"Now there's also the possibility, and it's an argument that has been used by other people,"
"At this point, I don't know if it's somehow or some way I ingested something that caused the tests to be that way."
Yes, one way of the 'some way' is to take a needle and stick it in and press the plunger all the way down.
"The tests and the people doing the tests would like you to believe that the only possibility is that I essentially took some drugs and that's why the test is that way."
"There are multiple reasons why this could have happened, other than what they're saying,"
or there's Ockum's Razor which basically states
"when you have two competing theories which make exactly the same predictions, the one that is simpler is the better."
David Black, a forensic toxicologist, said
"there are not hundreds of plausible explanations. If the tests were so unreliable that there were hundreds of possible reasons, there would be no point in performing the tests. It's nonsense."
Don't forget he's already said...
a. He has naturally high testosterone levels. Yes, the average is 1:1 the accepted max is 4:1 with a 30% deviation. His test was 11:1 - explain that.
b. When it was revealed that the testosterone also proved to be synthetic he had to drop the excuse (a) or does he really have naturally high levels of synthetic testosterone?
c. Beer and Whisky affected the sample. More likely beer ot whisky affected his judgement. He'd like us to believe he was irresponsible enough to consume alchohol in the middle of a tour but not take drugs and that he was lucky enough to benefit from this binge? Everyone's gonna be drunk at the next Olympics!
Then to go and say none of those excuses where actually his - they were statements made by his team, lawyers, doctors, friends etc etc. But not him. At the time these excuses were offered he did not disown them. Only after they were proved to be false.
A great article about it can be found here on USATODAY.com