Not only did Alison KORN get this wrong at SLAM sports of Canada (there are even extensive citations to an author whose last name is Fainaru-Wada, so her find command may not be functioning...), but there are several pages of the history of WADA's inception, should she wish to become informed on the relationship of WADA to this report.
Upon finishing a reading of that history (see pp 261 to 263), Mitchell (or his writing staff) gleaned an important list of components "... recognized as essential to an effective program to prevent the use of performance enhancing substances in training and competition":
1. independence of the program administrator;
2. transparency and accountability;
3. effective, year-round, unannounced testing;
4. adherence to best practices as they develop;
5. due process for athletes;
6. adequate funding; and
7. a robust education program.
WADAwatch, never having been a hasty agent for analysis, will look at this document, although certainly more feedback, such as from WADA itself, would be produce a more robust, better balanced flavour to the situation.
As to the ramifications of this list, Ww is certainly curious to find out if there are any substantive differences to the concepts of 'independence of the program administrator' (Mitchell list point 1), 'transparency and accountability' (Mitchell list point 2), or 'due process for athletes' (Mitchell list point 5).
Simply stated, Ww remains sceptical, as to the independence, transparency and due process to athletes offered via WADA, which has known various conflictual situations in its brief history, many of which were tied to a phrase similar to: "Dick Pound, president of WADA, said......."...
FLASH: French agency AFLD has matched the USADA suspension in the Floyd Landis case of suspected testosterone doping at the 2006 Tour de France. Few credible details have been published already, as to the decision taken by AFLD.