Well said. And WHAT SUPPLEMENTS WERE TAKEN?! They will not say! If you are not guilty, then why wouldn't you want to give fellow athletes a heads up on what NOT TO TAKE!? This is a red flag. Going back to Paulson...quoted from the April 2016 release about her ban "Paulson was taking a supplement that was subsequently examined, tested and found to be contaminated with the drug." Numerous coaches called her coach to find out what was taken to try and protect their athletes in the event that they were taking this 'contaminated' supplement...but he refused to say. These two new bans make 7 total doping bans in triathlon...ever. What a slap in the face to the other 99.99999% of professional triathletes in history to not test positive.

I'm not doubting that contamination can happen, I just find it odd that these athletes had Ostarine (out of the laundry list of other banned substances) in their supplements and to my knowledge these were all different supplements and/or brands.

Right...because everyone owes it to the public of a STer demands it be...

Plus it is public info in at least one case as everyone has deduced from the addition to 411. But you're right...as an athlete, regardless of their lives, they must monitor ST and abide by ST demands.

Which gets to the heart of part of this (and the front-page article does a pretty good job talking about this) - there are few actual manufacturers, many brands.

It's surprisingly similar to the run footwear industry - you have a couple of large factory lines with curtains/walls segmenting the different brands they are providing service to.

I think this is in part why you're seeing shortened bans for more athletes than anticipated - the contaminated supplement issue is more plausible than many on this board are giving it credit for.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

I would like to see us judge guilt/innocence based on a fair application of fair rules--and not base it on someone's likability, or social media presence, or good alibi, or whatever. Because there are friendly likeable people (with good PR skills) who dope and there are rotten SOB's (with terrible PR skills) who are clean.

That said, I'm very aware of the corruption/bribery/extortion involving doping at the top levels of the sport. This includes the recent president of the IAAF (track & field) and at least one WADA-certified lab. Who knows what goes on at the national federations, and within WADA itself? Which all makes me wonder if I'm naive in believing it's even possible to have a fair application of rules.

I got a big laugh from the article just from the pic they included. Because AG or pro doping isn't the biggest issue in triathlon. It's drafting and it's inability to be officiated corrrectly. Or let me say drafting is something that likely can be much fairer officiated than drug testing in this sport.

Ok sorry back to doping controls, I just laughed at the pic they included in the article of 400 + cyclist all "riding" in Kona (yes I know I know it was uphill but look at the line at bottom of hill all "drafting" ).

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

What good would that do? Instead of small sample, you would have to maintain a complete, unopened, sealed bottle of each supplement, and even then they might not accept it coming from the athlete who just popped a positive.

Sighs this approach is maddening. We expect pros to now become chemist? Because how are you the athlete validating that X baggy is from A product and Z baggy is from B product? Because you say so? Isn't that a flawed process from the start? So couldn't they say you contaminated it to cover your tracks? I guess there is no way to certify your process yes?

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I might make some adjustments. Honestly, I am most likely going to keep evaluating what NEEDS to be taken an adjusting from there. For instance. You may have seen my recent Blood Test write-up. All my labs that supplements could fix are very normal. I wouldn't mind trying to lower and lower the dosage of say Iron, Vitamin D, and Magnesium and only supplement if I am at a deficit. I am planning on getting ~4 blood tests a year for the rest of my career.

---

---

Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset

It's a CYA maneuver. Not flawless by any means, but it's also their career on the line.

What I'm asking is the legality of it. So every gu/gel/powder you have keep a pinch of it somewhere so you can cya. But that seems like opening up a big can of worms for legality of how X product is X and how you prove Y is not in X?

I guess I'm asking how are these pros suppose to validate that they didn't spike it after the fact that we have seen mentioned here. So what I'm bringing up is more or less chain of custody issues.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Somewhere I read that Laura gave the bottle of her pills for testing and then testers went and independently purchased more with the same batch numbers to also test. Both were positive to containing Ostarine.
Beth provided some un opened packets of the pills she had been taking, one she provided showed 'possible traces on it' but others did not. I assume independent purchasing of more tablets from the same batch number also proved clear, hence the 2 year ban. I thought was interesting wording from her to state 'on' not 'in'also. Maybe a typo, or maybe something quite different.
Basically the batch numbers are what need to be kept. not the product itself. Anyone could rub a bit of the banned product on what is already in their cupboard and send off for testing. Therefore It is the later testing of product, independently acquired, from the same batch that can get the ban lowered or not.

Not if they provide unopened packets. If the packets are truly sealed then the person could not rub the banned product on it, correct.

Basically the batch numbers are what need to be kept. not the product itself.

---------

thx for this info.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

And this is a great post. A 6-month retroactive ban is damn near pointless. In the case of the 2015/16 female triathlete who tested positive for Ostarine (if you don't know who, look it up) getting a 6 month retroactive ban that took place during...wait for it...the off-season! What timing... She was banned retroactively from mid-October to mid-April; now that's what I call well played. What a sham.

She knew the potential of the ban. She could have continued to race and then the ban started the day it was announced and continued for 6 months.

I hope you're trolling with this comment. 'she seems about as home-spun as they get.' C'mon son. And your daughter really is just studying in the basement alone with her boyfriend...wake up! If you can give me a convincing argument on how you go from running 6hr 70.3's in 2014 to 4:30's in 2016, I will eat my words. Additionally, mid-35 with not even as much as collegiate sport on her resume...? But, hey. She's a nice gal (which from what I've heard, she's great). The system does go overboard, but it is to protect the honest people from getting hurt. When someone trains full-time (substance free) and loses big cash to a doper...now that is what hurts.

You guys have gotta start taking some time to research this stuff before you come out and verbal vomit your assumptions that really don't make any sense. You're killin me.

Ostarine is popular with the ladies because though it is not technically a 'steroid', it still delivers muscle gains and the benefits of certain steroids without the side effects that would deter most females (facial hair, balls, etc.) Osterine HAS proven to be very effective in building lean muscle (skipping other benefits) AND increasing strength as well as...wait for it...endurance; increasing them past the point of what your natural genetics are capable of. Another huge benefit for endurance athletes is that it increases tendon strength, ligament health and bone density. This = Recovery. For a female who is between the age of 30 and 40, it's very hard to build muscle and if you're body is taking the pounding of an endurance athlete, recovery is vital. If a SARM can cut your recover time in half...while building lean muscle and strength and endurance, you're gonna have some pretty significant increases if you can push out 2-3 hard workouts a week versus the 1 or 2.

So what if you get caught? And stop taking it? Well, if you continue to train hard after you stop taking Ostarine, you'll of course see some declines, but the gains that were not possible to achieve before taking it are still there. If you quit all together, then I would assume it'd become useless...but if you take Ostarine and train like a beast for 12 months and then stop taking it, but still continue to train...the muscle is still there and the benefits will live on. So if you're banned for using this substance for 6 months, but still continue to train through your ban, you will still benefit from the muscle build and endurance gains that took place while juicing.

How do people determine the subtle nuances you've described that are associated with these PEDs? How did you learn what you've shared?

This all seems very refined for underground and illicit activities.

I'm not challenging what you've shared, just niavely oblivious to the sources of sophistication at work behind the scenes.

Scott

THIS ^^^ Just because the athlete said oh poor me, why would I even take it when it gives no benefit to a triathlete? doesn't make it true. Far from it.

I am married to a high level professional athlete and a very honest one at that. Through being around the sport and self research from my own curiosity (at first I didn't understand what the big fuss was all about). When you hit a certain level of talent at a high level, everyone is so damn good and no one tests positive for anything because they don't take anything that would risk career suicide. You simply stay away from anything and everything...you don't even look at it; you also read the USADA banned substances list, print it out, memorize it, put it on the fridge, etc., and take it very serious. In professional sports like running, triathlon and cycling (which are all very tight knit groups at high levels aka they all know one another because they're racing together all of the time) even the best are barely scraping up the money to get by as a professional, so when something like this happens they take it very personal simply because it is wrong. It is cheating. There is no shortcuts. I witnessed a great athlete miss the Olympic team by 1 slot in 2012; and as it turns out the person who got the 3rd slot and made the team was doping. Can you imagine dedicating your life to something like this and how devastating that would be at the end of your career if that happened? To some people it's not a big deal, but I can promise you to the elites who have sacrificed their lives for their sport, it is a very personal issue.

Wow. realtalk. Calm down.
There is no one who despises cheating in any form than myself. But I also believe in fairness. And if these supplements are tainted then yes I will always stick up for the athlete.
And btw your comment on trolling. .. Just because you disagree with someone doesn't mean there a troll. Why can't you debate the topic instead of going after fellow posters. You seem to have real anger issues.

So all one needs to know is the batch number of a known contaminated substance (such as the batch # of the salt pills Lauren Barnett was taking) and then they can take Ostarine and claim it was from the specific batch of salt pills? I would think you'd need to have more evidence than a batch #.

Well then an unopened container of salt from that batch would need to show traces of the drug to prove it was contaminated....

Is this process that confusing?

Realtalk is spot on with everything in my opinion. Wake up, ST.

---

https://twitter.com/mungub

Maybe you aren't understanding what I'm saying.

Let's say I get tested and have Ostarine in my system. If I know the batch number from the salt pills that Lauren Barnett took, which have been tested and contained traces Ostarine, I can just claim that I took salt pills from that batch. Sure, I'll get six months but that's a hell of a lot better than 2-4 years.