WADA
IC2p71 No laboratory personnel ever witnessed the FSB’s method for removing the caps of the bottles. In order to verify that the caps of the bottles were removed the IP conducted its own experiment. The IP is satisfied that the caps of the bottles can be removed, p72 A representative set of 11 B bottles was randomly selected for examination by the IP scratches and marks expert. The expert confirmed that all 11 samples had scratches and marks on the inside of the bottle caps representative of the use of a tool used to open the cap. Thus, of the representative set of samples that the IP suspected of having been swapped, 100% of the bottles have evidence of tampering. The IP was able to verify that the bottles were not counterfeit.
Critique
http://www.berlinger.com/en/drug-and-doping-control/media/media-release-detail/mclarenwada-investigation-of-sochi-2014-allegations/ Berlinger Special AG has no knowledge at present of the specifications, the methods or the procedures involved in the tests and experiments conducted by the McLaren Commission. Berlinger Special AG conducts its own regular reappraisals of its doping kits, and also has its products tested and verified by an independent institute that has been duly certificated by the Swiss authorities. In neither its own tests nor any tests conducted by the independent institute in Switzerland has any sealed Berlinger Special AG urine sample bottle proved possible to open. This also applies to the “Sochi 2014” sample bottle model. The specialists at Berlinger Special AG are able at any time to determine whether one of the company’s sample bottles has been tampered with or unlawfully replicated.
https://openparachute.wordpress.com/2016/08/07/34384/ Ethics and the doping scandal – a response to Guest Work – Ken Perrott – results of the “forensic testing” commissioned by McLaren (DNA data and testing the methods for removing and replacing seals on sample vials and scratches on the vials) are not even included in the report.
Mark: Berlinger guarantees the security of the athlete’s sample. Berlinger would be forced to challenge the McLaren Report, and in turn McLaren and his happy band would have to demonstrate the alleged ‘undetectable’ tampering technique. as Berlinger guarantees the reliability of its product in safeguarding the athlete’s sample from collection to testing, its false advertising of its product as tamper-proof without leaving clear signs of tampering caused material harm to Isinbayeva. He pointed out that in order for that approach to work, Isinbayeva would have had to buy the sample bottles herself. (Alex Mercouris) If it turned out that what McLaren says about the bottles is true Berlinger would lose the case and would pay Isinbayeva compensation for breach of the duty of care. If it turned out that what McLaren says is false, the IAAF, WADA and McLaren would pay Isinbayeva compensation because of the harm she suffered from their actions, and they would also have to compensate Berlinger its legal costs involved in attending the case in which it was obliged to uphold the integrity of its product. If you force the cap off, you will leave scratches; but even if you open it the way Berlinger says to do it, which cracks the cap in half, you will have left microscopic scratches on the inside of the cap when you closed it. There will be no marks at all on the inside of the cap only so long as the cap remains separate from the bottle, and perhaps not even then; manufacturing may well have left marks which are visible with a microscope. The process should be duplicated for Berlinger, and it is amazing they were not brought in as expert witnesses.