USOC Confirms Some Big-Name Positives

[gh]

USOC Announces Thirty-Day Disclosure of Doping Positives

COLORADO SPRINGS, COLO. (December 30, 2003) - - The United States Olympic
Committee (USOC) received notification from the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency
(USADA) 30 days ago that USADA’s Anti-Doping Review Board determined that
sufficient evidence of doping exists to proceed further in seven cases:

· Track and field athlete Chryste Gaines, 33, of Lithonia, Ga., tested
positive for modafinil at the USA Outdoor Track & Field Championships at
Stanford, Calif., on June 20, 2003.

· Track and field athlete Sandra Glover, 34, of Sugarland, Texas,
tested positive for modafinil at the USA Outdoor Track & Field
Championships at Stanford, Calif., on June 21, 2003.

· Track and field athlete John McEwen, 29, of Ashland, Ohio, tested
positive for modafinil and tetrahydrogestrinone (THG) at the USA Outdoor
Track & Field Championships at Stanford, Calif., on June 20, 2003.

· Track and field athlete Chris Phillips, 31, of Little Rock, Ark.,
tested positive for modafinil at the IAAF World Championships in Athletics
at Paris, France, on Aug. 30, 2003.

· Cyclist Adham Sbeih, 30, of Sacramento, Calif., tested positive for
erythropoietin (EPO) at the U.S. Cycling Federation (USCF) Elite Track
National Championships at Trexlertown, Pa., on Aug. 26, 2003.

· Track and field athlete Eric Thomas, 30, of Houston, Texas, tested
positive for modafinil at the USA Outdoor Track & Field Championships at
Stanford, Calif., on June 22, 2003.

· Track and field athlete Kelli White, 26, of Union City, Calif.,
tested positive for modafinil at the USA Outdoor Track & Field
Championships at Stanford, Calif., on June 20, 2003 and the IAAF World
Championships in Athletics at Paris, France, on Aug. 24, 2003.

Currently, all seven athletes are disputing their cases in the USADA
adjudication process. If a sanction is imposed, USADA will make the
announcement at a later date.

This announcement is made in accordance with the USOC’s published
Anti-Doping Policy, which was adopted in 2001 by the USOC Executive
Committee and requires this disclosure.

[gh]

Re: USOC Confirms Some Big-Name Positives

In my haste to get this posted I didn't note what was perhaps most significant (other than White now having two Modafinil positives): no mention of Toth or Jacobs.

[Guest]

Re: USOC Confirms Some Big-Name Positives

The problem is: what's IAAF doing?
Why no decision on modafinil?
Wake up Mr. Diak!

[gh]

Re: USOC Confirms Some Big-Name Positives

IAAF has nothing to do with this at this point. Such cases are ajudicated by the athlete's own country, so the ball is in the USADA/USOC/USATF court.

[michael lewis]

Re: USOC Confirms Some Big-Name Positives

Well it clearly was the year of the NARCO-leptic in T&F.

[Guest]

Re: USOC Confirms Some Big-Name Positives

"IAAF has nothing to do with this at this point. Such cases are ajudicated by the athlete's own country, so the ball is in the USADA/USOC/USATF court."

that's not true. IAAF has to say if K.White is W. Champion or not.

[gh]

Re: USOC Confirms Some Big-Name Positives

U.S. side will come up with a decision. If they say White is guilty then IAAF will say she's not the champion (undoubtedly after a CAS arbitration). If U.S. side says White is innocent, then IAAF will examine the decision and decide and whether or not they accept it. (One would guess NOT)

[MJD]

Re: USOC Confirms Some Big-Name Positives

>no mention of Toth or
>Jacobs.

So what does that mean potentially? The rumours were false or that there was a positive and, nothwithstanding that positive, the USADA’s Anti-Doping Review Board has determined that
insufficient evidence of doping exists to proceed any further?

[gh]

Re: USOC Confirms Some Big-Name Positives

We're trying to find out. Do recall that at one point Toth's lawyer said that they had to test the B sample twice before they got a confirming positive. Also note that while Toth and McEwen made some public comment about their rumored positives, I don't believe that Jacobs (or any representative thereof) ever said word one.

[MJD]

Re: USOC Confirms Some Big-Name Positives

I don't believe that Jacobs (or any representative thereof) ever
>said word one.


I can only imagine what is going on at letsrun as a result of this development. Must look.

[Guest]

Re: USOC Confirms Some Big-Name Positives

Would that be the same letsrun that a couple of days ago had at the top of the homepage an anti-Jacobs rant that closed with a phrase along the lines of preventing her from "ever committing theft again" and then the next day had modified the statement so that conclusion was no longer there?

[Guest]

Re: USOC Confirms Some Big-Name Positives

I'm confused...so what will happen to those caught on Modafinil? Since they were caught months ago, and before it was banned, then it was classified as a mild stimulant, does that mean their marks are removed from the lists or do they get a short ban starting next season?

[MJD]

Re: USOC Confirms Some Big-Name Positives

>Would that be the same letsrun that a couple of days ago had at the top of the
>homepage an anti-Jacobs rant that closed with a phrase along the lines of
>preventing her from "ever committing theft again" and then the next day had
>modified the statement so that conclusion was no longer there?


I'm not defending them. I'm just curious, given the above and other comments made by them about her, what they will say this time.

[gh]

Re: USOC Confirms Some Big-Name Positives

In the eyes of the governing bodies there is no such thing as "before it was banned." They use the "similar substances" rule to penalize people who are caught with previously undiscovered substances in their samples (same w/ THG).

The penalty for a "mild stimulant" is what the IAAF likes to call a "public warning," which entails your being DQed from the meet (the whole meet, if it's a multi-day meet) in question, with attendant loss of any prize monies that might be awarded. That's the sole extent of the penalty. There will be no ban next season, and only the marks from the meet in question are removed from the lists. That clarify it?

[Asterix]

Re: USOC Confirms Some Big-Name Positives

>In my haste to get this posted I didn't note what was perhaps most significant
>(other than White now having two Modafinil positives): no mention of Toth or
>Jacobs.

Guess I should review the summary page to be sure about Toth, but weren't both of those supposedly for THG? The list above seems to be dealing with people testing for Modafinil or EPO. The only mention of THG is for McEwan, who also tested for Modafinil.

Might it be possible that they are still trying to wrestle with the THG issue and therefore haven't got a ruling yet on those who tested positive just for that substance?