Ray Cipollini writes, over at the Daily Peloton – Pro Cycling News, about the Anti-Doping Agencies and the presumption of guilt existing in the cycling world. HereÃ¢â¬â¢s some of what he has to say:
Why do we have UNCONDITIONAL faith in the ADA, even when there is no way to verify their usually inflammatory and inaccurate statements?
Why is it that I have never seen an ADA or NGB or the media retract an accusation when the athlete was subsequently exonerated?
The ADAs define their own rules, interpret their own rules, create their own science, hide behind closed doors, use Ã¢â¬Åindependent expertsÃ¢â¬Â that are appointed by and paid for by the ADA, hold the athletes to different standards than they themselves are willing to accept, and have to answer to no one. They would like the general public to believe that they are infallible, and that the athlete has specific rights to mount a defense to a positive test. The fact is that the athlete has virtually no rights, and instead is forced to fight using technicalities in the process, and the ADA (and the ADA approved labs) has an agenda (and the resources) that an individual athlete cannot reasonably defend against. The athlete cannot argue against the positive test result, only the procedures surrounding the testÃ¢â¬Â¦.the ADA has already met their burden of proof, and guess what, you are already guilty.
I believe that the current anti-doping process is completely ass-backwards and tramples on the basic rights of the athletes, for the common good.
I must say that I agree with this argument and I’ve been thinking this way for some time. I still believe Tyler, despite it all… ð There are many questionable findings from these labs, but the ADA are unwilling to discuss the possiblility of false positives. The fact that these labs and scientists are unwilling to accept questioning of their results brings doubt immediately to the forefront of my thinking.
Go read RayÃ¢â¬â¢s letter and make up your own mind.