Another Kenyan busted!

casual obsever wrote:

Ghost1 wrote:

I think she also convinced AKA and WADA that she did not have nefarious intentions.

For the past year or so, AKA has been coming down very hard on its own athletes so this is an indication that the clemency took place because they (AKA) believed that she did not have deliberate intent to cheat.

If I get more news from Kenya on this subject I will post. Thank you for your patience.

Neither WADA nor ADAK were involved. This was an AIU ooc test, and the athlete was charged with 2.1 and 2.2 (Presence and use of a prohibited substance).

AIU specifically wrote that the athlete got (only) 10 months because of 10.6.1(a).

Here is 10.6.1(a):

Where the anti-doping rule violation involves a Specified Substance (other than a Substance of Abuse) or Specified Method, and the Athlete or other Person can establish that they bear No Significant Fault or Negligence for the anti-doping rule violation(s) alleged against them, then the period of Ineligibility will be, at a minimum, a reprimand and no period of Ineligibility, and at a maximum, two (2) years of Ineligibility, depending on the Athlete’s or other Person’s degree of Fault.

Clearly she was judged to have No Significant Fault, but some degree of Fault > 0, as postulated earlier today, because her punishment is close to the middle of the 0 - 24 months of 10.6.1(a).

rekrunner wrote:

casual obsever wrote:

Neither WADA nor ADAK were involved. This was an AIU ooc test, and the athlete was charged with 2.1 and 2.2 (Presence and use of a prohibited substance).

AIU specifically wrote that the athlete got (only) 10 months because of 10.6.1(a).

Here is 10.6.1(a):

Clearly she was judged to have No Significant Fault, but some degree of Fault > 0, as postulated earlier today, because her punishment is close to the middle of the 0 - 24 months of 10.6.1(a).

You can get up a to 1-year reduction for admitting it and not contesting it.

And some of you don't seem to realize that we are talking about letrozole: "… "everyone agrees it’s not a performance enhancer," said University of Colorado professor Roger Pielke, who has spent several years studying the scientific flaws in WADA’s drug-testing policies."" Unlike "astro" would have us believe, nobody agrees "this is a very potent drug".

This doesn't seem like the kind of "intentional cheat" that WADA was created to go after, and another example that shows the Code is in need of reform.

The AIU should not be sanctioning athletes at all, for the bona-fide use of a routine treatment involving this a "Specified Substance" which "everyone agrees it’s not a performance enhancer".

rekrunner wrote:

casual obsever wrote:

Neither WADA nor ADAK were involved. This was an AIU ooc test, and the athlete was charged with 2.1 and 2.2 (Presence and use of a prohibited substance).

AIU specifically wrote that the athlete got (only) 10 months because of 10.6.1(a).

Here is 10.6.1(a):

Clearly she was judged to have No Significant Fault, but some degree of Fault > 0, as postulated earlier today, because her punishment is close to the middle of the 0 - 24 months of 10.6.1(a).

You can get up a to 1-year reduction for admitting it and not contesting it.

And some of you don't seem to realize that we are talking about letrozole: "… "everyone agrees it’s not a performance enhancer," said University of Colorado professor Roger Pielke, who has spent several years studying the scientific flaws in WADA’s drug-testing policies."" Unlike "astro" would have us believe, nobody agrees "this is a very potent drug".

This doesn't seem like the kind of "intentional cheat" that WADA was created to go after, and another example that shows the Code is in need of reform.

The AIU should not be sanctioning athletes at all, for the bona-fide use of a routine treatment involving this a "Specified Substance" which "everyone agrees it’s not a performance enhancer".

Ghost1 wrote:

Rengeruk: Exactly that, she (probably) gained no advantage by using this medication prescribed by a doctor. This was recognized

According to Peter Van Eenoo, head of the anti-doping lab in Ghent, the drug speeds up muscle build and recovery.
“It inhibits the breakdown of testosterone and anabolic steroids.” – Peter Van Eenoo
Eenoo assures us that it’s not an obscure drug. There were 17 cases just in 2020.

“In 2020 there were 17 cases worldwide, if you know that there were 28 EPO cases, that puts everything in perspective. Letrozole comes back quite often .” – Peter Van Eenoo

Van Eonoo also went on to explain the benefits. “These products are obviously very important in muscle building and promote recovery during periods of intense training or when many competitions follow in close succession,” he said. “Periods of intense training” could accurately describe the pre-Worlds timeframe.