Laura Barquero tests positive for banned substance

[BlissfulSynergy]

She's not a minor.

Is that the only reason why Valieva was allowed to skate though!?

 

[Amei]

Is that the only reason why Valieva was allowed to skate though!?

It was literally the first thing they listed in their decision for dismissing the appeal to reinstate her suspension so it was certainly a factor if not the main factor

 

[BlissfulSynergy]

It was literally the first thing they listed in their decision for dismissing the appeal to reinstate her suspension so it was certainly a factor if not the main factor

Yeah, I thought it's clear I'm being sarcastic. But that was clearly an excuse in any case, and not the only reason for their decision.

 

[Draculus]

Even so, TMZ is also a banned drug. What's important now is not which drugs are more dangerous.

Another attempted deflection, as usual, but are you trying to claim there's been enough study of trimetazidine to show both that it's not effective for doping and that it's also not dangerous to otherwise-healthy 15-year-olds? If so, point us to the studies.

Cmon, can you ppl read? The was a claim, quoting below:

However, are they really going to give her a 18 month suspension, when perhaps Kamila is getting away with a far more generous punishment with a more serious case, just because of her age? Again, this really doesn´t seem fair play to the athletes.

"a more serious case". And I am asking a very simple question:

Sorry, but I do not get why Kamilla's case is more serious. Can you make it in one sentence?

And as a reply I got various words about importance, about that I'm claiming something, a talk about how bad is the whole situation, how bad is that Kamilla used doping, ppl tried to guess what I meant, etc. But nobody had answered that simple question and that's the only thing I wanted.

 

[norwegianfairytale]

Cmon, can you ppl read? The was a claim, quoting below:

"a more serious case". And I am asking a very simple question:

And a reply I got various words about importance, about that I'm claiming something, a talk about how bad is the whole situation, how bad is that Kamilla used doping, ppl tried to guess what I meant, etc. But nobody had answered that simple question and that's the only thing I wanted.

I gave you my reply (and several others gave it too) and it´s not my problem that you don´t feel it was a reply to your question. I have nothing more to say about this matter, so we can agree on disagree, and I regret even bringing it up because this thread is going far off topic and I should have known better to bring this topic into discussion in this case. But unfortunately in light of everything that has happened this cases will continue to be compared and discussed in the future, in forum threads or elsewhere.

 

[flotsam]

Cmon, can you ppl read? The was a claim, quoting below:

"a more serious case". And I am asking a very simple question:

And as a reply I got various words about importance, about that I'm claiming something, a talk about how bad is the whole situation, how bad is that Kamilla used doping, ppl tried to guess what I meant, etc. But nobody had answered that simple question and that's the only thing I wanted.

Can you read? I merely requested published studies that would substantiate your claim that trimetazidine is neither effective for doping nor dangerous to (young) athletes. If you have no evidence for that claim, I expect that you won't repeat these baseless statements again in the future.

 

[Draculus]

Can you read? I merely asked for published studies that would substantiate your claim that trimetazidine is neither effective for doping nor dangerous to (young) athletes. If you have no evidence for that claim, I expect that you won't repeat these baseless statements again in the future.

My question was about the reasoning behind somebody's opinion. I would expect that anybody can explain why they have the opinion they express. Your question requires much more effort to answer, comparing with efforts to 'explain your opinion'. I do not have such time.

 

[flotsam]

My question was about the reasoning behind somebody's opinion. I would expect that anybody can explain why they have the opinion they express. Your question requires much more effort to answer, comparing with efforts to 'explain your opinion'. I do not have such time.

Stating that trimetazidine is ineffective for doping and not dangerous to (young) athletes is not an 'opinion'; it is a truth claim. Until you 'have such time' to find the requested studies, I think it's best you avoid making the claim again - that is, if you don't want to look like a liar.

 

[mrrice]

I know someone that snuck in urine to pass a drug test for their job, so unfortunately there are some requirements that make a third party be present for 'collection' (I've had to do for my job as well, in my case they did give privacy just had to glance to make sure your sample wasn't pre-packaged)

This used to happen in our district before pot became legal. We actually went to see the on campus nurse, peed in a cup and left. Things changed after I left. I guess one of the coaches had a fake sample hidden on the bathroom and he was caught. That's why they started having people pee in front of the tester's.

 

[jenaj]

Is that the only reason why Valieva was allowed to skate though!?

Actually, yes. Or more accurately, because she is a "protected person," under age 16.

 

[jenaj]

Whether they should be able to do so or not is immaterial. The rules are what they are now and we can only work what with what we have in place at the current time. CAS can only rule on the regulations as they are, not as we would like them to be.

And the rules as they are now say that Valieva can skate at Worlds and Barquero can't.

And frankly, if she was dumb enough to use a steroid cream known to cause doping problems, as an adult in charge of her own decisions, as is now being reported, then she does not deserve to.

The rules don't say Valieva/ protected persons can't be provisionally suspended. The CAS decided that because the rules don't address provisional suspension for protected persons, she shouldn't be suspended. But if the rules don't make an exception for protected persons, then there is no exception. Valieva and Barquero should receive (or should have received) the same treatment under the rules as they are now.

 

[anonymoose_au]

Sorry, but I do not get why Kamilla's case is more serious. Can you make it in one sentence?

Laura could have ingested the steroid by accident whereas the chance Kamila ingested TMZ accidentally is slim to none, she probably didn't know what it was but adults gave it to her and should be investigated as top priority.

 

[Draculus]

Laura could have ingested the steroid by accident whereas the chance Kamila ingested TMZ accidentally is slim to none, she probably didn't know what it was but adults gave it to her and should be investigated as top priority.

So the 'seriousness' is in the awareness, somebody's intent, not in what actually happened, am I got you right?

 

[anonymoose_au]

So the 'seriousness' is in the awareness, somebody's intent, not in what actually happened, am I got you right?

Obviously, if Laura accidentally ingested the steroid she was very stupid and if she did it on purpose then that's even worse.

But Kamila is under 16, she has been screwed over by her team (I don't believe for one minute her Grandpa has anything to do with this). If serious questions aren't been asked by the Russian Figure Skating Fed then it just compounds the issue even more.

 

[skatedreamer]

Obviously, if Laura accidentally ingested the steroid she was very stupid and if she did it on purpose then that's even worse.

But Kamila is under 16, she has been screwed over by her team (I don't believe for one minute her Grandpa has anything to do with this). If serious questions aren't been asked by the Russian Figure Skating Fed then it just compounds the issue even more.

Assuming that the amount of the steroid in the cream wasn't nearly enough to have any performance-enhancing effect, I can't imagine why Laura would have done this on purpose. Of course she should have been more aware of the ingredients but it just seems to me like a dumb mistake.

In Kamila's case, there was real purpose/intent, but it didn't come from Kamila. IMO it came from the doctor or whoever gave her the TMZ without her knowledge. As for the Grandpa story, right there with you: there's no way I'm buying that one.

 

[Draculus]

In Kamila's case, there was real purpose/intent, but it didn't come from Kamila. IMO it came from the doctor or whoever gave her the TMZ without her knowledge. As for the Grandpa story, right there with you: there's no way I'm buying that one.

I'm failing to get why ppl ok with cream story but not with granpa. Can't find any explanation other than bias.

 

[iceskater10]

I'm failing to get why ppl ok with cream story but not with granpa. Can't find any explanation other than bias.

Really???

 

[anonymoose_au]

I'm failing to get why ppl ok with cream story but not with granpa. Can't find any explanation other than bias.

Well maybe if the story was that Grandpa dissolved his tablets in water and Kamila accidentally drank from the glass it would be... slightly more believable? But then she wouldn't have drunk the whole thing, it would have tasted terrible! Also the timeline doesn't seem to work either, apparently the TMZ would have needed to be ingested the day before the positive result but Kamila and her Grandpa were in completely different cities at that time?

Then there's the whole delay with the sample too, who knows maybe there is something nefarious going on there. Has RUSADA made any statements about investigating that? Worlds is coming up so I would have thought that's top priority?

Plus there's the dodgy as Heck Team Doctor with the two previous doping offences?

This is probably off-topic on this thread, but it has to be said it's quite an odd case.

 

[Amei]

I'm failing to get why ppl ok with cream story but not with granpa. Can't find any explanation other than bias.

Well the cream story has happened before, whereas drank after grandpa (during a pandemic) and ingested enough of his meds to flag a drug test comes off as much more of stretch, but its negligence on both athlete's part

 

[BlissfulSynergy]

Actually, yes. Or more accurately, because she is a "protected person," under age 16.

It's not the only reason. It's their go-to reason which is also being used as an excuse because they did not want to suspend Valieva during the Olympics. The outcome is quite similar to how Russia was only given a slap on the wrist for their 2014 Olympics doping scandals.

Furthermore, if their interest was so genuine about 'protecting' Valieva as a minor, then where was the protection against her being given an unnecessary and illegal drug to ensure quick physical recovery for better training endurance?