MMA and marijuana

BodogNation tackles the topic and gives this blog some credit...sort of.

UPDATE: Sprawl N' Brawl gets in on the marijuana action, too. Notable quote:

I'm not saying all fighters smoke. But some obviously do. And it seems that if Sam Sheridan can identify that at least in Brazil, smoking weed is a clear part of the jiu jitsu culture, then it must have some influence on the American MMA culture, which incorporates Brazilian jiu-jitsu and its culture into its sport. And people like Nick Diaz and Diego Sanchez are clear cases of this.

So why are we testing fighters for it?

Excellent question. And to the previous point, fighters wouldn't even need to import cultural practices related to jiu-jitsu in Brazil to figure out marijuana has a lot to offer. The best argument I ever heard in favor of marijuana turned a major argument against the drug on its head: if pot is so great, why does it cause people to not engage life? The obvious response - to anyone who's ever used pot - is that, on the contrary, marijuana is known to enhance the enjoyment of all sorts of activitives such as watching a movie, listening to music, eating food, enjoying the weather, helping with sleep, alleviating hangovers, inducing appetite, among dozens of others. So is it really any wonder why people choose to use the plant?

It's a helluva drug

It appears Melvin "The Young Assassin" Guillard has tested positive for cocaine. Pretty funny, considering he blasted Joe Stevenson for using illegal substances yet he's the one getting caught.

And don't let my pro-marijuana rants fool you here. As a matter of personal liberty and pragmatism, I don't care if people use coke and yes, I think it'd be wise to legalize it. But allowing fighters to use it - recreationally or not - is another matter altogether. Coke is lethal even for elite athletes (Len Bias anyone?). I also believe a fighter who enters the ring on coke is a danger to himself and others. Its true that coke only stays in your system for three days, so if you test positive on the day of your fight it may not be that you've entered the ring impaired. But I think the prudent course of action is to still prohibit use.

Am I suggesting I would not care if a fighter uses marijuana three days before a fight but I would if they used cocaine? Yes, I think so. The difference is that if two fighters - one using weed, the other coke - took their respective drugs 3 days out from a fight and not again, they walking into their fights unaffected by their drugs. But on first glance, it appears to me coke is too dangerous a narcotic to give the benefit of the doubt. Now, if they can establish a reliable test that can put the use of coke squarely on the day of the fight, then for sure bust them. But I don't even think that's necessary.

I'm open to suggestion otherwise, but when you combine the benign nature of marijuana with the fact that testing for impairment with a urinalysis is inconclusive, it makes sense to pause. I don't see the same reasons to pause with cocaine.

Keith Kizer on Beatdown

I have no problem linking to other radio shows when they have interesting content. And yesterday's Beatdown did. Keith Kizer, Executive Director of the Nevada State Athletic Commission, appeared to explain the Nick Diaz case, the commission's testing policy, and why marijuana is tested.

Kizer comes off like an intelligent and well-intentioned professional. But as long as he sticks to arguing that marijuana should be tested, he's painfully wrong.

The most interesting argument he made is that marijuana isn't necessarily a performance enhancer, but rather, did the use of marijuana in a particular instance have a "positive impact" for the fighter who used it? To determine that, they look at how the fight played out, how strongly the THC levels show, and how the fighter's general behavior appears. In the case of Nick Diaz vs. Takanori Gomi, Kizer asserts that because Diaz absorbed a ton of punishment, had glassy eyes earlier in the fight, and very high THC levels, it stands to reason that marijuana "might" (his words) have had a "positive impact".

I'm sorry, but that is nothing more than pure subjectivity. First, a "positive impact" is a euphemism for performance enhancing. When people think of "performance enhancing" they think of something like steroids that gives you an obvious advantage. Kizer can't get away with saying that about marijuana, so the commission has concocted a watered down version that is supposed to be more palatable.

Second, if you take Kizer at his word regarding a "positive impact", all he's using is poor deductive reasoning. You cannot deduce marijuana that showed up in Diaz's system had anything to do with his performance or state in the ring with such flimsy and unrelated evidence. You don't know for sure that he had a glassy eye, you're just saying that. And even if he did, there are any number of explanations that don't involve actually being high from marijuana. Yes, high levels of THC showed up in his system. But if we know that THC levels and drug impairment differ wildly among people and that there is no-dose correlation that exists between metabolite levels in urine to drug impairment, then glassy eye or not, shouldn't we give Diaz the benefit of the doubt?

Kizer went into more detail about the testing process itself, all of which is valuable information. I recommend listening. But the more I hear about the arguments for testing marijuana, the more it becomes obvious the emperor - or should I say commission? - has no clothes.

Legal set-ups

Here's what the letter of the law states with punishments given to fighter's who've been caught for drug use in the state of Nevada:

NAC 467.850(6):

"A licensee who violates any provision of this section is subject to disciplinary action by the Commission. In addition to any other disciplinary action by the Commission, if an unarmed combatant who won or drew a contest or exhibition is found to have violated the provisions of this section, the Commission may, in its sole discretion, change the result of that contest or exhibition to a no decision.
[Athletic Comm’n, § 54, eff. 4-25-78]—(NAC A 12-13-82; 12-2-97; R058-05, 12-29-2005)

Emphasis mine. This wording is somewhat new. On December 29, 2005 the commission slightly changed the wording to explicitly enter the possibility of overturning the fight's ruling for said violation. This probably also explains why Sylvia never had his fight overturned after he popped for steroids, ostensibly the more serious drug offense, in 2003.

Most importantly, it also demonstrates that the commission - "in its sole discretion" - voluntarily went overboard when punishing Diaz. They didn't have to overturn his victory, they chose to. They didn't just enforce the law; they basically threw the book at him. They chose to go as far as they did and for what? To protect the safety of fighters? To send a message?

The only message I'm getting is that they're ignorant of the facts or intellectually dishonest.

UPDATE: If you're up for it, tell them how you feel:

Nevada Department of Business & Industry
Nevada Athletic Commission 555 E. Washington Avenue, Ste 3200
Las Vegas, NV 89101
PHONE (702)486-2575 FAX (702)486-2577
boxing@govmail.state.nv.us

Reefer madness

The NSAC handed down its punishments today, absolutely hammering Nick Diaz for a positive marijuana test. Notable quote:

Fighter Nick Diaz, following his defeat of Takanori Gomi on the February 24, 2007 Pride event in Las Vegas, Nevada, also tested positive for Delta-9-THC. The commission suspended Diaz for 6 months from the date of his fight, which would be August 24, 2007 and fined him $3,000, which was 20 percent of his reported $15,000 purse. In addition to the suspension and fine, the NSAC also ruled that the result of the Diaz vs. Gomi contest be changed from a victory for Diaz to a result of no contest.

Apparently, the commission felt that the level for which Diaz tested at, 175, was a considering factor in his performance during the fight. Dr. Tony Alamo, the Commission's Chair, said that a result of 15 is considered positive, but that the NSAC has a threshold of 50 to test positive for THC and that they "feel very comfortable that everyone that tests positive [in Nevada] is truly positive."

I've tackled this issue before, but please read what I wrote it if you haven't yet. What the NSAC is doing is absolutely shameful. They are testing for a drug with no demonstrable performance effects and they are establishing "intoxication" with a test that definitively does not prove intoxication.

Even worse? They turned his win over Takanori Gomi at PRIDE 33 into a "No Contest" instead of a hard fought and rightful win. They also fined him $3,000 and handed down a 6-month suspension - the same suspension given to Tim Sylvia for admitted steroid use.

Everyone on that commission should be ashamed of themselves. They've punished a young fighter financially, psychologically, emotionally, socially, and rewrote the official history of his greatest victory.

Down. Right. Disgusting.

Let's see if he responds

My questions for Keith Kizer. If he actually responds, I'll post it here.

I told you so

I knew the arguments made against marijuana use by the NSAC were bullshit and now I've got more proof.

What say you now, Kizer?

Diego Sanchez loves marijuana

This went under the radar for whatever reason, but apparently Diego Sanchez popped for mary jane after besting Joe Riggs on the last UFC Fight Night. Notable quote:

UFC welterweight contender Diego Sanchez tested positive for marijuana after his first-round KO over Joe Riggs on Dec.13 at Miramar Marine Corps Air Station. Armando Garcia, the executive officer of the California State Athletic Commission, said Sanchez paid a $500 fine and served a three-month suspension, so he has been cleared to fight Josh Koscheck at UFC 69 on April7 in Houston.

Two things:

1. Now we have a case where two fighters (Diaz and Sanchez) both test positive for marijuana after WINNING their fights and not against questionable opponents either. Although Miramar isn't in Nevada (and I'm not sure if California tests for the same amount of nanograms in the urine), this further calls into question NSAC Commissioner Kizer's assertion that when a fighter tests positive for weed they are putting themselves in danger.

2. Diego Sanchez? REALLY? That's just hilarious. Look, I don't think the kid should've had to pay a dime in fines, but I wonder how this is going to square with his fans, namely, Jesus Christ. After all, Diego keeps thanking him for his wins. I wonder how he'll take the news.

Here comes the lie parade

I suppose it was inevitable.

Nevada State Athletic Commission Executive Director Keith Kizer did an interview with Inside Fighting to talk about Nick Diaz testing positive for marijuana use. Kizer cobbles together what I suppose can be classified as a response, albeit a ridiculous one. Notable quote:

“Most marijuana tests are done with employment tests. What they use as a limit is 15 nanograms per millimeter, what we do here is we raised it to 55 nanograms so there is no way if someone tests positive with that level that it was second hand smoke or done weeks ago. It was done recently and is in their system. It’s more than three times what is tested for in normal marijuana tests. If you’re over 50 nanograms there is concern of a slow down in reflexes or being more impervious to pain. So it could either be a disadvantage or an advantage. Most of the time I think it’s the former. Most of the guys that have tested positive recently for marijuana got beat and got beat bad including Joe Pearson. Just like we wouldn’t let them go to the ring under the influence of alcohol, we don’t want to do that with marijuana” Mr. Kizer said.

“You know you have a fight coming up. Just like alcohol, don’t drink right before your fight and don’t smoke if you have a fight coming up. Marijuana may stay in your system longer than alcohol but you just have to decide. It’s not about being immoral. It’s the same with aspirin. You can’t take aspirin before your fights (because of the dangers the drug’s blood thinning effects could pose during a fight) and that’s not an immoral thing to do. Athletes have to make sacrifices for their job from time to time like everyone. Do the drugs or fight, you have to choose” concluded Mr. Kizer.

I guess the good news is they don't test for it because they believe it's performance enhancing or due to it's illegal status. I'm also glad they raise the threshold for what constitutes a positive response. But, of course, they need to raise it in order for their absurd argument to work.

The essential claim is that just like alcohol impairs the ability to fight if taken at a time in very close proximity to the actual contest itself, so too can marijuana impair a fighter's ability to perform. The claim is that the drug's affects slow down reflexes and makes one more impervious to pain. Therefore, a fighter can do serious damage to themselves if they are feeling the effects of the drug. And since the NSAC raises the acceptable THC presence to a higher level, they can say, "A ha! Normally we don't care about marijuana use, but it's obvious that since you tested positive for the drug at such a high level you must be at least under the influence of its effects at this moment."

What a crock of shit.

First of all, are they suggesting Diaz was high as he went into the ring? For this argument to make any sort of sense, Diaz has to be feeling the effects of marijuana at the moment of the fights. He doesn't have to be baked, but Kizer claims marijuana can slow reflexes and heighten pain tolerance. I suppose he can argue the sluggishness can be felt even after the high, but the pain tolerance is only possible during the stages of euphoria. And if that's the case, this argument can be dismissed here.

But that Kizer actually thinks a raised level to 55 nanos from 15 is evidence of marijuana physically affecting a fighter at the moment of contest is past the point of laughable into sad. You can attain those levels 24 hours past the point where the drug was consumed. That's more than enough time for the effects to wear off, even for a very strong dose.

Let's also observe for a moment that Diaz appeared to be in top athletic form. Comparing his performance in the Gomi fight gives no indication that he appeared to be either sluggish or of a higher pain tolerance.

Marijuana is not good all the time for everyone. As with any drug, there are harmful side effects. But the NSAC's line of reasoning is abysmally stupid. Testing for this is superfluous at best and detrimental to a career at worst.

UPDATE: So I emailed the Inside Fighting interview to a journalist I met last year who is the senior editor at Reason magazine, Jacob Sullum. His best-selling and widely-acclaimed book on drug use is an invaluable resource for information and thoughtful analysis on drugs, drug use, prohibition, and addicition information. This was his response to the Diaz debacle:

Are you talking about a urine test or a blood test? According to NORML's Paul Armentano, 10 nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood seems to be a reasonable cutoff level for driving impairment. But he says "no dose-concentration relationship exists correlating drug metabolite levels [in urine] to drug impairment." Even if this fighter exceeded the 10 ng/ml THC blood level, he was not necessarily feeling any effects. As the medical marijuana expert Rick Bayer notes, "the THC level below which there is no impairment varies dramatically among individuals." See www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=6492 and http://www.alternativesmagazine.com/35/bayer.html.

There you have it. If this were a blood test, Diaz would indeed be much more likely to be impaired. But it's a urine test and there is no scientific correlation between metabolite levels in urine to intoxication from the drug.

What's your response now, Kizer?

Mazzagatti: Learn striking

UFC Mania's got a great interview with MMA referee Steve Mazzagatti. He dishes on his background, controversial stoppages, the ring vs. cage, and more. But on the issue of how to build the best foundation for MMA, Mustache Gatti drops some knowledge. Notable quote:

Jesse Holland (UFCmania): With your background as a fighter, trainer and now as an official, what is the foundation for up and coming fighters who want to be successful in MMA? A lot of people will say wrestling.

Steve Mazzagatti: They’re all equal. Man in this age of MMA you gotta know it all or you’ll never make it. Just think about the guys we’ll be seeing in five years. I guess I would say striking because it’s the hardest to learn. It really is a science. Developing angles, it’s so complex, it takes years to master.

Yeah, but you can't get the sweet cauliflowers ears just by throwing hands.

Diaz, marijuana, and irrationality

I can't believe we are even talking about this, but we are: the Nevada State Athletic Commission tests fighters for marijuana use and Nick Diaz - coming off the greatest win of his career - has tested positive for the controlled substance:

Nick Diaz has failed the drug test that he took following his win over Takanori Gomi at Pride 33: The Second Coming. Diaz tested positive for marijuana, according to the Nevada State Athletic Commission.

Diaz will have an opportunity to defend himself at a Nevada State Athletic Commission hearing in the future.

The typical punishment for MMA fighters or boxers who test positive for marijuana in the state of Nevada has been a six-month suspension, most recently with professional boxer Mikhail Lyubarsky, who was suspended for six months at his NSAC disciplinary hearing just this morning.

That's not a terrible suspension and since he has a broken orbital bone, he may already get "time served" after his injury heals, so to speak. But that's hardly the point.

It's both impossible and tiresome to defend the use of marijuana on this blog right now. Over time I'll make the case piece by piece and if readers are interested in a dialogue on the matter, always feel free to contact me. But really, I'm just fatigued. I've spent the better part of my academic, professional, and personal studies delving into this issue. I know why the drug is illegal. I know the origins of how it came to be banned. I know what the effects and side effects of both short and long term use are. I know what the previous and current battery of medical studies say and don't say about the drug and it's use. I know why users find the drug appealing. I know the social, economic and legal consequences of drug use - admitted or otherwise. I am very familiar with this issue.

And testing Diaz - or any fighter - for marijuana is believable, sadly. That we still wish control and penalize personal pleasure or hold onto exploded myths is something I have no trouble accepting. Of course I am angered, frustrated and annoyed by the fact, but am I surprised that our society can act so anachronistically on issues of personal liberty or pleasure? No, not in the least.

While Diaz's career won't be severely affected, there is certainly no shortage of lives that have been damaged or irreparably destroyed by the prosecution of activities related to this plant. It's all ridiculous, woefully unnecessary, and in this case, humiliating/embarrassing for the fighter. But hey, the law's the law, right?

Does it matter that Nick's cardio was better than Gomi's? Does it matter that marijuana isn't a performance enhancing drug and so therefore gave Diaz no medical advantage in the fight? Does it matter that Nick's career-defining fight will be tarnished because a substance with real medical pain alleviating benefits is unnecessarily banned? Does it matter that Nick's ability to fight in Vegas will be obstructed not just for the next 6 months, but for as long as he fights in Nevada since he now has an offense on his record?

So to the NSAC: STOP. STOP TESTING FIGHTERS FOR MARIJUANA. STOP RIGHT NOW.

And hell, even if you find drug use reprehensible, there's always the attitude Chuck Liddell takes: