Sirena
Don't monkey with the buzzsaw
I had a random look on the interwebz and there seems to be fairly unanimous technical agreement that Radcliffe's scores were within reason for someone recently having done altitude training or having just finished a race. A lot of it is beyond me but I can't imagine Radcliffe having a propaganda damage-limitation machinery working on her behalf...If we are talking about blood values as measured for the biological passport here, the parameters are not set at levels which would indicate a very strong probability of doping but instead are set at levels so extreme that they crossing various thresholds indicates a near absolute certainty of doping. This is so for the understandable reason that the anti-doping authorities don't want some doper convincing a sympathetic court that the system is unfair and getting a ruling that effectively finishes the passport. But it also means that very often data which would not trigger an official passport violation would still indicate to an informed observer that doping is the likely explanation.
ie there's a big gap between what is considered proven under the passport system and what a reasonable observer might take as enough evidence to be for practical purposes sure that someone was or is on the hot sauce.
The Biological Passport & the Paula Radcliffe Controvery | Human Limits: Michael J. Joyner, M.D.
In defence of Paula Radcliffe and her biological passport | Slate Lab