Whyte was cleared based on absolutely nothing

[Redd Foxx]

It's a weird culture over there. In the states we love to crucify our cheaters. In the UK, they do anything possible to protect their boys.

[Mammoth]

What weird is if someone fails a drug test at work and then passes three other drug tests, that test they failed isnt overruled by the three they pass. They still get fired.

A good explanation doesn't get somebody out of failing a drug test in the work place either

[Citizen Koba]

There wasn’t an investigation, nothing new was presented and the B sample that exists was never tested. UKAD had all the same facts in front of them and just decided to clear Dillian Whyte for no reason.

I’ve never seen a fighter fail a drug test and get cleared without reason.

Why do we have drug tests then?

I think it’s worth pointing out again that there isn’t a single fighter from the United Kingdom who’s banned by UKAD for using performance enhancing drugs.

The reason was that the dose taken couldn't possibly have been taken with any intent to enhance performance. At least that's my understanding of the UKAD explanation. Because you have before and after negative tests there's only a fairly short window in which the drug could have entered the body, knowing this window and the elimination half life of the drug in question allows you to calculate fairly accurately the maximum amount of the drug which could have entered the body.

If this maximal amount is significantly (and I'd hope we're talking orders of magnitude here, but without the actual numbers there's no way of knowing) below a therapeutic dose that could be expected to produce any noticable effect then it's a reasonable assumption that accidental contamination is to blame for the prescence of the metabolytes rather that deliberate use.

I think the idea is that if the amounts of metbolytes detected suggested he's only taken a maximum of a coupla micrograms - for instance - when a therapeutic dose is in the 10s of milligram range he would quite literally have had to just have shaved off a coupla grains from a single pill on a single occasion which would be ridiculous... 'Course, once again it comes down to the numbers. I can't give any kind of opinion on how strong the argument is unless they release the metabolyte concentrations found in Dillians positive samples.

[Mammoth]

The reason was that the dose taken couldn't possibly have been taken with any intent to enhance performance. At least that's my understanding of the UKAD explanation. Because you have before and after negative tests there's only a fairly short window in which the drug could have entered the body, knowing this window and the elimination half life of the drug in question allows you to calculate fairly accurately the maximum amount of the drug which could have entered the body.

If this maximal amount is significantly (and I'd hope we're talking orders of magnitude here, but without the actual numbers there's no way of knowing) below a therapeutic dose that could be expected to produce any noticable effect then it's a reasonable assumption that accidental contamination is to blame for the prescence of the metabolytes rather that deliberate use.

I think the idea is that if the amounts of metbolytes detected suggested he's only taken a maximum of a coupla micrograms - for instance - when a therapeutic dose is in the 10s of milligram range he would quite literally have had to just have shaved off a coupla grains from a single pill on a single occasion which would be ridiculous... 'Course, once again it comes down to the numbers. I can't give any kind of opinion on how strong the argument is unless they release the metabolyte concentrations found in Dillians positive samples.

Lol I got nothing but respect for you, Koba but c'mon, man!

[ShaneMosleySr]

I doubt Canelo Alvarez’s clenbuterol levels were at a level that would enhance performance. He was still suspended because having performance enhancing drugs in your system is illegal and it’s the responsibility of the athlete to make sure it doesn’t happen.

The reason was that the dose taken couldn't possibly have been taken with any intent to enhance performance. At least that's my understanding of the UKAD explanation. Because you have before and after negative tests there's only a fairly short window in which the drug could have entered the body, knowing this window and the elimination half life of the drug in question allows you to calculate fairly accurately the maximum amount of the drug which could have entered the body.

If this maximal amount is significantly (and I'd hope we're talking orders of magnitude here, but without the actual numbers there's no way of knowing) below a therapeutic dose that could be expected to produce any noticable effect then it's a reasonable assumption that accidental contamination is to blame for the prescence of the metabolytes rather that deliberate use.

I think the idea is that if the amounts of metbolytes detected suggested he's only taken a maximum of a coupla micrograms - for instance - when a therapeutic dose is in the 10s of milligram range he would quite literally have had to just have shaved off a coupla grains from a single pill on a single occasion which would be ridiculous... 'Course, once again it comes down to the numbers. I can't give any kind of opinion on how strong the argument is unless they release the metabolyte concentrations found in Dillians positive samples.

[Citizen Koba]

Lol I got nothing but respect for you, Koba but c'mon, man!

I'm explaining the argument being used, man, not giving an opinion on the validity of it. I'd need to see the actual figures for the metabolyte concentrations to know if it holds water or not.

[Citizen Koba]

I doubt Canelo Alvarez’s clenbuterol levels were at a level that would enhance performance. He was still suspended because having performance enhancing drugs in your system is illegal and it’s the responsibility of the athlete to make sure it doesn’t happen.

They're very different situations because Canelo didn't have a clear test a few days before his positive, If he had have done it would be possible to establish the maximum possible amount of Clenbuterol that had entered his body (based upon the 36 hour Clenbuterol half life in humans) If, say, like Dillian he had been tested 3 days prior to his positives we could say that there was no way a useful therapeutic dose could have been taken and eliminated down to the 600 - 800pg/ml level detected in his urine within that 3 day window so the only sensible conclusion would be that contaminated meat was the cause. Because there was no earlier test we're left not knowing whether Canelo's results were due to contaminated meat eaten a few days before his tests or a much larger dose or course taken with intent and ceasing maybe a week or two prior.

EDIT: But yes, in general I am in favour of a zero tolerence approach... ie that he should have served a minimum ban regardless of intent. As I explained above I was just trying to explain in more clear terms the reason given by UKAD for clearing Whyte, because based on the OP you appeared not to understand the case they were making. I wasn't giving my opinion on how valid that case was.

[QueensburyRules]

There wasn’t an investigation, nothing new was presented and the B sample that exists was never tested. UKAD had all the same facts in front of them and just decided to clear Dillian Whyte for no reason.

I’ve never seen a fighter fail a drug test and get cleared without reason.

Why do we have drug tests then?

I think it’s worth pointing out again that there isn’t a single fighter from the United Kingdom who’s banned by UKAD for using performance enhancing drugs.

- -U clear U BALCO son?

[ShaneMosleySr]

Canelo actually took a hair follicle test after he had the two positive tests and it showed no traces of clenbuterol in his system.

He was popped for having traces of clenbuterol in the parts per trillion range.

The difference is the Nevada State Athletic Commission holds athletes responsible for what’s in their bodies while UKAD only holds foreigners to that standard.

They're very different situations because Canelo didn't have a clear test a few days before his positive, If he had have done it would be possible to establish the maximum possible amount of Clenbuterol that had entered his body (based upon the 36 hour Clenbuterol half life in humans) If, say, like Dillian he had been tested 3 days prior to his positives we could say that there was no way a useful therapeutic dose could have been taken and eliminated down to the 600 - 800pg/ml level detected in his urine within that 3 day window so the only sensible conclusion would be that contaminated meat was the cause. Because there was no earlier test we're left not knowing whether Canelo's results were due to contaminated meat eaten a few days before his tests or deliberate dosing ceasing maybe a week or two prior.

EDIT: But yes, in general I am in favour of a zero tolerence approach... ie that he should have served a minimum ban regardless of intent. As I explained above I was just trying to explain in more clear terms the reason given by UKAD for clearing Whyte, because based on the OP you appeared not to understand the case they were making. I wasn't not giving my opinion on how valid that case was.

[BodiesInFlight]

It's a weird culture over there. In the states we love to crucify our cheaters. In the UK, they do anything possible to protect their boys.

You have no idea what the culture is besides a few posts on this site.

The culture tends to be here to build them up to knock them back down.