Comments Thread For: Dillian Whyte Tested Positive For Two Dianabol Metabolites

[Alan Smithee]

That was from a couple days ago and it seems that it wasn't the fact the B sample hadn't been tested that made the UK anti doping panel allow the fight to go ahead, it would seem more likely it was the fact Whyte presented his other VADA etc clean results and the fact the amounts were "ultra trace" .

If it we're just the B sample hadn't been tested I assume he would have been provisionally suspended.

So although you might be right in that Whyte requested the B sample tested, I don't think that had anything to do with him being allowed to fight.

I will respond to you andocom but not that nitwit Kafkod. Here is a link and a quote. The BBOC could have been sued if they suspended Whyte at that point!

https://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/whyte-was-cleared-to-fight-by-ukad-and-british-boxing/

It is understood that Whyte’s AAF occurred on 17 July. Had the BBBofC suspended Whyte, it may have made itself vulnerable to a lawsuit. The dangers of such an approach have been thrown into sharp relief by recent cases involving Mamadou Sakho and Sun Yang.

[Alan Smithee]

... at this point is so easy for VADA to release a ped test result meant to send Whyte into oblivion...

Whyte was tested on the 15th by VADA and passed. He was then tested on the 17th by UKAD and failed. Could either or both results be faulty? Absolutely but the "B" sample from UKAD is an important factor. The passing of the VADA test if it was urine is easily explained. Urine testing is not an exact science. A sample result from midstream urination can be different from (first catch) when you first start or when you are finishing.

[thesmokingman]

Whyte was tested on the 15th by VADA and passed. He was then tested on the 17th by UKAD and failed. Could either or both results be faulty? Absolutely but the "B" sample from UKAD is an important factor. The passing of the VADA test if it was urine is easily explained. Urine testing is not an exact science. A sample result from midstream urination can be different from (first catch) when you first start or when you are finishing.

The test for those metabolites is exact and it is a urine test. Whyte could have popped a pill the day of the last VADA test thinking he had 3 days till the metabolites are gone but UKAD came knocking on day 2. B sample testing is ****** and purely about chain of custody. A few years back maybe more, WADA considered taking away B sample protocol altogether as it stretches things out, complicates things and increases the cost dramatically.

That said UKAD/BBBoC is doing it WRONG. They are not following WADA Code or protocols on adverse finding notifications. UKAD have recently been warned to stay in their lane by WADA or they will be replaced. They have ben acting like judge, jury and executioner all in one, whilst allowing suspect athletes to continue competing. That's all kinds of wrong.

[Raggamuffin]

So is Robot Kong guilty or not?

[El_Cholo]

Whyte did not request his B side to be analysed!

Where are you getting this crap from?

As per Eddie Hearn, there wasn't time for the B sample to be analysed, so instead of going down that route, the BBBoC offered Whyte a chance to get clearance to fight by having an expert panel from UKAD interview him and examine the results of his VADA tests.

Dillian agreed to this and the hearing took place on the morning of the fight. After interviewing him and looking at his VADA record, the panel and the BBBoC cleared him to fight.

the B sample has been requested by the Whyte side, in fact it was requested the day he met with UKAD.

and Whyte didn't agree to meet them, he was told! You don't agree with the testers then you are burned simple as that.

UKAD rules state on Adverse finding that they can take action or can decide to delay for the time being.

[kafkod]

the B sample has been requested by the Whyte side, in fact it was requested the day he met with UKAD.

and Whyte didn't agree to meet them, he was told! You don't agree with the testers then you are burned simple as that.

UKAD rules state on Adverse finding that they can take action or can decide to delay for the time being.

The only information about that meeting came from Eddie Hearn. He said Whyte was told by UKAD that there wouldn't be time to have his B sample tested, but they gave him the option to have them make a ruling based on interviewing him and looking at the results of his VADA tests.

Dillian passed all the VADA tests, so UKAD couldn't look at any of the data from them without his permission. Dillian agreed to show UKAD his VADA results and have them make a ruling based on that evidence.

[_Rexy_]

The only information about that meeting came from Eddie Hearn. He said Whyte was told by UKAD that there wouldn't be time to have his B sample tested, but they gave him the option to have them make a ruling based on interviewing him and looking at the results of his VADA tests.

Dillian passed all the VADA tests, so UKAD couldn't look at any of the data from them without his permission. Dillian agreed to show UKAD his VADA results and have them make a ruling based on that evidence.

That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. if I go out and **** someone tonight, I don’t get to show the judge a **** kit from last week as proof I’m innocent lmfao

[rudy]

That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. if I go out and **** someone tonight, I don’t get to show the judge a **** kit from last week as proof I’m innocent lmfao

So basically he is a cheat, now he got money to buy a lawyer to get him of this cheating move.

No more ratings for scumbags like this.

[rudy]

His career will be over either way getting knocked out badly or Liver damage from all the steroids

[kafkod]

That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. if I go out and **** someone tonight, I don’t get to show the judge a **** kit from last week as proof I’m innocent lmfao

I don't know what you're on about there. The traces of metabolites in Whyte's UKAD sample were so low level that VADA tests apparently didn't detect them. Or maybe VADA did detect them, but didn't think they were caused by the breakdown of a banned substance?

It seems very logical to me that UKAD would want to look at the results of the VADA tests, and also the times at which they were taken.