iaaf decision gone unremarked that i know of, but can be found in the latest
edition of IAAF News on the iaaf site (www.iaaf.org)
"In the matter of the application for the early reinstatement of Kathy Jager,
a 56-year-old athlete of the USA, the Council adopted the position that the
IAAF
In a message dated 8/7/00 11:42:52, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So, we have to ask how do we balance the objectives of masters competition,
and how they differ from elite competition, with the benefits and risks of
drug usage. For masters women, the benefits of hormone replacement are
y to older women, "you can only compete if your ovaries are fully
functioning, otherwise you're excluded." Sounds like an ADA lawsuit in the
making.
Richard McCann
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 12:56:32 -0700
From: "R.T." [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: (fwd) Re: t-and-f: Kathy Jager
Greetings, all:
I've submitted the following article to National Masters News. I welcome your
comments.
Ken Stone
http://www.masterstrack.com
Kathy Jager's bumpy road to early reinstatement from her two-year IAAF drug ban took a
wrenching turn in late July. And if she wasn't bruised enough
On Sun, 06 Aug 2000 12:55:37 -0700, R.T. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've submitted the following article to National Masters News. I welcome your
comments.
Certainly. If you're going to test at all, you cannot allow exemptions, unless
the test can be 'tweaked' to allow for the exact amount of
