I don't want to enter in the merit of the quarrel if Paula was clean or not. Personally, I strongly believe she was clean.
Instead, I want to comment Paula's statement, saying everything she ran has a logic for who really knows the effects of athletics at the maximal levels.
The fact is that NEVER scientists involved in antidoping are able to communicate something SPECIFIC regarding every athlete (also without identifying him/her in order to defend the privacy), publishing the full data of the research belonging to an athlete, collected in longitudinal way.
Scientists need to quit to think that "everybody is doped" when there is some deviation from average data (average of the data coming from thousands athletes), and to think that nobody can be able to understand the mean of the real data, so it's useless to publish them, but it's enough to say something general when they speak about doping and training.
The researches about effects of training are ridiculous, and frankly some of themn totally stupid, showing that the "researchers" didn't have any clue about what training is.
Never there is some research speaking clearly about some PRECISE and ESSENTIAL DATA :
a) which was the detailed training with duration, speed and system used, instead speaking about "well trained athlete", which doesn't mean anything
b) which is the PB of every athlete, instead speaking about "elite Group"
c) which are the basic blood values of every individual, instead comparing individual values with general average values.
d) in which condition of training and physical efficiency every sample was taken (for example, about women, in relation with the menstrual period, or, about every athlete, in relation with the last workouts they carried out, or with the weather conditions, or with the different training period).
e) which protocol they use for taking blood samples : taking samples while standing, while seating or while lying, we can have a difference (of course, with the same blood) of 4 points of Hct, while reticolocytes don't change.
For all those reasons, I never can give any credit to the conclusions of "scientists" such as Parisotto and Ashenden, who, if were involved in the Group studying the system for creating the Biological Passport, have to deny what they previously studied for arriving to final results OUT OF THE OFFICIAL PROTOCOL THEY CONTRIBUTED TO CREATE.
This fact makes them to appear devoid of every credibility, to everybody analyzing what they wrote, using the brain, and not the belly.
For example, I was in Vilamoura when Paula won the WHMCh (I had the number 3 and 4 in the men race), and well remember the weather conditions, with more than 32 degrees for a course totally under a strong sun, without one meter with some shadow. It's obvious that any blood sample taken immediately after that race has to produce final data very far from a "normal" average.
We need to understand that, without precise details and data (not "INTERPRETATION OF DATA" from Parisotto and Ashenden, because we can give to the same data a different interpretation, if we have a deep case histories about samples taken in the same conditions, with different athletes, in different competitions, and we were able to compare these data with the "normal" data of the same athletes when in their "normal" training), the interpretation of every scientist is something personal, depending on the personal knowledge of data that the scientist was able to collect.
But the data that individual scientists were able to collect are only a small part of the data collected during many years by the WADA or the antidoping of IAAF, so can produce a partial vision only of the several situations we can find in athletes, connected with their training and all the factors I explained above.
For this reason, I refuse any pseudo-investigation regarding not acclarated FACTS, but PARTIAL, NOT SCIENTIFIC and NOT SHARED in the scientific world CONJECTURES fruit of fanatic mentality (or not honest speculations, in order to have personal advantages).
Doping exists, and without any doubt we need to implement the system for fighting again it. But we don't solve the problem shooting in the Group, and making a lot of honest athletes victims of a bad interpretation of a form of justicialism, where "everybody is doped, and, if clean, needs to prove this fact", which is exactly the opposite of what happens when we speak about the justice applied in every democratic and liberal Country.