Geek, considering the way you went after George to answer your questions it is disappointing that you are steadfastly avoiding commenting on the Kicker V. case.
Gull, the WADA information you quote deals with whether a violation has occurred. Now that JH is not contesting the validity of the test results no one is contesting that a violation occurred, regardless of circumstances or intentions. That doesn't mean that circumstances and intentions won't be taken into account when determining the penalty beyond the invalidation of results. If you review previous rulings you will find that some athletes have had the standard penalty reduced due to circumstances.
At this point I am having a hard time imagining an explanation and it seems likely it will turn out that she deliberately doped, but then, I would never have come up with the contaminated supplements explanation for Kicker's violation which I would have said was too far fetched to be true if it hadn't been proven to a court's satisfaction.
Question: Is the positive test set at X level solely to avoid false positives? Or is taking a PED in a quantity less than X level simply not that performance enhancing? I'm assuming it is, but am still curious.
I would not take it as a given that there is any tolerance for drugs that can be isolated. I think people may be getting confused with tests for substances that naturally occur, where tests set a level or ratio that is higher than ever naturally occurs. The Brazilian swimmer was nailed when it was shown that the testosterone in her system was synthetic rather than natural.
Geek, considering the way you went after George to answer your questions it is disappointing that you are steadfastly avoiding commenting on the Kicker V. case.
Gull, the WADA information you quote deals with whether a violation has occurred. Now that JH is not contesting the validity of the test results no one is contesting that a violation occurred, regardless of circumstances or intentions. That doesn't mean that circumstances and intentions won't be taken into account when determining the penalty beyond the invalidation of results. If you review previous rulings you will find that some athletes have had the standard penalty reduced due to circumstances.
At this point I am having a hard time imagining an explanation and it seems likely it will turn out that she deliberately doped, but then, I would never have come up with the contaminated supplements explanation for Kicker's violation which I would have said was too far fetched to be true if it hadn't been proven to a court's satisfaction.
Question: Is the positive test set at X level solely to avoid false positives? Or is taking a PED in a quantity less than X level simply not that performance enhancing? I'm assuming it is, but am still curious.
I would not take it as a given that there is any tolerance for drugs that can be isolated. I think people may be getting confused with tests for substances that naturally occur, where tests set a level or ratio that is higher than ever naturally occurs. The Brazilian swimmer was nailed when it was shown that the testosterone in her system was synthetic rather than natural.
