Re: t-and-f: Kelli White & narcolepsy

[Richard McCann]

Yes, because my argument is about procedure and athlete's rights.  The 
vigilante attitude that athletes are guilty until proven innocent is 
ridiculous.  My comment was made in the obvious context that someone 
proposed that athletes record everything that they've ingested over their 
entire careers.  There is no provision for human errors in such a 
policy.  To somehow make the anecdotal case of White's applicable to 
absolutely all other cases is ludicrous.  A universally legitimate and 
supportable drug enforcement policy must be able to account for human foibles.

On a procedural point, the vigilantes wanted to immediately move forward 
with penalties WITHOUT any ability of the athlete, White in this case, to 
have a hearing.  Perhaps White did have a legitimate explanation.  NONE of 
us had ANY knowledge of whether her explanation was true or not.  The 
vigilantes would just immediately move to the conclusion that she was 
guilty solely because she failed to declare the drug on the precompetition 
list.

I agree that the Mondafil scandal is now expanding, and we don't yet even 
understand the full implications of its use.   But the discovery of wider 
use has come from drug testing, not whether an athlete has declared the 
drug or not.

RMc

At 02:40 PM 10/27/2003 -0800, t-and-f-digest wrote..
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 20:07:52 -0400
From: "Martin J. Dixon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: t-and-f: Kelli White & narcolepsy
Given the most recent, and what is sure to be more, revelations, are we still
going with this?
Richard McCann wrote:

> I don't know why we
> should hold athletes to an even higher standard than ourselves--in fact I
> find it hypocritical.  You're implying that White should have gone so far
> as record absolutely everything that she ingested--where does she make the
> cutoff as to what to report?  She may not have realized that the drug had
> some type of stimulant.