- Joined
- Feb 27, 2012
"Proof"???
If WADA has a rule in writing that it would be "proof," please provide a citation.
Ekaterina Bobrova & Dmitri Soloviev
- Thread starter Macassar88
- Start date
"Proof"???
If WADA has a rule in writing that it would be "proof," please provide a citation.
There was no point of checking B sample, the result would be the same. It only delays the outcome. She basically thought it was some kind of mistake and the dose was very small because she only stopped to use it in November. So she hoped to explain and clarify everything in time to make it to the Worlds, but after then the latter came and the dose mentioned there is gigantic. Now it's too late to test B sample.
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2012
Thx, psusanne. Your pdf shows that the rule about the B sample is clearly stated in the WADA code.
I know that lack of awareness of a rule does not exempt anyone from a rule. But I do wonder whether Team Bobrova knew/remembered this rule about the B sample, based on what Snow posted about why she declined testing of the B sample.
So many questions about the whole situation, as Snow says.
Yes, there are so few doping cases in figure skating that the team might not have acted wisely. Maybe they panicked. And there's reason to panic, because if she tells the truth there's still not much than anyone can do to help her. I think she should try to get the B sample tested. If the result is negative, all would be good (but probably not enough time for the whole process until Worlds). If it's negative it wouldn't be worse than it is now.
I feel for them.
Why should it be worse? It has happened that the A sample was positive and the B sample negative. It's the easiest way to proof the athlete's innocence. And if she doesn't know how the melodium got into her system there's a possibility, however small, that it wasn't there in the first place, that samples got mixed up. I don't think that the WADA would hold it against her. Athletes are allowed to proof their innocence. Sharapova f.e. knew that she took it so she knew why she's tested positive and then there's really no need to test the B sample.
About the B sample
The WADA has the B sample as the final prove of an athletes guilt or innocence. It is used to make sure, nobody get´s suspended without prove, call it a fail safe mechanism to protect the athletes. Said B sample, however, must also be analyzed separately and I believe at the same laboratory, which requires shipping and handling and therefore takes time and costs a lot of money. It can be easily manipulated or even made flawed, for instance by breaking the uninterrupted cold chain, wrong handling in the laboratory itself or yes, someone who want´s to damage your reputation...
In theory, the B sample could be positive, or negative and you are innocent, or it can be unreadable and you are innocent as well as with Olga Yegorova in 2001.
If they refuse to look at the B sample, it actually shows their honest intentions, from my point of view. They don´t try to hide anything, they know it´s there and take responsibility.
I want to point out, however, that I sadly don't have any first hand information from skaters or the ISU / Russian Fed, so please only see my post as speculation under the case, of them not wanting to check the B sample. What´s written in the media, is never a good source, so I would be careful with what you read there and wait until the athletes make an official statement.
The WADA has the B sample as the final prove of an athletes guilt or innocence. It is used to make sure, nobody get´s suspended without prove, call it a fail safe mechanism to protect the athletes. Said B sample, however, must also be analyzed separately and I believe at the same laboratory, which requires shipping and handling and therefore takes time and costs a lot of money. It can be easily manipulated or even made flawed, for instance by breaking the uninterrupted cold chain, wrong handling in the laboratory itself or yes, someone who want´s to damage your reputation...
In theory, the B sample could be positive, or negative and you are innocent, or it can be unreadable and you are innocent as well as with Olga Yegorova in 2001.
If they refuse to look at the B sample, it actually shows their honest intentions, from my point of view. They don´t try to hide anything, they know it´s there and take responsibility.
I want to point out, however, that I sadly don't have any first hand information from skaters or the ISU / Russian Fed, so please only see my post as speculation under the case, of them not wanting to check the B sample. What´s written in the media, is never a good source, so I would be careful with what you read there and wait until the athletes make an official statement.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2016
I still believe in her innocence, but, let's face it, Russia's been doping since the 1960s. It pains me to write this, as I truly admired Russian and other Eastern European sports people growing up and I certainly love the present Team Russia skaters, but look at athletics alone! After the Wall came down in Germany, a lot of athletes, including skaters, told the truth about performance enhancing substances. Therefore, there is no doubt in my mind that there are still elements who try this on. Whether the athlete in question is aware of it or not. Funny, the coincidence with Sharapova. Sounds like some international sporting body raided the medical HQ in Russia. Anyway, Dima and Katia, stay strong, we're behind you! 
No one, including Ekaterina, denies that there was Mildronat in her blood. She never said there wasn't. She only says she didn't use it herself or knew it was used without her knowing of that fact. So there is no need to test 'B' sample, it's as easy as that.
Ukrainian biathlon coach (three biathlonists from Ukraine were banned for using Mildronat) says they have an official independent conclusion of some French laboratory that says that Mildronat could accumulate in athlete's body and stay there up to 120 days. It happens when athlete use it constantly for a long amount of time.
It's here: http://www.sports.ru/biathlon/1037882108.html
Ukrainian biathlon coach (three biathlonists from Ukraine were banned for using Mildronat) says they have an official independent conclusion of some French laboratory that says that Mildronat could accumulate in athlete's body and stay there up to 120 days. It happens when athlete use it constantly for a long amount of time.
It's here: http://www.sports.ru/biathlon/1037882108.html
Last edited:
I still believe in her innocence, but, let's face it, Russia's been doping since the 1960s. It pains me to write this, as I truly admired Russian and other Eastern European sports people growing up and I certainly love the present Team Russia skaters, but look at athletics alone! After the Wall came down in Germany, a lot of athletes, including skaters, told the truth about performance enhancing substances. Therefore, there is no doubt in my mind that there are still elements who try this on. Whether the athlete in question is aware of it or not. Funny, the coincidence with Sharapova. Sounds like some international sporting body raided the medical HQ in Russia. Anyway, Dima and Katia, stay strong, we're behind you!
That's two different cases. Mildronat was legal up to 2016, and 40.000 athletes (according to WADA) used it. Yes, you can call it a system if you want. But it's not the same as athletics, where strong banned drugs were used knowingly.
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2016
Okay, fair point, Snow63. Well, it came on the index in January, experts must have known that this was on the cards. The Europeans were at the end of Jan... Don't worry, don't want to split hairs over it, I'm not a doctor.
Thank you, this is very interesting to know.
Didn't she say that they expected that the test result would only show traces of the substance? That would have been explainable, because she could have taken Meldonium in December. But a large amount of the substance was found and Ekaterina and her team were surprised by that. The amount of the banned substance will make a difference in the final WADA decision. If it's true that Meldonium can accumulate in the body this could all become a very different story. I would be surprised if it really could accumulate (the WADA tests normally should take this into account). Anyway, she says that she didn't take it and doesn't know how that large amount got into her system and because of that I think it would be smart to have the B sample tested. There could be a mix up or a false positve test result.
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2011
Yes her continuing to decline to have the B sample tested is what really doesn't ring true to me in all of this. If true that she really thought initially that there were going to be trace amounts she could explain away, I don't understand why on receiving more detailed papers she did not immediately say 'since to my knowledge this seems impossible, I changed my mind and want the B sample tested'. Why she isn't at least trying to get the B sample tested, if everything she is saying is true, blows my mind.
We're repeating ourself again and again. The testing of 'B' sample is taking long time, weeks at least. They didn't want that delay. She basically thought, 'Oh man, I just stopped to use it in November so there probably some traces left in my blood'. See? She thought it was traces AND if she thought that, it means that 'B' sample will contain traces of Mildronat too. So there was NO POINT of testing that 'B' sample. None. Zero. It would only be a wasting of time. So they decided (I'm sure it was not Katia's sole decision, but the Fed's as well) to fix that 'misunderstanding' as soon as possible and contacted WADA. When WADA responded, and Katia saw the amount of that thing in her blood, it was once again pointless, not to mention too late. Because it's there, in her blood, and she can do nothing about it now.
Since she declined to test her 'B' sample, she confirmed basically that she's 'guilty' and it will be counted during the negotiation of the time of her disqualification. After her 'B' sample test she would be 'proved guilty' too. It's not 'at least trying to get the B sample tested', it's more like to choose a lesser from two evils.
Just think about it. It's a rational and logical decision. I absolutely 100% agree with it, and I most probably would do the same in her position.
Because it would be positive too.
Last edited:
I support Katia!
So great to see Lena & Zhenia insta posts!
Yeah, I'm actually surprised by support. Usually it's not very welcomed when athletes show open support for other athletes who got caught on doping. So that's a toughing gesture, that's for sure.
Similar threads
