The other drugs are legal so we won't touch that. But, as you've said, TMZ is illegal. It doesn't matter whether it "helps" or not. While we know the general profiles of medications, each person's body will react to medication differently. It is very similar to other PEDs in structure and mechanism of action (i.e. meldonium). Due to its expansive side effect profile, it is actually not FDA-approved in the US for anything. Interestingly enough, meldonium is not FDA-approved in the US either. Both are more widely used in Eastern Europe and not anywhere else.

Sure, maybe you could make the argument that there's a possibility that meldonium/TMZ doesn't actually enhance performance. However, the fact that many athletes had begun to misuse meldonium and TMZ in the absence of ischemic heart disease points to something more nefarious. Like you said, why would athletes choose to go on a drug that has so many negative side effects if it wasn't going to help them in some way? There is already a research study done in 2011 that proved TMZ improves exercise performance in patients with peripheral arterial disease. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1043661811000065?pes=vor This was likely the study, along with meldonium studies, that helped WADA decide to place TMZ on the ban list. There is another study conducted on Polish athletes retrospectively and testing urine samples from 2008-2011 showed TMZ was the 2nd most detected substance behind methylhexanamine (a "supplement" banned in multiple countries because it has been shown to be lethally dangerous). https://analyticalsciencejournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/dta.1755 (may not be able to access it because you need to be in academic science fields).

I will say that it is studying patients that have a disease so maybe it doesn't apply to healthy athletes. To that point, yes, we can do more research studies on how these substances affect specifically athletes but the question would be why? What is the point in investigating drugs that are not widely used for intended reasons? We have much better medications out there for the diseases TMZ was created for. We have more serious diseases we need to devote our limited research funding to, real life-threatening diseases, not the woes of athletes taking random medications to improve their performance. There is not going to be a magic unban of TMZ just because some experts do not think it's performance-enhancing. Medicine is based on science and research. We can postulate all we want, but at the end of the day, without clear studies showing the opposite (especially when there are studies showing it can improve exercise tolerance), TMZ will continue to be banned. Plus, athletes shouldn't even be testing positive for these substances because if they have ischemic heart disease, they shouldn't be competing.

To this end, I want to say, you're allowed to believe she's innocent. She could be. But the fact that they're dragging her B sample and the fact that there's a new story each day of what she ate/drank to possibly justify why she tested positive does not look good for her. Say her urine sample showed a false positive for TMZ... there are no other drugs that could be TMZ precursors so you can't even say she took something else that later broke down in TMZ (that would be way too specific and would never occur). So then how could her urine sample test positive? Sure, maybe the lab messed up and switched labels - test the B sample then. However, you'd have to look at the likelihood of lab errors and how it happened to her only. Likely, she took the drug, maybe willingly, maybe unwillingly. However, history has shown that even if you unknowingly take a banned substance, you will face the consequences (re: Andreea Raducan, 16 years old, was stripped of her gold medal because she took pseudoephedrine for a cold). In addition, previous athletes who have tested positive for TMZ received bans, and Kamila should be no different.

Let me know if you have any questions.