There’s an employer I want to work for.
There’s an employer I want to work for.
OriginalLurker wrote:
Oral-Turinabol worked like a charm for the East Germans,
17alpha substituted steroids are resistant to first pass metabolism
My goodness, I would be way more concerned about trichinosis from pork out of a food truck than some minor chemical.
Spanish Olympic Gold Medalist Race-walker Daniel Plaza also brought sex into his defence, explaining his positive test for the banned steroid nandrolone by saying he had had prolonged oral sex with his pregnant wife, a defence based on the suggestion that pregnant women can produce nandrolone naturally. Plaza, too, received a two-year ban, although he was later exonerated.
https://www.esquire.com/uk/culture/news/a4395/worst-doping-excuses-sport/
As I said before, this looks like burrito gate.
It smells fishy and does look like they are lying. If I was writing about this incident as a responsible journalist, I would write about the facts and compare information from all sides. I am not writing a story, so I can just comment on what I know. I believe she is guilty. Why? The story does not make sense. Athletes use PEDs. I have spoken to top athletes in the past who admitted so but asked for the information to be "off the record". I have spoken to some who freely admitted they used PEDs. Some I know were asked to use PEDs, and refused. There are a lot of athletes using PEDs, pretty sure on that or otherwise, we would not be seeing positive drug tests. I believe if we had life time bans, there would be more incentive not to cheat. Now, people can either stick their heads in the sand and believe everyone is good and clean or people can advocate for a clean sport. What athletes have told me is they need to cheat to compete with the US and world's best or they do it for the money. I hope others are not afraid to speak up. It took courage for fellow cyclists to dispute Lance Armstrong's claims he did not use PEDs, maybe the same will happen in track and field?
losmateo2 wrote:
@rojo the Lawson story was after he was cleared, where is the article at the moment he was charged about how it was a tragedy?
Also I am unclear where did the information on the lab that did Shelby’s test come from?
That is a false statement. John wrote two stories. One before he was cleared and one after. Here is the one before.
https://www.letsrun.com/news/2019/08/a-life-on-pause-jarrion-lawsons-career-hangs-in-the-balance-as-he-fights-his-four-year-doping-ban-and-the-global-anti-doping-system/The information came from a source and was confirmed by her lawyer. People who think we are foolish to accept facts told us by the lawyer don't know what they are talking about. He's not going to lie to us when asked factual matters as it would be exposed when the report comes out in a few weeks.
trackgirlnut wrote:
As I said before, this looks like burrito gate.
It smells fishy and does look like they are lying. If I was writing about this incident as a responsible journalist, I would write about the facts and compare information from all sides. I am not writing a story, so I can just comment on what I know. I believe she is guilty. Why? The story does not make sense. Athletes use PEDs. I have spoken to top athletes in the past who admitted so but asked for the information to be "off the record". I have spoken to some who freely admitted they used PEDs. Some I know were asked to use PEDs, and refused. There are a lot of athletes using PEDs, pretty sure on that or otherwise, we would not be seeing positive drug tests. I believe if we had life time bans, there would be more incentive not to cheat. Now, people can either stick their heads in the sand and believe everyone is good and clean or people can advocate for a clean sport. What athletes have told me is they need to cheat to compete with the US and world's best or they do it for the money. I hope others are not afraid to speak up. It took courage for fellow cyclists to dispute Lance Armstrong's claims he did not use PEDs, maybe the same will happen in track and field?
It's known to pretty much anyone with more than two brain cells that every elite athlete is taking drugs. It's a don't ask, don't tell policy. To compete at the elite level you definitely require drugs. Eventually, doping will become legalized since most drugs used in a regulated way and dosages have minimal side effects.
We know Houlihan has an unusual physiology (and as a result has had her spleen and gall bladder removed). I wonder if she also can produce abnormally high levels of endogenous nandrolone.
Liberal fact checker wrote:
You can argue that's justified, and maybe it is as Salazar was probably up to no good as a coach, but you can't pretend you aren't biased.
Well of course he's biased. What's wrong with being biased based on past actions? I mean if Jimmy Carter issues a statement or Donald Trump isssues a statement, who are you more likely to believe?
If the Russian press issues a statement or the BBC issues a statement who are you more likely to believe?
Your reputation matters. That's why we pointed out Ayette's past testimony. I loved the guy/gal who said she should have been banned for 4 years herself.
DanM wrote:
Spanish Olympic Gold Medalist Race-walker Daniel Plaza also brought sex into his defence, explaining his positive test for the banned steroid nandrolone by saying he had had prolonged oral sex with his pregnant wife, a defence based on the suggestion that pregnant women can produce nandrolone naturally. Plaza, too, received a two-year ban, although he was later exonerated.
At least this sounds more plausible than the burrito. Guess I will need to build up a harem.
linelknelke wrote:
I'm a research scientist who routinely uses GC-MS and LC-QTOF-MS to analyze trace amounts of organic compounds. However, I do not measure steroid compounds from humans/animals (I measure from plants and other organisms). I read that apparently both the A and B sample tested positive (see pdf posted above). I'd like more detail on the analytical protocol (replicates, standard deviation, etc.). I'd be less inclined to believe a single measurement on one sample. Yes, these instruments can theoretically detect to the picogram range, but everything has to be optimized and that generally refers to single compound standards on something like an LC-triple quad MS. Natural samples with a mixture of compounds are more difficult to analyze, and the limit of detection is generally not as low. I'd also like to see protocols for how they quantified the steroid via internal standards, and assurance that the quantities being analyzed are within the linear range of the instrument. For our applications (analysis of steranes), it's more difficult to quantify on an LC-MS/MS compared to a GC-MS. I have to assume that all of these protocols have been worked out given that it's a WADA-certified lab. But because I've spent over 20 years doing measurements on natural samples, I deal with natural variability in my daily life. Having the full reporting of A and B results and replicates (how many injections on A and their values, how many injections on B and their values) results would be illustrative. I don't necessarily trust anyone's conclusions without seeing the raw data.
And speaking of data, more is generally better, so I'm a bit troubled by the hair follicle results. I'm not familiar with that technique and am not really qualified to comment, but wouldn't a short- or long-term ingestion show up in the hair follicle record? The lack of detection in the hair follicle as a secondary piece of evidence seems key to interpreting the A/B results.
From the PDF, CAS apparently did not take these extra pieces of data under consideration. They just asked Shelby to name the source of the steroid, she said burrito, and they laughed and said nope (jk).
Great post. can you email us? I'd like to know what questions to ask of people to get this info.
robert@letsrun.commy local taco truck is better wrote:
If she knew some greasy pork from a food truck could possibly be an excuse for taking nandrolone, why not just intentionally get as much taco truck as you can for a built in alibi?
Interesting theory. If you are going to take this drug. why not just go eat pork on purpose the n ight before you cycle up. THen you have a perfect excuse for getting off. My god all dopers should do it.
Letsrun is not objective. You guys went all out on Christian Coleman, and now you are defending a doper? If you dope or commit crime you should be punished.
rojo wrote:
My god all dopers should do it.
All Burrito Track Club dopers already thought of this.
alanson wrote:
We know Houlihan has an unusual physiology (and as a result has had her spleen and gall bladder removed). I wonder if she also can produce abnormally high levels of endogenous nandrolone.
If she could , do you think there would be a story about a burrito?
pahantuc wrote:
In addition, how do we know for certain she wasn’t injecting? We’ve only heard carefully crafted PR and talking points from BTC people. Is there some scientific analysis that proves that this was definitely not injected?
Honest question here. I haven’t dug into all of the reports enough and figured I’d rely on LetsRun to set me straight (lmao).
The lawyer said it was accepted she didn't inject it. She didn't test positive in a later test and she had a hair sample tested. The lawyer wouldn't lie about this as the report will come out eventually.
linelknelke wrote:
And speaking of data, more is generally better, so I'm a bit troubled by the hair follicle results. I'm not familiar with that technique and am not really qualified to comment, but wouldn't a short- or long-term ingestion show up in the hair follicle record? The lack of detection in the hair follicle as a secondary piece of evidence seems key to interpreting the A/B results.
You are assuming way too much about the hair and buying their lawyer's opinion hook line and sinker. The hair is a complete red herring of her Chewbacca defense, same as that "lie detector". Her defense strategy is just throwing lots of doo-doo and seeing what can stick. According to her same lawyer, the detection window of the drug is extremely short, 1 hour to a few hours depending on which Shelby/lawyer mouth is speaking. With such a short half life, do you really expect their to be much detectable amounts of it in hair? Then add to this that it was her lawyer that got her to do the hair test at somebody they paid, and not an independent party.
alanson wrote:
We know Houlihan has an unusual physiology (and as a result has had her spleen and gall bladder removed). I wonder if she also can produce abnormally high levels of endogenous nandrolone.
That’s an interesting post. Also, exposure to tainted meat might raise levels higher for her given organ differences. I have no idea if that’s the case. But given that she’s already banned, maybe she could somehow get approval for some experiments.
my hinney wrote:
But you “directed” him what to write? You’re as bad as Houlinhan.
I feel bad fit Shelby but this incident completely exposes LetsRun. They are kind to their favorites and label everyone else a doper
I didn't direct him. I was kind of stunned he wanted to write it as he rarely does opinion pieces. But he's a great employee and if he's passionate about something I almost always let him do it.
My god, we published a guest column earlier this year complaining that Alexi pappas new book wasn't woke enough. Do you think I agree with that?
I love things that are interesting and challenge people to think. Iw ant people to think. That's why I spent so much time in publishing it as a podcast this morning. I want people to hear the BTC side (and hopefully the other side when it comes out)
rojo wrote:
The lawyer said it was accepted she didn't inject it. She didn't test positive in a later test and she had a hair sample tested. The lawyer wouldn't lie about this as the report will come out eventually.
Rojo, don't you think the simplest explanation for all this is that Shelby is micro-dosing orally and messed up the dosage one day and took too much? Of course she wouldn't year positive in a later test once she learned she got popped and stopped her dosages.