Drug Testers Defend Procedures In Wake Of Jones’ Clean Test
 |
Drug Testers Defend Procedures
Following Jones’ Tests |
With U.S. sprinter Marion Jones’ “B” sample testing negative for EPO after her
“A” sample showed traces of the performance enhancer, “drug testers defended the
test in the face of criticism,” according to Dick Patrick of USA TODAY. WADA member
Gary Wadler: “I don’t think it’s a blow to credibility.” Wadler said, “I’m told
there were 183,000 tests done in WADA labs last year. In less than five the ‘B’
didn’t confirm the ‘A.’” USADA Senior Managing Dir of Legal Affairs & General
Counsel Travis Tygart said, “We stand by its reliability and will continue to
use it.” However, Penn State Univ. professor Chuck Yesalis said, “They took a
body shot. ... Not a knockout punch. A big body shot.” Patrick notes “B” samples
coming back negative “occurs with EPO more than other drugs.” Aegis Sciences Corp.
President David Black said the test “works within the WADA system because the
burden of proof is on the athletes to prove their innocence. If that burden were
shifted to a system to prove the reliability of the test, I think it would have
a difficult time in a court of law.” Patrick writes, “There’s one thing testing
proponents and critics agree on: Leaking test results of ‘A’ samples against USADA
protocol is unfortunate” (USA TODAY, 9/8).
RELIABILITY: Donald Catlin, who tested both Jones’ “A” and “B” samples,
said that he has “full confidence in the accuracy of the EPO test,” but he would
“not comment further about what could have gone wrong with Jones’s B sample” (N.Y.
TIMES, 9/8). WADA Chair Dick Pound: “It shows the system works. In close circumstances,
the benefit of the doubt goes to the athlete. I think athletes should be delighted”
(L.A. TIMES, 9/8). In Chicago, Philip Hersh reports the publicity around
Jones’ case “could serve other athletes by raising further questions about the
reliability of the analysis used to find evidence of the banned oxygen-enhancing
drug” (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, 9/8).
IMPACT ON LEAGUES: In S.F., Fainaru-Wada & Williams write Jones’ negative
“B” sample may be “an opportunity for entities like [MLB] and the [NFL] to defend
their stances against adopting more rigorous policies and employing independent
agencies to oversee those policies.” Anti-doping expert Steven Ungerleider said,
“This does open the door for the skeptics and naysayers -– the NFL and [MLB].
People will continue to take shots at the integrity of testing and the viability
of testing” (S.F. CHRONICLE, 9/8).
DECLARING INNOCENCE: Jones appeared on “GMA” on Friday, where ABC’s Robin
Roberts said to her, “Let me point blank ask you again. Marion Jones, have you
ever, ever taken any type of sports performance-enhancing drug?” Jones: “I’ve
always said, and I will continue to say, that I believe in a drug-free sport.
I have never, ever taken a performance-enhancing drug” (“GMA,” ABC, 9/8).
IS JONES’ EXONERATED? ESPN.com’s Adrian Wojnarowski wrote under the header,
“No Test Can Salvage Jones’ Tarnished Legacy.” Wojnarowski: “You have every right
to doubt the prime of her gold-medal-winning career. Since her [ex-husband C.J.
Hunter], boyfriend (Tim Montgomery) and coach (Trevor Graham) were implicated
in major drug scandals, you have every right to wonder whether she was something
more than an innocent bystander” (ESPN.com, 9/7). USA TODAY’s Jon Saraceno
writes, “It is an Olympian leap of logic to be cleared of any doping in one meet
and then claim that means you never used performance-enhancing drugs” (USA
TODAY, 9/8). In L.A., Steve Dilbeck writes under the header “Jones Hasn’t
Erased Doubts.” Dilbeck: “Her cloud remains and it’s never going away. Her legacy
will be less the five medals she won at the 2000 Olympics in Sydney than the suspicions
of performance-enhancing drugs that advanced her cause” (L.A. DAILY NEWS, 9/8).
|
