What is the statute of limitations on this? If you take them before the race, or before you register for the race, she may not have been subject to any anti-doping authority. If she was taking them this summer it seems too soon, just curious what the time frame would be
WADA Code — Article 17: Statute of Limitations
No Anti-Doping Rule Violation may be asserted against an Athlete or other Person unless the Athlete or other Person has been notified of the Anti-Doping Rule Violation as provided in Article 7, within ten (10) years from the date the Anti-Doping Rule Violation is asserted to have occurred.
Source:
World Anti-Doping Code (2021 edition, still current in 2025) — available on WADA’s official site under “World Anti-Doping Code”.
What could have guided these violation lengths? I think life spans of cells would be a good marker:
Brain cells: 200+ years?
Eye lens cells: Lifetime
Egg cells: 50 years
Heart muscle cells: 40 years
Intestinal cells (excluding lining): 15.9 years
Skeletal muscle cells: 15.1 years
Fat cells: 8 years
Hematopoietic stem cells: 5 years
Liver cells: 10-16 months
Pancreas cells: 1 year
You basically don’t become or be an IFBBPRO without being on gear.
Would have to look into the WADA code and regulations to see how that all works. When you sign up to the Code, is it from that point forwards that you must be clean and anything done beforehand is outside of their control??
She needs to lower the dose for triathlon. Those lats are not aero at all.
4 Likes
I wouldn’t consider a social media post to be “on the record”. If they confront her over it, she could say she was lying. Lying on social media isn’t a stretch by any means; it’s part of the business model.
1 Like
They’re very unlikely to “confront” her over it. What one should expect is that she’ll be waking up to a knock on the door and an unannounced out of competition test in the near future.
It’s a shame should need to spend the thousands of dollars that process entails in this case.
I saw her on the race course several times and again at the prize giving; she looked extremely jakt like the young female crossfitter look; perhaps not the fastest for a triathlon to carry the muscle at a fitness IFBB level, but she didn’t look like that here, she looked pretty lean and in shape, all that muscle and the low body fat would surely be helpful, even if no longer on the gear. Her actual time in most years here on this course would see her going to Kona, 11.17 is a quick time for a woman here; this is generally not a fast course (although this year the number of really fast men changing that).
I’d presume she may get a test at some point, and if she’s off gear doesn’t admit anything she’s probably ok to race - I think that’s how it works?
I don’t think that’s answer the question. The 10 years of limiation is basically how long WADA can hold a sample and test (or retest?).
But if someone is not under WADA jurisidiction and then becomes under WADA juridiction by becoming an sport member that follows WADA, you can’t be punished for prior sins when you weren’t required to follow WADA regs right? If your still taking PEDS while as a signature member, then yes you can get busted.
I don’t know the ins and outs of bodybuilding and such with WADA regs, etc. If you aren’t a WADA member, you basically can do anything you want until you become an organizational member that follows WAD A controls right?
The way I feel getting out of bed some days I’ll be juicing to the eye balls before long
3 Likes
I can relate…Hell,I’m on the Gold Coast right now and I’d need to get on the gear just to fit in with the girls around here.
2 Likes
testing is non existant. so many fit-fluencers out there shilling their products and competing. By chance they sponsor some races so they dont get tested. I believe someone at IMAZ will get away too
1 Like
Dun, dun, dun! Intrigue abounds!
1 Like
Assuming he means a Crossfit guy with a youtube channel that is racing Arizona. I actually don’t think he is taking anything, but I’m probably the minority.
1 Like
I think he’s talking about a very popular supplement company YouTube personality. I don’t think he will KQ though, so not as harmful as the OP’s example.
1 Like
OP example is admitting to usage. My example is saying their results are from legal supplements, which they happen to sell: much worse
1 Like
Really think so? Had to scroll pretty far on ST to find discussion of this, feel like I’m the only one sitting here saying ‘anyone else seeing this??’