Dara Torres-Amazing

Are we back to this loophole quagmire? Why not give the girl some credit, she's training appropriately for her events. The point is that a negative test means nothing. I posted an article from the Sporting News (August 19,2002) on another thread. The author lists the following possibilities when a test is negative: 1) The athlete doesn't use steroids. 2) He uses steroids daily but with a masking agent. 3) He uses steroids, but all traces are flushed out of his system within two or three days. 4) He uses a steroid recipe fashioned by a designer famous for undetectable potions. 5) He used steroids as training aids two years ago, bulked up, kept buff with madman workouts and now needs a juice refill only every January. 6) He uses human growth hormone, or insulin-like growth factor I. These replicate steroid enhancement, but no test exists for them.

I have no proof, it seems highly suspect for 40 year old woman to be that strong cut and fast, we all know that many dopers have found ways to slip around testing positive. I suspect that Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens doped, the fact that I don't like either of them makes them more suspect in my mind, but just because I suspect them does not make them guilty. Shouldn't these athletes be presumed innocent until they are proven guilty? That requires a leap of faith :angel:(or naivete in some people's eyes). I am mostly playing devil's advocate because in the NSR thread about Clemens, I chided George for defending Clemens. I like Dara, so it is easier for me to believe she is innocent than it is for me to believe Clemens is innocent (only because he abandoned the RedSox for the maney in Toronto)!

I have no proof, it seems highly suspect for 40 year old woman to be that strong cut and fast, we all know that many dopers have found ways to slip around testing positive.

As an athlete you care about your body, and your long-term health. You also care about winning. The balance between the two is what leads some to cheat, and others not to.

Caring about your sport is one thing, but how can a person spend their whole life training, being healthy, just to ignore the risks of substance abuse? Beats me, ask Floyd.

So, JMiller, how do you explain any athlete doping? I don't think my comment was out of context at all. You would think that people would do things in their lives to stay healthy, but the fact is many do not. Athletes are not necessarily an exception to this.

Aren't you the one who believes everything Big Mac says. I think he would love to train you at no charge. Don't let him get behind you he may tell you it is Vitamin B. I think you would believe him like some of the congressmen. I have no idea what you are talking about. Big Mac is Mark McGwire but I think you mean Brian McNamee, Roger Clemen's personal trainer, who you have accused of hearsay by saying he personally injected Roger with the juice. Clemens admitted he gave himself shots of B12, at his mother's urging. Did you watch or read the testimony?

A lifetime of negative tests is proof-enough for me. Barry Bonds thanks you for this open minded view. If you don't think a 41 year old woman, or man, would take harmful substances then you are just plain naive. Go to your local bookstore and pick up a few random copies of sports enthusiast magazines. You will be amazed by the number of adds for supplements, some which carry warnings to not take them if you are subject to doping control.

I doubt a 41 year old woman would risk her life by taking harmful substances. Good point. No 41 year old women would ever do something like, say, smoke cigarettes.

The thing I hate about accusing someone of doping is the accused has absolutely no way of proving their innocence. A lifetime of negative tests is not definitive proof that the athlete isn't doping.