Is the latest film by ARD/Hajo Seppelt vindication for Alberto Salazar? You can test positive after someone touches you

The lengths you're going to to try to dismantle drug-testing in an attempt to vindicate doper Shelby is alarming.

He was banned for

1) unlicensed experiements with T

2) sending thyroid meds unlawfully

3) infusions?

I think he was and is grey area all along. Grey area can do a lot. I do not think he deserved a long ban like he actually directly cheated with classical PEDs.

There’s another thread on this as well.

I watched it this afternoon; it’s kinda scary. They do the research to show that what Salazar had been thinking could happen - another athlete could rub a minimal amount of cream laced with a PED onto skin - actually produces positive doping tests.

If I remember correctly, they used four different PEDs and tested dabbing the PED & cream mixture on the palm, back of hand, forearm and back of neck (one spot and one PED per test, obviously). A WADA-accredited lab showed that participants’ urine was testing positive within an hour in some cases and lasting up to two weeks. Most of the combinations returned positive results.

Richard McLaren, whose name everyone will know from WADA’s investigation into Russian doping, looked at the results and said that if everything the documentarians and lab did is true, then it’s very problematic.

Yes - but ironically, Salazar showed that it cannot with testo. Will be interesting to see which substances were tried, and how large the resulting concentrations were.

For the record, Salazar got banned for three anti-doping rule violation: using a forbidden method, tampering with the anti-doping process, and traficking with testosterone.

The outcome of the testo experiment had no impact on the ban. In fact, even without the testo experiment, he would have gotten a four year ban, as explicitly spelled out in AAA's decision.

rojo wrote:

The newest ARD doping film apparently shows it's easily to test positive after someone rubs cream on you.

I haven't had time to watch it. Someone please do (it's got English sub-titles) and let us know what it says.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DM1lzGUJJN8

If you use DMSO as the agent to get the product in you don’t have to even rub it in.

And I wonder how effective it would be to put stuff in socks or shoes ; very I would think.

ARD documentary "Doping, a secret matter: guilty"

Positive through skin contact - doping experiment shakes the sports world

By Hajo Seppelt and the ARD doping editorial team

Positive after fleeting skin contact: an alarming experiment questions the global anti-doping system and shocks athletes.

Simon Getzmann escaped his worst nightmare by pure chance. A positive doping test had turned the Swiss national handball player's life completely upside down.

But he hadn't doped. Nevertheless, he was faced with the shards of his career, threatened to lose his livelihood and suffered mental health problems. In his desperation, he had the last tablet from a painkiller pack analyzed for foreign substances - and landed the most important stroke of luck of his life.

Due to a production error, the pill contained traces of the dehydrating agent hydrochlorothiazide, which is banned in sports and which had caused his positive doping test. The redeeming acquittal followed more than a year later, but with all the relief Getzmann also realized: "My case shows: You can be positive, but not dop." Be guilty - with no realistic chance of proving innocence.

Worldwide unique experiment

Getzmann's story is just one case of several that are discussed in the current documentary by the ARD doping editorial team. "Doping as a secret matter - guilty" shows how shockingly easy athletes can become unintentionally dopers. A worldwide unique experiment by the ARD doping editorial team and the Institute for Forensic Medicine at the Cologne University Hospital proves that even fleeting contact can make athletes positive.

The researchers administered small amounts of various anabolic steroids to twelve test persons using a carrier substance through the skin - by briefly touching the hand, neck and arm. The first evaluations of the samples by the renowned Cologne doping control laboratory revealed massive suspicions of doping in all twelve test subjects. The traces were detectable in the laboratory up to 15 days after the administration of the extremely low dose of anabolic steroids.

"If the samples had come from athletes, we would have had suspicions that we would have investigated and with a high degree of probability would have had a positive result in many of the samples taken," said laboratory manager Mario Thevis: "Then we would have a violation of the anti -Doping rules, which would also have been sanctioned accordingly. The athlete would definitely be punished, possibly up to four years. "

The "end of professional sport"?

The results of the experiment and the four years of research caused horror among athletes. "Without sounding too apocalyptic: I ask myself whether this could be the end of professional sport to some extent," said triathlon Olympic champion Jan Frodeno, who shared parts of the documentary with other German sports stars and athlete representatives before it was published has seen.

The film showing with the athletes is also part of the documentation. "I think that will generate a worldwide debate," said Maximilian Klein from the interest group "Athletes Germany". Thomas Röhler, Olympic Javelin Champion, was "shocked" because the documentation had "extreme effects in all directions".

Evidence that doping attacks can be carried out and athletes made positive in a simple way shakes a cornerstone of the global anti-doping system: reversing the burden of proof. While in criminal law the accused is only considered guilty if intent and guilt have been proven beyond doubt, in sports law a positive doping test serves as evidence of guilt.

Positive means guilty in sports law: reversing the burden of proof

Positive means guilty in sports law: reversing the burden of proof

The athlete concerned must then convincingly demonstrate that his positive test was not the result of willful doping. If he does not succeed, he will be banned. This reversal of the burden of proof had repeatedly been described as indispensable by authoritative bodies such as the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the International Olympic Committee (IOC).

"Sport would have to look for a new system"

Experts consider this principle of sports law to be hardly tenable in view of the results of the experiment. If it is "so extreme" that the administration of a doping agent "is practically imperceptible and possible as an act of sabotage", then that would mean "that the sanction would constitute a violation of human rights," said law professor Angelika Nussberger, who was vice-president until 2019 European Court of Human Rights, ARD.

"The consequence would be that the relevant regulations would then have to be changed. This burden of proof would have to be adjusted so that athletes have a chance at all have to avoid an accusation, "said Nussberger:" The sport would then have to look for a new system. "

Simon Getzmann would not help even a possible reorganization of sports law. He invested more than 10,000 euros in solving his case, which he did not get back despite the acquittal. Sports law does not provide for any kind of redress for falsely accused and banned athletes

Gatlin was the one who invented this ridiculous excuse, not Salazar. Yes, Salazar experimented with this, but I assumed it was in order to see how much microdosing of testosterone he could easily get away with with his athletes, not actual fear of sabotage. Now, fearing sabotage or contamination is something that smart athletes do. I think mostly the careful athletes just watch closely what goes into their bodies through food and drink though.

bio drome wrote:

Gatlin was the one who invented this ridiculous excuse, not Salazar. Yes, Salazar experimented with this, but I assumed it was in order to see how much microdosing of testosterone he could easily get away with with his athletes, not actual fear of sabotage. Now, fearing sabotage or contamination is something that smart athletes do. I think mostly the careful athletes just watch closely what goes into their bodies through food and drink though.

I believe it was Trevor Graham how invented the excuse, not Justin Gatlin.

“who invented”

So if small amounts brought onto the skin can trigger a positive test even 2 weeks later, how is this myth of “microdosing” supposed to work?

If anyone thinks Salazar carried out a deliberate, well controlled experiment they know nothing about the man. His whole MO is just to throw shlt at the wall and see what sticks.

More likely to vindicate Justin Gatlin? Hasn’t he always said he was sabotaged or something?

tradition wrote:

He was banned for

1) unlicensed experiements with T

2) sending thyroid meds unlawfully

3) infusions?

I think he was and is grey area all along. Grey area can do a lot. I do not think he deserved a long ban like he actually directly cheated with classical PEDs.

I think all the evidence points to him micro dosing classical PEDs. Steve Magness was being told he was just getting injected large doses of L-Carnitine and Vitamin D and after that he was able to keep up with Galen Rupp is some mile repeats workout. If just L- Carnitine and Vitamin D injections where that super effective why don’t we see more dopers going that route or at least mass abuse of L-Car and Vitamin D pills. In reality only Dr. Brown and Salazar knew what was actually in those injections and infusions. Some posters in other Salazar thread have speculated that the Vitamin D and L-Car macro doses where use to maximize the effects of micro doses of EPO/ Growth Hormones or other androgens.

I have always thought that the suspicion of Salazar is unfounded. As long as I have been reading these boards, way before the testosterone cream story came out, he was being accused of doping his athletes. The testosterone cream experiment made perfect since in the context of Gatlin's claim but hardly anyone could be intellectually honest about it. I think that there always has to be a bad guy and Salazar was the appointed bad guy. The constant slander of him and his athlete's, who have been heavily tested but never failed a test, has done more to hurt track and field in this country than all other factors combined.

It's been interesting to watch the mob try to settle on the next bad guy. There is a bad guy vacuum. Jerry seems to be the leader now which is ironic as he was the good guy in the Salazar narrative.

Unfounded??? The Testosterone cream story wasn’t an experiment, kara gaucher and Steve magness saw Galen rupp using cream. Those two had to testified in a court of law against Salazar so its not just slander they said on a podcast or something. Idk dude not to be rude but you gotta pretty naive to think it’s all slander, USADA took him to court and gave him the due process and he was found guilty. As for his athletes passing drug test that doesn’t say much. WADA wants us to believe that these test catch can catch dopers effectively but some of them are very flawed for example the testosterone test is a ratio test. (Testosterone to epitestoterone) hence why testosterone is the most common PED used. Taoufik Makhloufi has passed every single drug test yet he was caught with all this stuff. There’s a million ways to cheat.

To think Salazar was clean is to ignore a mountain of evidence

I don't think that banning someone from athletics is a human rights violation.

I don't see professional, paid sport as a human right.

When I applied for my job, it was not my human right to be given it. I could have not been hired for any one of thousands of reasons, including something slight as my attitude, the shirt I was wearing or having a cough.

Professional sport does not need to allow everyone. Only athletics thinks that it needs to allow all people the right to compete in the sport.

Nearly all other sports have selective teams who can pick athletes based on whatever criteria they want, as long as it is not racially discriminatory, and everyone else is excluded.

A doping positive, whether it is beyond reasonable doubt or not, should be a reason to exclude an athlete from competing.

You don't have to call that a ban if you like, athletes are free to go and run at their local track; but not in the diamond League. Or the world championships. This sport needs to get a grip and become professional or it will die.

You fool.

The ban is for all level of sport and all sports and even training at a whole range of facilities.

Make the effort to understand the rules.

They never said they saw Galen using the cream. They said Alberto had the cream and then they said Alberto gave Galen a massage so he must have been rubbing it on him.

No, not a vindication, if you believe in actual evidence.

As per extensive documentation, Salazar knowingly and repeatedly:

trafficked testosterone

tampered with doping controls

gave unprescribed, controlled medications to athletes

forbid his own athletes from accessing their medical files

engaged in further wada-prohibited practices