* AI ("Artificial Intelligence") subtitles on Tagalog.com are generated using "Whisper" by OpenAI (the same company that created ChatGPT and DallE2). Results and accuracy may vary.
* The subtitles do include errors occasionally and should only be used as a tool to help with your listening practice.
* You can request this website to create a transcript for a video if one doesn't already exist by clicking the "Request AI Subtitles" button below a video. Transcribing usually takes 30-40% of the length of a video to complete if there are no other videos in
the queue. For example, a 21 minute video will take 7-8 minutes to transcribe.
* Running a super fast cloud GPU server to do these transcriptions does cost money. If you have the desire and financial ability, consider
becoming a patron
to support these video transcriptions, and the other tools and apps built by Tagalog.com
00:00.0
At at every stage, WARA followed all due process and diligently investigated every lead and line of inquiry in this matter.
00:11.3
If we had to do it over again now, we would do exactly the same thing.
00:17.0
We carefully reviewed the decision of the Chinese anti-doping organization from every perspective.
00:24.2
If we interrogated every piece of evidence and gathered further information as appropriate.
00:31.8
We had no evidence of wrongdoing to present and no credible way to disprove the contamination theory that was accepted by Chinada and the position that was also accepted by World Aquatics.
00:47.2
In short, if we had taken such an appeal and challenged the contamination explanation,
00:53.3
we would certainly have lost.
00:55.9
The ultimate source, meaning how the TMZ got into the kitchen, was not discovered.
01:04.9
Chinada and the authorities conducted a number of interviews in order to try and explore how the substance could have gone into the kitchen.
01:16.9
But that didn't result in anything concrete.
01:20.9
And they didn't hypothesize.
01:22.9
They didn't even put it in their in their report.
01:26.5
To me, what is important to understand is that contamination is not just the substance, it's the context of possible contamination.
01:36.5
And even if the source of Trimethazidine in this dossier is not identified,
01:42.5
what we can certainly consider is that an individual who had been prescribed with Trimethazidine was under the medication of Trimethazidine.
01:52.5
And we have used it on site in the restaurant could have very well contaminated the areas.
01:58.5
So the fact that the spice containers were found with places of Trimethazidine in the kitchen as well is not incompatible with somebody who would have used Trimethazidine on site and would have contaminated those elements.
02:15.5
Is that we didn't have any evidence that there'd been anything untoward.
02:20.5
Is that we didn't have any evidence that there'd been anything untoward.
02:21.5
Is that we didn't have any evidence that there'd been anything untoward.
02:22.5
A plenary sample or an assignee,
02:23.5
ahaul of evidence that that had gone on.
02:24.5
If the if the what's underlying.
02:26.5
The question is a thesis that this might have been planted in the kitchen,
02:31.5
and then and then that gave rise to the detection and we didn't have.
02:35.5
We didn't have any evidence of that.
02:37.5
And as I said before,
02:39.5
I'm very confident that if we'd have gone to the CAS with all of the five or six elements that I mentioned that already suggested contamination
02:49.5
as opposed to deliberate ingestion coupled with the detection in the hotel,
02:51.5
In the hotel kitchen and in the absence of any evidence of any sort of misconduct of the kind that I think you might be alluding to, I'm very confident that we would have had close to a 0% chance of succeeding in establishing that the athletes had not met their burden to show the origin of the prohibited substance on the balance of probabilities.
03:14.8
And perhaps one of the most important points is that, as I said, a number of these athletes were tested on multiple occasions. Some of them were tested on three occasions in consecutive days, and the results often varied between positive and negative. So positive, negative, positive, negative, negative, positive, and always at these low levels.
03:41.9
Ultimately, these fluctuating negative, positive, negative, negative, positive, negative, negative, positive, and always at these low levels.
03:44.8
And perhaps one of the most important points is that, as I said, a number of these athletes were tested on multiple occasions. Some of them were tested on three occasions. Some of them were tested on three occasions.
04:14.8
And perhaps one of the most important points is that, as I said, a number of these athletes were tested on three occasions. Some of them were tested on three occasions.
04:44.8
And perhaps one of the most important points is that, as I said, a number of these athletes were tested on three occasions. Some of them were tested on three occasions.
05:14.8
And perhaps one of the most important points is that, as I said, a number of these athletes were tested on three occasions. Some of them were tested on three occasions.
05:44.8
And perhaps one of the most important points is that, as I said, a number of these athletes were tested on three occasions. Some of them were tested on three occasions.
06:14.8
And perhaps one of the most important points is that, as I said, a number of these athletes were tested on three occasions. Some of them were tested on three occasions.
06:15.8
And perhaps one of the most important points is that, as I said, a number of these athletes were tested on three occasions.
06:16.1
And perhaps one of the most important points is that, as I said, a number of these athletes were tested on three occasions.
06:22.8
And perhaps one of the most important points is that, as I said, a number of these athletes were tested on three occasions.
06:23.7
And perhaps one of the most important points is that, as I said, a number of these athletes were tested on three occasions.
06:23.7
And perhaps one of the most important points is that, as I said, a number of these athletes were tested on three occasions.
06:23.8
And perhaps one of the most important points is that, as I said, a number of these athletes were tested on three occasions.
06:24.1
whether or not it merits bringing legal action against the relevant entities and or individuals.
06:29.9
But what is clear is that some of the comments that have been made,
06:32.9
which suggested a cover-up of doping cases for political reasons,
06:40.2
couldn't be further from the truth.
06:42.2
They clearly have the potential to damage WADA's reputation
06:46.0
and therefore it's something that we will have to go through with a fine-tooth comb
06:49.0
and take whatever action is necessary.
06:51.6
I think that in terms of what one can say to athletes,
06:57.5
this is an explanation that WADA, and not only WADA,
07:01.9
but also World Aquatics, scrutinized extremely carefully.
07:04.8
That will be clear from what Professor Rahman has said and what I've said.
07:09.2
And ultimately, based on a number of contextual elements, factual elements,
07:13.4
but also on the science, we concluded that this was a case of innocence exposure.
07:21.8
That is our genuine conclusion with respect to what happened here
07:24.7
based on the evidence that we had then and still have now.
07:27.4
And therefore, athletes from other countries that are competing against these athletes
07:32.8
should not be... should not have concerns.
07:36.1
These were athletes that we have to assume were innocently exposed to traumatizing contamination.
