Ca$hnelo is Clean. BOSS.

[bigdunny1]

I'm not sure what you think is wrong with my answer... based on the available evidence any answer is effectively a guess. Are you asking me to guess?

And no, I specify that the urine tests taken cannot differentiate between meat contamination and PED use, maybe you misunderstood what I wrote.

Further I also specify that nothing in the available evidence tells me that hair follicle testing can give a reliable answer in this case. If you disagree please feel free to point me to the information or research - either in the presentation the Conte supplies or elsewhere - that you've uncovered which tells us how exactly how long Clenbuterol would be detectable in a particular hair type based on the concentrations found in Canelo's urine or on how hair growth or other factors could impact on the results.

You can't because such research is incomplete and can at the best only be extrapolated from data on other drugs. What Detlef Thieme and WADA are saying is that hair testing has the potential to provide better differentiation than urine testing, but at the moment insufficient research has been done to be able to give reliable results. I ain't sure what's so hard to understand about that.

I get the impression that somehow you think I'm accusing Canelo of PED abuse. I ain't. Do you understand what I am saying?

dude still dancing from a simple question. lol YOU ARE NOT AN EXPERT I'm not asking you for an expert opinion I'll go to Victor Conte or someone else then a message board for that. I'm asking you for a simple opinion on what is more likely if you are unbiased it should be very easy to give that opinion. What's so hard about answer 1 straight question without a long essay refusing to step off the fence. Let's try a 4th time based on the data, what the experts have all said what is more likely that canelo ate bad meat or that he was cheating?

I'll help you out we have 2 tests. A urine test that could be meat or could be PED but the fact that the levels were extremely low is MORE consistent to meat and canelo is from Mexico a country flagged for meat problems. Then you have a hair test that all the experts say is a better judge of intent to cheat or simply bad meat and that test negative no traces which is what you would get if you were simply ate bad meat because PED use has much higher doses that stays in hair for 6 months.

[Citizen Koba]

dude still dancing from a simple question. lol YOU ARE NOT AN EXPERT I'm not asking you for an expert opinion I'll go to Victor Conte or someone else then a message board for that. I'm asking you for a simple opinion on what is more likely if you are unbiased it should be very easy to give that opinion. What's so hard about answer 1 straight question without a long essay refusing to step off the fence. Let's try a 4th time based on the data, what the experts have all said what is more likely that canelo ate bad meat or that he was cheating?

I'll help you out we have 2 tests. A urine test that could be meat or could be PED but the fact that the levels were extremely low is MORE consistent to meat and canelo is from Mexico a country flagged for meat problems. Then you have a hair test that all the experts say is a better judge of intent to cheat or simply bad meat and that test negative no traces which is what you would get if you were simply ate bad meat because PED use has much higher doses that stays in hair for 6 months.

More consistent? What does that even mean? Consistent with means 'does not contradict the available evidence'. You're confusing consistency with probability.

The only 'expert' that's given an opinion on this case is Conte and the information he's provided doesn't actually offer evidence to back up what he says. I've looked through it, have you? When you have come back and we'll discuss this on a more informed basis.

Until then please stop trying to say that I'm 'dancing around the question' when in fact I'm giving the only answer that a reasonable person can give given the lack of reliable evidence.

If you want to give half-assed opinions based on your trust of someone who's opinions happen to coincide with your own, feel free but don't expect me to give mine without evidence a great deal more solid than what we have seen so far.

EDIT: Oh yeah. And go fuck with your 'if you are unbiased' bull****. We can all play those games. You were parroting the opinion that the urine tests somehow proved that contamination was the only reasonable conclusion long after it had been pointed out to you multiple times that this was not the case... if there's anyone with a case of confirmation bias here it's you, man.