RBSC

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

WADA’s double standards

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • WADA’s double standards

    This is what we (Jamaicans) need...our press and our experts to be more publicly vocal about the nepotism and the unfair admonishment of punishment of drug offences to smaller countries by WADA.

    Maria Sharapova vs Yohan Blake, et al


    Dr Rachael Irving

    Sunday, April 24, 2016

    In 2009 a young Yohan Blake, Marvin Anderson, Lansford Green, Allodin Fothergill and Sherri-Ann Brooks bought some supplements online. The company claimed it was WADA certified. A few months after they tested positive for Methylexanamine which was not on the banned list then, but WADA claimed it was biologically and structurally similar to Tauminoheptane that was on the banned list.

    Methylexanamine is said to increase the flow of adrenaline, but adrenaline is a hormone produced naturally by the response of the hypothalamus (brain) during the running process. Dr Peter Russell and I went through 100 years of scientific data trying to tell WADA that there was no real science linking Methylexanamine to Tauminoheptane then, and furthermore, it was not on the 2008/2009 banned list. At one stage I got exhausted trying to put the data together to exonerate Blake, et al. I said to Peter then I was tired and wanted out, and I remember Peter saying to me these are poor upcoming Jamaican athletes and history will exonerate us and them.
    http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/sport...tandards_58678
    Hey .. look at the bright side .... at least you're not a Liverpool fan! - Lazie 2/24/10 Paul Marin -19 is one thing, 20 is a whole other matter. It gets even worse if they win the UCL. *groan*. 05/18/2011.MU fans naah cough, but all a unuh a vomit?-Lazie 1/11/2015

  • #2
    Di worl nuh level...Good post !
    THERE IS ONLY ONE ONANDI LOWE!

    "Good things come out of the garrisons" after his daughter won the 100m Gold For Jamaica.


    "It therefore is useless and pointless, unless it is for share malice and victimisation to arrest and charge a 92-year-old man for such a simple offence. There is nothing morally wrong with this man smoking a spliff; the only thing wrong is that it is still on the law books," said Chevannes.

    Comment

    Working...
    X