I was kind of on the fence about it all, not having an opinion, but now, after reading Floyd's blog and then reading the AP article on AOL this morning in which they used the terms:

"his backup doping sample tested positive"
"sample confirmed the initial "adverse analytical finding" for higher-than-allowable levels of testosterone."
"who says the positive finding was due to naturally high testosterone levels"
"high testosterone reading"

I am on Floyd's side. There seems to be a lot of half-truths and obfuscation and misinterpretation of the results by the press. I know from personal experience that people writing articles about things they know only a little about get it wrong quite often. It has taken on a life of its own and the TDF people, UCI, and certainly Phonak are not treating him fairly.

If his testosterone was in the normal range as he says, it would only be fair that the press point that out, and explain that it's the ratio that matters, and not continue stating that it was a "positive" test or higher than allowable levels.

It also doesn't make sense that none of his other samples showed a similar result.

Unfortunately, I don't think he'll beat it. I think the lawsuits will carry on and on and in the meantime they'll strip his title and by the time the lawsuits are over it will be years too late to get his title back. I don't think he did it. Between a rock and a hard place, he is.

Karen