Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
Posts: 4997
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Wed Sep 21, 2016 10:13 am

trailgumby wrote:Largely I agree with you Alex, however I'd encourage you to cast your net wider when considering the risks and ethics of supplementation.
I have, and is why I created this Venn diagram some years ago to help make the distinctions.

Image

A substance or method can move between A and D depending on the circumstance (e.g. giving bicarb supplement to an elite adult vs a junior).

And of course a substance can be in A or B depending on it's use case.

People here are making personal judgements about things that fall into category D. i.e. what they consider to be unethical even though it's not classed as doping.

And that's the problem - what one person considers unethical will be different to another person's view. But doping is defined for us and largely removes that subjective element that makes these discussions go round in circles.

User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
Posts: 4997
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Wed Sep 21, 2016 10:22 am

Naturally I have my own views about things that fall into category D. But I can't assume my standards are "right" and someone else's are "wrong". I can argue a case of course (if I could be so bothered).

A simple example. Some people think the use of bike technology, e.g. aero testing, is not an ethical means of performance improvement. I'm not kidding.

Then move towards a slightly greyer area: Use of say altitude rooms/tents. It's actually illegal in Italy, but it's not doping. Many strongly argue against it. But it's not that different to using heating or air con to modify the environmental conditions we live/sleep in.

OK, so now move to a particular supplement, say nitrate supplementation, or tribasic sodium phosphate. Neither are doping but many will scream that it's unethical.

and so on along a spectrum of greyness

User avatar
trailgumby
Posts: 15469
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:30 pm
Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby trailgumby » Wed Sep 21, 2016 7:56 pm

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:and so on along a spectrum of greyness
I'm probably way over-simplifying, but it seems to me the necessary sunlight is provided by answering the question "is it safe, or will its use have adverse consequences for the rider's health in the long run?"

I appreciate that is often difficult due to a lack of data, in which case should not the default position be to knock it back? We only have one body. If we damage this one you can't buy a replacement. What does it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his own life?

Sorry, that's probably a bit deep and meaningful...
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:You know, so far no one has actually produced any documented evidence of all these supposed deaths being directly attributed to the misuse of EPO. Not that I'm saying we should be using it or that it's not dangerous, but running a line devoid of evidence/facts does not help the cause IMO.
The smoking gun argument.

You're right, of course, and it's why I said linked rather than caused. There isn't one, but then there wasn't one demonstrating that tobacco caused lung cancer for many years either, despite it being known to most everyone except the tobacco industry, its lobbyists and apologists they were highly correlated. And it turns out that the tobacco industry did in fact know, they just lied through their teeth.

Similarly there was a correlation between unexplained cardiac deaths among athletes and their being on teams known to be using the juice, according to some (eg, Lemond). The omerta being in full flight while the deaths I am aware of occurred doesn't help with transparency. Obviously I don't have first hand knowledge of it, but I'm not sure running an argument that the assertion is devoid of facts/evidence is wise.

I agree with most of the rest of your analysis, though. The parallel to speed limit compliance is astute.

While we may disagree on some elements of this subject matter, I do very much appreciate your contribution to the forums and the considered thoughtful opinions you express.
Last edited by trailgumby on Wed Sep 21, 2016 8:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
biker jk
Posts: 7001
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby biker jk » Wed Sep 21, 2016 8:48 pm

TUEs are a cover for the use of performance enhancing drugs, there's nothing grey about it. The secrecy around TUEs is by design, serving to facilitate the use of PEDs.

Even David Millar believes the corticosteroid taken by Wiggins should be banned.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/millar- ... be-banned/

User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
Posts: 4997
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Thu Sep 22, 2016 7:19 am

biker jk wrote:TUEs are a cover for the use of performance enhancing drugs, there's nothing grey about it. The secrecy around TUEs is by design, serving to facilitate the use of PEDs.

Even David Millar believes the corticosteroid taken by Wiggins should be banned.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/millar- ... be-banned/
I've worked with people that have completely legitimate use cases for TUEs. It does annoy me that such people are tarnished due to the actions of dopers and their enablers, but then let's face it, all athletes are tarnished just by nature of what they do.

Is there abuse? Definitely but the issue is not as black and white as many like to make out. I do agree that the TUE system could use some improvement, but even that isn't as easy as many think (first have a good solid read of the TUE requirements in the WADA code). Then think through the practical issues of whatever change it is you think is needed.

User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
Posts: 4997
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Thu Sep 22, 2016 7:34 am

trailgumby wrote:
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:and so on along a spectrum of greyness
I'm probably way over-simplifying, but it seems to me the necessary sunlight is provided by answering the question "is it safe, or will its use have adverse consequences for the rider's health in the long run?"
Just snipping out this one thing. The discourse has been good.

In terms of actual or potential harm to health, yes it is over simplifying as it's often not such a binary matter. It comes down to dose, frequency, duration of use, and use case.

In many cases not using such a substance would be more dangerous when it's needed for legitimate health reasons. e.g. take someone that needs to carry an EpiPen. Prohibited substance. Life saving substance. Take your pick. Is it reasonable to grant a TUE to someone that might require use of an EpiPen to immediately treat a life threatening allergic reaction? Of course it is.

This is one of the more sane places to chat about the overall doping problem. Places like the clinic are full on conspiracy theory mongers with every snippet moulded into whatever narrative people have pre determined.

grw
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:57 am

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby grw » Thu Sep 22, 2016 10:39 am

biker jk wrote:TUEs are a cover for the use of performance enhancing drugs, there's nothing grey about it. The secrecy around TUEs is by design, serving to facilitate the use of PEDs.

Even David Millar believes the corticosteroid taken by Wiggins should be banned.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/millar- ... be-banned/
Yeah, that's right. What really gets me is when teams like Novo Nordisk also try and pretend they're not on the juice. Those cretins...

User avatar
biker jk
Posts: 7001
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby biker jk » Thu Sep 22, 2016 2:00 pm

grw wrote:
biker jk wrote:TUEs are a cover for the use of performance enhancing drugs, there's nothing grey about it. The secrecy around TUEs is by design, serving to facilitate the use of PEDs.

Even David Millar believes the corticosteroid taken by Wiggins should be banned.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/millar- ... be-banned/
Yeah, that's right. What really gets me is when teams like Novo Nordisk also try and pretend they're not on the juice. Those cretins...
Yes insulin is indeed on the WADA prohibited list but diabetics are obviously allowed to take it. How many in the pro peloton have TUEs for insulin versus corticosteriods? What percentage of the pro peloton claims to be asthmatic versus diabetic? Your sarcasm attempt is a big fail.

grw
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:57 am

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby grw » Thu Sep 22, 2016 3:20 pm

biker jk wrote:
Yes insulin is indeed on the WADA prohibited list but diabetics are obviously allowed to take it. How many in the pro peloton have TUEs for insulin versus corticosteriods? What percentage of the pro peloton claims to be asthmatic versus diabetic? Your sarcasm attempt is a big fail.
TUEs for Insulin versus cortiosteriods? Diabetic vs Asthmatic versus ? Very very low I'd have thought. However, that wasn't the issue. My post was in response to your comment that "TUEs are a cover for the use of performance enhancing drugs".

Clearly - as was intended by use of Novo Nordisk as example - TUEs are required to allow those with particular medical conditions to compete (under the current system) and are not a cover for the use of performance enhancing drugs.

I'm sorry this wasn't clear enough for you. I'll try harder next time. :D

User avatar
trailgumby
Posts: 15469
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:30 pm
Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby trailgumby » Thu Sep 22, 2016 9:34 pm

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:In many cases not using such a substance would be more dangerous when it's needed for legitimate health reasons. e.g. take someone that needs to carry an EpiPen. Prohibited substance. Life saving substance. Take your pick. Is it reasonable to grant a TUE to someone that might require use of an EpiPen to immediately treat a life threatening allergic reaction? Of course it is.
Couldn't agree more.

I think you contribute a lot to the level of sanity. :)

User avatar
find_bruce
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10579
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:42 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby find_bruce » Thu Sep 22, 2016 9:53 pm

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:In many cases not using such a substance would be more dangerous when it's needed for legitimate health reasons. e.g. take someone that needs to carry an EpiPen. Prohibited substance. Life saving substance. Take your pick. Is it reasonable to grant a TUE to someone that might require use of an EpiPen to immediately treat a life threatening allergic reaction? Of course it is.
Sounds a lot like Kim Brennan, but you probably knew that.

User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 29060
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby Mulger bill » Thu Sep 22, 2016 9:55 pm

biker jk wrote:Yes insulin is indeed on the WADA prohibited list but diabetics are obviously allowed to take it.
?????

Serious question, how would insulin class as performance enhancing?
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011

piledhigher
Posts: 483
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 11:10 am
Location: Kew, Victoria

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby piledhigher » Thu Sep 22, 2016 9:58 pm

Mulger bill wrote:
biker jk wrote:Yes insulin is indeed on the WADA prohibited list but diabetics are obviously allowed to take it.
?????

Serious question, how would insulin class as performance enhancing?
Quick google:

Insulin may be illegally used in conjunction with anabolic steroids, in an attempt to increase muscle growth and definition. Body builders use it in the belief it will enhance the storage of greater amounts of carbohydrates and amino acids inside muscle cells.

User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 29060
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby Mulger bill » Thu Sep 22, 2016 10:01 pm

Cool PH, thanks for that.
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011

User avatar
find_bruce
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10579
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:42 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby find_bruce » Thu Sep 22, 2016 10:21 pm

Mulger bill wrote:
biker jk wrote:Yes insulin is indeed on the WADA prohibited list but diabetics are obviously allowed to take it.
?????

Serious question, how would insulin class as performance enhancing?
From my basic understanding, insulin is a hormone that enables your body to process glucose & is especially useful in replenishing muscle glycogen. Not EPO level of performance enhancing but noticeable. It was just one of the drugs Michael Rassmussen admitted to using.

Reports of body builders using insulin in combination with steroids have been around for years. Whether it works in the way that bodybuilders think it does is, of course, another matter entirely.

User avatar
redsonic
Posts: 1772
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:08 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby redsonic » Mon Sep 26, 2016 7:17 pm

Article in ABC News about Wiggins' TUE

User avatar
trailgumby
Posts: 15469
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:30 pm
Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby trailgumby » Mon Sep 26, 2016 7:36 pm

redsonic wrote:Article in ABC News about Wiggins' TUE
Interview transcript here (courtesy The BIke Comes First FB page) http://www.thebikecomesfirst.com/this-w ... y-wiggins/

Draw your own conclusions.

User avatar
biker jk
Posts: 7001
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby biker jk » Mon Sep 26, 2016 8:39 pm

Paul Kimmage telling like it is, again.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-s ... 76219.html

Wiggins' former doctor questions use of corticosteroid.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/ ... ed-steroid

User avatar
MichaelB
Posts: 14775
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:29 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby MichaelB » Tue Sep 27, 2016 8:48 am

I haven't read all the articles yet, but the more that is answered/defended/denied, the more ducks that are adding to the paddling.

As has been pointed out, nothing illegal has been done, but it's well and truly moved into the 'D' area of the Venn diagram posted by Alex above.

The bit for me that was most telling/smelly was when Wiggins mentioned the team docs asking "Is there anything we can do to help ?". and after winning quite a few things, then saying, "oh yeah, having a bit of trouble breathing ....."

:lol: :lol: :lol: :roll: :roll: :roll:

User avatar
biker jk
Posts: 7001
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby biker jk » Thu Sep 29, 2016 9:37 am

Paul "I never saw doping in the 1980s as a pro rider" Sherwen exposed...

https://twitter.com/Digger_forum/status ... 1260094464

warthog1
Posts: 14305
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm
Location: Bendigo

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby warthog1 » Sat Oct 01, 2016 5:08 pm

^^ I have no opinion on whether he did or didn't dope.
That "document" doesn't change anything until there is some sort of validation as to its' legitimacy :|
Dogs are the best people :wink:

User avatar
MichaelB
Posts: 14775
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:29 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby MichaelB » Fri Oct 14, 2016 8:44 am

As much as I dislike Wiggo, it seems like the burrowing that is going on is chasing a single person because of who he is. But then again, the holier than thou stances from before (individual & team), the continual denials and suspect/blurry issues that keep turning up is making it anm easy target. Not to mention when someone takes a 'package' across international borders without knowing what it is really stretches the limits of credibility.

Is it fair ? Smae sort of questions were asked with the LA hunt by USADA. In my mind, it's fair, beacuse as each stone is unturned, more issues that seem to point in the wrong direction are uncovered.

What is bewildering to me though is the governing bodies responses. Or lack of it ....

I hope in the end, that structural changes to the procedures are made that make it much harder for anyone to engage in the 'legal but questionable' actions that have been uncovered recently.

:D

1st world problems solved :mrgreen:

User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
Posts: 4997
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Fri Oct 14, 2016 8:56 am

It happens because there is a large trust deficit in elite sport, and in such an environment things that are genuinely innocuous are viewed with far greater level of suspicion.

It's also why we need to apply an even greater level of rigour to assessment of "evidence" so as to avoid bias. It's for this reason that I don't particularly like the approach of some commentators on such things who seem quick to jump to conclusions about the intent of such things while at the same time promoting themselves as having a science-based approach.

User avatar
RonK
Posts: 11508
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 2:08 pm
Location: If you need to know, ask me
Contact:

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby RonK » Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:57 am

MichaelB wrote:What is bewildering to me though is the governing bodies responses. Or lack of it ....
Why? It seems quite apparent that Cookson is to Wiggins/Sky what Verbruggen was to Armstrong/US Postal. Perhaps even more so.
Cycle touring blog and tour journals: whispering wheels...

User avatar
MichaelB
Posts: 14775
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:29 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Postby MichaelB » Fri Oct 14, 2016 1:25 pm

RonK wrote:
MichaelB wrote:What is bewildering to me though is the governing bodies responses. Or lack of it ....
Why? It seems quite apparent that Cookson is to Wiggins/Sky what Verbruggen was to Armstrong/US Postal. Perhaps even more so.
The difference is thet this is now with all the learings behind us to show the results.

Then again, are my sights set a little high ..... :roll:

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users