I note the following regarding Tom Danielson's 'Positive test for Artificial Testosterone' in 2015:
* Tom Danielson did not test positive for high T/E – the (false?) ‘positive’ was based ONLY on the CIR test
* According to Jonathan Vaughters in an interview I saw (link now lost), the Artificial testosterone was estimated in the PICOGRAMS – which implies only an extremely small difference between the testosterone and the epitestosterone [EDIT - CHOLESTEROL (OR OTHER REFERENCE STEROID) NOT EPITESTOSTERONE] C13/C12 ratios on which this estimate was based.
* The reason the CIR test ‘works’ is that artificial testosterone is made from e.g. soy, which has low C13/C12 ratio, much lower than most foodstuffs from which the body manufactures its own natural testosterone & epitestosterone [EDIT - REFERENCE STEROID]. If you ingest artificial testosterone, then the testosterone (coming partly from the artificial soy-based testosterone) will have lower C13/C12 ratio than the epitestosterone [EDIT - REFERENCE STEROID] (containing higher C13/C12 ratio due to coming largely from non-soy-based foodstuffs having higher C13/C12 ratio).
* HOWEVER - I note that Tom Danielson is now VEGAN (uncommon for athletes). Was he perhaps Vegetarian/semi-vegetarian/Vegan at the time of his ‘positive’ test? Specifically – WAS HE INTERMITTENTLY EATING HIGH QUANTITIES OF SOY-BASED PROTEIN? (which has low C13/C12 ratio) This is a common practice among vegetarians – but likely not tested for specifically in the control group on which WADA based its CIR test???????
* I am not at all an expert at pharmacokinetics, but if I recall correctly, peak epitestosterone and peak testosterone [EDIT - REFERENCE STEROID]in urine from food ingestion come different numbers of hours after food ingestion. Could it be that the epitestosterone [EDIT - REFERENCE STEROID] in his urine came from a non-soy-containing meal containing high C13/C12 ratios, and that his urinary testosterone came from another meal a few hours earlier (or later – I am not sure which way round it is as I cannot recall if it is the testosterone which peaks first or the epitestosterone [EDIT - REFERENCE STEROID] – please can someone look that up?) containing low C13/C12 ratios, thus giving in a difference in the ratios which was interpreted as ‘Artificial testosterone in the picograms’?
Please can someone do the calculations for this, as whilst I do have a degree in physics and a PhD in the Physical sciences (although I please ask that if you know who I am then not to put this on the boards as I prefer to maintain my anonymity as far as the message board goes and don’t want to speak to journalists – if you have a legitimate interest/question then PM me and ask me for my email address), this is not my area of expertise, and I do not want to do a load of calculations on something I don’t understand properly. But I think it is important for someone to do these calculations, as there may well have been a miscarriage of justice. But I don’t know. I want WADA to look into it in terms of whether the CIR test should have some kind of adjustment in its ratification for the ratio differences required for a positive CIR test.
If this hypothesis is correct, then the reason for Tom Danielson’s positive test may well have been ordinary diet and nothing to do with supplement contamination, and if so, then there should have been no ban at all, not even a reduced ban due to ‘unintentional supplement contamination’. Please note that I AM NOT AN EXPERT – I just want the experts to look into this.
Argyle Fan
* Tom Danielson did not test positive for high T/E – the (false?) ‘positive’ was based ONLY on the CIR test
* According to Jonathan Vaughters in an interview I saw (link now lost), the Artificial testosterone was estimated in the PICOGRAMS – which implies only an extremely small difference between the testosterone and the epitestosterone [EDIT - CHOLESTEROL (OR OTHER REFERENCE STEROID) NOT EPITESTOSTERONE] C13/C12 ratios on which this estimate was based.
* The reason the CIR test ‘works’ is that artificial testosterone is made from e.g. soy, which has low C13/C12 ratio, much lower than most foodstuffs from which the body manufactures its own natural testosterone & epitestosterone [EDIT - REFERENCE STEROID]. If you ingest artificial testosterone, then the testosterone (coming partly from the artificial soy-based testosterone) will have lower C13/C12 ratio than the epitestosterone [EDIT - REFERENCE STEROID] (containing higher C13/C12 ratio due to coming largely from non-soy-based foodstuffs having higher C13/C12 ratio).
* HOWEVER - I note that Tom Danielson is now VEGAN (uncommon for athletes). Was he perhaps Vegetarian/semi-vegetarian/Vegan at the time of his ‘positive’ test? Specifically – WAS HE INTERMITTENTLY EATING HIGH QUANTITIES OF SOY-BASED PROTEIN? (which has low C13/C12 ratio) This is a common practice among vegetarians – but likely not tested for specifically in the control group on which WADA based its CIR test???????
* I am not at all an expert at pharmacokinetics, but if I recall correctly, peak epitestosterone and peak testosterone [EDIT - REFERENCE STEROID]in urine from food ingestion come different numbers of hours after food ingestion. Could it be that the epitestosterone [EDIT - REFERENCE STEROID] in his urine came from a non-soy-containing meal containing high C13/C12 ratios, and that his urinary testosterone came from another meal a few hours earlier (or later – I am not sure which way round it is as I cannot recall if it is the testosterone which peaks first or the epitestosterone [EDIT - REFERENCE STEROID] – please can someone look that up?) containing low C13/C12 ratios, thus giving in a difference in the ratios which was interpreted as ‘Artificial testosterone in the picograms’?
Please can someone do the calculations for this, as whilst I do have a degree in physics and a PhD in the Physical sciences (although I please ask that if you know who I am then not to put this on the boards as I prefer to maintain my anonymity as far as the message board goes and don’t want to speak to journalists – if you have a legitimate interest/question then PM me and ask me for my email address), this is not my area of expertise, and I do not want to do a load of calculations on something I don’t understand properly. But I think it is important for someone to do these calculations, as there may well have been a miscarriage of justice. But I don’t know. I want WADA to look into it in terms of whether the CIR test should have some kind of adjustment in its ratification for the ratio differences required for a positive CIR test.
If this hypothesis is correct, then the reason for Tom Danielson’s positive test may well have been ordinary diet and nothing to do with supplement contamination, and if so, then there should have been no ban at all, not even a reduced ban due to ‘unintentional supplement contamination’. Please note that I AM NOT AN EXPERT – I just want the experts to look into this.
Argyle Fan
Last edited: