Ottey should not have been cleared

[Baddaz]

Ottey should not have been cleared of doping charges
Saturday, 05 January 2008


Drug testing experts are claiming that former Jamaican sprint queen, the legendary Merlene Ottey should not have been cleared of doping charges in 1999.

Ottey was suspended in 1999 after testing positive for the steroid nandrolone, but was later cleared of after her 'B' sample tested negative.

But, head of the accredited laboratory in Montreal, Professor Christane Ayotte, claims Ottey should never have been cleared and that the wrong formula was used in her case.

Professor Ayotte said this resulted in the samples being turned upside down.

She claims Ottey's correct reading based on the concentration of urine should have been 12 nanograms per millimeter , (12ng/ml).

The legal limit for testing positive is 5ng/ml.

Ottey, who is set to earn the bronze medal from the 100 meters at the Sydney Olympics following Marion Jones' doping admission, has maintained her innocence.

[Sickko]

Calculation error saved Ottey — report




THE world-famous sprinter Merlene Ottey should not have been cleared of drug charges in 2000, some of the world’s most prominent experts in drug testing claim.
They reveal that an error of calculation was made in the IAAF (International Amateur Athletic Federation) proceedings, but it was kept secret.
Ottey, 47, is still competing and can compete in an historic eighth Olympic games in Bejing later this year. The women’s record is currently seven Olympic games. A group of experts say that she should not have been allowed to compete in Sydney 2000.
Ottey tested positive for the steroid Nandrolone at a competition in Switzerland in July 1999 and was suspended. She denied having taken illegal drugs and the case was sent to the IAAF Arbitration Panel. Because of the specific gravity (concentration) of the urine sample, the test result was corrected from 15 ng/ml to 4,53 ng/ml. The threshold for testing positive is 5 ng/ml.
The panel decided that there were no grounds to uphold the suspension of Ottey. The ruling of the IAAF Arbitration Panel was final and binding.
Christiane Ayotte, professor and head of the accredited laboratory in Montreal, was a member of the expert group that met after the decision in July 2000.
“The sample shouldn’t have been corrected at all,” Christiane Ayotte says. “And when they did, they used the wrong formula. It was a very stupid mistake. They turned it upside down.”
According to the expert group the test result, after correction of the urinary concentration, should have been 12 ng/ml.
“The problem is that no one from the IAAF side was able to correct this formula during the Arbitration. Later the arbitrators wrote that they were misled by the Ottey expert, but that it was too late,” Christiane Ayotte says.
The experts sent a letter to IAAF and wanted the organisation to make this public. The experts wrote: “Under no circumstances, other than misapplication of the calculation, could a concentration ever be corrected from 15 ng/ml to 4,53 ng/ml…
“The method used at the Arbitration Panel seems to have been Method 1 but with the erroneous use of the formula for Method 2… Finally we feel that this incorrect calculation and application of the IOC recommendation must be publicly disclosed and denounced. The athlete’s experts have misled the Panel.”
But IAAF did not go public.
“Even if it was a clear case I don’t think you should publicly question a court ruling,” says Arne Ljungqvist, at the time vice-president of IAAF.
And now, seven years later, Christiane Aoytte says she has a greater understanding of IAAF’s decision.
“I recognise that it was difficult for them. Because the ruling was final and binding they had no further action to take. It was a really bad decision, but IAAF lost the case already during the Arbitration.”
Ottey maintains her innocence: “It has been proved that the body can produce this Nandrolone hormone. I’m not an expert in this, but I do know that I have never taken Nandrolone,” she says.
Ottey holds the women’s record for olympic medals: eight. She will soon get another. She will receive the bronze medal for 200 metres in Sydney 2000, after the gold was taken away from Marion Jones.
— Johan Lindber


OTTEY... tested positive for Nandrolone in July 1999

[Sickko]

I dont believe there was any error, she is part of the bigger IAAF conspiracy that kept many drug taking athletes competing even after they were found to be dirty, Americans, Europeans, the whole bag of them.

The IAAf had a bigger problem on their hands than they could handle and also colluded in allowing 'dirty athletes' to continue running.

[Assasin]

It also could have been a mistake in the first intial testing as well. If them screw up a nobody's fault but their own, can't blame Ottey fi that.

[Gamma]

amen!

yuh betta just 'low my merlene yuh hear missa psycho! sarry ... mi mean sickko!

[Sickko]

Ok so Ottey was clean and EVERY OTHER runner who beat her weere dirty?

You also believe Asafa is a clean as a new brand roll of Charmin right? and Tyson Gay and all the others are as dirty as when come sout of the sewers?

[Mosiah]

Yes. What?

[Assasin]

it is not so much what I believe, it is what evidence them have.

I am not sure who is clean but I know Ottey was no hurry come up or overnight sensation, just like how Campbell is not. It is easier to believe when a runner has improved drastically over a period of time bu not someone who a run great times from class three a Vere.

If them a accuse her them need fi come good and nuh badda with the flimsy thing.

[Gamma]

yuh got that right!!!