Dara just one the national title in the 100M Freestyle in 54.4 at the ripe old age of 40. Simply Incredible. :applaud: :woot:
If that's not inspiring I don't know what is.
The courts are always right???
OJ Innocent in one court.
OJ Guilty in another court.)
There is a difference between the two courts George. The defendant must be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal court, otherwise he is not guilty of the crime with which he was charged. Apparently, the glove not fitting planted a seed of doubt in the jury (that was supposed to be a funny). And in my opinion, not guilty is different than innocent. The court found him not guilty of capital murder; that doesn't mean he didn't kill anybody.
The drug tests are perfect and always tell the truth???
The only truth the drug tests tell is the absence (or lack thereof) of any particular substance in some pre-determined concentration. No doubt they are not perfect, but they are far more perfect than most people's sense of the truth.
Is it possible the Clenbuterol they have used in the Beef, Pork, Chicken and Fish industry could be the source???
I read somewhere just this past week that Clenbuterol is not approved for use in any medicine in the US and it is not approved to use on livestock in the US, although it has been the source of some poisonings outside the US.
There is a difference between the two courts George. The defendant must be proven guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt in criminal court
I think the correct wording is "beyond reasonable doubt." Beyond a shadow of a doubt implies much more to me.
Geek I am not looking for insults, I am asking if it is possible. I had read somewhere that some Spanish athletes had side effects from eating Clenbuterol tainted meat. It was used in Texas to grow big calfs.
My calves are massive, all that Breaststroke!
George, I too think due process and allowing room for an error or inadvertant consumption. I think the food thing is a stretch though, how comes we're not all rippin up the pool.
Right now it shows she tested positive, I think the burden to prove that it's wrong falls on her. I'd favour a lab error to be the likely reason for a false positive, if there was a mistake, that's where I'd expect to find it.
If you told me my livelihood depended on testing, I'd be a freak about it. In fact I have done to get many jobs where money and ethics are involved. I listed everything, from a-z that I'd taken in a month just in case. I know kids at college got jobs lined up but didn't lay off the ganja, lied about using and then wondered why they got told they lost the job after the tox screen. If she took something without really checking/knowing it, that's kind of dumb, and the invalidation of her qualification is just.
Um, if she did take Clenbuterol, then yes, she did commit a crime as that is not available in the US by prescription.
As scyfreestyler posted, the drug is not controlled by the Controlled Substances Act. Therefore she did not commit a crime.
Some of the arguments here are pretty comical.
A couple interesting facts.
5/26/2006 at the age of 19 Jessica hardy swam 26.97, the first time under 27 seconds in her career that I could find on usa swimming. All swims prior to this were 27's and 28's.
From that swim, she makes dramatic improvements from 26.97 all the way to 24.48 in the olympic trials at age 21 (where she test positive for a banned substance).
Nearly a 2.5 second drop. That is going from not even being an olympic trials qualifier to world class in a pretty short time. And the substance she tested positive for is known for its ability to clear the body quickly and has benefits for sprinters.
Anything is possible, tainted meat or supplements, fellow team mate spiking her water bottle, or even a dirty coach. But how likely are those scenarios?
On a side note, is being tested 3 times at the trials normal? Are all of the olympic qualifiers tested after each race? Could she have thought she was in the clear after the first test?
Is there any infraction associated with getting a prescription for something not allowed in the US (lets just assume it is not allowed) or for obtaining a prescription for purposes other than the drug's intended benefit? I'm just asking, not making any statement here.
I've read about this being done with cancer patients. I assume it occurs elsewhere in medicine as well on a routine basis.
I think the bottom line is, not a controlled substance, not a crime.
Very interesting scenario, good point. If this drug clears quickly and she thought she was only getting tested once, that could explain the order of her test results. Well done, inspector!
I've read that the drug has a 35 hour half life. I believe that it should clear after four half lives. If she took a dose during the Trials, which would explain the negative/positive/negative sequence of test results for July 1, July 4, and July 6, then she must have been either careless or desperate.
Or she ate some tainted beef from overseas.
I do know that criminal and civil courts are not the same.
Clenbuterol is not approved in the USA for use for humans or in livestock but there are not enough inspectors in the USA agriculture dept. to protect against its use. It has been used before in livestock in the USA.
www.fsis.usda.gov/.../clenbute.htm
Gull:
You are 100% correct. No law, to my limited knowledge exists that makes her - test a criminal offense. Having said that, I believe it should be, based on the money and potential earnings she deprived other clean swimmers.
THAT in my thinking is criminal!
IMHO
