Originally posted by El Toro
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
all 5 Jamaicans cleared?
Collapse
Unconfigured Ad Widget
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by justblaze1011"Methylhexaneamine was patented in 2005 by Illinois chemist and bodybuilder Patrick Arnold, who is best known for creating the designer steroids at the heart of the BALCO scandal which landed Sydney Olympic sprint queen Marion Jones in prison.
First patented in 1944 by Eli Lilly Reference
Arnold and Methylhexaneamine
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by TalibanBut the substance isn't banned....
However, there is too much that is still unknown. If I were Jamaica I would not run any of these athletes on a relay that they think that they will medal in.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by scratchmanOriginally posted by TalibanOriginally posted by scratchmanThe thing is, whatever they took, they know it was helping them.
And I'm quite sure they knew it wasnt on the banned list.
5 people with the same thing in their systems? All track athletes? All from the same club?
.... :roll: C'mon now.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by guruof trackOriginally posted by justblaze1011
WOW!!!!!!!
Talk about Bush league.................but again this should NOT surprise anyone. We HAVE seen this lack of competency before with the agency.
"Methylhexaneamine was patented in 2005 by Illinois chemist and bodybuilder Patrick Arnold, who is best known for creating the designer steroids at the heart of the BALCO scandal which landed Sydney Olympic sprint queen Marion Jones in prison.
Under the World Anti-Doping Agency Code (article 10.2), the offence for this drug is a two-year ban, a penalty which may be reduced if there was no intent to gain a performance advantage" - From the article
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by justblaze1011
Apparently methylhexaneamine is found in flower oil such as geranium and so is found in a few supplements as well.
But if precendent exists for it being a banned substance then it's questionable how they've been cleared on the basis of its status being unclear.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by justblaze1011
WOW!!!!!!!
Talk about Bush league.................but again this should NOT surprise anyone. We HAVE seen this lack of competency before with the agency.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by TalibanOriginally posted by scratchmanThe thing is, whatever they took, they know it was helping them.
And I'm quite sure they knew it wasnt on the banned list.
5 people with the same thing in their systems? All track athletes? All from the same club?
.... :roll: C'mon now.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by scratchmanThe thing is, whatever they took, they know it was helping them.
And I'm quite sure they knew it wasnt on the banned list.
5 people with the same thing in their systems? All track athletes? All from the same club?
.... :roll: C'mon now.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by scratchmanThe thing is, whatever they took, they know it was helping them.
And I'm quite sure they knew it wasnt on the banned list.
5 people with the same thing in their systems? All track athletes? All from the same club?
.... :roll: C'mon now.
Leave a comment:
-
The thing is, whatever they took, they know it was helping them.
And I'm quite sure they knew it wasnt on the banned list.
5 people with the same thing in their systems? All track athletes? All from the same club?
.... :roll: C'mon now.
Leave a comment:
-
If its not on the list then they should be able to run. A lot of things that aren't on the WADA can also be found in banned products. This whole ordeal was idiotic.
Leave a comment:
-
Yeah, it's either banned or not.
I don't see how someone can return an AAF on a drug that is not banned.
Maybe that's why the problem won't go away because if it's not a banned substance, someone messed up by declaring it so prematurely.
Then it really begs the question that if the administrators cannot be sure after deliberation whether the substance is one prohibited, could the athletes have been sure before taking supplements containing it?
Does it speak against the clarity of the rules in this particular case?
Because if this were any anabolic steroid they would be out for a while, no doubt.
So I definitely agree that a ruling needs to be made establishing that it was evident, by the rules, that the substance was banned.
Otherwise, I don't see how the athletes can be sanctioned.
Leave a comment:
-
wada need to make a quick decision whether this drug is a "related" substance or not
if it's not, then clear these guys & let them go to berlin
it will be a travesty if this is not settled until after berlin & declared a non-banned drug, related or not, & 5 athletes didn't get to compete because of administrative uncertainty as to whether it is a banned drug or not
this is firmly in wada's ballcourt...
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: