Comments on: Jamaicans and footballers: how to interpret a single urine sample http://www.weareforensic.co.uk/jamaicans-and-footballers-how-to-interpret-a-single-urine-sample/ A body of evidence... Mon, 03 Apr 2017 13:51:01 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.1 By: Dr Tom Bassindale http://www.weareforensic.co.uk/jamaicans-and-footballers-how-to-interpret-a-single-urine-sample/#comment-10972 Mon, 03 Apr 2017 13:51:01 +0000 http://www.weareforensic.co.uk/?p=2482#comment-10972 In reply to Christiaan Bartlett.

Thanks Christiaan, I agree it is a real thing, it looks like China and Mexico have a particular issue, amongst others. It looks like they went for a blanket 1 ng/mL threshold for these retested samples. Will link to Wada press release when at home!

]]> By: Christiaan Bartlett http://www.weareforensic.co.uk/jamaicans-and-footballers-how-to-interpret-a-single-urine-sample/#comment-10971 Mon, 03 Apr 2017 08:01:00 +0000 http://www.weareforensic.co.uk/?p=2482#comment-10971 The contaminated meat causing clenbuterol positives is a real thing:
https://www.wada-ama.org/en/media/news/2011-10/wada-withdraws-cas-appeal-in-case-of-mexican-footballers
but as you say this exoneration maybe only possible because players were tested several times over a short period rather than having a single sample in isolation.
Also possible in China? Be careful what you eat!

]]>