So he tested positive for Turinabol once, tested negative for a whole year and only then started "pulsing" like crazy. I'm sure you and USADA have a theory why M3 would take a year off before showing up regularly. And the fact that USADA chose the most unlikely and improbable scenario to save Jon Jones from a lifetime ban says it all: They are the UFC's bitch. If they lose the UFC contract, they lose over 60% of their business. (That's according to you)
Is that what happened? When he first tested positive for Turinabol it was under exactly the same circumstances, with exactly the same results as the subsequent failure. The first test failure was as much a "pulse" as the subsequent one. The main difference between the two is that for the first one, Jones hand never previously been punished for ever having used Turinabol.
Why would it only show up under those circumstances? What are those circumstances?
No detection of the actual substance. During regular preceding testing, no detection of primary or secondary metabolites that do eventually clear the system, but that would indicate ongoing PED use during that timeframe. Post fight testing did not indicate anything abnormal. Levels of the tertiary metabolite were only detected at levels much, much lower than ever even possible before.
It shows up because there's enough of a concentration of the substance to be detected. What is a common factor of post-weigh-in pre-fight urine tests vs other tests, before and after?
The fighter is dehydrated. How is concentration of the substance measured? weight of the substance per unit of volume. By definition, the concentration of ANYTHING, except for water, itself, is going to be higher in a urine sample of a dehydrated person.
It's not all that complicated. A substance exists in levels that aren't concentrated enough to be detectable. After dehydrating, it shows up in barely detectable levels, due to the substance not being diluted in as much water as with the other samples.
These are ordinary and very understandable, uncomplicated concepts, that do not require any kind of conspiracy theory. Also, this wasn't invented for Jon Jones. They had seen it happen in enough other cases and in other sports between suspension and subsequent result that they no longer dismissed it out of hand, and the growing body of evidence led them to conclude that they couldn't definitely say it was due to subsequent PED use. That's also how science works. You have your working theory based on the best explanation for the data available. When better and more data comes in, you update it because the previous explanation is not longer the best based on currently available data.
