Half marathon course cutter Ashley Paulson, who served 6 month contamination suspension, wins coveted Badwater 135.

please don't

This thread is going to be a great talking point for people arguing against the obligation to share data and cooperate with investigation. Ashley shared her data, cooperated with the investigation. Derek did a thorough investigation and did his part in attempting to dispel the suspicion. But this thread had taken on live of its own, and those who piled accusation on her with hardly any more basis than the firm faith that she's no good continue on. Nothing will convince them.

It does make the point that regardless of Derek's intention, his original article shouldn't have been published, because it kindled the wildfire that nobody can extinguish. As much as Derek emphasized his intention to bring truth out, the irrational nature of public opinion never really stop at truth. On hindsight, may be Derek, should've known better.

I think you make some good points but there is another viewpoint which is once you cheat, your reputation is ruined forever no matter how much you try to redeem yourself.

He gets paid from that site in the form of donations and maybe ad revenue as well, not sure. So like anything online the more content and the more clicks, the more money. He's not going to pass up an opportunity to stir the pot. That's capitalism for you, same with almost all of us.

I believe in that punishment should be proportional to the crime. Ashley's course cutting is more like a one time thing. Even though she didn't respond well, it's still hart to prove that she did it intentional. The drug ban was also judged to be accidental. Even if it's not, who knows how many of the ultra "legends" are also on juice? You should only seriously punish people for something if you are really serious about it. The ultra world is not taking the fight against PED very seriously, and it wouldn't be fair to bury Ashley's entire future because she was caught once outside of ultra running circle.

I think it's fair because taking drugs benefits you in the long-term, not just the short-term. So the punishment has to be long-term also. Drugs enable you to train harder, build muscle, get faster. That muscle and those gains will not disappear in the short-term. When you put that stuff inside your body you have to do so with the knowledge that if caught the rest of your results however far in the future will be called into question and rightly so because you are still gaining an unfair advantage years later.

The single incident of use was deemed to be unintentional due to a tainted supplement. Her suspension was vastly reduced and her incident has even been used as an example in reporting of cross contamination in various manufacturing facilities as it pertains to choosing which supplements to use in the future. Since that time, she has never failed a test or been barred from competing, to include the US Olympic Trials.

the 'tainted supplement' is the first excuse every doping athlete turns to because it is easy to take a supplement and add whatever you want to it, whilst the manufacturer probably will not have any of the same batch remaining in stock to test. what was the supplement in this case and how easy is it for her to add it and then get it tested in a lab? it would be very easy for me to add something to a protein powder and stir it up, for example.

if it was really unintentional then why was she banned at all? you are either innocent or guilty. they have to give bans for this sort of 'unintentional' use otherwise everybody would be using the same excuse and there wouldn't be any repercussions.

you are naive if you think everybody that uses the contaminated supplement defence is doing so genuinely.

Ross Tucker
@Scienceofsport
·
12 Aug 2021
Anyway, point is, the “supplement did it” is a common “play” by athletes. It can be legit, but if the levels in the athlete are high, but supplement low, it falls flat.

So before you send it off to the lab you have to have some degree of knowledge of how much PEDs to add to the supplement. Or you have to find a dodgy lab that can manufacture the required result for you. In some of the banana republics or the countries where governments collude to dope their athletes, that would be easy. Probably less easy in well-regulated/developed countries. You'd have to stir it up yourself and hope the lab results came back believable enough for the anti-doping agency to think it was a plausible explanation.

Read the media reports on this. It was found in an unopened container she had as well as an opened one. She was required to turn over every supplement she had on hand and it was tested by an independent 3rd party lab. The ban had to be in effect as she still had the substance in her body. Time reduce to just what was needed to ensure it was fully out of her system and she would have no possible benefit from it when competing again. She is far from the only one this has happened to. It has happened to many in various sports.

i'm too lazy to read all the background info. is it beyond the realm of possibility that she resealed a container? what sort of seal? a metal one or a basic plastic film? in either case, how much would one of those sealing machines cost, or how many dozens of factories within an hour's drive would do it for her for the right amount of £$? if you consider that the ban might otherwise be what, 4 years? it would be worth it for her to go out of her way.

but if all what you wrote is true and there's been no obfuscation of the facts, then i agree she is probably an unfortunate victim in that incident. but there is too much casual PED use in these semi-professional athletes for us to not by cynical from the start.

It is more about perception than punishment, there is no way to eradicate the doubt in people's minds that once someone has cheated in any context that they are more likely to be tempted again than someone whose personal moral code forbids it. You can whataboutery all you like but this doesn't change.

For people with an healthy amount of brain cells, the evidences has erased any reasonable doubt that her results wasn’t legit. All that’s still fueling these insane accusations are the willing ignorance, laziness to read analysis results or lack of comprehension ability, stupidity, and a unjustifiably deep hatred.

That's a generalization that's totally incorrect in this concrete case (micro-dose of ostarine). "Drugs" is just a general term that can be applied to your multivitamin as well. Does it enable you to train harder and build muscle? Yeah, maybe, if you were deficient, it will give you a boost of 0.000001%. Your argument is either intellectually dishonest or intellectually lazy.

Even on highest doses of anabolic steroids anything you gain will totally disappear a year from use. Growth hormone? You might keep that bigger jaw and ears, but not muscle. Yeah, without it you could have a ripped tendon or some injury during the hard training. I guess that's what makes it evil in your eyes.

i was quite open in admitting i couldn't be bothered to research, so "intellectually lazy" is fair, if what other people have said regarding the dosage is true. i think it was obvious what i meant by 'drugs'. multivitamins aren't banned.

there are quite a few cases of ostarine use on the usada site where athletes (cyclists, T&F, MMA, and a few others) claimed tainted supplements, and a couple even stated in their usada releases that the supplements were recommended to them by their coaches. it may even be a case of coaches (and perhaps even athletes) knowing what's in the supplements despite the labels not saying. who knows. but ashley did work with a different coach (not ryan hall) during her triathlon days. maybe she was just doing as directed.

also, did it even help? she's seemed faster since then. this is a woman who ran four marathons very close together because she wanted to get the Olympic qualifying standard. her ambition is on another level, for whatever that's worth.

I think there’s more to this story. It isn’t over yet.

While I get that this is drawn out and beaten to death, I still don't understand how standing around/walking slowly would contribute to an increased stride length--it would be the opposite. So the "expert" explanation doesn't make sense and discredits his expertise. Or am I stupid?

Second, the supposed contaminated supplement is really a common excuse--it's very possible for coaches/athletes to find out which supplements contain a drug they're looking for, and, for an "elite triathlete", she would know not to take untested supplements. When I was at the developmental camp for cycling 15 years ago they talked about this...

And finally, why doesn't she just have a performance test done to demonstrate she has the VO2Max to even perform at the level she did? It is understood that aerobic capacity isn't everything in ultras, but it would help support her being an outlier. She wasn't even a top triathlete, which makes it hard to understand her performance at the end of a 135-mile aerobic run.

I dislike how Ashley had to "walk" Derek through what she did to her data. It almost seems as though he changed his tune because of the time he spent with her, prioritizing friendship over truth. Yeah, yeah--I still have a hard time buying her story and the GPS analysis. Sorry.