick
05-17-2010, 12:41 PM
I realize it is unfair for me to think Cush would act as I would in this type of situation but here are questions I have.

1. Having a history of allegations of a history of abuse, why did he not submit to NFL everything he admits to putting in his body "just in case" prior to game one? At least he could show an attempt to work within guidelines even though HCG would not have been on the list as he did not use it.

2. Why did you allow McNair and Kubiak to get blindsided by this? Your agent works for you. Maybe Texans could have made suggestions. Even if your guys are telling you that the appeal will be in your favor, a heads up would have been appreciated.

3. As the test results were pretty vague and if one NFL doctor said Cushing's position was plausible, why the 4 game suspension. We do not know if NFL agrees with Cushing's assertion on doctor's disagreement.

1. He said that everything he puts in his body is stuff approved by the Texans

2. He told them that he had an "issue" with the league. He said he thought they were going to win their appeal. His attorney told him not to say anything. Usually listening to your attorney Is A Good Thing.

3. If you break the policy, it is an automatic 4 game suspension. No wiggle room. He tested positive twice last year but only one test counted because both samples matched.

badboy
05-17-2010, 12:41 PM
Exactly. Cushing said his "source" (assuming to be a doctor) told him that his situation could be caused by injection or a tumor. Cushing then said, he knows he never injected or ingested this stuff so he played the rest of the season thinking he had a tumor. He never said he had a tumor. He never said a tumor was causing this. All he said is that based on the two options the source gave him, he was scared it was a tumor. He says he doesn't know what is causing this, just that he was told a tumor may have been the culprit and at that time he was running on the assumption that's what it could have been.

There is way too much "twisting of words" here that peoples' opinions are now becoming 'facts'. Thanks for your part in sorting this out TC.When I read Cushing's comments in Houston paper saying he was told the substance could be caused by a tumor and that he had already had a pituitary gland problem, plus saying he thought he may be playing football for his last season, I thought he was saying he might have a tumor.

HuttoKarl
05-17-2010, 12:45 PM
When I read Cushing's comments in Houston paper saying he was told the substance could be caused by a tumor and that he had already had a pituitary gland problem, plus saying he thought he may be playing football for his last season, I thought he was saying he might have a tumor.

The "source" of the tumor language is a letter sent by the NFL saying that tumors can cause the hCG levels on a test. Since Cushing didn't inject anything, he THOUGHT he MIGHT have a tumor. Never said he had one, which isn't what Peter King and Mike Florio and other hacks have been saying.

infantrycak
05-17-2010, 12:48 PM
Folks should e-mail John McClain as well and tell him hcg is not a masking agent.

HuttoKarl
05-17-2010, 12:55 PM
Folks should e-mail John McClain as well and tell him hcg is not a masking agent.

No shyte!

keyser
05-17-2010, 02:15 PM
Exactly. Cushing said his "source" (assuming to be a doctor) told him that his situation could be caused by injection or a tumor. Cushing then said, he knows he never injected or ingested this stuff so he played the rest of the season thinking he had a tumor. He never said he had a tumor. He never said a tumor was causing this. All he said is that based on the two options the source gave him, he was scared it was a tumor. He says he doesn't know what is causing this, just that he was told a tumor may have been the culprit and at that time he was running on the assumption that's what it could have been.

This is all correct. If you parse his words, his defense is that he doesn't know what's causing it, but has "medical and scientific data" that support his case.

But... I don't think it's at all unreasonable to have listened to Cushing's press conference and said he was giving a "tumor defense." When you have statements like:
"Personally, I know that I didn't ingest or inject anything, and the fact that my options were that I was either injecting or I had a tumor, as I was told by some sources, I played the whole season thinking I had tumors. "
and:
"the two toughest parts about the situation are my health and my reputation. I'm obviously concerned every single day and why is this happening and why something like this would keep re-occurring."
and:
"...I was told was that the only way it can get into your body, and obviously everyone having their different opinions, was that it was either through injection or through a tumor. I personally know I'm not injecting myself with anything. And then I'm playing the whole season thinking this could not only be my last season, but my last year."
he is clearly stating that he thought he had tumors through much of last season. And, he presents no other "medical or scientific data" besides discussing the possibility of tumors.

If someone says: a) they have medical and scientific data to support their case, b) that the only two options they were told about were injecting or tumors, and he hadn't injected, c) that he was worried all season about tumors, and that he might die, and meanwhile a) presents no alternative scientific or medical data/theories besides the tumor idea, and b) never says anything about whether he now believes he doesn't have tumors, then I am not going to blame someone for calling this a "tumor defense."

I do realize that the attorney later presented some more information having to do with the pituitary gland. The main problem here is that Cushing didn't state his case clearly at all. If he wasn't wanting to make a "tumor defense" then he should have said he no longer believed this was the case, or that the tests for tumors were all negative, or that now he had other alternatives being investigated, or something. Instead you're left from the press conference with the idea that he doesn't know what caused it, and is still looking into it, but that tumors seem to be the most likely option! Really - from his press conference, I get a stronger sense that he is saying "it seems like tumors are the most likely alternative" rather than that he is saying "I don't know what it is."

I know Cushing is a football player, not an attorney or PR agent; so, it makes sense that he would not communicate his position very clearly/precisely. But, I don't think it's a sign of bad journalism for someone to summarize his press conference statements, bluntly, as a "tumor defense." He presented tumors as an alternative option, and didn't present anything else.

Texans_Chick
05-17-2010, 08:03 PM
Peter King wrote his article for publication on Monday. McClains report on pituitary gland came out on Friday. Obviously, King didn't see it.

Nobody asked Cushing what his compelling medical scientific evidence was. They just asked him what he felt. It was the worst presser ever because the questions were so lame and it lasted for 11 minutes. Nobody got a chance to ask the follow up question about tumors.

Carr Bombed
05-17-2010, 08:06 PM
Peter King wrote his article for publication on Monday. McClains report on pituitary gland came out on Friday. Obviously, King didn't see it.

Nobody asked Cushing what his compelling medical scientific evidence was. They just asked him what he felt. It was the worst presser ever because the questions were so lame and it lasted for 11 minutes. Nobody got a chance to ask the follow up question about tumors.

And don't expect them to in the future, because apparently the reporters were all told that once that conference is over they were no longer allowed to ask Cushing any other questions regarding that "issue" and Cushing wasn't going to comment on them either.

Doesn't sound like a team/organization who's very confident in Cushing's "argument/explanation". Sounds more like a combined effort from team/player & Representatives to just make a couple of statements and then shut up and hope the whole situation just fades away.

Gee this whole AJ holdout is awfully convenient isn't it. Cushing has to be the happiest man in Houston tonight about AJ not showing up for the OTAs.

noxiousdog
05-17-2010, 08:41 PM
Awesome writeup Steph. Thanks for putting that together.

b0ng
05-17-2010, 09:31 PM
This is not beating a dead horse.

Peter King in today's MMQB states "I don't believe Cushing's tumor defense."

He never said he had a tumor defense.


Honey, you're talking about Peter King. A guy who once cheated a 7 year old out of a foul ball and when called on it, justified himself by saying the kid was a thief. (http://kissingsuzykolber.uproxx.com/2009/07/fun-with-klassic-peter-king-the-foul-ball-story.html)

Lets not give the pompous ass more credibility than he deserves (which is none of course).

Texans_Chick
05-17-2010, 10:05 PM
And don't expect them to in the future, because apparently the reporters were all told that once that conference is over they were no longer allowed to ask Cushing any other questions regarding that "issue" and Cushing wasn't going to comment on them either.

Doesn't sound like a team/organization who's very confident in Cushing's "argument/explanation". Sounds more like a combined effort from team/player & Representatives to just make a couple of statements and then shut up and hope the whole situation just fades away.

Gee this whole AJ holdout is awfully convenient isn't it. Cushing has to be the happiest man in Houston tonight about AJ not showing up for the OTAs.

This has always been the Texans approach to controversial subjects. Always:

http://www.watchdogwag.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/officer_barbrady_move_along_sm.jpg

JB
05-17-2010, 10:19 PM
Nice little message from Cush on facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=827979156005&ref=mf

He does not really say anything, but it is nice to see he is not hiding.

HoustonFrog
05-18-2010, 09:58 AM
The "source" of the tumor language is a letter sent by the NFL saying that tumors can cause the hCG levels on a test. Since Cushing didn't inject anything, he THOUGHT he MIGHT have a tumor. Never said he had one, which isn't what Peter King and Mike Florio and other hacks have been saying.

The problem here is that he said he thought he might be playing all year with a tumor. That is basically saying it was a plausible explanation in the absence of injections. So it was broached. What wasn't broached was the the other medical condition with the gland. So why even mention the tumor...and it was mentioned?That was my beef.

infantrycak
05-18-2010, 10:03 AM
The problem here is that he said he thought he might be playing all year with a tumor. That is basically saying it was a plausible explanation in the absence injections. So it was broached. What wasn't broached was the the other medical condition with the gland. So why even mention the tumor...and it was mentioned?That was my beef.

Because enlarged pituitary glands are often caused by adenoma which are a form of tumor. Investigating cancerous tumors, eliminating them and then moving on to study the enlarged pituitary can still be an investigation of tumors.

HoustonFrog
05-18-2010, 10:16 AM
Because enlarged pituitary glands are often caused by adenoma which are a form of tumor. Investigating cancerous tumors, eliminating them and then moving on to study the enlarged pituitary can still be an investigation of tumors.

But why not explain that?I guess it isn't something he had to do but it makes more sense. My response was also one that was more towards people splitting hairs and saying he didn't mention tumors really. He did. They were the alternative to injections that could cause his problems.

Again, still don't buy it. It seems CnD has given a very good view here over the past week or so and I trust more what he is saying regarding the medical areas of it than anything I put together through media outlets.

Sorry for posting now on these things. I was enjoying life in San Diego from Thursday night until yesterday with basically the goal of playing with my kids and enjoying things out there. Didn't miss the news one bit :)

GP
05-18-2010, 10:23 AM
Because enlarged pituitary glands are often caused by adenoma which are a form of tumor. Investigating cancerous tumors, eliminating them and then moving on to study the enlarged pituitary can still be an investigation of tumors.

Is this related to the excessive growth hormone disorder, such as Andre The Giant and motivational speaker Tony Robbins?

August 24th, 2009 - 11:55 am ICT by IANS -

Washington, Aug 24 (IANS) Researchers have uncovered information about genetic mutations associated with a form of gigantism which usually involves enlarged hands, feet, and facial features.
The discovery could lead to better screening for the disease, acromegaly, which stems from a benign pituitary gland tumour that can be deadly if left untreated, but which is difficult to detect until later stages when features become pronounced.

Researchers located a 31-member aboriginal family that included individuals with acromegaly living in a mountainous region of Borneo, Malaysia when the effects of the family patriarch’s growing pituitary tumour necessitated medical treatment.

A team including Van Andel Research Institute (VARI) investigator Bin Tean Teh and staff from the University of Malaya Medical Centre as well as Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Malaysia collected blood samples for testing.

“Researchers had recently found a mutation in the AIP gene associated with acromegaly,” said Teh, “but we found that several family members who didn’t have visible symptoms of acromegaly had this mutation as well.”

The later stages of acromegaly often produce enlarged hands and feet, protruding brows and lower jaws, a thick voice and slowed speech from swelling of vocal cords.

When diagnosed, the tumour and entire pituitary gland are usually removed, followed by hormone therapy for the rest of the patient’s life.

However, because the progression of the disease is so gradual, it is difficult to detect. If left unchecked, patients can die from complications such as heart or kidney failure.

Well-known acromegalics include wrestler-actor Andre the Giant and motivational speaker Tony Robbins.

The prevalence of acromegaly is approximately 4,676 cases per million, and the incidence is approximately 117 new cases per million every year.

Link to story. (http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/health1/why-do-some-people-have-giant-hands-and-feet_100236954.html)

Just wondering if this connected. Cases are rare, and the features are usually well-pronounced (enlarged hands, feet, head, etc.). Cushing doesn't strike me as suffering from this disorder, unless it is a milder or more unique case.

infantrycak
05-18-2010, 10:25 AM
But why not explain that?I guess it isn't something he had to do but it makes more sense.

Eeh, I said before the news conference that the only way his statements weren't going to get picked apart was if he came out and admitted steroid use. That's the only scenario where everyone would be satisfied.

My response was also one that was more towards people splitting hairs and saying he didn't mention tumors really. He did. They were the alternative to injections that could cause his problems.

Sure he mentioned tumors but that wasn't the hair being split. A lot of folks both on local radio and in national outlets were asserting he claimed to have had a tumor and he certainly did not do that.

BullNation4Life
05-18-2010, 10:25 AM
Is this related to the excessive growth hormone disorder, such as Andre The Giant and motivational speaker Tony Robbins?

Link to story.

Just wondering if this connected. Cases are rare, and the features are usually well-pronounced (enlarged hands, feet, head, etc.). Cushing doesn't strike me as suffering from this disorder, unless it is a milder or more unique case.

don't forget this guy as well...

http://api.ning.com/files/ovEBODM0NDE84R2n3AQLfYPqddys-szgTTP5QYJ4B2NIkHkIx9B2YKlDnnQSHvwjagQ4iiNE8LOFd3j 92ezVMWj8TToLv-HA/BigShow.jpg

WEEEEELLLLL IT's THA BIG SHOW!!!!!

infantrycak
05-18-2010, 10:32 AM
Is this related to the excessive growth hormone disorder, such as Andre The Giant and motivational speaker Tony Robbins?

Link to story. (http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/health1/why-do-some-people-have-giant-hands-and-feet_100236954.html)

Just wondering if this connected. Cases are rare, and the features are usually well-pronounced (enlarged hands, feet, head, etc.). Cushing doesn't strike me as suffering from this disorder, unless it is a milder or more unique case.

CnD has not told me it is so that question would best be directed to him.

What he has told me is an enlarged pituitary is either exactly that, just bigger than normal, or in a significant number of cases (he is trying to determine the % but it may be in the 50% range) is caused by an adenoma (which is a type of tumor). Adenomas come in both functional and non-functional varieties with the functional producing along with the remainder of the pituitary and the non-functional basically being inert. He has found a report that either will cause an increase in hcg. The increase from a non-functional adenoma appears to be in the range of a couple points (remember high healthy male is 5 and the test break point is 20) so it doesn't appear it should cause a positive NFL test. The functional adenoma increased the hcg more but the article didn't quantify how much more although CnD thought it was unlikely the increase would be sufficient to produce a positive either.

Texans_Chick
05-18-2010, 10:33 AM
Sure he mentioned tumors but that wasn't the hair being split. A lot of folks both on local radio and in national outlets were asserting he claimed to have had a tumor and he certainly did not do that.

Exactly.

He did not say he had a tumor.

He did not make a "tumor defense."

He said the origins of the elevated hCG levels are unclear. He fears that it will happen again. He is a football player not a medical person so if he had unfounded fears of things not diagnosed definitively, that is understandable given his story.

Texans_Chick
05-18-2010, 10:36 AM
CnD has not told me it is so that question would best be directed to him.

What he has told me is an enlarged pituitary is either exactly that, just bigger than normal, or in a significant number of cases (he is trying to determine the % but it may be in the 50% range) is caused by an adenoma (which is a type of tumor). Adenomas come in both functional and non-functional varieties with the functional producing along with the remainder of the pituitary and the non-functional basically being inert. He has found a report that either will cause an increase in hcg. The increase from a non-functional adenoma appears to be in the range of a couple points (remember high healthy male is 5 and the test break point is 20) so it doesn't appear it should cause a positive NFL test. The functional adenoma increased the hcg more but the article didn't quantify how much more although CnD thought it was unlikely the increase would be sufficient to produce a positive either.

Do we know what the test break point is for NFL testing?

There was an ESPN article that said that the number had come down last year compared to previous years, but I could never find what those numbers were. It sounded like that might have been part of the appeal, but that was never clear.

I've been trying to get people to tell me this information + what the standard of proof is on appeal and haven't been able to track down either.

HoustonFrog
05-18-2010, 10:42 AM
Sure he mentioned tumors but that wasn't the hair being split. A lot of folks both on local radio and in national outlets were asserting he claimed to have had a tumor and he certainly did not do that.

That is fine. My point being that there is a big difference between, "I thought I might be playing all year with a tumor" and "I have an enlarged pituitary gland that has been looked at and we are trying to see if this may be the cause." Either way, the tumor was the word used and out there. You can claim that there will be doubt no matter what he says but with alot of people it is as simple as being logical. Having an enlarged pituitary gland (reality as far as we know) and it having affects makes sense to people. Let's hear the research. Claiming that he was nervous he might be playing with a tumor all year kind of suspends reality. Especially when the gland details come later from the agent. I'm not busting the guy but everything that I've read from CnD here since Day 1 leads me to think that it is harder and harder to explain but in one way. I know TC was saying she didn't want to parse it out here on the board and thus wrote the article but I actually found alot of good info from people in the thread....again, especially from CnD. I'm just trying to step back from the thing without trying to connect too many dots that don't make sense to me.

GP
05-18-2010, 10:51 AM
“I was told the only way it could get into your body was through injection or a tumor,” Cushing said. “I personally don’t inject myself with anything. I played this whole season not only thinking it could be my last season but my last year.” - Brian Cushing (during his press conference)

He didn't "say" it was from a tumor, but if he says he did not inject or ingest...then he says he was told it potentially could be from a tumor...so then how did it occur in his system?

Not injected.

Not ingested.

Was told it "could" be from a tumor, as an alternative potential explanation.

Then he says "...I played this whole season not only thinking it could be my last season but my last year.”

Seems to be fairly easy math, IMO. He's implying, without saying it, that it was a tumor. Possibly. Maybe. Who knows. But he floated it out there. Not anybody else.

HoustonFrog
05-18-2010, 11:01 AM
He didn't "say" it was from a tumor, but if he says he did not inject or ingest...then he says he was told it potentially could be from a tumor...so then how did it occur in his system?

Not injected.

Not ingested.

Was told it "could" be from a tumor, as an alternative potential explanation.

Then he says "...I played this whole season not only thinking it could be my last season but my last year.”

Seems to be fairly easy math, IMO. He's implying, without saying it, that it was a tumor. Possibly. Maybe. Who knows. But he floated it out there. Not anybody else.


This was the quote I got...and what I remember hearing. This is before the quote you showed above. To me it is pretty to the point. No need to even infer here. I just quoted you to bring up this other quote not to debate since you seem to feel similarly. I just think there is a big difference between this quote and explaining a gland problem.

http://www.houstontexans.com/news/Story.asp?story_id=6160

(on how people are to believe he had a banned substance in his body and he doesn't know how it got there) "Well, that's how they're going to believe it. There are certain different ways. There are a lot of different options for how it can get into a male's body. Personally, I know that I didn't ingest or inject anything, and the fact that my options were that I was either injecting or I had a tumor, as I was told by some sources, I played the whole season thinking I had tumors. So that's how I feel."

infantrycak
05-18-2010, 11:19 AM
Do we know what the test break point is for NFL testing?

Working on it as well.

ChampionTexan
05-18-2010, 11:30 AM
Edit

HoustonFrog
05-18-2010, 11:38 AM
I think this is a perfect example of the confirmation bias that TC pretty much based this whole thing on.

Facts or representations taken into account:
1. Brian Cushing said he was told it could be potentially from a tumor
2. Brian Cushing said he played the season believing it could be his last
3. Brian Cushing said he played the year thinking it could be his last

Reasonable conclusion to reach:
1. Brian Cushing believed during the season he potentially had something medically wrong with him that could be serious. Brian Cushing may very well have played the season believing he had tumors.

Facts or representations not taken into account:
1. The season ended in January
2. The press conference occurred in May
3. There were four months for Cushing to attempt to find out more about his condition between the season and the presser.
3. Brian Cushing referred to his belief that the season and year may be his last in a historical context.
4. Brian Cushing did not state that he currently believes he has a tumor or tumors
5. Brian Cushing did not state that he currently feels his career/life could be over soon.

I really don't get your point. Where is the bias?He said "I played the whole season thinking I had tumors. So that's how I feel."

Yes he was told it was injecting or tumors but we are talking 5 months after the season, as you said. Days later his agent brings up the Pituitary Gland. I'm not sure how the media is getting too far ahead of itself when there was a direct tumor reference and then the gland reference. These guys aren't some HMO guys on the street who couldn't get care. They are surrounded by the best trainers and doctors. If he thought tumor, etc then he would have been getting looked at all year. He also would be having his Pituitary Gland looked at when it was discovered. All I read was that people believed he thought he was playing with a tumor and then they hear his agent give details about the Pituitary Gland. I don't believe it is out of the realm to take the tumor thing with how it was quoted. It's like people are taking the quote by GP above and completely skipping the other relevant quote where the "tumor" was clearly stated as something he thought he had from the info.

Back to the point, why not lay it all out there....gland, tumors, the process. To me the presser seemed a little hurried...because they didn't get out ahead of the story...and defiant. Just a little messy.

infantrycak
05-18-2010, 11:59 AM
A little follow up information on functional adenomas. They will provide sufficient hcg to pop an NFL test. In fact hcg testing is a diagnostic tool and they will probably produce significantly higher levels than necessary. Now this isn't really a possibility for Cushing as untreated the levels would not go down so he shouldn't have had any subsequent negative tests.

badboy
05-18-2010, 12:05 PM
1. He said that everything he puts in his body is stuff approved by the Texans

2. He told them that he had an "issue" with the league. He said he thought they were going to win their appeal. His attorney told him not to say anything. Usually listening to your attorney Is A Good Thing.

3. If you break the policy, it is an automatic 4 game suspension. No wiggle room. He tested positive twice last year but only one test counted because both samples matched.
1. Texans do not set policy but that is good to know he did tell them.
2. I though Texans said they were not aware but if Cushing said he had an issue, he still should have gave them a heads up. It is not as if he was telling the cops he had been in someone's house trespassing, but I do see your point.
3. McNair is a very influential owner & should ask them to take another look at the policy. I really don't care how many tests counted as that is legalese. If I hit you in the knee twice and then say only one counts, how does your knee feel? Not intending to be rude TC as I understand the policy but if Cush hangs his helmut on the "one time negative", I disrespect that.

For me, it is the NFL coming out of this looking bad.

badboy
05-18-2010, 12:16 PM
A little follow up information on functional adenomas. They will provide sufficient hcg to pop an NFL test. In fact hcg testing is a diagnostic tool and they will probably produce significantly higher levels than necessary. Now this isn't really a possibility for Cushing as untreated the levels would not go down so he shouldn't have had any subsequent negative tests. I read that some doctor shot down the tumor idea saying he would be receiving emergent treatment for cancer if that was an indicator. Basically, he pooh poohed that thought as ridiculous. If Cushing was told by anyone that tumors were possible, he should have also been told it was minimal chance so he would not have worried that it could have been his "last year". It just smacks of BS that he mentioned it.

infantrycak
05-18-2010, 12:25 PM
Getting off the medicine for the moment, I know Cushing has an attorney that is supposed to be experienced in NFL appeals such as this but his story doesn't work for me. The way he relates it it sounds like he went into the hearing as if it was a criminal defense and was just trying to create reasonable doubt. That's not my understanding of the process. Basically the positive test is the trial and Cushing had been found guilty. At the appeal the burden was on Cushing to show either the test was false or provide an affirmative innocent reason for why the test was positive such as a health condition. It almost looks like he told Cushing not to have definitive testing done to eliminate other causes so that he could argue them as possibilities at the hearing. Just looks hinky to me.

I read that some doctor shot down the tumor idea saying he would be receiving emergent treatment for cancer if that was an indicator. Basically, he pooh poohed that thought as ridiculous. If Cushing was told by anyone that tumors were possible, he should have also been told it was minimal chance so he would not have worried that it could have been his "last year". It just smacks of BS that he mentioned it.

The emergency treatment is an over statement but basically it really isn't a possibility. Cancerous tumors don't just instantly bust out huge hcg levels, they grow over time (to huge levels relative to normal). In theory you could catch one early when it is just departing normal and not an emergency matter but that option can be shot down because if he had cancerous tumors the levels would have kept increasing and supposedly Cushing has had subsequent negative tests. Adenomas are non-cancerous tumors so again ditch the emergency but they fail as a possibility for the same reason. Until treated the levels of hcg would continue to trigger a positive NFL test result.

Ole Miss Texan
05-18-2010, 12:41 PM
I read that some doctor shot down the tumor idea saying he would be receiving emergent treatment for cancer if that was an indicator. Basically, he pooh poohed that thought as ridiculous. If Cushing was told by anyone that tumors were possible, he should have also been told it was minimal chance so he would not have worried that it could have been his "last year". It just smacks of BS that he mentioned it.

So are you saying that Cushing was told one possibility, although it's unlikely, is that he could have tumors (either carcinogenic or non-carcinogenic) and that this news really didn't worry him at all?

HuttoKarl
05-18-2010, 12:55 PM
n/m

J_R
05-18-2010, 01:01 PM
He appears to be fine. Let it blow over like he's doing.


Texans linebacker Brian Cushing (http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NFL&id=5206) is trying to put the talk of tumors and an enlarged pituitary gland behind him.

After his first football practice of the offseason, Cushing said he had no worries about his health (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/fb/texansfront/7009769.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+houstonchronicle%2Fspfbtxfron t+%28HoustonChronicle.com+--+Houston+Texans+Football%29) and nothing was bothering him.

"I haven't felt this great in a while," Cushing said. "It feels good to have all those ailments gone, and I'm just flying around."

Cushing struck a different note less than one week ago at the press conference in which he denied taking a banned substance (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/05/13/brian-cushing-claims-he-took-no-banned-substances/).

"Right now, I'm concerned about myself," Cushing said last Thursday. "I'm concerned about my health, and that's the most important thing right now. I have to take care of my situation and find out why this is happening from a health standpoint and also from a prevention standpoint that it doesn't happen again."

Cushing's lawyer later claimed that the linebacker has an enlarged pituitary gland (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/05/15/steinberg-continues-belated-damage-control-for-cushing/), which can have many negative health complications. But that issue appears to be largely settled, if he has no lingering health concerns.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/05/18/cushing-says-he-has-no-worries-about-his-health/

Edit: And...he brings it back up.

briancushing56 (http://twitter.com/briancushing56)

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/fb/texansfront/7006235.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/fb/texansfront/7006235.html) http://bit.ly/9Dprhb (http://bit.ly/9Dprhb)

HuttoKarl
05-18-2010, 01:04 PM
He appears to be fine. Let it blow over like he's doing.




http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/05/18/cushing-says-he-has-no-worries-about-his-health/

Yep...basically his way of saying he's not talking about it.

CloakNNNdagger
05-18-2010, 02:08 PM
Is this related to the excessive growth hormone disorder, such as Andre The Giant and motivational speaker Tony Robbins?



Link to story. (http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/health1/why-do-some-people-have-giant-hands-and-feet_100236954.html)

Just wondering if this connected. Cases are rare, and the features are usually well-pronounced (enlarged hands, feet, head, etc.). Cushing doesn't strike me as suffering from this disorder, unless it is a milder or more unique case.


Giganticism and Acromegaly is produced by a pituitary tumor (usually benign) that produces abnormal amounts of growth hormone which can be detected along with abnormal levels of IGF-1. This does not result in increase of HCG.

beerlover
05-18-2010, 02:14 PM
I don't understand agenda NFL is taking in regards to rejecting appeal, clearly there is not enough to reject based on the facts presented. makes me suspicious given first four games of season & who they could impact. Houston Frog is going to love me (nothing personel) but one of those games is against Dallas, heaven forbid if the Texans where to beat them? Cushing is a huge roadblock removed.(yes I'm going with the conspiracy theory).

NFL experts disagree
“We presented our case and our expert testimony,” he said. “Our expert said his low levels were consistent with natural production. There were two NFL experts at the hearing.

“During cross-examination, I asked the first expert — and the second expert was in the room and would have heard his testimony — and he said, ‘As head of toxicology for the NFL, there's no way a player can naturally create this substance in their body. I've of the opinion that Mr. Cushing had to inject it.'

“The second expert for the NFL testified, ‘No, I do believe that it can be produced naturally, and I do believe there's scientific confirmation that a male can naturally produce it.'

“At that point, I thought this hearing is over. I should win this hearing. Our feeling was that if the two NFL experts are in disagreement, how does the NFL sustain the suspension when their own experts are in disagreement?”

JB
05-18-2010, 02:27 PM
“At that point, I thought this hearing is over. I should win this hearing. Our feeling was that if the two NFL experts are in disagreement, how does the NFL sustain the suspension when their own experts are in disagreement?”

That is the question I would like answered...

HoustonFrog
05-18-2010, 03:33 PM
I don't understand agenda NFL is taking in regards to rejecting appeal, clearly there is not enough to reject based on the facts presented. makes me suspicious given first four games of season & who they could impact. Houston Frog is going to love me (nothing personel) but one of those games is against Dallas, heaven forbid if the Texans where to beat them? Cushing is a huge roadblock removed.(yes I'm going with the conspiracy theory).

I'm going to take the actual question and not some ridiculous conspiracy theory. The Texans can easily still win a game without Cushing. So a guy actually testing for something isn't something anyone could set in motion like this.

As for the quotes. They HAVE to reject the appeal on those quotes. He tested positive. The only way he wins is to prove Doc #2s contention by showing how he has an issue that makes it naturally occurring. It doesn't sound like he did. One guy says that it is injected. The second one doesn't deny that it can be injected but says that it can be naturally occurring. He didn't say that Cushings was naturally occurring. With that said they go with the results. The burden, as I think Cak said earlier, was on Cushing.

Ole Miss Texan
05-18-2010, 03:45 PM
As for the quotes. They HAVE to reject the appeal on those quotes. He tested positive. The only way he wins is to prove Doc #2s contention by showing how he has an issue that makes it naturally occurring. It doesn't sound like he did. One guys says that it is injected. The second one doesn't deny that it can be injected but says that it can be naturally occurring. He didn't say that Cushings was naturally occurring. With that said they go with the results. The burden, as I think Cak said earlier, was on Cushing.

I think you hit the nail on the head. The NFL doesn't have to prove that the banned substance was added from outside his body. Cushing tested positive for a banned substance - that's a 4 game suspension. The fact that this substance CAN be naturally produced doesn't mean it was. Cushing and his team would have to prove with scientific/medical data that he naturally produced (or can produce) enough hCG to test positive on one of their tests. Then, that might be enough to get the suspension lifted.

TimeKiller
05-18-2010, 04:28 PM
So Cushing just needs to come up with another positive test?

Runner
05-18-2010, 04:30 PM
So Cushing just needs to come up with another positive test?

Good one.

I think it's too late now.

TimeKiller
05-18-2010, 05:18 PM
Probly...here's what I think: He's taking hcG, not steroids. I've read and heard that hcG does two things that would be of particular interest to a strength freak:

1. Increases naturally produced testosterone
2. Increases metabolism

Now, the idea is that after a steroid usage, when your men are just boys hcG will reboot the system and increase the natural production of testosterone. What if he's not taking steroids, just gets a boost of natural testosterone from the supplement? Not exactly steroids but still pushing the limits of cheating. Also if he's able to take in more food, that means more for his extremely fine tuned muscles.

infantrycak
05-18-2010, 05:29 PM
Probly...here's what I think: He's taking hcG, not steroids. I've read and heard that hcG does two things that would be of particular interest to a strength freak:

1. Increases naturally produced testosterone
2. Increases metabolism

My understanding from CnD is hcg is effective at kick starting underproduction of testosterone but once at normal levels will not elevate testosterone in any meaningful way. Now maybe Cushing got bad advice but there wouldn't be any performance benefit. Similarly, it seems hcg is portrayed by some as helping in weight loss/maintenance but there isn't any credible proof it is effective.

Ole Miss Texan
05-18-2010, 06:50 PM
My understanding from CnD is hcg is effective at kick starting underproduction of testosterone but once at normal levels will not elevate testosterone in any meaningful way. Now maybe Cushing got bad advice but there wouldn't be any performance benefit. Similarly, it seems hcg is portrayed by some as helping in weight loss/maintenance but there isn't any credible proof it is effective.

I was under the assumption that it increases the testosterone, not just "get it into proper level", if you will. That's really interesting - maybe rule out the intentional increase in testosterone.

As as weight loss/maintenance goes, I've read about that but also how it doesn't really have much effect on that. Maybe if, what timekiller says in #2-increases metabolism, is true... then that could have definite effect on the weight issue.