Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Gea Johnson, 1990 NCAA Hept Champ, Gets 3rd PED Suspension

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Charley Shaffer View Post
    That would be my constitutionally-protected opinion as well. These posts are beginning to sound as if they are coming from a paid brand management firm, one of those outfits that try to sanitize your presence on the Internet by countering or deleting everything that the client does not like.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reputation_management
    I'll guess they are coming from someone as close to the situation as can be.

    Comment


    • #32
      If we only had a buck or two for every time an athlete failed a drug test the claimed innocence an victim hood we'd all be rich. So sorry if people here are a bit skeptical. Fool me ice shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. Being a victim 3 times is too far fetched for me to believe. Perhaps Gea should move on to finding an identity outside of athletics if she wants to escape the doubters.

      Comment


      • #33
        I can understand your skepticism. And if she had been found with PEDs in her system 3 times I'd certainly agree. However in Gea's case the first was proven by DNA not to be her test sample and thrown out, so one of the 3 doesn't count. The second was for high hormone levels that can be naturally produced, hormones that would reduce performance, and wasn't brought to sanction until 4.5 years later, violating her rights. The third was for taking an allowed out-of-competition drug that was accepted by AAA as being outside 72 hours before competition, but was still sanctioned for a minute amount found in an in-competition test, although GlobalDRO defines in-competition as within 12 hours.

        Gea has been tested at least 41 times since 10/21/2001, most of those out-of-competition (Lance Armstrong was tested less than 60 times by USADA) and many more tests prior to that. Being in the NTP and winning often results in lots of tests, increasing the risk that something can go wrong in any of them. I've never been tested, although having won National championships and many other races and thus I've never had a wrongful sanction; go figure.

        If people could get over the knee jerk reaction to trash someone that has been sanctioned and realize that many innocent athletes could fall into the same circumstance, then it could be used to improve the current system which currently has no checks and balances over the anti-doping agencies deceptions and breaking of their own rules.

        The anti-doping agencies need to justify their existence with convictions which keeps the money flowing in; more money than most athletes can have available to fight them. They have little regard for athletes rights or common sense innocence. Yes they also catch real dopers, but the ratio of cheaters to innocents is too small to be acceptable.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by AZcyclist View Post
          I can understand your skepticism. And if she had been found with PEDs in her system 3 times I'd certainly agree. However in Gea's case the first was proven by DNA not to be her test sample and thrown out, so one of the 3 doesn't count. The second was for high hormone levels that can be naturally produced, hormones that would reduce performance, and wasn't brought to sanction until 4.5 years later, violating her rights. The third was for taking an allowed out-of-competition drug that was accepted by AAA as being outside 72 hours before competition, but was still sanctioned for a minute amount found in an in-competition test, although GlobalDRO defines in-competition as within 12 hours.
          Can you verify those statements with outside sources?

          Comment


          • #35
            So we are supposed to believe that an athlete who had been wrongly accused twice of drug violations, instead of educating herself about the process and being exceedingly cautious about everything she ingested:
            1) Took a prohibited drug close enough a competition that it didn't clear her system,
            2) Failed to apply for a TUE,
            3) Did not list the substance on her doping control form, and
            4) Believes that the 12-hour window for in-competition testing refers to when the substance is ingested, not when the test sample is taken.

            Riiiiiight.
            Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Master403 View Post
              So we are supposed to believe that an athlete who had been wrongly accused twice of drug violations, instead of educating herself about the process and being exceedingly cautious about everything she ingested:
              1) Took a prohibited drug close enough a competition that it didn't clear her system,
              2) Failed to apply for a TUE,
              3) Did not list the substance on her doping control form, and
              4) Believes that the 12-hour window for in-competition testing refers to when the substance is ingested, not when the test sample is taken.

              Riiiiiight.
              Shhhhh stop bringing logic to the table...

              Comment


              • #37
                And thus we have the perfect example of the negative bias USADA imposes on an athlete and vilifies them with facts that were irrelevant to the decision. If you were to read Gea's Arbitration panel analysis at http://geajohnson.com/pdf/Award%20-%2051367.pdf you would see that
                1) The only science available was for modafinal which shows 48-72 hour clearance times, so she gave it 120 hours and was accepted by the panel as having stopped more than 72 hours before the event.
                2) "USADA has never granted a TUE for modafinil, so if she had requested a TUE, which she did not have to do for an out of competition permitted substance, she would have been denied".
                3) The arbitrators stated "she has no obligation to fill out that form at all, let alone to list medications taken out of competition days earlier".
                4) The GlobalDRO website http://www.globaldro.com/US/search/FAQ states that "In-Competition usually means twelve hours before the start of a competition through the end of the competition" and "it means you can't use your medication".
                So facts are better logic than conjecture. Study http://geajohnson.com/WarToConvict.asp for more facts.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Why was Gea Johnson taking Modafinil?

                  I would hope she never takes anything else that could result in more of the same old same old.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Although she was convicted of taking Modafinil, she was taking Nuvigil (armodafinil), so that is not entirely correct on the USADA site. Her work was suffering from a lack of concentration and fatigue. Wikipedia states that it has been shown to improve vigilance in air traffic controllers. An old coach of hers was giving it to her without a prescription, which I would have advised her to not do had I known (I give her regular training advice, but I am not her dedicated coach). I've advised her to just use products with more caffeine or reduce the stress of her workload going into the future and to consider the "Bread and water" diet to not take anything that should ever need to be declared. She was already being targeted, getting tested often as she is in the NTP and usually wins her masters Nationals (and tested every time), so she needed to be extra vigilant, but failed to do so. She is too trusting of others and needs to take more control over her actions.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by NotDutra5 View Post
                      I'll guess they are coming from someone as close to the situation as can be.
                      That's my thinking. Maybe we're chatting with Ms. Johnson herself. If so...winky-smilie!
                      You there, on the motorbike! Sell me one of your melons!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by AZcyclist View Post
                        Although she was convicted of taking Modafinil, she was taking Nuvigil (armodafinil), so that is not entirely correct on the USADA site. Her work was suffering from a lack of concentration and fatigue.
                        Next up: before taking an upper, did she check red blood count, hemoglobin, and do all possible iron related testing?

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by AZcyclist View Post
                          Although she was convicted of taking Modafinil, she was taking Nuvigil (armodafinil), so that is not entirely correct on the USADA site. ....
                          I remember that in Charlie Francis' book "Speed Trap" he wrote that Ben Johnson was indeed doping, but when they busted him in Seoul for stanozolol, they had the wrong drug! All he was really taking, according to Francis, was furazabol (another steroid), synthetic HGH, and a diuretic.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X