New Urine Test For HGH!

Scientists from Italy and the United States claim to have found a method to detect human growth hormone in athletes using a simple urine test. The test will be available in approximately six months and is quite possibly one of the most important scientific breakthroughs in sports medicine.

Previously, HGH was only detectable by blood screenings. For years, researchers have been trying to develop a more non-invasive way to test for the performance-enhancing drug that has been proven to help athletes recover from injuries faster. Despite urban legend, HGH is primarily used to recover from injuries rather than to put on bulk and size.

Ceres Nanosciences, a biotechnology company based in Virginia, claims that the test can detect HGH in a person’s urine up to two weeks after use. Instead of using biological processes typical of most drug tests, researchers claim to have found a way to use nanotechnology to detect the hormone.

A microscopic web of particles, acting like a fishing net, are used to sweep through the urine specimen. These nanoparticles filter through the specimen while isolating ultra-tiny HGH residual particles.

This proposed urine screening would not only be less invasive, but also more effective, as blood tests can only detect HGH within 24-48 hours of use. The test is awaiting approval from the World Anti-Doping Agency and could be available for the start of the 2009 NFL and MLB seasons as well as the Tour de France, although the process of approval by each organization may cause some delay.

The only problem, as we all know, is that this will be an ongoing battle.  As you sit and read this, there are scientists in labs scrambling to find new undetectable ways to synthetically enhance an athlete’s performance.  But at least it’s a step in the right direction.

My experiences in the field of biology have led me to believe that biotechnology will yield incredible advances in the detection of all performance enhancing drugs. Other biotech methods, such as the use of fluorescently-tagged antibodies, could also be extremely useful in leveling the playing field. Hopefully in about a decade, performance-enhancing drugs will be a thing of the past thanks to scientific advances in the field of biotechnology.

AKittellVarsity

74 days ago

Score 3

How the hell did these guys get funded? It's awesome, but I want to see the proposal. Nanotechnology just keeps getting bigger and bigger. I can't wait for it to really advance in the structural biology area.

Permalink | Reply

Baltimoresports247All-American

72 days ago

Score 0

It's already starting too...it's a great time to be a bio major, even in this crappy job market

Permalink

Oh No RomoDraft Pick

74 days ago

Score 0

"Hopefully in about a decade, performance-enhancing drugs will be a thing of the past thanks to scientific advances in the field of biotechnology." There's a lot of idealism in that quote. Science changes a lot. I don't think you can ever get rid of performance enhancing drugs. Scientists will come up with better ways to make these drugs and evade the tests.

Permalink | Reply

Baltimoresports247All-American

74 days ago

Score 4

They may never get rid of the drugs themselves, but my point was that using biotechnology they can find ways to pretty much test for anything

Permalink | Reply

Oh No RomoDraft Pick

73 days ago

Score 0

Until somebody comes up with a better performance enhancer that isn't detectable by drug testing.

Permalink

Baltimoresports247All-American

73 days ago

Score 1

ONR...dude, I like your work...I really do...but you're just not getting it...how much experience do you have in the field of biotechnology? You can detect literally ANYTHING if you have the correct parameters. If we can start utilizing biotech in drug testing, we can use things like tagged antibodies to isolate the smallest of particles and use polymerase chain reactions to amplify them to see exactly what they are...as long as you know what the substance is, you can find the surface molecules to detect certain membrane-bound proteins. You can then create antibodies to attach to those membrane-bound proteins to isolate the particle and then use PCR to amplify it to see exactly what it is...biotechnology is an amazing field that is growing in both application and popularity in the science world...don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to bash anyone or insult their intelligence, I'm just saying that companies like Ceres Nanosciences are making great strides in developing tests like these...so, using biotech methods, YOU CAN TEST FOR ANYTHING...trust me

Permalink

Oh No RomoDraft Pick

73 days ago

Score 0

I may not know science, but I do know this, science evolves. It always has and it always will! It's hard to get ahead of these scientists creating performance enhancers because unless you cover all possible avenues, something new and better will be out on the market. It's a crap shoot!

Oh and you didn't need to repeat your message to me.

Permalink

Baltimoresports247All-American

72 days ago

Score 0

Dude your making my point for me...you're just not getting it...it doesnt matter how much science evolves...as long as you know what the substance is, you can detect it using biotechnology...I really can't be anymore blunt than that...if you still don't get it, I don't know what else to tell you... and as far as sending you the message, I just wanted to make sure you saw it...sorry it made you so upset (if it didn't, I have a hard time believing that you would make it public)

Permalink

RawbeezeitzAAA-er

71 days ago

Score 1

Absolutely no need for the minuses on ONR's comments. Whoever did it... shame on you. Wag of finger.

Permalink

IbeargRed-Shirting

73 days ago

Score 2

Solid article although i feel like it could have used a source... unless you're the one interviewing ceres nanosciences (which is possible). My understanding is though that HGH is naturally occurring in the human body though (just not at the levels that taking it will get you to). so will this test specifically be able to measure hgh introduced from outside the body or will it just measure unusually high levels?

Permalink | Reply

MlnsportsVarsity Captain

72 days ago

Score 1

When you pay something to the writer, you get a source and his time. Otherwise he's doing you a favor just letting you know that it's happening. You want a source, how about getting off the couch and making the call yourself then?

Permalink

Baltimoresports247All-American

72 days ago

Score 0

this isn't a research paper...i did not interview ceres nanosciences and i never felt the need to do so...just go to their website and it tells you all you need to know... HGH does occur naturally in the human body, but not at the intensity that the synthetic option provides...my understanding is that they are testing for the synthetic form...I don't know for sure, but I'm assuming one of two things: A) the levels of natural HGH are so low in the human body that it wouldn't matter...or B) the synthetic version has specific target proteins that they have been able to identify and isolate

Permalink

IbeargRed-Shirting

72 days ago

Score 1

i didn't mean to offend or question your credibility or do anything other then simply offer a suggestion as to how the article/future articles could be improved. i wasn't makin a big deal about it, just thought a fairly scientific article like this could be improved with a source.

Permalink

Baltimoresports247All-American

72 days ago

Score 0

its all good man no worries...i never once thought you were questioning anything...considering it is a science article, maybe I should have cited it...but to tell you the truth, after doing my thesis I'm just sick of having to cite every little thing...in case you were wondering, I pulled some info from a USA Today article as well as a short blurb about it on ESPN.com...you would think that this is big enough news where they would write something a little more substantial!

Permalink

RawbeezeitzAAA-er

71 days ago

Score 2

Mlnsports, you couldn't be more wrong. When a writer gets information or ideas from another writer, he should cite it. Considering Baltimoresports247's background in this field, the stuff in his article may be common knowledge to him, so it doesn't even have a specific source he could cite.

It's not the responsibility of the reader to verify or look up the information of any piece of writing. EVER! That's on the writer. If a writer doesn't properly cite ideas taken from somewhere else, it's plagiarism, which is a form of theft.

Ironic story: I once told Baltimoresports247 that Gillette Stadium was hosting the 2009 college lacrosse championships. And although he knew I worked there, he still requested that I back up my information with a tangible source. And that's understandable. I'm just a screename and an avatar, but GilletteStadium.com is much more real and reliable.

Permalink

JuTMSY4Hall of Famer

71 days ago

Score 3

I'll just give you Yale's take on plagiarism within their university (seeing as its fairly respected). And you guys can hack away...

With that, let me just say that I think Rawb is wrong about "common knowledge" issue and its debatable whether or not it could simply be looked up...I'd argue the BS (who i think wrote a great article btw) should probably back it up a little if for no other reason than to tell us where he got this info, because I remember reading an AP article with similar facts...

but i digress

Permalink

Baltimoresports247All-American

71 days ago

Score 0

for those who were wondering:

http://sport...y?id=3504036

http://www.u...e-test_N.htm

Permalink

Baltimoresports247All-American

71 days ago

Score 0

damn it... http://www.u...e-test_N.htm

http://sport...y?id=3504036

Permalink

MlnsportsVarsity Captain

72 days ago

Score 1

Fine article. What it, and no test can take into account, is how it will be used, and how commercially viable it is. They will have to prove, particularly to the unions, that it is effective across a wide spectrum of testing candidates While the IADA would be a likely early adopter, and the NFL could use that IADA data to cram it with their union, MLB is another story. While they don't like the appearance of being PES cheats, MLB owners profited, and will continue to profit, from PES. Their use of a non-uniform testing system from major to minor still allows loopholes.

As much as Romo there may not have articulated the position really well, I think he's right when he makes the point: When the testers tell the guy to go drink enough water to flood the results and come up with a negative, as we have reported in our articles at SZ that minor league players were being so instructed, most testing systems need a certain sampling level.

If it is so sensitive as to pick up atoms, perhaps this test can't be beaten. That would be a good thing.

As a scientist, though, you know that there are several hundred of your kin out there making big money by figuring out the science of the screening and beating it.

You will want to send flowers to Don Fehr's house first. The only way to get PES out of baseball will be to publicly fire, and contractually strip players of both their salaries and their bonus monies. I'm just assuming that Fehr is dead in this scenario, because he said that firing anyone will happen over his dead body.

Maybe that is what it will take, though.

Permalink | Reply

Baltimoresports247All-American

72 days ago

Score 0

...Drinking tons of water (enough to dilute your urine) will raise a red flag to the testing center and they will probably make you re-test...

...It's important to remember that we're not dealing with atoms, rather specific membrane-bound proteins. Antibodies bind to proteins.

...the current struggle with the other scientists that are attempting to make PES is that they are attempting to find ways to make those drugs untraceable. I think I mentioned that in the blog.

thanks for reading!

Permalink

Oh No RomoDraft Pick

72 days ago

Score 1

All I can say is, where there is a will, there is a way. A lot of athletes are looking for that edge. As long as the money is there, scientists will find a loop hole around drug tests.

Permalink

RawbeezeitzAAA-er

71 days ago

Score 0

I agree with you ONR, only I'd say "Where there is money, there is a way." Without all the media buzz about HGH, I doubt companies would be trying this hard to come up with a test for it. But now there's an ever growing market for an HGH test.

And since that test now exists, there is a market for ways to beat it. And let's not forget the best way to beat a drug test. USING SOMEONE ELSE'S PISS!!! God, didn't anybody else watch Playmakers?

Permalink

Baltimoresports247All-American

71 days ago

Score 1

I actually REALLY like Playmakers...I think that was the last good mini series they did

Permalink

JuTMSY4Hall of Famer

71 days ago

Score 1

that's weird...the NFL didn't like playmakers ; - )

Permalink

AKittellVarsity

69 days ago

Score 1

It's always going to be a race. The problem is the drug developers are always ahead of the game because they come first. Scientists will always develop an antibody to specifically trap any unique or synthetic biproducts. Levels of these red flags won't matter because we can measure to a ridiculous low level. In the end, though, the development of these antibodies will take at minimum 6 months and on the average 12-18 months. That doesn't take into the problem of getting the money and identifying that people are even taking them. The science will always catch up, but the drugs have far too big of a head start.

Permalink

The oldest manJV Squad

68 days ago

Score 0

ALEX, THIS TEST WAS USED IN THE 84 GAMES AT UCLA AND WHY THE ITALIANS ARE TRYING TO TAKE CREDIT FOR IT NOW IS A BIG JOKE. REMEMBER THE SISTERS FROM RUSSIA WHO WERE GOLD MEDAL WINNERS THAT LATER ON WERE FOUND TO BE MEN. FEMALE AND MALE DNA HAS BEEN USED HERE IN THE US FOR OVER 30 YEARS. NOW MAYBE IT IS CHEAPER AND CAN BE DONE FASTER BUT MAYBE IT IS THE ONLY WAY TO STOP THE STERIOD USE AND OTHER DRUGS.

Permalink | Reply

The oldest manJV Squad

67 days ago

Score 0

If any of body read the article about the Russians being removed from their teams,now knows that it is still happening in the eastern block countries and I include China in that. The east german coaches and doctors that used the steriods in the Munich games all went where the money was about being discovered and that has lead to China etal. Been there done that covers it completely. Because the differences between the two world powers centered around economics and power, the eastern block powers used anything to try and show the world that their system was better than the Western world. So much for the history lesson here, but the point of fact still comes to the division of world power between the east and west and the Chinese will do anything to show that their system works between than what is happening in the west. I have said it before the games in Bejing or Peking whatever should not have been allowed to happen. Politics are never going to be put aside, particularly in the world where the governments rule with a gun and punishment. Money for the OC is why the games are in China to begin with so if the world was perfect and its' not it would work. Aug 8 begins something that is going to be judged very closely by all the world and if anything goes wrong I wouldn't want to be the leaders of the government because if the past is any judgement of the future, new leadership will be forecoming and very fast. Does the word UPRISING ring a bell?

Permalink | Reply