Red flags in the Houlihan case that need explaining

I don't know if someone else mentioned it in the 18 pages of this thread, but your assumption that Houlihan would need to eat 310 mg of meat would seem to be incorrect, unless she has the same body mass and blood volume of the tested people in the research article.

This is probably unrelated well maybe but I find it a little odd but seems like her and Centro broke up around the same time this happened. Concidence??? What happened?

Why don't drug testing organizations make athletes write out everything they have ingested BEFORE their drug tests. Pro athletes have to know what they have eaten within a 24 hour time frame and it could prevent 'tainted meat' excuses or other contamination excuses. Thanks for you write up.

Hobby.Jogger wrote:

Why don't drug testing organizations make athletes write out everything they have ingested BEFORE their drug tests. Pro athletes have to know what they have eaten within a 24 hour time frame and it could prevent 'tainted meat' excuses or other contamination excuses. Thanks for you write up.

Top on that list will be the deluxe uncastrated wild boar burrito with extra testicle.

Ray Cyst wrote:

JBaller33 wrote:

It's much more likely that she was notified of her positive test, notified Jerry and BTC, who notified Nike and that smug lawyer they have. They then decided on the "meat contamination defense" that has worked for Ajee Wilson and others, and then asked Shelby to make a list of everything she was eating around the time of her positive test. They landed on the food truck burrito because that was the only thing remotely close to anything that might possibly have nandrolone in it and they could blame it on the dirty Mexicans.

Exactly correct! And everyone here is distracted with nanograms of nandrolone offal.

Authentic Mexican Illegal Alien Food Truck straight from the border

The lawyer tried to bury the truth under technical detail for which he had no expertise. Where was the WADA expert Shelby referred to in her defense? I’m of the opinion that if she was doping consistently, she has a collection of food truck burrito receipts. Take the pill, go get a burrito and keep the receipts in case you get caught.

HIIT wrote:

Hobby.Jogger wrote:

Why don't drug testing organizations make athletes write out everything they have ingested BEFORE their drug tests. Pro athletes have to know what they have eaten within a 24 hour time frame and it could prevent 'tainted meat' excuses or other contamination excuses. Thanks for you write up.

Top on that list will be the deluxe uncastrated wild boar burrito with extra testicle.

"Ah gee, I can't really remember, I've been so busy training . . . but I know it had a lot of really greasy hog balls in it."

davies report wrote:

Another giver of +1 wrote:

The rules are the rules. You sign up for them and agree to abide by them no matter how unreasonable they may seem. We see now that USATF agrees with the rules and reverses their decision to allow her to run in the trials under protest.

Contracts have to be reasonable and can’t be unfair.

They have, for instance, have to comply with health and safety law, discrimination law etc.

Look how the Bosman case changed football.

And, the swimming completion rules law intervention of recently.

Is it reasonable that multi millions in each country to have sign up to rules that require them to give blood and urine samples any time of the day and in any place , at work, play or home?

It is not multi millions signing up to abide by the rules. It is only those who wish to compete in the sport of track and field. If they don't like the rule that samples can be taken at an agreed time once every 24 hours then they can choose to take part in a different sport that's not under WADA rules or not at all.

data hack wrote:

Good post!

I see three possible scenarios:

1) She ate a burrito tainted with pig offal - as you said, this is extremely unlikely given the low probability that not only would her carne asada order been screwed up, but the huge quantity that she would have needed to consume. Yet this is the defense that her team presented.

2) She doped with nandrolone - she took a chance that the drug would clear out of her system before her next drug test and lost the gamble.

3) She took a supplement that was contaminated with nandrolone - I have read that nandrolone contamination is a somewhat common occurrence, so this is entirely possible. Her defense never presented this possibility and she would obviously face consequence if this were the case, although probably not as severe as a 4 year ban.

So in my book, it's either 2 or 3.

With regard to 3, I think it would depend on what the contaminated supplement was. If it's creatine or something else legal, and she could prove that it was contaminated (i.e. by providing the supplement to be analyzed), she might not face a ban at all. However, if it was something like testosterone (i.e. another banned substance) that she was micro-dosing with, then she can't really admit that, as that would also subject her to a four-year ban.

Just because something’s “authentic Mexican” doesn’t mean it fails to meet food safety standards in usa

nina_sjl wrote:

Thank you for this post!

Also, the explanation that they did the hair sample test and say that there was no build up doesn't prove her innocence in any way. She could have used Nandrolone for the first time on the day the positive sample was given. I assume that's why WADA doesn't care about this kind of test.

The idea that she started nandrolone the first time on the day she was tested makes eating contaminated pork seem reasonable.

If hair testing was reliable for these drugs, it would be used. It isn't.

ddidididid wrote:

nina_sjl wrote:

Thank you for this post!

Also, the explanation that they did the hair sample test and say that there was no build up doesn't prove her innocence in any way. She could have used Nandrolone for the first time on the day the positive sample was given. I assume that's why WADA doesn't care about this kind of test.

The idea that she started nandrolone the first time on the day she was tested makes eating contaminated pork seem reasonable.

If hair testing was reliable for these drugs, it would be used. It isn't.

There’s so much more to this story, otherwise it would be a two-year ban. The AIU doesn’t have a lot of faith in the American testing body.

Another giver of +1 wrote:

It is not multi millions signing up to abide by the rules. It is only those who wish to compete in the sport of track and field. If they don't like the rule that samples can be taken at an agreed time once every 24 hours then they can choose to take part in a different sport that's not under WADA rules or not at all.

They have set up this 'puppet show' to be the only game in town, and it puts the athlete (puppets) in situations of extreme disadvantage and unfairness.

The only way doping goes away anytime soon is when sponsors and training groups take an actual no doping stance and start testing their athletes. Want people to think your training group is clean? Don't wait for a third party to test your athletes, do it yourself. Otherwise, we can all go on thinking sponsors like Nike are at minimal complicit in this, at maximum supplying and aiding. Not unlike a halfway house that tests residents for drugs, if you fail, you are OUT. Imagine a training group dropping an athlete for drug use before WADA had a chance to catch them.

... and because this will never happen, doping isn't going away anytime soon.

I keep reading people say Shelby Houlihan is innocent. This is not a claim of guilt or innocence you fools, it’s a binary blood test not a trial.

Did the blood test detect a banned substance,? Yes it did. That would simply be a blood test that is positive for banned substance, not a guilt verdict by a jury.

Get a frigging clue. The steroid was either there or it wasn’t.

puppet show extraordinaire wrote:

Another giver of +1 wrote:

It is not multi millions signing up to abide by the rules. It is only those who wish to compete in the sport of track and field. If they don't like the rule that samples can be taken at an agreed time once every 24 hours then they can choose to take part in a different sport that's not under WADA rules or not at all.

They have set up this 'puppet show' to be the only game in town, and it puts the athlete (puppets) in situations of extreme disadvantage and unfairness.

And the clean athletes that miss out on teams, medals, dollars due to finishing behind dopers are not disadvantaged?

A telling post three days prior to Houlihan's December 15th test.

Caption: "I'm hoping I've been nice and not naughty this year so my dream of track and field in 2021 can become a reality."

The shirt:

All I want for

CHRISTMAS

Track + Field

In 2021.

Sherone Simpson, anyone?