"No wrong doing"

[question everything]

we usually hear this from politicians and now, sadly, from Landis.

Doesn't this mean that one "did it" - whatever "it" was - but that doing so was not wrong?

[ananda]

1. Landis

Landis musta bought the GOP lie that he's above the law.

He did it all right. The elevated testosterone they found was synthetic.

Landis is toast.

Too bad the GOP isn't.

[sgxnk]

2. to clarify

the rules state that the athlete is responsible for what substances are in his body

this means that in many cases there might be no intentional wrongdoing, but still a positive test

this means the burden is on the athlete to prove that he was doped unknowingly, which is next to impoissible

one case that comes to mind - a weightlifter who tested positive for nandrolone

first of all, there are evidence of false positive tests for nandrolone

that aside...

it turned out that investigators were able to determine that a jilted girlfriend had actually doped his TOOTHPASTE with nandrolone and that was how it was introduced into his body. since nandrolone metabolites are among the longest acting/lingering in the human bloodstream/urine NO athlete in his right mind in a drug testing sport would EVER cheat with nandrolone. it can be detected up to a YEAR after administration. the microdoses he was getting in his toothpaste were enough for him to test positive

regardless, the point is that the rules are clear in pro cycling. assuming there were no methodological problems with the testing himself - he's screwed

if the drug T was in his system in supraphysiological amounts (as evidenced by a wacky Testosterone/epitestosterone ratio) he's screwed unless HE can prove he was doped unknowingly which is usually next to impossible

[question everything]

3. What a story!

But if someone administered to him, it would be more believable if he said that he had no idea how it got into his system, would swear, even, that he did not take it..

But to first claim that he naturally has high level of testosterone, and then to use that "no wrong doing" claim casts a large shadow on him.

And there are still investigation about Lance Armstrong, I believe, though his case is different, it is about of whether he took something when he had his cancer operation, right?

[sgxnk]

4. i don't know enuf about lance

to comment on his case. so, i won't speculate

in the case of landis, while many athletes DO have unnaturally high levels of testosterone (in fact, in many sports - that is part of what makes them genetically superior in the first place), high levels of ENDOGENOUS (iow natural) T do not throw off the RATIO which is the test that was used to suggest landis had taken exogenous dosings of T.

iow, he may have misunderstood what he tested positive FOR, but since he wasn't flagged for high T levels, but for a high T/Epitestosterone ratio, that excuse does sound kinda bogus

as for the "no wrong doing" claim... given the policy of "you're responsible for what's in yer system", it's a tough burden to PROVE and unlike a court of law, the burden is on him to prove he was wronged

probably his best bet is to hope that the testing methodology or chain of evidence was flawed

back to the other point. im not surprised landis tested positive.

my claim is that most elite athletes use banned substances. that's the nature of competitive sports

some, unfortunately for them, get caught though

as another example of substances getting into one's system without 'wrongdoing' there have also been cases where non-banned supplements were shown to have trace amounts of banned supplements since the same milling machines were used by the supplement companies to prepare both.

the example i recall was a company that made a ZMA supplements (zinc-magnesium aspartate) milled their ZMA with the same machines they used to mill nor-androdiol. norandrodiol was a prohormone that was structurally similar to nandrolone. thus, people taking ZMA could test positive for nandrolone (commonly known by the name "Deca" as in nandrolone decanoate)

sigh...