Kamila Valieva: Anti-doping Case and Follow-ups

[Warwick360]

Actually if you watch the broadcast again, Trusova seems pretty fine after Sherbakova's skate and you can see her with Anna in K&C with Kaori pretty OK. But once Valieva bombed she flew off the handle! I think she was ready for Valieva's gold but was not for Anna's gold.

I don't believe that because when Anna was in Kiss and Cry, she was fine. But we didn't see her after Anna's scores were announced.

When Valieva was in Kiss and Cry, Trusova was no where to be seen, which only led me to the conclusion that Trusova's meltdown happened right after Anna's score came and the realisation of loss set in. But I could be wrong, although I highly doubt it.

Edit: Also, I'd like to emphasise that I did watch different broadcastings and none gave a different impression. All the same. Both in Euro and in BBC.

 

[[email protected]]

CAS protocol is there https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/OG_22_08-09-10_Arbitral_Award__publication_.pdf

Some remarks. First of all, I read through the description of trimetadizin

При приеме внутрь триметазидин быстро абсорбируется из желудочно-кишечного тракта (ЖКТ) его максимальная концентрация в плазме крови достигается в среднем за 5 часов. Более 24 часов концентрация триметазидина в плазме крови поддерживается на уровнях превышающих или равных 75% от максимальной.

Translation: after taking inside trimetadizin quickly absorbs. Its concentration reaches peak on average in 5 hours. For more than 24 hours concentration in blood is at the level at or above 75% of the maximum.

This is important info. The half-life of 7 hours which many referred to as the proof of drug's short life has little to do with its concentration in blood/urine because the info also says that 60% of it is not absorbed by the body and is taken out as is in urine. That's the point of half-life: within some hours more than half of trimetadizin is taken out of the body as it was not absorbed. So that the half life is absolutely useless notion here.

The important question is what is the time function for the absorbed trimetadizin - which is doping if taken on purpose. There is also an answer: peak concentration in blood is 100 ng/ml and it stays for one 35 mg pill at the level of 75% of the maximum for at least 24 hours. so, trimetadizin stays in the body for days and looks like a dubious thing to use detection wise in the first place.

One can do a quick estimate of concentration in urine. As there is 5 l of blood in Kamila and she "produces" about 1 l of urine per day if her blood cleans up in 10 days from 100 ng/ml maximum to 0 the average concentration of trimetadizin in urine would be 50 ng/ml. The report says about 2.1 ng/ml So this means that either she took this 1 pill (why?) really long time ago or the dosage that she consumed was 1-2 mg which is a small fraction of a 35 or 80 mg pill. Then accidental intake becomes very feasible.

It's not over, folks, no matter how many times you repeat: "she was caught!"

 

[pearly]

No, it's not until sample B is open

Interesting how we haven't heard much about sample B and nobody seemed to rely on that very much. Instead, they came out with the narrative explaining how the substance got in her system. It seems as if they pretty much expect the B to come back positive as well. (Although we've all heard what Rodchenko had to say about that.)

 

[whatif]

CAS protocol is there https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/OG_22_08-09-10_Arbitral_Award__publication_.pdf

Some remarks. First of all, I read through the description of trimetadizin

При приеме внутрь триметазидин быстро абсорбируется из желудочно-кишечного тракта (ЖКТ) его максимальная концентрация в плазме крови достигается в среднем за 5 часов. Более 24 часов концентрация триметазидина в плазме крови поддерживается на уровнях превышающих или равных 75% от максимальной.

Translation: after taking inside trimetadizin quickly absorbs. Its concentration reaches peak on average in 5 hours. For more than 24 hours concentration in blood is at the level at or above 75% of the maximum.

This is important info. The half-life of 7 hours which many referred to as the proof of drugs short life has little to do with its concentration in blood/urine because the info also says that 60% of it is not absorbed by the body and is taken out as is in urine. That's the point of half-life: within some hours more than half of trimetadizin is taken out of the body as it was not absorbed. So that the half life is absolutely useless notion here.

The important question is what is the time function for the absorbed trimetadizin - which is doping if taken on purpose. There is also an answer: peak concentration in blood is 100 ng/ml and it stays for one 35 mg pill at the level of 75% of the maximum for at least 24 hours. so, trimetadizin stays in the body for days and looks like a dubious thing to use detection wise in the first place.

One can do a quick estimate of concentration in urine. As there is 5 l of blood in Kamila and she "produces" about 1 l of urine per day if her blood cleans up in 10 days from 100 nm/l maximum to 0 the average concentration of trimetadizin in urine would be 50 nm/l. The report says about 2.1 ng/ml So this means that either she took this 1 pill (why?) really long time ago or the dosage that she consumed was 1-2 mg which is a small fraction of a 35 or 80 mg pill. Then accidental intake becomes very feasible.

It's not over folks no matter how many times you repeat: "she was caught!"

I don't think it matters though? They had previous cases for even less doses (as little as 0.5nm/l) where the offenders were still censured or punished.

I am more shocked by the rest of the report where they do confirm that Valieva's main defence is to blame her grandfather, who shared a car ride with her? Really????

 

[el henry]

Sample B is irrelevant if the athlete admits the substance was found in their sample.

Is there now a denial that the substance was found? That was not among the previous defenses (That I saw).

ETA: I do see in a post below that Kamila may be contesting the actual finding.

 

[whatif]

Interesting how we haven't heard much about sample B and nobody seemed to rely on that very much. Instead, they came out with the narrative explaining how the substance got in her system. It seems as if they pretty much expect the B to come back positive as well. (Although we've all heard what Rodchenko had to say about that.)

I doubt we will ever see sample B. It will most likely confirm the result. It won't be in their interest to insist on opening it.

 

[[email protected]]

I don't think it matters though? They had previous cases for even less doses (as little as 0.5nm/l) where the offenders were still censured or punished.

I am more shocked by the rest of the report where they do confirm that Valieva's main defence is to blame her grandfather, who shared a car ride with her? Really????

I think they did it right. The report says:

Moreover, since the substance detected in the
Athlete’s Sample is other than a Substance of Abuse, the Athlete shall
demonstrate at the comfortable satisfaction level that the prohibited substance
entered her system through the use of a contaminated product.

Isn't it important? Looks like it's not straight trimetadizin that was found. They might have not the direct explanation. That's why they resort to the only hypothesis available.

 

[[email protected]]

I doubt we will ever see sample B. It will most likely confirm the result. It won't be in their interest to insist on opening it.

You did not read further:

Moreover, the DADC also took into
consideration that the Athlete’s legal representative disputed the positive results

CAS OG 22/08-22/09-22/10 – Page 8Tribunal Arbitral du Sport
Court of Arbitration for Sport
Tribunal Arbitral del Deporte
of the Sample alleging that the concentration of 2.1 ng/ml, is well below the
technical limit of detection of Trimetazidine, which is 10 ng/ml, and may be a
technical mistake of the sample analysis in the laboratory and she confirmed at
the hearing the intention to request the analysis of the “B” sample

 

[whatif]

I think they did it right. The report says:

Moreover, since the substance detected in the
Athlete’s Sample is other than a Substance of Abuse, the Athlete shall
demonstrate at the comfortable satisfaction level that the prohibited substance
entered her system through the use of a contaminated product.

Isn't it important? Looks like it's not straight trimetadizin that was found. They might have not the direct explanation. That's why they resort to the only hypothesis available.

I think you are confusing the CAS findings with what their report states. This report is not CAS' determinations or basis for their decisions to allow her to compete here. This is just a transcript of what Valieva's defence presented. Not what CAS found or thinks or decided. That will come later after the full investigation is complete and the presented arguments are reviewed.

That's how I understood it.

The simple fact is the drug in question or its traces is on the banned list. The drug or its traces was found in her system. Valieva's defence now confirms that indeed it is true.
That's it!

Nobody cares at this stage whether it's right or not to have this specific drug on the banned list or how the drug entered her body. That's irrelevant in this situation.

I know it's hard for fans to swallow and I understand your frustration and one can launch a crusade to change the system but that's what it is right now.

 

[[email protected]]

I think you are confusing the CAS findings with what their report states. This report is not CAS' determinations or basis for their decisions to allow her to compete here. This is just a transcript of what Valieva's defence presented. Not what CAS found or thinks or decided. That will come later after the full investigation is complete and the presented arguments are reviewed.

That's how I understood it.

The simple fact is the drug in question or its traces is on the banned list. The drug or its traces was found in her system. Valieva's defence now confirms that indeed it is true.
That's it!

Nobody cares at this stage whether it's right or not to have this specific drug on the banned list or how the drug entered her body. That's irrelevant in this situation.

I know it's hard for fans to swallow and I understand your frustration and one can launch a crusade to change the system but that's what it is right now.

I don't understand your points, sorry.

You said that they would never go for sample B. I gave you the passage where they say that they think of a mistake and will surely go for sample B. Then you wrote this text. I suggest not to continue.

 

[el henry]

Very initial reactions to RADA (Rodchenkov Anti Doping Act). Not extended analysis and just my own opinions.

When I first read the posts about this law extending to overseas events, I thought, nah, can't be, exaggerated. Well butter me up and call me a biscuit. It does.

1. The first person ever charged under RADA (in January) resides in the US, but allegedly doped non US athletes at non US comps:

Texas Man Is First Charged Under New Antidoping Law in U.S. (Published 2022)

The law targets people who would skirt doping regulations in international competitions, but it does not apply to major American leagues like the N.F.L. and Major League Baseball.

www.nytimes.com

First Olympic Anti-Doping Charges Filed In Manhattan Federal Court

www.justice.gov

2. RADA prohibits any person, other than an athlete, to knowingly carry into effect, attempt to carry into effect, or conspire with any other person to carry into effect a scheme in commerce to influence by use of a prohibited substance or prohibited method any major international sports competition. 21 U.S.C. § 2402(a).

There is extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction over an offense under this section. 21 USC § 2402 (b). That means, the US considers it a crime prosecutable in the US, even if it didn't happen in the US.

21 U.S. Code § 2402 - Major international doping fraud conspiracies

www.law.cornell.edu

3. One law firm's analysis of the Act:

Rodchenkov Act: the potential impact of controversial new US anti-doping legislation in the fight against international doping conspiracies (via Passle)

On 4 December 2020 the much publicised Rodchenkov Anti-Doping Act 2019 (“the Act”) was signed into United States law. The Act is designed to assist the ...

mse.dlapiper.com

TL; DR:

The Act does allow for prosecution of "doping" violations in the US that occurred outside the US if they affected US athletes. The Act allows harm to other parties such as broadcasters to be taken into account.

Recognition and enforcement of arrest warrants in other countries is a whole separate area of law. Needless to say, should an indictment or warrant even happen, I would never expect Russia to honor it. I wouldn't expect the US to try.

Most serious hypothetical outcome: WADA sustains a violation. Proof is adduced that someone else gave the athlete the banned substance. Warrants are issued for those persons.

Do they ever set foot in the US again?

This is not saying what will happen, this is saying what could.

 

[whatif]

You did not read further:

Moreover, the DADC also took into
consideration that the Athlete’s legal representative disputed the positive results

CAS OG 22/08-22/09-22/10 – Page 8Tribunal Arbitral du Sport
Court of Arbitration for Sport
Tribunal Arbitral del Deporte
of the Sample alleging that the concentration of 2.1 ng/ml, is well below the
technical limit of detection of Trimetazidine, which is 10 ng/ml, and may be a
technical mistake of the sample analysis in the laboratory and she confirmed at
the hearing the intention to request the analysis of the “B” sample

That is another mistake by Valieva's defence just like their grandfather story. If I was her personal lawyer, I would have advised her against that. If sample B confirms the results of sample A they are digging even bigger hole for themselves and for this poor girl. This whole situation appears to me if as their strategy is now to shift blame on her individually and away from her coaching team.

 

[elysium]

It was questionable to allow Kamila skate the individual event, but it was really sad to see her falling apart on ice today.

 

[millie]

I don't understand your points, sorry.

You said that they would never go for sample B. I gave you the passage where they say that they think of a mistake and will surely go for sample B. Then you wrote this text. I suggest not to continue.

It’s not for us to make that decision about Sample B, that decision is not in our hands. The right people will decide that. You suggest not to continue with what?

 

[whatif]

It’s not for us to make that decision about Sample B, that decision is not in our hands. The right people will decide that. You suggest not to continue with what?

I think he/she was responding to me directly because he/she thought I was referring to sample B post. But I responded to his previous post.

 

[Mista Ekko]

I don't believe that because when Anna was in Kiss and Cry, she was fine. But we didn't see her after Anna's scores were announced.

When Valieva was in Kiss and Cry, Trusova was no where to be seen, which only led me to the conclusion that Trusova's meltdown happened right after Anna's score came and the realisation of loss set in. But I could be wrong, although I highly doubt it.

Edit: Also, I'd like to emphasise that I did watch different broadcastings and none gave a different impression. All the same. Both in Euro and in BBC.

Trusova also seemed perplexed when receiving her marks, the mask hides it but you can see it in her eyes and hands.

She was probably holding on to frustration from not being chosen to get a team gold, and from what we gather
from some of her rant she was maybe "promised" some stuff that weren't accurate and she was frustrated by
going back home as the only one without a Gold medal.

I know that she showed good control in all the "official" parts of the event before and after the results, but for about 5-10 minutes there getting ready for the podium with a Eurosport cameraman hovering around she lost her ability to give a damn.

 

[Corwin]

"Now they won't cancel the ceremony," Valieva said and cried during the announcement of the scores for the free program.

So, WADA and the IOC did what they wanted.

 

[macy]

The thing is though she's not better than them whatever she thinks, and she needs someone who is going to tell that to her straight. She is a PHENOMENAL jumping technician- undoubtedly the best female jumper OF ALL TIME, but the judges have sent her the clear message over and over that she cannot win even with all her quads unless she elevates the rest of her skating. She needs coaches who will help her do that.

I do think if she manages to muster the will to go forward she has a very good chance of still being competitive in 4 years; in fact I think she has the best shot of still being competitive in 4 years of all the current top Russian ladies. Hopefully she can face what she needs to improve and work hard to improve it.

this. her coaches have really done her a disservice if they've told her all this time the quads are all she needs to win.

 

[[email protected]]

It’s not for us to make that decision about Sample B, that decision is not in our hands. The right people will decide that. You suggest not to continue with what?

I suggested not to continue with the argument. It is obvious that the matter itself will continue. I don't believe that it was doping here and I do hope that Kamila's name will be cleared.

I have no emotions regarding "the army of vultures" who crushed Kamila mentally. I would be if they did something that I did not expect them to do. But I am here 8 years now - I know what to expect from everyone to get excited. I just suggested not to waste time in the exchanges of opinions which lead nowhere and change no one's ideas about what is going on.

 

[millie]

I think they did it right. The report says:

Moreover, since the substance detected in the
Athlete’s Sample is other than a Substance of Abuse, the Athlete shall
demonstrate at the comfortable satisfaction level that the prohibited substance
entered her system through the use of a contaminated product.

Isn't it important? Looks like it's not straight trimetadizin that was found. They might have not the direct explanation. That's why they resort to the only hypothesis available.

Well according to you, all this is for naught! She was charged with a banned substance in her system TMZ. Now it’s up to the investigators to solve it. They know the dope was in her system, she tried to explain how they got there (the infamous papas mug), now it’s up to the authorities to investigate and find the truth. With all those pieces of information on this thread, I don’t think that we are going to solve ourselves. But there is nothing wrong with us giving our opinion on the subject.