There has been a precedent set.
In the Asian Games 2002, I believe a woman athlete was tested with something similar to nandrolone. When the B sample was tested, it was still over the limit, but it was lower.
Then I believe she submitted her pee pee again for a DNA Test, and they proved that the pee pee submitted id not match the one that they just received.
Also vaiby, what are you on about. 6.2 is NOT high.
Site said:
A limit of 2 ng per ml of urine (set by the International Olympic Committee) is the maximum concentration thought possible to occur in human body by 'natural means', and if this is exceeded the drug test is considered positive. Since some samples given by athletes have shown levels up to 100 times higher than this, the conclusion is that the athletes must have been taking extra quantities of the drug to enhance their performance.
http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/motm/nandrolone/nandc.htm
That would be 200 ng per mL
Asif is 6 ng per mL.
Also, there are WAY too many cases with Nandrolone testing being found to be inaccurate.
Vaiby, you may be a doctor, but I'm not sure you specialize in drug testing.
Have a look at this -
UCLA said:
Studies performed by UCLA's Catlin and by researchers at the Cologne lab, then under the International Olympic Committee, showed in 2000 and 2002 that a wide range of nutritional supplements commonly taken by elite athletes were contaminated with nandrolone and other steroids.
Catlin's research, furthermore, made clear that it was not difficult for tests to distinguish a contamination victim from a cheater. His paper noted that an athlete taking nandrolone in a determined effort to cheat would show levels higher than 100,000 nanograms per milliliter, or parts per billion, of urine.
And vaiby, you say 6.2 is too much? Yet, this research determines that it would actually be 100,000 or higher, if Asif was trying to cheat.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw...0,0,2627563,full.story?coll=la-home-headlines
Vaiby, you may be a doctor, but I think you have been officially owned. 6.2 is NOTHING.
And I am yet to find a source on the 0.8 - 1.0 ng per ml figure - can you please point me to one on that? If it is one of the sources only doctor people can look at, can you please take a screenshot of the relevant information?
Thank you.