A New Doping Defense

Not actually such a new defense. Remember when Tammy Thomas argued that her
positive was due to conversion of a "morning after" contraceptive? The
arguments are specious from a biochemical point of view. I suspect that the
plan is more to cause confusion among those not familiar with biochemistry.
An argument that there was contamination of the product with a banned agent
might be more reasonable. Neosaldina is a product sold to treat migraine so
it is actually quite believable that it might contain a banned stimulant,
either intentionally and off label or as a contaminant. Paracetamol is, for
Americans, acetaminophen or Tylenol. Certainly not metabolized to a banned
stimulant and probably less likely to be contaminated.

Mike Murray

"B. Lafferty" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Bodily transformation. From CyclingNews:

Calle said that she had had headaches before the race, and took some
paracetamol and some "neosaldina", which according to her doctor did not
contain any banned substances. "We think that one of these products
transformed itself in my body, and this resulted in the positive test,"

she

Quoted message said:

said, adding that she will now undergo a series of tests at the Bogota
anti-doping laboratory to try to show her innocence.

--
Peloton Pigs--Flying Since 1991

"Mike Murray" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:V4mZc.218473$8_6.179521@attbi_s04...

Quoted message said:

Not actually such a new defense. Remember when Tammy Thomas argued that
her
positive was due to conversion of a "morning after" contraceptive?

I wasn't aware of that. Of course, that raises another interesting
question.

B. Lafferty said:

"Mike Murray" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:V4mZc.218473$8_6.179521@attbi_s04...

Quoted message said:

Not actually such a new defense. Remember when Tammy Thomas argued that
her
positive was due to conversion of a "morning after" contraceptive?

I wasn't aware of that. Of course, that raises another interesting
question.

I'll say it:

Who was the lucky guy?

"gym gravity" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty said:

"Mike Murray" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:V4mZc.218473$8_6.179521@attbi_s04...

Quoted message said:

Not actually such a new defense. Remember when Tammy Thomas argued that
her
positive was due to conversion of a "morning after" contraceptive?

I wasn't aware of that. Of course, that raises another interesting
question.

I'll say it:

Who was the lucky guy?

Mother always told me that there was someone for everyone.

"gym gravity" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty said:

"Mike Murray" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:V4mZc.218473$8_6.179521@attbi_s04...

Quoted message said:

Not actually such a new defense. Remember when Tammy Thomas argued that
her
positive was due to conversion of a "morning after" contraceptive?

I wasn't aware of that. Of course, that raises another interesting
question.

I'll say it:

Who was the lucky guy?

Crit Pro
Dave

"gym gravity" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty said:

"Mike Murray" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:V4mZc.218473$8_6.179521@attbi_s04...

Quoted message said:

Not actually such a new defense. Remember when Tammy Thomas argued that
her
positive was due to conversion of a "morning after" contraceptive?

I wasn't aware of that. Of course, that raises another interesting
question.

I'll say it:

Who was the lucky guy?

Crit Pro
Dave

Dave H said:

"gym gravity" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty said:

"Mike Murray" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:V4mZc.218473$8_6.179521@attbi_s04...

>Not actually such a new defense. Remember when Tammy Thomas argued that
>her
>positive was due to conversion of a "morning after" contraceptive?

I wasn't aware of that. Of course, that raises another interesting
question.

I'll say it:

Who was the lucky guy?

Crit Pro

But I thought Crit Pro had no balls ...

--

--------------------

Remove CLOTHES to reply

In article <BcvZc.221408$8_6.194421@attbi_s04>,

Tim Lines said:

Dave H said:

"gym gravity" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty wrote:

>"Mike Murray" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>news:V4mZc.218473$8_6.179521@attbi_s04...
>
>
>>Not actually such a new defense. Remember when Tammy Thomas argued that
>>her
>>positive was due to conversion of a "morning after" contraceptive?
>
>
>I wasn't aware of that. Of course, that raises another interesting
>question.
>
>

I'll say it:

Who was the lucky guy?

Crit Pro

But I thought Crit Pro had no balls ...

Well, you don't need balls to do that. Of course, not having any does
make the morning after pill a rather moot point, doesn't it?

--
tanx,
Howard

Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind.
Albert Einstein

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

"Tim Lines" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:BcvZc.221408$8_6.194421@attbi_s04...

Quoted message said:

Dave H said:

"gym gravity" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty wrote:

>"Mike Murray" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>news:V4mZc.218473$8_6.179521@attbi_s04...
>
>
>>Not actually such a new defense. Remember when Tammy Thomas argued

that

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>her
>>positive was due to conversion of a "morning after" contraceptive?
>
>
>I wasn't aware of that. Of course, that raises another interesting
>question.
>
>

I'll say it:

Who was the lucky guy?

Crit Pro

But I thought Crit Pro had no balls ...

Tammy had enough balls for both of them