Originally Posted by
work4bike
I think it's totally wrong to think someone is guilty based entirely on the guilt of others. Yes, she did fail the test, but these tests have been getting much more sensitive and there are many other points already made here and elsewhere on why this doesn't seem to be a case of doping.
For the record, I think she was guilty because she had a banned substance in her body.
Note: regardless of how it got there, it's the athlete's responsibility. So even if she ordered beef but got pork instead, and that pork happened to be in the ~2% of the pork in the USA that has this substance, and she happened to consume enough of it to show up on a test (I've heard 3/4 of a pound), she's still guilty.
Of course, that's all about as likely (Occam's Razor anyone?) as an elite athlete, in a sport with many dopers, not knowing about Nandrolone... which she also claims.