Daisy wrote:I agree but my point is that anything that comes throught the system will be on WADA's radar screen.
The problem is the ones NOT on their radar screen.
OK, but . . . [hang in there, I think I'm closing in on SOMETHING here!] aren't there other things, like HGH, that are used legitimately by medicine, but cannot be accounted for by the current drug testing technology?
iirc the problem with HGH was not it's detectability ( it's very easy to detect ), but that the normal range was so huge, that it's was virtually impossible to really assign a cut-off line as being definite doping ( similar thing with testo, where they didn't get anywhere with absolute testo level, but fortunately that had a closely-linked associate, epitesto which went up in tandem with normal human production of testo, so they figured on 4:1 as being limit of natural production ( body normally produces linked amount of these in something like a 1:1 ratio - external testo won't put up epi-testo, so ratio starts shooting up )
someone will have to look up HGH range, but it was something like 100 - 900 units/cc & a doper coud have it near the 900 & you still coudn't accuse them of doping, as he/she coud just turn around & say that's still in the normal range & normal body production
anyhows, all the HGH nowdays is synthetically derived & they look for the synthetic part ( same as with EPO test )
the main reason they can test for these nowdays is because they are now all synthetically derived