Since you appealed to my intelligence, and you are not wrong, let me attempt to clarify my position. This story bothers me in some ways even I don't fully understand, not because I claim Alberto is pure, but I think much of this is public over-reacting to things which are not banned, or reacting prematurely to issues not yet ripe for conclusions. Look at the recent L-Carnitine "outrage" -- people want Alberto to hang, and look for every excuse to finally be able to say they were right all along. (Look also at the recent 2006 letsrun thread that was bumped -- not much has changed in the last 10 years -- this is not a new story).For the most part, I'm mainly giving priority to what from this story would WADA call a doping violation for an athlete. If WADA is OK with it, then I am too. If WADA uses this experience to tighten the rules to prevent certain abuses, probably the only likely outcome, I fully support them, and would recognize Alberto's "negative" role in that.I will admit there are some serious things that Alberto needs to clarify, namely connected to testosterone. Yet none of the 17+ athletes/staff ever claimed that any athlete received testosterone. On the contrary, some of them claimed to take TestoBoost and AlphaMale, corroborating Alberto's claim that the "medication" was a natural supplement rather than the banned hormone. This is still an open question for me, which could go either way. If some athletes step forward and say they received Justin Gatlin-type massages with special gels from Alberto's bag, that would tip the scale. If Jeffrey Brown says testosterone boosting has always been purely herbal and homeopathic, at Alberto's insistence, then, without contradicting evidence, there is no story.Much of the accusations involve breaking state or federal laws, like playing doctor, or shipping drugs by mail. I'm not so interested in any of these things, unless they involved banned substances, or until WADA calls it a doping violation. They might end up putting Alberto in jail, but I will not call this doping/cheating.I admit the allegation of experimenting with his son and Androgel is disturbing. Maybe Alberto was spooked by Justin Gatlin's story, and really really doesn't want any accidents. I'm very interested in that explanation. But if the experiments stopped short of directly involving athletes, again maybe we talk about breaking federal or state laws, but no athlete will be subject to any WADA sanction.Much of the accusations involve non-banned substances. As a human being, I feel Kara Goucher's pain and betrayal, but Cytomel is not banned. Similarly, thyroid (and recently L-Carnitine) are other non-banned drugs not nearly worthy of the attention they receive. These are pseudo-scandals.Lauren Fleshman's story is probably the most illuminating. I fully get why many people think that is just plain wrong. Vin Lananna put it succinctly, it's probably not illegal, but doesn't recommend going down that road. Here we have a set of circumstances that many find cross the line, but what line? For me this is clearly an ethics question, which I will not dispute anyone's position. But if we put our WADA hats on, is this a doping violation? Every athlete can see a doctor, get asthma medication, take high doses, sleep in an altitude tent, get thyroid medication, and WADA will not sanction them. Call it what you want, but a question of ethics, which will not be banned by WADA, is not a doping scandal.Some people keep bringing up Lance Armstrong as some kind of deja vu. Every doping story seems to be like Lance Armstrong. Lance took many banned drugs in order to win. That alone would make him just another doper -- nothing really special. What separates Lance from everyone else is pushing his teammates to take the same drugs, in order for Lance to win. What further separates Lance is his ability to get UCI to sweep some of his positives or suspicious results away. What further separates Lance is they way he treated other cyclists, former American heroes, former staff, reporters, friends, lab directors, etc., if they dared to talk about their personal truthful experiences, or dared to just do their job.Comparing Lance's story to Alberto's, it's not yet clear that Alberto has given any athlete a banned substance yet. Even if we have 17 athletes/staff stepping forward, saying they feel uncomfortable, we cannot compare Alberto's use of asthma and thyroid medication to Lance's sophisticated program of taking banned substances, pushing banned substances on his teammates, and his ability to avoid sanctions.But regardless of all that, the next step is to hear Alberto's detailed response.
prorunner wrote:
rekrunner wrote:It took BBC/Mark Daly/Panorama/Epstein/Propublica 2 years to compile their reports -- how much time is appropriate for Alberto to collect evidence and prepare a rebuttal?.
Rekrunner, it took two years to compile their report, because the Epstein team had to make contact, follow leads, accumulate details, play phone tag, interview, vet, verify, offer rebuttal opportunities, follow up, chase new leads, assimilate and organize the story, pass editor's scrutiny, etc. Salazar has to do none of that. He knew all of the details long before Epstein tackled the story.
Salazar deserves NO time for rebuttal. He knows that he's finally been cornered.
Rekrunner, you are normally one of the smartest and best posters on Letsrun, but on this one you appear to be deliberately trying to run interference for Salazar. The facts have been laid out. Salazar's silence speaks loudly.