WADA Boss: FINA Ignored Our Questions On Kylie Palmer For 20 Months After ‘Positive’

Kylie Palmer by Patrick B. Kraemer

FINA stands accused of ignoring WADA. “WADA first requested information from FINA on the case on 5 October 2013, with a reminder sent on 4th December 2013 – both were ignored. More than a year then passed before we were informed on 23 December 2014 that the case had been closed.” – David Howman, head of WADA on the case of Kylie Palmer

All SwimVortex articles are placed in our archive after five days, the library of content available to subscribers.
Log In Register

FINA stands accused of ignoring WADA. “WADA first requested information from FINA on the case on 5 October 2013, with a reminder sent on 4th December 2013 – both were ignored. More than a year then passed before we were informed on 23 December 2014 that the case had been closed.” – David Howman, head of WADA on the case of Kylie Palmer

Comments

Bad Anon

I’m not surprised that FINA authorities ignored the questions put forward to them in 2013, accountability does not seem to exist in their vocabulary. Its a shame that Ms Palmer is now a victim of a process that may drag on for months to come #smh

Verram

I bet you any money that no-one will lose their job in FINA over this… Palmer will probably get her career ended prematurely because she is unable to defend herself more than two years after the fact…

Personal Best

There are a lot of questions:

– What if Kylie Palmer’s samples did exceed the allowable limit. Why did they? Why did FINA ignore them?

– If they did exceed the limit, why wasn’t she able to defend herself? There is no way now to properly build a case, on either side, for either party.

– If they did exceed the limit, and IF Palmer deliberately cheated, why did FINA let a swimmer get away with that?

– On the one hand, it is extremely unfair to suspend Palmer NOW over something which may have been a mistake in 2013, because FINA stuffed up.

– On the other hand, it’s extremely unfair to allow a swimmer to get a free pass.

– If they ignore her test results, how many other swimmers’ have they ignored? How many cheats have gotten away with it?

Lawrie Cox

Oh dear the circus continues down the inevitable vortex. Unfortunately Kylie will be seen as expendable by the blazerati.
Now is the time to for FINA to admit fault and get an expedited hearing giving Kylie some possibility of resuming her career.
Bit like believing in the tooth fairy!!

Ger

Yet another damning report on the behaviour of FINA. With the recent events involving FIFA, it makes one wonder even more so, what level of corruption is taking place there. With regard to drug testing, can one have any confidence that FINA is doing its utmost to police the sport? Is there a level of cover up relating to positive tests, particularly if it involves the top names? I would imagine so. Sporting bodies are in effect, political bodies and thus do not honestly represent their duties. This site has pointed this out regularly. FINA is a mess.

aswimfan

““In the meantime, we will refrain from further comment in order to protect the integrity of the case.”

Ummm….. sure
almost 2 years too late boss

Lorraine Tobin

FINA is a disgrace, has long been so, and could be likened to FIFA

WADA is a disgrace also, for allowing FINA to take from December 2013 to December 2014 to respond inappropriately, and then appeal it.

In the meantime an elite athlete continues to train and compete, all the while unknowingly in jeopardy. Which has flow on effects for her and her team mates. I mean, who remembers what banned substance one might have accidently and unknowingly taken 2 years ago?

Any sanctions, if any, should be backdated to October 2013, for Kylie.

There should be a statute of limitations placed on WADA and FINA so that other swimmers don’t have to go through a process almost 2 years after the fact.

FINA and WADA should both be punished for inefficient and ineffective management !

ApplesAndOranges

She is at least entitled to an expedited hearing a la Cielo and the rest of his PED using teammates.

What irks me is that she is not raising a fuss, at least as far as I can tell. This leads me to believe that maybe, just maybe, she was caught. I don’t know.

Viva la Bang

Kylie cannot comment until the case has been reviewed, FINA are the ones at fault here not Kylie, who has been made a scapegoat for their own incompetence and stupidity, she should sue them!

Viva la Bang

I think WADA’s main beef is with FINA, because of their lack of communication on this, rather than the minute substance that was not recognised by the doping experts as a positive test.

Personal Best

If Palmer did ingest something which contained a banned substance, and she did so for a known reason (known to her and others), then there may be a record of it somewhere.

If it was medication for instance, she and her doctor may have a record of it, so presumably she would be going over all those details.

Todd

In regards to a tribunal hearing, a date will be set when Palmer and her defence team are ready. They’ve asked for time to investigate. It’s not easy to go back two years to investigate potential reasons for this, including if there was potential contamination. Once they are ready they will get a quick hearing so the ball is currently in their court, not a FINA or WADA delay – this time…

Bill Bell

She’s been training steadily lastbtwomyears. Why all of a sudden on the eve of Kazan has this matter come to the fore. Didn’t FINA/WADA have this matter under consideration long ago?.

I can’t recall Austdalia going through all these conundrums in last 30 years.

First Mags goes under the knife, then that girl got cancer and had to withdraw and now Palmer. Well maybe the Camobells will get married next month and skip,Kazan, Seebohm will stay home to focus on Rio and that young male distance star who looks to be Second Coming of Hackett/Oerkins will go to World Juniors for more seasoning. Then Sprengervwill announce his knee is too hurt to compete, Lawson will miss the plane and the NcJeons will compete in the Lifesaving Champiinshios instead.

That ought to get Sjidtrom her five golds!

Craig Lord

Thanks Todd, that makes sense … though the delay they seek is one forced by FINA/WADA, of course, not one taken by choice but through circumstance.

Aaron

FINA should never have cleared Palmer in the first case.

Ben Nichols at WADA didn’t mention this but both Palmer’s A and B samples both showed traces, although fina’s own investigation showed nothing.

If also seems that Furosemide (probably the drug in question) is getting more and more popular, and let’s not forget it comes under MASKING AGENTS as well as diuretics.

Craig Lord

Aaron, you may be right but it isn’t accurate to say both of FINA’s tests showed nothing: they did indeed show trace for furosemide (and there is only one set of tests that showed what is now being challenged as a positive … (WADA is referring to the tests taken by the FINA testers). What is yet to be made clear is what the levels were (FINA folk deemed it too small, esp in context of other tests, while WADA appears to suggest that it was above the level that triggers a ‘positive – case to answer’).
In terms of what the drug does, I doubt very much that this swimmer would have deliberately been taking anything to hide or enhance – in competition in the midst of an Australia team. That will be for the judges to decide, so to speak, but the swimmer in the dock has been placed in an impossible position – assuming innocence, how to explain what she consumed in July 2013 that might have caused this…

Viva la Bang

Yes but the strange part of all this is a test a few days earlier, and a few days later came back negative, why would you need to take a drug in between?????

beachmouse

Note: massive speculation of my part on one of many possible scenarios, and why that scenario is still a problem for FINA.

The weak positive after a negative has been linked/used as an excuse to contaminated or improperly labeled dietary supplements before (Kicker Vencil, Jessica Hardy, assorted Brazilians). You have to have strict anti-doping liability or there’s no point in anti-doping, yet even a vigilant athlete can’t test 100% of what they consume every day and they shouldn’t have to worry about the protein powder in their smoothie from Jamba Juice at the airport having been contaminated during manufacturing.

If that is what happened here, something that’s a guess on my part, then FINA did wrong to athletes and supplement company because they should have known there was a problem. A responsible supplement company, of which there are probably some out there, upon notification that one of its sponsored athletes might have had a WADA problem with their product, is going to want that information quickly so they can tell their other impacted elite users to discontinue product use immediately, recall remaining stock from stores, and go into the manufacturing plant and try to correct the quality control problem immediately.

Aaron

I agree with you Craig on the “low levels” thing, but isn’t it a bit difficult to completely rule out Palmer taking something deliberately?

In Amaury Leveaux’s book recently published, it appears to show such things could be widespread?

Craig Lord

Aaron, yes, of course all things are possible but it is also fair to point out the very difficult place in which this places the swimmer. If she tested positive at the time of this decision, then that and WADA’s first question early on should have sufficed for that to have going to full case, the likely outcome, on what we know so far, likely have led to a warning if the swimmer at the time could have pinpointed what might have caused the problem. As things stand, if she is innocent of deliberate cheating, then the passing of time works against her in a very hefty fashion – through no fault of her own.

Leave a comment

Post a comment with your SwimVortex Account. Don't have a SwimVortex Account, Sign Up?

(*) Fields are required!
×