Listen to the last podcast Shelby H did before she got banned

Of course they threw out the uneaten portion of the their burritos. If they were that suspicious, they would have stopped after a couple of bites.

Thanks for attempting to interpret this for me, but I have already read it.

The standard for the CAS was “balance of probabilities”, and not “scientific doubt” or “reasonable doubt”.

CAS are not scientists, but lawyers who listen to the scientists, and who read the legal language of the rules.

There were two elements to address: 1) guilt, and 2) intent.

Guilt does not require showing intent. The B-sample confirming the A-sample is automatically considered a violation, presuming the results are correct.

The way Houlihan’s team addressed guilt was to say that the AIU and WADA labs did not use the correct procedure. A majority of the panel disagreed, but it was not unanimous (i.e. one panelist agreed).

Showing “no intent”, which strongly requires establishing the source, would still result in a guilty verdict, but with a reduced or no ban. This would be relevant, for example, if there were another violation later, it would count as a second violation, leading to a lengthier ban.

From the media release in June, we already knew that the CAS found that 1) with respect to guilt, she did not rebut the presumption that the process was correct (by majority), and 2) with respect to intent, she did not identify the source, on the balance of probabilities, and as a consequence, did not rebut the presumption of intent (unanimous).

If the story were remotely true, we should think of athletes as normal people who, like most everyone here, wouldn’t ever think of a burrito as being “risky” or “suspect”. Like any normal person, she likely threw away the remainder of the burrito, oblivious to the risk of a small chance of eating a soy-fed boar-pork organ burrito and oblivious to the possible need of preserving the rest for testing 1 or 2 months later. If she had kept it, and tested it, that would have certainly tipped the scales of the balance of probabilities, either for her, or against her.

It is popular to believe that CAS scientifically determined the burrito story to be false, but the CAS used different language that many elements of the story were “possible” but either “not likely” or “improbable”, and based on all the evidence before them, determined that it did not meet the balance of probability. Numerically they scored the burrito story between 0 and less than 50 (they didn’t indicate which is the better estimate), and Houlihan needed more than 50 to convince the panel. The CAS did not say 0 probability (although the AIU claimed “near zero”).

who knows? wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Whether she ate a burrito or not, was never going to be contested. The receipt was proof that she did.

Clearly the nandrolone did not come from the burrito and we'll never know if came unknowingly from a supplement or if she cheated.

Who takes deliberately nandrolone in T&F? It was popular as an injectable steroid up until 1983 when it became detectable for many weeks due to a new detection method.

Did she use a tainted supplement? Nobody knows including her.

There are many benefits to taking oral nandrolone.

- increases bone density = less likely to get stress fractures

- helps heal soft tissue and muscles after hard workouts without the massive muscle gain found by injecting nandrolone

- increases hemoglobin count and red blood cell production

- it's not detectable after 24 hours

Oral Nandrolone will not make your muscles grow bigger or more powerful like injected Nandrolone does so the common refrain from athletes who inject it is "oral nandrolone doesn't do anything!" is a response to the fact that these other benefits mean "nothing" to them and their particular goals (body building, pushing big lineman around, sprinting or throwing the shotput)

If she indeed took it unknowingly through a tainted supplement that she didn't disclose, we probably are never going to know. What supplements she had on hand last December are long gone.

My guess is she either:

- Took some other banned/suspect supplement and nandro was in it, but she obviously couldn't disclose the true source.

- Nike was supplying her supplements and she/BTC blindly took whatever they were given and it turned out they accidentally spiked her dose with nandro

- She knowingly doped with nandro all the way and was sociopathically hoping she could BS her way out of it by constantly grandstanding about being clean.

Also, because this has come up yet again: Nandro is useful for runners because it accelerates recovery, and BTC is known for relentless, brutal workouts (because their coaches are idiots). If you can survive them you do get better, but most elite runners simply cannot do so clean.

Isn’t the bigger question why didn’t frerichs and her sister have traces of nandrolone?