Right but you're trying to base whether someone is using or not based on size
I'm not, but you seem to feel measurements being roughly similar bolsters your position when it undermines it. Size is a really good indicator, but it's not the be all end all. In fact, you seem to be using a crossfit woman's lack of (relative to bodybuilding)size as proof she's clean
which is pure speculation. Tons of lifetime natural guys and girls can build significant physiques, and started out as skinny kids.
"Significant" is as nebulous as "crossfit jacked"
You wanna see skinny to jacked, check out the body of Darth Vader himself, David Prowse. And other than his height, he's not
that big. But a perfectly attainable size
The same science of building muscle (hypertrophy) applies whether using or not. Of course the amount of development of those using may be a nominal % greater than if they were natty, but it's not astronomical.
That is absolutely ridiculous. You're right about hypertrophy being a thing and just about nothing else.
Ronnie Coleman wouldn't be Ronnie Coleman without a shitload of steroids. There would be some natural bodybuilding contest
somewhere where a guy looks even something remotely approaching him. Same goes for women and Iris Kyle. But there aren't either of those things. Not even close. And if you're not even close, you're not talking a "nominal %"