Ryan Braun, MVP, Tests Positive for Steroids; Will Appeal
Milwaukee Brewers player Ryan Braun, who is also the 2011 Most Valuable Player for the National League, has apparently tested positive for steroids — or, as Major League Baseball (MLB) likes to call them, “performance enhancing drugs,” or PEDs.
See this link for further details:
Note the word “apparently.” This is because there is no confirmation from MLB as to whether or not this actually happened.
Here are a few paragraphs from the article; please note that the Yahoo Sports blog is referencing an earlier report at ESPN that I wasn’t able to find:
The “Outside the Lines” report goes on to clarify that elevated levels of testosterone in Braun’s sample are what triggered the positive test. Further tests showed that the testosterone was synthetic. In other words, Braun’s body did not produce it naturally.
MLB went on to consult the World Anti-Doping Agency lab for a second opinion to confirm the results. The WADA conducted a secondary test to see whether the increase in testosterone could have been produced by Braun himself or if it came from a secondary source.
The test confirmed MLB’s original results. The extra testosterone came from outside Braun’s body.
So, if this is all to be believed, Braun apparently tested positive for having too much testosterone in his bloodstream. And MLB insists that it’s of a synthetic nature, meaning Braun couldn’t have produced it himself. So that means that it’s possible that Braun’s outstanding 2011 season, which produced 33 HRs, 111 RBIs, and a .331 batting average, wasn’t produced naturally.
But here’s the thing. Braun has been an outstanding player from the time the Brewers brought him up. He won the Rookie of the Year Award in 2007. His lifetime numbers are comparable to his MVP numbers; over his last five seasons, he’s averaged 36 HRs and 118 RBIs a season, and has hit over .300 every year except 2008 (when he “only” hit .285); his lifetime batting average, over five complete seasons, is .312.
So I don’t really see where Braun could’ve been taking anything that was of an enhancing nature, especially if he’s never tested positive before (and indeed, he hasn’t).
According to this article at USA Today, Braun plans a vigorous defense. He also called the “Outside the Lines” report “B.S.”
A spokesman for Braun said (quoted in both articles referenced):
“There are highly unusual circumstances surrounding this case which will support Ryan’s complete innocence and demonstrate there was absolutely no intentional violation of the program. While Ryan has impeccable character and no previous history, unfortunately, because of the process we have to maintain confidentiality and are not able to discuss it any further, but we are confident he will ultimately be exonerated.”
All I know is, the Brewers had an odd situation a few years back where centerfielder Mike Cameron tested positive for a “performance enhancing drug” — and you know what it was? He took an over the counter cold medicine, which happened to have something like Sudafed in it — that’s something that can raise your blood pressure because it allows you to breathe better. But it’s not something you take unless you’re ill, and Cameron was ill, and had doctors’ notes (more than one) to prove it.
And a few years ago during the World Baseball classic, there was a pitcher who was denied use of his albuterol asthma inhaler because apparently, being able to breathe is a “performance enhancement.” (This was a pitcher who was known to be asthmatic. As I am also asthmatic, I fail to see how being able to breathe, rather than succumbing to a fatal asthma attack, is a performance enhancement. Does MLB prefer healthy, vigorous baseball players who have asthma to drop over dead rather than take their albuterol in order to save their lives?)
And even with the players like Manny Ramirez, who have tested positive for something that can be called a “performance enhancement” — well, Ramirez was taking a very odd drug that enhanced, of all things, his estrogen levels. (A female fertility drug that is quite legal in many jurisdictions.) I never did understand what the benefit of that could possibly be, even though various chemists weighed in saying this, that, and the other. (The only thing I ever figured out is that this particular drug could’ve possibly been masking other drugs that really did make a difference in Ramirez’s on-field performance.)
But as baseball Hall of Famer Mike Schmidt (a third baseman, and a power hitter, for the Philadelphia Phillies) said in his book CLEARING THE BASES, baseball players have been trying to “gain an edge” since the beginning of time. Trying to legislate that away will never work (not that I think Braun did anything wrong here, but if he was trying to gain an edge, so what?). And if the players are harming themselves down the line to gain big bucks now, that should be their prerogative — all I ask is that if someone is taking something like that, they watch what happened to Oakland Raiders’ star Lyle Alzado (who died young, and horribly, from cancer that may have been prevented if Alzado hadn’t admittedly taken many, many steroids over time).
In this, particular case, my view is that Braun’s statistical performance was well within his own normals. So it’s very hard for me to believe that Braun actually did take anything illegal of the PED variety; because of that, and because of my admittedly laissez-faire attitude toward baseball players and legal drugs, I believe Braun should be considered innocent until and unless he is proven guilty.
Therefore, all the talk of Braun being stripped of his MVP award should stop already — it’s nonsense. Nothing’s been proven yet. Braun may have a good reason for why this happened, and I, for one, am willing to wait and see what it is, especially as his on-field performance hasn’t changed one whit since he was brought up to the big leagues to stay in 2007.
Music, Remembrance, and Observations
Folks, this is a difficult blog to write, mostly because I’ve been struggling with my grief process over the loss of my good friend, Jeff Wilson, all week long. (Well, really since he died, but this week it hit hard and fast, and just hasn’t really let up for very long.) Couple that with the holidays, and with missing my late husband Michael something fierce, well . . . let’s just say that I haven’t really had an enjoyable few weeks and save steps, shall we? (The sinus infection I’ve been dealing with hasn’t helped, either.)
What keeps me going despite these difficult and frustrating times? My music, that’s what. Music has a profound resonance for me, partly because I’ve spent most of my life studying it, and partly because I think better in music than words. (Strange, but true.)
Next Tuesday, I’ll play the first concert since making a bit of a comeback as a musician out at the University of Wisconsin-Parkside in Kenosha. The UW-Parkside Wind Ensemble and Community Band will perform, both singly and together; as first chair alto saxophone in the Community Band, I will be playing an extended solo in a piece called “Roma.” I’m looking forward to the concert, and I hope those of my friends and family who attend will enjoy it.
That being said, it feels very strange to me to be playing a concert at this time. I’m not one hundred percent right, not physically (even without the sinus infection, my hands continue to give me fits due to my carpal tunnel syndrome), and certainly not emotionally due to the recent loss of my friend Jeff. But that’s not any sort of excuse to keep me from doing whatever I can; I refuse to sit on the sidelines just because I am not in the musical shape I’d rather be in, or the physical shape, either.
The last time I played a concert, it was before I had met my late husband Michael — while Michael heard me practice many times, he never got a chance to hear me play in a concert, something I will always regret. Now, Jeff is also gone; while he was there encouraging me through both rounds of occupational therapy in the last year, which helped me regain enough of my abilities to again be able to play my saxophone (and play reasonably well), he is no longer able to hear me tell him how things are going, much less get a chance to hear a recording of the concert itself. (With his health issues the last five weeks of his life, that would’ve been the only way for him to hear me play unless I’d been able to get out there and play for him in person. Which of course I also wanted to do.)
So the two people who were the most important to me in this life are gone. I can’t do anything about that, other than wish with all my heart and soul that they were still here . . . and that’s not enough. (I’m sorry. I wish it was, but it really isn’t.)
What I’m going to try to do, therefore, is play and hope that wherever they are, they’ll hear it and know I’m doing everything in my power to regain my musical abilities. That meant a lot to them, and I’m sure that wherever they are now, it still does — so for the moment, all I can do is save up my experiences and hope that down the line, I’ll again be able to share with them how I felt about what I was doing in some sort of meaningful way (even if it has to be in the positive afterlife, not here).
Music, ’tis said, is a great healer. All I know is, it helps me to be able to play right now, even though nothing is going to be able to take this pain away because I miss my husband. I miss my good friend. And I wish very much that they were still with me in this life, because I really would’ve liked to see their faces after I finished, triumphantly, playing my solo in “Roma.”
Thoughts Regarding Editing (and Editors)
While continuing to recover from the latest sinus infection (nastier than most), I thought I’d blog about something I know a great deal about: editing, and editors.
See, some writers tend to think that editors “have it in” for them. That couldn’t be further from the truth, but you wouldn’t know it by what little tends to get said about editors — most of it being unflattering in the extreme.
Editors work hard to make sure manuscripts make as much sense as they possibly can before they get turned in. This can mean anything from fixing minor errors to asking questions about important plot points — though some places split the editing job up into three parts (proofreading, copy editing, and “straight editing,” the latter being more about the “macro-edit” of any given piece, while the first two deal with the more mundane particulars), other places don’t. I tend to call all three things “editing” even though if I’m asked merely to proofread, I don’t tend to bring my skills of “macro-editing” (looking at the piece of writing overall as a gestalt, then trying to improve it to the best piece of writing of which I can conceive), while if I’m being asked to copy-edit, it’s more likely that the “macro-edit” has been done by someone else.
But because all three of these things can be called for on one job (this happens quite often with one of the places I regularly edit for), it helps to get the particulars of any given job narrowed down. Do not feel silly if you ask questions, because without being willing to look silly at times, you cannot learn.
All that being said, editors often have last-minute changes from a writer (or, in the case of an anthology, writers) to incorporate. Sometimes, these changes come in after the layout process has started; that can be a particular challenge, one that makes you want to tear your hair out as an editor, but seems to be par for the course in our new, hyped-up digital age. Writers expect editors to just “go with the flow” and mostly, we do — but when we perform heroic actions to get a book to market despite delays on the writing end, it can get old.
So the next time you think about your editor (or editors), try to remember that editing skills are every bit as important as those a writer employs — and that many editors (if not most) are (or were) writers first. Editors have a really good understanding of what makes a writer tick, and we’re completely uninterested in stopping the creative process cold — what questions we ask are meant to spur something from you, the writer, that may not be in your manuscript as it stands but that you, the writer, may have thought was there. In short, editors are there to help you, and most if not all will work with you to improve your manuscript because any editor being employed has the best interests of the manuscript (story, novel, you name it) at heart. Period.
So if you were one of those I referenced above who thought that editors were “out to get you,” please do yourself a favor and think again. Because refusing to work with editors is not only counterproductive, it’s unprofessional, and will mark you out as a neophyte sooner than just about anything else. So do yourself a favor, and work with your editor rather than insisting your manuscript is so wonderful it needs no oversight whatsoever. (Please?)
——-
Edited to add: My late husband Michael was one of the best editors I’ve ever been around. I learned a great deal from him — what to do, what not to do — and it improved my writing immensely because I listened to him and didn’t automatically throw his suggestions out. I knew Michael was more accomplished than I was when I first started showing him my work — this was before we started dating, much less got married, mind — and from the beginning I was impressed by the depth and breadth of his knowledge and expertise.
You see, editing does not need to be a “zero sum game.” You don’t need “scorched earth tactics” to get the point across; you can instead use wit and humor, which is what Michael did with anyone he ever edited for — and it worked amazingly well.
Me, I am much more blunt than Michael ever was. But I try to use some humor as well as pointing out the good points of a manuscript when I edit; this is my ideal. But when time is short, sometimes the good points don’t get discussed — and that’s when writers get frustrated.
I can see any individual writer’s point, for the most part; he or she has worked very hard on a manuscript (whether it’s a story, novelette, novel, etc.) and here comes Ms. Editor to mark it all up in red. Then there are the balloons to the side if you’re using MS Word, and if you don’t see any words of encouragement from Ms. Editor, it can seem extremely disheartening and make writers go, “Now, why did I take up this profession again?”
But you must persevere and listen to your editor. If you have questions regarding an edit, ask your editor — I can’t say this often enough. Most if not all of us are glad to explain what we’re asking for — we may do it in a blunt way if we’re pressed for time, but we will explain it, and we will not be rude. (There’s a big difference between “rude” and “blunt.”)
Remember what my late husband Michael did, if you’re editing and can employ this strategy. It’s not only good manners, but it makes the maximum amount of sense — approaching someone’s manuscript gently, if you have enough time that you can do so, is almost assuredly the best way to go. (But even Michael, if he were pressed for time, would not explain as much or crack as many jokes during the explanation of his edit. Because that’s the nature of the job; you need to first get everything taken care of, then you can frame it a little bit so the writer can understand. But without first taking care of all of the problems, framing is impossible . . . does this make sense?)
Sinus Infection Here
Folks, right now I’m mostly down for the count. The review I’d hoped to write for Shiny Book Review didn’t get done, and all I’ve managed to do thus far is get up and have something to eat (in order to take my antibiotic, as it can irritate the stomach).
I’m also re-reading one of my favorite “comfort books,” this one being A MAN RIDES THROUGH by Stephen R. Donaldson. (Hard to believe that Donaldson had problems writing this one; he’s said in speeches — one witnessed by my niece — that he agonized over the “Mordant’s Need” duology and that it did not come easily. Can’t tell that by the quality of the writing or plot, that’s for sure.)
Nothing else of consequence got done today, unless you count me watching the second quarter of the Big Ten Championship game (the Wisconsin Badgers won the game overall, but the second quarter, they lost — didn’t score any points at all — to their opponent, Michigan State. Good thing games are decided by the total score, not by the “quarter-by-quarter” score or the Badgers would’ve been in trouble.)
Tomorrow must be better . . . as is, right now I’m about to go and stare at the insides of my eyelids, again.
Just Reviewed two “Wheel of Time” books at SBR
Folks, I reviewed THE GATHERING STORM and TOWERS OF MIDNIGHT, both written by Robert Jordan (and continued by Brandon Sanderson after Jordan’s death in 2007) this evening at Shiny Book Review.
Take a gander:
Here’s the upshot: Sanderson writes very well. I enjoyed what he did, and think he did an excellent job — I know how hard this is because I’m trying to finish Michael’s novels and he wrote in a completely different style from me. (When he helped me with my novel, ELFY, Michael wrote in my style. Writing in Michael’s style is much tougher for me than Michael writing in mine was for him, apparently, as it doesn’t come naturally. I leave it up to the reader as to whether or not Michael was more advanced as a writer/editor at the time of his death, though I know I think he was.)
Both books are good. I liked TOWERS OF MIDNIGHT better. I think that book was more humane and made more sense. But both are good and if you’ve read the previous eleven books in the WoT series, you will enjoy them. (But if you haven’t, please go out and read the first eleven or you will be hopelessly lost.)
Part 22 of “Changing Faces” in progress
Folks, I take my victories where I see ’em. And writing CHANGING FACES is definitely one of those, because I’ve persisted writing this novel over the past ten years. It’s gone through revisions, the death of my husband Michael, and now the death of my best friend, Jeff . . . and yet I persevere.
I hope that once I am finally done with this MSS, it will find its audience; I may have to self-publish it but I will try it, first, at a few places as it’s, in essence, a Christian-derived fantasy romance. Not my usual thing, and of course it has some New Age sentiment in it — but there’s nothing in it that is inaccessible, either.
I can also only hope that both Michael and Jeff, who were big fans of my writing in general and CHANGING FACES in particular (both wanted to see this finished and published in their lifetimes), will be happy with the final result. I know they’d be happy with me continuing onward, though I can’t do anything but that and be me . . . at any rate, getting a thousand words of writing in tonight into the next chapter (part 22) of this work is something to celebrate.
So let the happy dance commence.
Walker Recall Petitions hit 300,000 Sigs . . . Walker Recall Petitioners Harassed in Racine
With the statewide Wisconsin recalls of Governor Scott Walker (R), Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch (R), and our local recall of district 21 Senator Van Wanggaard (R), have come problems. But first, the good news . . . statewide organizers from UnitedWisconsin.com and the Democratic Party (two separate things) have both reported that over 300,000 recall signatures have been gathered in the first twelve days.
As the story from the Racine Journal-Times says:
People have signed the recall petitions at the rate of about 1,040 per hour, according to United Wisconsin. The group says signatures have been collected from people in all 72 counties in Wisconsin, including:
• 10,033 residents from Columbia County.
• 4,713 in Pierce County.
• 3,698 in Oneida County.
• 16,845 in Eau Claire and Chippewa counties.
• 8,540 in Portage County.
Racine County numbers were not available.
Now, note these numbers; Racine County is more populous than any of those other counties. Also, all of those counties are known as Republican-leaning or heavily Republican districts . . . which is bad news for Scott Walker and his backers, for sure.
This may be why recall advocates and petitioners, even in Racine County, are now having trouble with people harassing them, stealing signs, and in one case even driving straight at a crowd of people attempting to gather signatures. (See this story from the Racine Journal-Times for further details.) As Kelly Gallagher said in the recent Journal-Times article:
Kelly Gallaher, the organizer for the local progressive group Community for Change, said when she was with a group of people on Friday near a laundromat by River Run Family Restaurant, 3616 Northwestern Ave., someone sped directly at a group of organizers. People ran out of the way, she said. “It was that close,” Gallaher said.
Also on Saturday, a driver deliberately backed his vehicle toward people collecting signatures outside All Sports Pub, 3458 Rapids Drive, Gallaher said. That same day, Gallaher said someone threw a big glass of soda or some other drink at a man collecting signatures outside the Social Security Office, 4020 Durand Ave.
“It’s concerning,” Gallaher said. “My biggest fear is that someone is going to get hurt.”
And what have the local Republican Party folks done about this? Not a whole lot. While condemning incidents like this (without admitting they actually have happened, mind you), Racine Republican Party Chairman Bill Folk was more concerned about the recall petitioners getting signatures outside local businesses. From the Journal-Times article (the same one that quoted Gallagher):
While Folk has not heard directly about people harassing people collecting recall signatures, he said he has heard complaints about people collecting signatures on property where they shouldn’t be, which concerns him.
“If they are not getting permission from the business owners, it’s exposing the business owners to a political segment they may or may not agree with,” Folk said. “They are putting a business owner in an awkward situation politically.”
Of course, Gallagher pointed out that at the three businesses she knew of where inappropriate and scary things had happened, the recall petitioners did have permission to be there. So this was just another attempt by Folk and his Republican colleagues to divert attention from what’s really going on — and that’s sad.
Just Reviewed “Beauty and the Werewolf” at SBR
Folks, if you’re looking for a fun, fast romantic fantasy that loves turning “the Tradition” of fairy tales on its ear, you will really enjoy Mercedes Lackey’s BEAUTY AND THE WEREWOLF. Here’s the link to my review:
Now, as to what else to say about it? Well, I loved the characterization, and I appreciated how the plot enhanced this rather than the reverse. That the characterization flowed out naturally and that the romance was an extremely believable one (where the two characters had to get to know each other as friends, first, and only then did they realize they were attracted to one another) was just an added bonus.
Very good story. Enjoyable plot. A good way to spend two or three hours. And I would gladly re-read this one again, which is why I gave it an A-. (There are a few things I would’ve liked to see here that I didn’t, mostly having to do with the bad-guy character, Eric. But they were minor quibbles, at most.)
Enjoy the review!
Post-holiday illness
Right now I’m more sick than well. I seem to have the flu, or something close to it . . . all I was able to do last night, writing-wise, is open up my current work-in-progress, CHANGING FACES, and look at it. (Sometimes that will prompt something; sometimes, not.) Which is better than nothing, of course, but not what I wanted.
I did practice my saxophone today for about forty-five or fifty minutes, so that’s something positive.
Otherwise, I finished up the book I’ll be reviewing for Shiny Book Review tomorrow, Mercedes Lackey’s BEAUTY AND THE WEREWOLF, re-read one of my all-time favorite books, Rosemary Edghill’s TWO OF A KIND (more people should write like Rosemary does; she can write any genre, any style, anything at all and does it with flair), and am now working my way through Rosemary’s ILL-BRED BRIDE (another fine book).
Now, you might be wondering how I can read anything while I feel so lousy, or practice my saxophone, either. This is partly because I have to do something that makes me feel better; right now, I am grieving the loss of my very good friend, Jeff Wilson, and yet I know he’d not want me to cry all day long. (Sometimes I do cry for a while, but it passes.) That’s not what he was about; he was about doing whatever it took to feel better, and books often helped him feel better when he was down. So reading, in a strange way, is honoring his memory — and as it also honors my late husband Michael’s memory (who was the same way Jeff was in this regard), it’s a doubled blessing.
So, I read a bit, I practiced a bit, and now Mom and I are watching a movie, LEAP YEAR, a comedy starring Amy Adams as a control freak wanting to get married. (I have yet to see or hear any man who could put up with someone drawn the way Adams has been in real life, but I suppose it could happen. We all have our quirks.) And later, I’ll read a bit more, try to write some music, and maybe some words will come to me also . . . hey, it could happen.
More tomorrow, one way or another . . . though right now, saying that reminds me of the Shakespearean quote (from “Macbeth”), “Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow, creeps in its petty pace from day to day . . . . “
Barb Caffrey's Blog 