I don’t care how many apologists there are for WADA out there, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out WADA was wrong from the very beginning.
Nandrolone in a person’s body does not mean they were using it as a performance enhancing substance.
No one has proved that the nandrolone was there in her body for the sake of enhancing performance. So some arbitrary, United States hating committee decides they have jurisdiction to ban an American athlete. That doesn’t mean she cheated. It just means they made a choice to ban her because someone else would “gain from it.”
If you’re not a hobby jogger or lazy finger pointer stop talking trash about Shelby and move on with your life.
Alberto Salazar doped athletes. Jerry Schumacher did not and NO, Shelby wasn’t some rogue one off. Use common sense and see that WADA is not an unbiased organization…it has motives and interests, just like any other body.
Use a little imagination in how you see Shelby’s case and don’t just assume that she cheated because WADA told you that she did.
WADA 100% gets some cases wrong, just as it gets some right. In this case they were wrong, but they will never admit as much, just like all political organizations and major figures…blame someone else for your own error.
they should just fire all of WADA and hire you instead, because you clearly has all the answers 🤦🏻
a covid denier comes on here to defend shelby. shelby is s trumpster, so most likely a covid denier. pretty good chance this person is shelby herself. it all adds up LOL
Shelby Busted: “WADA and AIU are corrupt! They totally framed Shelby, railroaded her in a kangaroo court, and singled her out for being a talented white American!!!”
Africans Busted: “About time! Filthy cheaters enabled by unethical Euro agents! Thank God that WADA and AIU are using their 100% foolproof science to bust these cheats!!!”
Why do I still believe that Shelby cheated? A lot of reasons. I won’t go into all of them. She’s a liar. She kept talking about how she had such a small amount of nandrolone in her system. That’s a lie. The results showed a significant amount in her system. Maybe it was intentional. She was injured at the time, IIRC, so maybe she was taking a sketchy supplement to help with her injury. At the end of the day, she had a large amount in her system and I find it highly unlikely that she tested positive from a burrito. There is a part of the story that she isn’t telling and she is lying about something. I can’t trust her. I won’t be rooting for her when she returns to competition.
But is it a lie? In their official guidance to the labs, WADA calls levels less than 10ng/ml "in the low range". This is what is "usually" expected following the consumption of intact boar, and sometimes can be much higher. Prof. Ayotte has reported values as high as 130 ng/ml and 160 ng/ml. Houlihan had 5.2 and 5.8 ng/ml -- well within the low range that WADA describes as usual.
"Following consumption of the edible parts of non-castrated male pigs, concentrations of excreted 19-NA in urine are usually in the low ng/mL range (less than 10 ng/mL), although higher concentrations have been exceptionally reported."
What? The nandrolone metabolite levels in Houlihan’s urine were two to three times higher than the highest values in the literature after eating much more significant quantities of mature (uncastrated) boar — a product different from the alleged cryptorchid in question, which would have been slaughtered at six months. Do some research. The amount of nandrolone in her system was exceptionally high.
I don’t care how many apologists there are for WADA out there, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out WADA was wrong from the very beginning.
Nandrolone in a person’s body does not mean they were using it as a performance enhancing substance.
No one has proved that the nandrolone was there in her body for the sake of enhancing performance. So some arbitrary, United States hating committee decides they have jurisdiction to ban an American athlete. That doesn’t mean she cheated. It just means they made a choice to ban her because someone else would “gain from it.”
If you’re not a hobby jogger or lazy finger pointer stop talking trash about Shelby and move on with your life.
Alberto Salazar doped athletes. Jerry Schumacher did not and NO, Shelby wasn’t some rogue one off. Use common sense and see that WADA is not an unbiased organization…it has motives and interests, just like any other body.
Use a little imagination in how you see Shelby’s case and don’t just assume that she cheated because WADA told you that she did.
WADA 100% gets some cases wrong, just as it gets some right. In this case they were wrong, but they will never admit as much, just like all political organizations and major figures…blame someone else for your own error.
It makes perfect sense.
The amount of Nandrolone was so high, that no natural explanation is valid. WADA nailed this.
And burritogate was the most ridiculous laughable excuse ever. She should have tried the Bauman excuse and blamed toothpaste.
The fact remains that Shelby is a drug cheat and should have been banned longer.
I don’t care how many apologists there are for WADA out there, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out WADA was wrong from the very beginning.
Nandrolone in a person’s body does not mean they were using it as a performance enhancing substance.
No one has proved that the nandrolone was there in her body for the sake of enhancing performance. So some arbitrary, United States hating committee decides they have jurisdiction to ban an American athlete. That doesn’t mean she cheated. It just means they made a choice to ban her because someone else would “gain from it.”
If you’re not a hobby jogger or lazy finger pointer stop talking trash about Shelby and move on with your life.
Alberto Salazar doped athletes. Jerry Schumacher did not and NO, Shelby wasn’t some rogue one off. Use common sense and see that WADA is not an unbiased organization…it has motives and interests, just like any other body.
Use a little imagination in how you see Shelby’s case and don’t just assume that she cheated because WADA told you that she did.
WADA 100% gets some cases wrong, just as it gets some right. In this case they were wrong, but they will never admit as much, just like all political organizations and major figures…blame someone else for your own error.
You could tell just from looking at her face well before she got busted.
I don’t care how many apologists there are for WADA out there, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out WADA was wrong from the very beginning.
Nandrolone in a person’s body does not mean they were using it as a performance enhancing substance.
No one has proved that the nandrolone was there in her body for the sake of enhancing performance. So some arbitrary, United States hating committee decides they have jurisdiction to ban an American athlete. That doesn’t mean she cheated. It just means they made a choice to ban her because someone else would “gain from it.”
If you’re not a hobby jogger or lazy finger pointer stop talking trash about Shelby and move on with your life.
Alberto Salazar doped athletes. Jerry Schumacher did not and NO, Shelby wasn’t some rogue one off. Use common sense and see that WADA is not an unbiased organization…it has motives and interests, just like any other body.
Use a little imagination in how you see Shelby’s case and don’t just assume that she cheated because WADA told you that she did.
WADA 100% gets some cases wrong, just as it gets some right. In this case they were wrong, but they will never admit as much, just like all political organizations and major figures…blame someone else for your own error.
Didn’t a lot of her training partners slow down dramatically, get chronically injured or retire shortly after her bust?
Shelby Busted: “WADA and AIU are corrupt! They totally framed Shelby, railroaded her in a kangaroo court, and singled her out for being a talented white American!!!”
Africans Busted: “About time! Filthy cheaters enabled by unethical Euro agents! Thank God that WADA and AIU are using their 100% foolproof science to bust these cheats!!!”
This was actually what made me realize she probably cheated.
I don't like identity stuff, but I realized that running media, the same media that loves to chastise everyone for being 'racist' or 'sexist' was believing her story without question, calling it 'tragic' and making grand proclamations about her character. Even in the presser, they didn't even ask the most obvious questions; what type of burrito did you order? Did you have it tested? When you say scarce amount, can you share the exact amount? I thought it's interesting how when Kenyans are busted, we don't give them a second thought, but suddenly THIS was the case that was going to change our entire perception of "the system".
Even when Ajee Wilson successfully defended herself against a ban, we didn't question the system. But Shelby gets busted, and the system needs to be thrown out?
Anyways here's the list of why I think she's guilty.
1. The two positive tests with the synthetic drug, nandrolone found in each
2. Her sketchy progression from 2018-2020.
3. She lies one too many times. She lied about her initial ban, saying she had injury issues and wanted to continue with training. She lied about it being a 'trace amount'. She lied about the type of burrito she ordered. I also think she's being untruthful about her relationship with Nike. She says they aren't paying her at all, but she can train on their grounds, and she hasn't had a job despite traveling a lot.
4. She keeps saying she wants to 'change the system' but has no concrete ideas about what needs to be changed. Only that with small amounts, AIU has to prove intent. She knows that makes no sense to implement.
5. She only talks to sympathetic reporters including someone who was a teenager. She refuses to answer questions with people who knows will ask more critical questions.
6. Ross Tucker basically figured out what she did based on her numbers.
7. She also did things like continue to train with Bowerman despite making others uncomfortable and grifting money which don't speak directly to cheating but does towards her character.
I don’t care how many apologists there are for WADA out there, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out WADA was wrong from the very beginning.
Nandrolone in a person’s body does not mean they were using it as a performance enhancing substance.
No one has proved that the nandrolone was there in her body for the sake of enhancing performance. So some arbitrary, United States hating committee decides they have jurisdiction to ban an American athlete. That doesn’t mean she cheated. It just means they made a choice to ban her because someone else would “gain from it.”
If you’re not a hobby jogger or lazy finger pointer stop talking trash about Shelby and move on with your life.
Alberto Salazar doped athletes. Jerry Schumacher did not and NO, Shelby wasn’t some rogue one off. Use common sense and see that WADA is not an unbiased organization…it has motives and interests, just like any other body.
Use a little imagination in how you see Shelby’s case and don’t just assume that she cheated because WADA told you that she did.
WADA 100% gets some cases wrong, just as it gets some right. In this case they were wrong, but they will never admit as much, just like all political organizations and major figures…blame someone else for your own error.
It makes perfect sense.
The amount of Nandrolone was so high, that no natural explanation is valid. WADA nailed this.
And burritogate was the most ridiculous laughable excuse ever. She should have tried the Bauman excuse and blamed toothpaste.
The fact remains that Shelby is a drug cheat and should have been banned longer.
+100000000
It makes perfect sense for sure. Plus, it was synthetic nandrolone for crying out loud, inconsistent with the ludicrous farm-fed beef burrito excuse that will remain a running joke for decades.
Last but not least, WADA had nothing to do with it. But nice conspiracy theory lol.
Rather, it was the AIU/WA who presented the case, and CAS and the Swiss Supreme Court who made the decision.
I don’t care how many apologists there are for WADA out there, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out WADA was wrong from the very beginning.
Nandrolone in a person’s body does not mean they were using it as a performance enhancing substance.
No one has proved that the nandrolone was there in her body for the sake of enhancing performance. So some arbitrary, United States hating committee decides they have jurisdiction to ban an American athlete. That doesn’t mean she cheated. It just means they made a choice to ban her because someone else would “gain from it.”
If you’re not a hobby jogger or lazy finger pointer stop talking trash about Shelby and move on with your life.
Alberto Salazar doped athletes. Jerry Schumacher did not and NO, Shelby wasn’t some rogue one off. Use common sense and see that WADA is not an unbiased organization…it has motives and interests, just like any other body.
Use a little imagination in how you see Shelby’s case and don’t just assume that she cheated because WADA told you that she did.
WADA 100% gets some cases wrong, just as it gets some right. In this case they were wrong, but they will never admit as much, just like all political organizations and major figures…blame someone else for your own error.
What? The nandrolone metabolite levels in Houlihan’s urine were two to three times higher than the highest values in the literature after eating much more significant quantities of mature (uncastrated) boar — a product different from the alleged cryptorchid in question, which would have been slaughtered at six months. Do some research. The amount of nandrolone in her system was exceptionally high.
I researched the research. "literature" here was two studies (with small sample sizes), regarding meat, which is not a valid assumption under a claim of pork offal in a burrito. In the proper context of a claim of pork offal, Houlihan's values were about 20-25x lower than the highest values in the literature. There are also reasons to doubt that the assumptions of "cryptorchid" and "six months" are valid during this period of the pandemic.
Again, WADA -- who has surely also done the research -- considers less than 10 ng/ml in the "low" range and "usual", after consumption of intact boar.
I think as we get closer to her returning, there will be more attempts by Shelby and media to refute allegations she was guilty.
To be clear, what she was most likely doing was taking 19-NOR-DHEA which is a nandrolone precursor and can be found on amazon. This was written in the report, though Shelby has liked to pretend in subsequent interviews that this conclusion magically doesn't exist. The information is out there. Shelby has nothing to refute this claim.
It would be nice for someone in the media to ask about this claim specifically.
What? The nandrolone metabolite levels in Houlihan’s urine were two to three times higher than the highest values in the literature after eating much more significant quantities of mature (uncastrated) boar — a product different from the alleged cryptorchid in question, which would have been slaughtered at six months. Do some research. The amount of nandrolone in her system was exceptionally high.
I researched the research. "literature" here was two studies (with small sample sizes), regarding meat, which is not a valid assumption under a claim of pork offal in a burrito. In the proper context of a claim of pork offal, Houlihan's values were about 20-25x lower than the highest values in the literature. There are also reasons to doubt that the assumptions of "cryptorchid" and "six months" are valid during this period of the pandemic.
Again, WADA -- who has surely also done the research -- considers less than 10 ng/ml in the "low" range and "usual", after consumption of intact boar.
Oh man, are you still not ashamed of all your trolling? The claim, unrebutted by literally everyone involved, before, during and after the hearing, was outer stomach muscle pork "offal". So yes, meat, not kidney, not testicles. Stop right there. Read the CAS report. Or at least Ross Tucker's explanations. And it wasn't "intact boar". And the carbon isotope ratio was inconsistent with commercial pork - however commercial pork was claimed, not wild migrating boar.
If you factor in the 2-5x as high quantities in the literature (187 - 491 g!), and her claim that it was 10 hours after consumption (and the meat peak occurs after 6 hours, not after 10!), her amount is at least 10x too high, as she ate less than 100 g. And even that ignores that her claimed pig was far younger and far less mature than the 3 years old studied!
To be precise, even the meat maximum amount in the Hulsemann study after 10 hours - not average - was 1 ng/ml from the 410 g roast. She had 5.5 ng/ml from less than 100 g...
But, go ahead and troll away instead of admitting defeat! Do you now want to come up with a new claim that the stomach muscle contained 50% testicles, or what? Hahahahaha.... sure, why not, this is letsrun here. Trash the science, and invent outrageous and unsupported unique scenarios based on your illusions, why not.
Oh man, are you still not ashamed of all your trolling? The claim, unrebutted by literally everyone involved, before, during and after the hearing, was outer stomach muscle pork "offal". So yes, meat, not kidney, not testicles. Stop right there. Read the CAS report. Or at least Ross Tucker's explanations. And it wasn't "intact boar". And the carbon isotope ratio was inconsistent with commercial pork - however commercial pork was claimed, not wild migrating boar.
If you factor in the 2-5x as high quantities in the literature (187 - 491 g!), and her claim that it was 10 hours after consumption (and the meat peak occurs after 6 hours, not after 10!), her amount is at least 10x too high, as she ate less than 100 g. And even that ignores that her claimed pig was far younger and far less mature than the 3 years old studied!
To be precise, even the meat maximum amount in the Hulsemann study after 10 hours - not average - was 1 ng/ml from the 410 g roast. She had 5.5 ng/ml from less than 100 g...
But, go ahead and troll away instead of admitting defeat! Do you now want to come up with a new claim that the stomach muscle contained 50% testicles, or what? Hahahahaha.... sure, why not, this is letsrun here. Trash the science, and invent outrageous and unsupported unique scenarios based on your illusions, why not.
I read the report. The report said the claim was a burrito containing pork offal, about a half dozen times. Intact boar offal is not a rebuttal, or a surrebuttal, but the original claim to be rebutted. I can't be fooled by partial rebuttals propped up with a series of unsupported assumptions which answers the wrong question.
I think as we get closer to her returning, there will be more attempts by Shelby and media to refute allegations she was guilty.
To be clear, what she was most likely doing was taking 19-NOR-DHEA which is a nandrolone precursor and can be found on amazon. This was written in the report, though Shelby has liked to pretend in subsequent interviews that this conclusion magically doesn't exist. The information is out there. Shelby has nothing to refute this claim.
It would be nice for someone in the media to ask about this claim specifically.
The report did not say "she was most likely doing ... 19-NOR-DHEA ... found on Amazon".
They said "consistent with", which gives no indication of likelihood.
This suggested alternative is a baseless allegation, and Houlihan rebutted it with a denial.
Try researching the facts and the rules. I give you a head start here out of kindness.
Facts and rules: after testing positive, the athlete needs to make her case. She needs to show hard-core evidence or at least witness testimonies.
That's why she went to great lengths about describing the unusual taste of her burrito, how she couldn't finish it, that the food truck was especially busy that day, and got several witnesses to confirm all of that. CAS agreed, that yes it is possible that she got a different order.
Then she showed, with evidence, that pork offal was on the menu. She showed, with evidence, that that pork offal was made from pork stomach from some Iowa plant. CAS agreed, that yes it is possible that she got offal. Based on the Iowa plant, CAS didn't agree that that offal would have come from "intact boar". Therefore she lost the case.
For some reason (to add insult to injury or to destroy any chances for an appeal maybe?), they kept going and discussed also whether that stomach could have causes her nandrolone levels in excess of 5 ng/ml (if it was intact boar). Based on the boar expert's testimony, and common sense (stomach muscle behaves like meat, not like an organ like kidneys when it comes to androgen levels), CAS didn't agree that that offal could have caused those steroid concentrations. Somehow you seem to have a problem with this part?
And yet, the story wasn't over. Here we come back to the Iowa plant - this is important, because that plant only buys pork from farms, not hunters. World Athletics, supported by said boar expert and a carbon isotope expert, demonstrated to the satisfaction of the court that the carbon isotopes do not match those of pork from farms. Here comes the consistent part - the whole story is fully consistent with that Amazon nandrolone, and not at all with that burrito excuse.
Again, just like with the stomach, Houlihan presented no evidence for (or even asked to consider) any other scenario (such as that the offal contained kidneys after all, or that the nandrolone was in her magnesium tablets, or that someone spiked her drink).
Nothing to criticize here. All claims were fully rebutted. See also Tucker + Tygart, and note that even in Houlihan's appeal, none of the above was criticized either. Instead Houlihan tried to argue about due process - and lost that argument too, because, as Tygart said, they all did everything perfectly by the book.
Shelby, the gullible people who believe you already do. The rational people will not be persuaded by your verbal diarrhea awful offal excuse. Just stop. This is almost as embarrassing as using the burrito defense initially.
Try researching the facts and the rules. I give you a head start here out of kindness.
Facts and rules: after testing positive, the athlete needs to make her case. She needs to show hard-core evidence or at least witness testimonies.
That's why she went to great lengths about describing the unusual taste of her burrito, how she couldn't finish it, that the food truck was especially busy that day, and got several witnesses to confirm all of that. CAS agreed, that yes it is possible that she got a different order.
Then she showed, with evidence, that pork offal was on the menu. She showed, with evidence, that that pork offal was made from pork stomach from some Iowa plant. CAS agreed, that yes it is possible that she got offal. Based on the Iowa plant, CAS didn't agree that that offal would have come from "intact boar". Therefore she lost the case.
For some reason (to add insult to injury or to destroy any chances for an appeal maybe?), they kept going and discussed also whether that stomach could have causes her nandrolone levels in excess of 5 ng/ml (if it was intact boar). Based on the boar expert's testimony, and common sense (stomach muscle behaves like meat, not like an organ like kidneys when it comes to androgen levels), CAS didn't agree that that offal could have caused those steroid concentrations. Somehow you seem to have a problem with this part?
And yet, the story wasn't over. Here we come back to the Iowa plant - this is important, because that plant only buys pork from farms, not hunters. World Athletics, supported by said boar expert and a carbon isotope expert, demonstrated to the satisfaction of the court that the carbon isotopes do not match those of pork from farms. Here comes the consistent part - the whole story is fully consistent with that Amazon nandrolone, and not at all with that burrito excuse.
Again, just like with the stomach, Houlihan presented no evidence for (or even asked to consider) any other scenario (such as that the offal contained kidneys after all, or that the nandrolone was in her magnesium tablets, or that someone spiked her drink).
Nothing to criticize here. All claims were fully rebutted. See also Tucker + Tygart, and note that even in Houlihan's appeal, none of the above was criticized either. Instead Houlihan tried to argue about due process - and lost that argument too, because, as Tygart said, they all did everything perfectly by the book.
Facts are facts.
Been there, done that. I wasn't impressed by the facts, nor the rules. Like the rebuttals of Houlihan's claim of "burrito containing pork offal", the facts were incomplete and insufficient to draw any fact-based conclusions of intentional doping. The rules permit finding rule violations based on presumptions supporting incomplete facts, as the CAS clearly explained in the report. This allows fast and cheap convictions of both innocent and guilty athletes alike without all the heavy burden.
Note that there were no supporting facts that Houlihan purchased or consumed "Amazon nandrolone".
So here we are 4 years later, and the answer to the question, "did she intentionally dope?" is still "we presume so", as the CAS explained.