> So, for them to clear her in a matter of days leads me to believe that she
either wasn't guilty or that there >were serious problems with the testing
protocol.
Someone correct me if they know differently, but there WAS a problem with
the testing protocol - they didn't do a blood test. The IAAF procedure is
to do a blood test first, which can detect EPO usage up to 4-6 weeks prior,
followed by a follow-up urine test. The blood test is considered to have a
small possibility of false positives, so a positive blood test is followed
by the EPO urine test, which is considered reliable but can only test for
usage in the pas few days. The two positive tests together constitute a
legally defensible test. Anything else (like Yegorova's test) is apparently
not. So there was no grey area unless the IAAF wanted to ignore they own
rules (which they've done before). The real errors were the French not
doing a blood test and the IAAF publicizing the positive urine test before
looking further into the matter.
Now here's where it is sticky. The urine test is pretty much considered
reliable on its own. It just usually can't pick up EPO more than a few days
prior. I wondered why they didn't just go with the urine test rather than
the combination but perhaps they wanted to get people used to the idea of
blood testing since that will be necessary for the next advancements in drug
testing. The way they did it just makes everyone doubt more about the
process.
But the fact is that she tested positive using the most reliable test. And
word was going around Edmonton that she was one of a number of athletes who
failed the initial blood test in Edmonton but subsequently passed the urine
test. I never heard official confirmation of this and really we shouldn't
have heard anything about those initial blood tests since they constitute
nothing by themselves. But really it appears that Yegorova was let off on a
real technicality. They had to let her off, and it should never have been
made public in the first place, but given the specifics of the technicality
there should be little doubt in our minds that she would have been banned if
the French had done the blood test.
It is unfortunate for her, the sport, and everyone involved that the IAAF
botched this so badly. As I said before, this is a textbook example of why
the U.S. waits until adjudication is complete before releasing names of
failed testees. The only saving grace is that the efforts to get the
single, reliable EPO test approved will certainly be at the forefront.
- Ed Parrot
