Sky News are reporting that they have seen independent reviews of the blood test results that cast suspicion on British marathon runner Paula Radcliffe.
The world record holder was drawn into the doping allegations currently plaguing the world of athletics by comments made during a Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee hearing in England.
The chairman of the British parliamentary committee appeared to raise suspicions about Radcliffe while questioning UK Anti-Doping chairman David Kenworthy.
Radcliffe said he “alluded” to past winners or medallists of the London Marathon and “in that period, aside from in the wheelchair race, it only could be me, so essentially he identified me”.
Radcliffe initially said she would not be blackmailed into revealing her bloods, but Sky News report that she has shown them to the news outlet in a bid to clear her name.
Sky News has exclusively obtained blood data which indicates #PaulaRadcliffe has not been involved in doping
— Sky News Newsdesk (@SkyNewsBreak) September 10, 2015
Three blood samples taken from the runner appeared to fall outside the normal scale, but Radcliffe offered a robust defence in each case, and has backed this with independent tests.
“This data needed to be looked at in context by the right experts so I requested WADA go back and go over again all of this data,” she said to Sky. “UK Anti-Doping can do that as well.
“I know that the IAAF have done that, I have requested that independent experts do that and I have those reports.”
No way I can reply to everyone but I am humbled and touched beyond words by everyone's support. Thank you all
— Paula Radcliffe (@paulajradcliffe) September 9, 2015
The reports say all three unusual results are understandable when put in the context of when they were taken from the runner. All three were taken after periods of altitude training and two were taken immediately after she had raced.
“They can tell me you don’t have three values that crossed any threshold, not when you apply the context of whether the test followed a period of altitude training or was carried out at altitude,” Radcliffe said of the independent test.
“Not when you apply whether the two hour rule – that it cannot be used within two hours of hard competition or hard training – is not valid.
“That rules out two of the tests they are referring to, and the other is not above the threshold.”