Not only did ASADA conclude AOD does not get caught under S2 - we've seen the emails where WADA themselves say that AOD does not get caught under S2.
Now let's understand the full import of this.
S2 covers peptides.
S2 has a catch all clause.
AOD is a peptide.
Why would both WADA and ASADA clear AOD under S2?
The only answer is that they view S2 as not having anabolic properties.
That's a good thing isn't it?
We're all happy to find that out - right??
You do know that milk has peptides in it don't you? And if you lift weights and drink milk it may turn into muscle? You are somehow over simplifying and over complicating the issue in one fell swoop.
You and others have an enormous hard on for these S numbers, but really that is all they are, just numbers. WADA could wake up tomorrow and decide to pop AOD9604 in S2, just on a whim, the clause is deliberately wide enough to allow that to happen.
As it happens they have decided to leave it in S0 for now, perhaps if a weight of evidence comes to light that proves a PE effect they may just change it, or they may not.
It doesn't really matter, it's their code, and they will classify these substances as they please.