Josette Norris vs Katir & Houlihan

people will start to care if she is beating highly ranked runners.

People have been trashing her

Not fair To Norris and Katir to be compared to a Proven Doper who is on a 4 year ban, It implies they are guilty of doping, Norris and Katir should be considered clean until proven otherwise.

Not a fan of Dopers, but if they are going to let men compete s Women As is happening in Olympic Weightlifting, then the whole sport is a farce, The New Zealand Weightlifter and 2 Boys who finished First and 2nd in the Connecticut Girls state meet are bigger cheaters than any doper, might as well let women dope if they have to compete against Men pretending to be Women.

It is clear that Norris is not a cheater. Using statistics to try to prove your point is par for the course with the covidiots. She completely passes the eye test unlike some others.

Come on man, are you kidding.

Shelby might be clean (contamination stuff), But Katir is definitely doping. He wasn't in wada testing pool last year.

I don't think many would care nearly as much about Katir's improvement if he maxed out at the equivalent of 3:59 and 14:51. Let's estimate that at around 3:31.5 and 13:05. But yes the improvement is huge, but whereas Katir is elite all-time globally and as far as Europeans due to his times, Norris is just a very good American historically. So Katir gets people who think way too good and too fast to not be drug-aided. Norris doesn't arouse nearly as much suspicious because she's not that good.

runner world wrote:

Come on man, are you kidding.

Shelby might be clean (contamination stuff), But Katir is definitely doping. He wasn't in wada testing pool last year.

LOL, what? First, Shelby had a highly suspicious progression, then tested positive for an anabolic steroid, and after due process and appeal, she is now a banned drug cheat. As a reminder, here is the final unanimous judgment from CAS:

she was found to have committed an intentional ADRV and sanctioned with a four-year period of ineligibility starting on 14 January 2021.

Katir "just" had a highly suspicious progression.

Let's start with association.

I don't know if Katir is clean or not. I haven't done enough research on this topic and who he associates himself with. Maybe he has some associations that cause people to think that he is dirty. If so, I'd be happy to hear them. Right now, I cannot make an informed opinion.

Houlihan tested positive and is associated with Nike. Already we are off to a bad start and I don't think much more needs to be said.

Norris is associated with Reebok and Chris Fox. Again, maybe I haven't done enough homework but I don't know of any runners that have a positive test or any drug accusations surrounding Reebok or Fox.

This is the opinion of an expert (David Epstein) on Houlihan situation

She had to try to establish the source of the nandrolone for her appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. They were appealing on a technical matter that hasn’t really been in the news, which is that if it is meat contamination, as opposed to injected nandrolone, the testing procedure is different.

Houlihan gave her hair samples, she had other tests around it that were negative, so she’s probably not injecting it, or those tests would have been positive. It’s improbable that someone would be taking nandrolone orally—it doesn’t work as well orally. The burrito story is improbable. Maybe they don’t know where it came from.

What we’re left with is: Nandrolone is a common contaminant. It makes up most of the positive tests that the Athletics Integrity Unit finds. We know it gets injected into meat illegally. Versus the chance that she was for some reason taking it orally, which would be very rare, and the stupidest thing you could possibly take.

So I’m sort of stuck between these improbable stories, but my reflex these days when someone tests positive for nandrolone is to think that it may be accidental because it’s a substance that everyone knows not to take on purpose anymore.

If Katir stays consistent for 2 or 3 years, i might believe him. But for now, i have huge question marks on his performances.

I think WADA should expand the number of athletes that are in the testing pool. Katir didn't get tested even one time in 2020 and early 2021.

This is a joke.

runner world wrote:

If Katir stays consistent for 2 or 3 years, i might believe him. But for now, i have huge question marks on his performances.

I think WADA should expand the number of athletes that are in the testing pool. Katir didn't get tested even one time in 2020 and early 2021.

This is a joke.

?

He was a complete nobody. You wold test guys that run 3:36.6? If you are doping to run 3:36.6 maybe you can continue doping. It doesn’t bother anybody. Nobody in the history of the world had ever gone from 3:36.6+ to sub 3:30 (until now)

Norris, with all her impressive improvement, is still TEN SECONDS off the WR. Katir is TWO SECONDS off the men's record. Massive difference, aside from the sketchy Iberian association.

Ihatejoe wrote:

It is clear that Norris is not a cheater. Using statistics to try to prove your point is par for the course with the covidiots. She completely passes the eye test unlike some others.

It’s really clear she’s doping just like Shelby. No way she made sudden miraculous times on her own!

If he didn’t get tested after a second place finish of 7:35 in January at a fairly big indoor meet (World Athletics Indoor Tour) that’d be odd. But yes he might not be getting tested out of competition, we don’t know.

The Con wrote:

Let's start with association.

I don't know if Katir is clean or not. I haven't done enough research on this topic and who he associates himself with. Maybe he has some associations that cause people to think that he is dirty. If so, I'd be happy to hear them. Right now, I cannot make an informed opinion.

Houlihan tested positive and is associated with Nike. Already we are off to a bad start and I don't think much more needs to be said.

Norris is associated with Reebok and Chris Fox. Again, maybe I haven't done enough homework but I don't know of any runners that have a positive test or any drug accusations surrounding Reebok or Fox.

There’s always a first. Fox may have nothing to do with it And she makes it obvious. And her face has changed over the last year or so looking more masculine

I keep hearing people say “it’s not as effective taken orally”.

A couple of things:

1. Has anyone cited studies that say it’s not as effective taken orally or was this just said and taken as fact? (This may have already been covered on here but I personally have not seen.)

2. This site is obsessed with “micro dosing” so even if it were less effective, it would still be somewhat effective and provide a benefit right? If it still provides some benefit and does not stay in your system as long, isn’t that more ideal than not taking it at all or injecting it?

At first I also thought she was cheating. But after reading this article, I change my mind a little bit (still I have some questions)

Here is what David Epstein he said

When I reported on baseball, when someone would say they had a false positive test, I always said, “BS,” except I came around on nandrolone specifically because it’s a common contaminant and it’s the single easiest thing to test for. Even baseball’s sorry-ass testing basically kicked nandrolone out of use, because if you inject it, which is how people typically use it, it is detectable for months.

As testing has gotten somewhat better and more truly random, it quickly fell out of favor, because if you’re injecting it, which again, is the way that people take it, it gets stored in your fat deposits and the metabolites are detectable for a long time. Otherwise, you could take it orally. I haven’t really heard of people doing that before. And it also wouldn’t be as effective. But I do think it’s a drug that for professional athlete use, it kind of went bye-bye when testing became legitimately random and independent.

First of all, Epstein is a sports reporter, and neither a doping nor a steroid nor a meat expert.

Second, he is creating a false dichotomy by limiting the steroid intake to orally or by injection.

Third, a small glowing window does not equal no effect.

Fourth, he ignores the two imho most likely scenarios that the nandrolone was either part of a complex designer cocktail or an unintended contamination of the good old testo cream (which would also have resulted in a four year ban).

Fifth, even USADA has been target-testing selected athletes of BTC including Shelby in the last year - they figured something is wrong in that club.

Sixth, the WADA lab concluded that the origin of the nandrolone could not have been meat.

Seventh, even the resourceful Nike team has been unable to find any meat containing nandrolone in Portland in over four months.

Eighth, there are no athletes in our history who ever accidentally ingested nandrolone by eating uncastrated boar in America.

Ninth, CAS came ultimately to the unanimous decision that Shelby doped intentionally with nandrolone. Yes, that includes the arbiter chosen by Nike.

Tenth, Shelby got the full four year ban for intentional doping, because CAS saw no extenuating circumstances whatsoever.

casual obsever wrote:

Third, a small glowing window does not equal no effect.

Actually Epstein himself said only that taking it orally "wouldn’t be as effective" as injecting it...