Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
-
- Posts: 314
- Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:45 pm
- Location: Nort West N.SW.
Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
Postby Farmer Elvis » Thu Dec 14, 2017 10:52 pm
-
- Posts: 1176
- Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 4:58 pm
Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
Postby vosadrian » Fri Dec 15, 2017 9:01 am
Anyway, some may not like him as a rider, but I doubt anyone would argue the guy is not stupid. He is very calculated in everything he says and does in a public forum. He is no hot head who does something in the heat of the moment without thinking. He is also probably the most drug tested rider in the Pro Peleton and has the most to lose by being caught with drugs. The drug he has failed a test on seems to be an easy one to detect, and has resulted in other rider penalties in the recent past. The question has to be asked.... given all the above, does anyone really think he would knowingly overdose on an asthma drug for performance enhancement? (especially given any performance benefit is questionable) It does not make much sense to me that he would. Seems more likely that it was either an accidental overdose, or a strange metabolism issue with his body.
- 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 Dec 15, 2017 9:38 am
Oh, you mean like Floyd Landis did?Farmer Elvis wrote:Geez, I wondered how he could ride away from his opponents after having had a bad day prior.......
- Thoglette
- Posts: 6627
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:01 pm
Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
Postby Thoglette » Fri Dec 15, 2017 11:09 am
Sorry Chris Froome, these days there's no benefit of the doubt when you fail a drug testvosadrian wrote:Seems more likely that it was either an accidental overdose, or a strange metabolism issue with his body.
Tony Martin's pretty annoyed tooRichard Hinds ABC online wrote:Yeah right, Chris Froome.
You were clutching that asthma inhaler just a bit too tightly during the Vuelta a Espana in September and double pumped when you only needed a single burst. Is that what we are supposed to think?
I mean, how were you to know that you were spraying your lungs with the drug Salbutamol that some claim enhances performance? You've only been monitoring your use of the drug for your entire career, right?
...., Froome's excellence might have once provided an aura of infallibility. Now it only fuels our suspicion about what fuelled him.
Chris Froome says failed drugs test ‘damaging’ but he followed protocol
Ingle and Kelner The Guardian quoting Tony Martin wrote: “Not only the public but also I have immediately the impression that there is wheeling and dealing going on behind the scenes, agreements are being made and ways are being sought as to how to get out of this case,” he said. “Do he and his team enjoy a special status?
"People are worthy of respect, ideas are not." Peter Ellerton, UQ
-
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2017 5:26 pm
- Location: Melbourne
Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
Postby G@v » Fri Dec 15, 2017 11:41 am
Thinking now that Froome didn't do anything wrong, but rules are there and he'll most likely face the consequences.
From this interview with Dr. Tom Bassindale, an anti-doping expert and lecturer at the Biomolecular Sciences Research Center at the Sheffield Hallam University in England.
http://www.velonews.com/2017/12/news/an ... -up_453381
VN: So what’s your take on the one-day spike and results of Froome’s test?
DTB: One assumes he was tested before and after throughout the Vuelta, and only this one day he had a spike in readings. That wouldn’t suggest long-term abuse. That day he said he had a significant increase in dosage with the spray, within the rules. They will try to explain it along those lines. There are also the less-innocent uses, and those are all banned. The not-so-innocent explanation would be the use of a tablet on top of his inhaler. There are the innocent explanations and the not-so-innocent. Now it’s up to them to make their explanation seem plausible.
VN: Explain how Salbutamol works in its spray form?
DTB: The spray will have an almost immediate effect. It opens up the bronchial tubes and relaxes the muscles that block the breathing. The puffers will only get you back to a ‘normal’ function. They cannot open the airways in any additional way. There is no extra benefit for anyone who might not be asthmatic. If an asthmatic took a few extra puffs, they might feel some mild simulation. Like a jolt of caffeine. Beyond that, there are not much additional benefits to performance.
I'm guessing the limit is imposed on Salbutamol for potential misuse via injections or tablets.VN: And via the other methods, how does that affect an athlete?
DTB: With injections or tablets, you start getting some additional effects. You might see anabolic effects, such muscle-growing or fat-burning, similar to what Clenbuterol might do. That wouldn’t result from a couple of puffs. That would be a longer-term abuse with a higher level of it to get that anabolic effect, over weeks or even months.
However rules are rules. Can't see Froome escaping this unfortunately and the damage has been done (to cycling and his reputation).
- 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 » Fri Dec 15, 2017 11:52 am
https://cyclingtips.com/2017/12/cycling ... tive-mean/
- AUbicycles
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15592
- Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:14 am
- Location: Sydney & Frankfurt
- Contact:
Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
Postby AUbicycles » Fri Dec 15, 2017 5:39 pm
There are also questions about the process and role of the UCI protecting their elite rider.... has happened before.
But that Froome has changed is riding style to be more exciting, preposterous.
- biker jk
- Posts: 7012
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
Postby biker jk » Fri Dec 15, 2017 7:00 pm
http://www.theroar.com.au/2014/06/12/di ... sthma-now/
-
- Posts: 6180
- Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
- Location: Mill Park
Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
Postby fat and old » Fri Dec 15, 2017 7:09 pm
Five years too late, Armstrong's been done.vosadrian wrote:I have to wonder about the motivations and psychology behind something like this. Froome seems to have a lot of haters and I am not one of them. He seems to have changed his riding style to be more exciting to watch, but haters are gonna hate!
Anyway, some may not like him as a rider, but I doubt anyone would argue the guy is not stupid. He is very calculated in everything he says and does in a public forum. He is no hot head who does something in the heat of the moment without thinking. He is also probably the most drug tested rider in the Pro Peleton and has the most to lose by being caught with drugs. The drug he has failed a test on seems to be an easy one to detect, and has resulted in other rider penalties in the recent past. The question has to be asked.... given all the above, does anyone really think he would knowingly overdose on an asthma drug for performance enhancement? (especially given any performance benefit is questionable) It does not make much sense to me that he would. Seems more likely that it was either an accidental overdose, or a strange metabolism issue with his body.
Ohhh, you're talking about Froomay.
- Chuck
- Posts: 4376
- Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:19 pm
- Location: Hiding in the bunch
Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
Postby Chuck » Fri Dec 15, 2017 7:33 pm
An interesting turn of phrase to use in this discussion. The guy who popularized the saying found himself in a not too different situation as Froome is in now and it turned out that the "haters" weren't haters at all they were just rightvosadrian wrote:but haters are gonna hate!
- 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 » Sat Dec 16, 2017 6:54 am
It's an adverse analytical finding (AAF) for a specified substance which has special meaning under WADA code. As such there is a way to go before a ruling on possible anti-doping rule violation (ADRV).
There are specific rules and processes that apply and these need to be allowed to play out accordingly. It's not a new process, it's been in place for a while now. One of those rules has already been broken by someone in the anti-doping chain and that is not helpful.
If you want to understand this process, have a read of this threaded twitter post which goes through it very nicely:
https://twitter.com/lukascph/status/941353550180945920
The upshot is that such specified substance AAFs are not black and white but rather are shades of grey. In this case it's a pretty dark grey but there are still potentially legitimate reasons for the AAF that will not result in an ADRV (anyone doing at least a cursory read of the scientific literature on this will know why).
Of course it may still result in an ADRV.
We are at present in the realms of possibilities and probabilities.
In terms of the process, the burden of proof now passes to Froome to demonstrate why an ADRV should not apply, and that requires a lot of detailed work over a long time and there is no specific timeframe.
This will be a drawn out process. those looking for a quick kill will be disappointed. It's going to dominate the news cycle where ever Froome goes.
- 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 » Sat Dec 16, 2017 7:26 am
A quarter of the subject's tests for exercise and exercise+dehydration returned readings above the WADA AAF limit. But also note how widely variable the individual results are.
I'm not defending Froome, just pointing out the difficulty involved and that it's shades of grey. To draw a firmer conclusion will require much more data on Froome's own metabolism of salbutamol.
- MichaelB
- Posts: 14866
- Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:29 am
- Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
Postby MichaelB » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:58 pm
But what I can’t quite get my head around and get a decent explanation for is the maximum allowable doasge requires a HUGE amount of puffs (in the order of 32 iirc) to just get to the maximum dosage (aside of what is left in the urine) in 24 hours, and this just borders on the ridiculous.
If you needed that many puffs, surely, continuing to compete is more of a life threatening condition ?
At the end of the day, all of the protests, marketing spin etc is trying to ‘prove’ they did nothing illegal, and once again shows that they are really pushing the limits of common sense and credibility despite being a “100% clean team”.
As much as I disliked Froome, I accept that he has talent despite being tarnished by Sky’s antics and ethics, but now, don’t even have that any more.
Hope he gets done like he should be, regardless.
- biker jk
- Posts: 7012
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
Postby biker jk » Sat Dec 16, 2017 6:57 pm
The test conducted on Froome would have also checked the urine for dehydration.Alex Simmons/RST wrote:For those interested in the scientific, just look at how variable the urine reading is for salbutamol is after a 1600 microgram intake (WADA permitted daily limit) for 12 subjects after exercise and dehydration.
A quarter of the subject's tests for exercise and exercise+dehydration returned readings above the WADA AAF limit. But also note how widely variable the individual results are.
I'm not defending Froome, just pointing out the difficulty involved and that it's shades of grey. To draw a firmer conclusion will require much more data on Froome's own metabolism of salbutamol.
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/viewtopic. ... 1#p2212761
- biker jk
- Posts: 7012
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
Postby biker jk » Sat Dec 16, 2017 7:00 pm
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/viewtopic. ... 9#p2212759
- 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 » Sun Dec 17, 2017 6:25 am
They would have checked for specific gravity of the sample, not level of dehydration.biker jk wrote:The test conducted on Froome would have also checked the urine for dehydration.Alex Simmons/RST wrote:For those interested in the scientific, just look at how variable the urine reading is for salbutamol is after a 1600 microgram intake (WADA permitted daily limit) for 12 subjects after exercise and dehydration.
A quarter of the subject's tests for exercise and exercise+dehydration returned readings above the WADA AAF limit. But also note how widely variable the individual results are.
I'm not defending Froome, just pointing out the difficulty involved and that it's shades of grey. To draw a firmer conclusion will require much more data on Froome's own metabolism of salbutamol.
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/viewtopic. ... 1#p2212761
Obviously dehydration is one main cause of higher SG in a healthy adult, even so that's not to say the SG limit for viable test sample won't have significant impacts on the concentration of a particular metabolite in the sample. As we can see from some PK studies, the results of samples are wildly variable even among a fairly homogeneous group of individuals.
The Clinic unfortunately suffers from the classic logical fallacy of picking evidence to suit a narrative, rather than examining all the relevant evidence to then draw a valid conclusion. Sometimes that conclusion is "we can't say with any certainty".
But I am not an expert in these PK matters which is why rather than speculating and wishing for an outcome that suits my individual bias I would prefer the experts do the assessment with due care and scientific rigour. Given that there are also issues of process, then it also needs to be conducted with due legal process and rigour as well, and given someone in the anti-doping chain of evidence must have broken the rules that does not fill me with as much confidence as the scientific side of things.
- 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 » Sun Dec 17, 2017 6:40 am
Oh I agree, the early indications strongly suggest a non-therapeutic dosage as do anecdotal reports from asthmatics. But early (and incomplete) indications and anecdotes are just that and are not scientifically rigorous. I think we need to be careful in coming to such conclusions based on our limited understanding of all the relevant factors involved.MichaelB wrote:Hi Alex, have read quite a few post/discussions etc, and understood most of them, and accept it’s not that simple.
But what I can’t quite get my head around and get a decent explanation for is the maximum allowable doasge requires a HUGE amount of puffs (in the order of 32 iirc) to just get to the maximum dosage (aside of what is left in the urine) in 24 hours, and this just borders on the ridiculous.
If you needed that many puffs, surely, continuing to compete is more of a life threatening condition ?
And when someone has a clear bias it can be difficult to see past that and assess things based on their actual merit. That's human nature and pretty normal - and is what sets quality scientific process apart. And it is also because of the large trust deficit that exists with the sport. Set against that background, your view is understandable.MichaelB wrote:As much as I disliked Froome, I accept that he has talent despite being tarnished by Sky’s antics and ethics, but now, don’t even have that any more.
Hope he gets done like he should be, regardless.
There are sports people I like, some I dislike and vast majority I have no strong views on.
I hope the process is done correctly and validly and the right outcome is reached on that basis. It's the validity of process I'm more interested in assessing.
Pro cycling is a bit like a sausage. Many of us love to consume it but would rather not know how it is made.
- MichaelB
- Posts: 14866
- Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:29 am
- Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
Postby MichaelB » Sun Dec 17, 2017 11:45 am
-
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2017 5:26 pm
- Location: Melbourne
Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
Postby G@v » Sun Dec 17, 2017 4:52 pm
Courtesy of Google Translate:
https://translate.googleusercontent.com ... 16656.htmlFroome's entourage let out information in the Times that Dr. MacLeod reportedly told the Vuelta Red Jersey to take three breaths of Ventolin after the stage and before the doping control. A strange advice to a rider who, that evening in his post-race interview, was not coughing and said he was "back [himself] after a " much better day " than the day before.
- MichaelB
- Posts: 14866
- Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:29 am
- Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
Postby MichaelB » Mon Dec 18, 2017 11:52 am
-
- Posts: 1176
- Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 4:58 pm
Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
Postby vosadrian » Mon Dec 18, 2017 3:29 pm
How so? I am not a fan of the Sky train control of the race, but I have seen some very different racing from Froome over the last 2 years than before that. I was watching the stage from last year TDF live and started viewing just as Froome attacked on the descent and won the stage. I did not believe it was real footage from the race it seemed so unlikely. Over the last couple of years we have seen him attack at unexpected times and mostly not up ascents. He has kept his opponents guessing. We have seen him ride ascents his own way while others attack each other (which may not be your cup of tea). He is doing things differently recently and it makes the race more exciting to watch. The Sky train is still there most of the time... but not all the time like it was. Even then, the Sky train is probably not anything an individual rider could change... and is something that will happen to any protected rider at Sky.AUbicycles wrote:But that Froome has changed is riding style to be more exciting, preposterous.
My original point was not that Froome should not be penalised if he did indeed get advantage even if accidental. My point was that if he did get advantage it must have been accidental. Surely no person with a small degree of intelligence could have expected to knowingly break rules using a substance that is easily tested at a time he was guaranteed to be tested and not get caught. Nobody has more to lose getting caught than him, and he was pretty much guaranteed to get caught. Many here imply he did it intentionally to get an advantage and I just can't see how that makes any sense. Could he be that stupid? There are some Pros that may be that stupid, but he does not seem that stupid.
As to pushing the limits of the rules... Not sure how to think on that one. In many sports, competitors push every limit to the max and try to find loop holes to get around limits.... like F1 for one. I am sure most riders are using legal supplements like energy gels etc. The line is blurred between legal and illegal supplements. Someone will one day find a new dietary supplement that has benefits nobody else knows about, and then at some point it will be made illegal, or everyone will start doing it legally. Should the person who worked it out get an advantage for their skills in working it out in the first place. I am not sure where to draw the line on that.
- biker jk
- Posts: 7012
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
Postby biker jk » Mon Dec 18, 2017 3:43 pm
Perhaps the UCI will have to throw its anti-doping chaperones under the bus given they allowed Froome to take puffs of his inhaler after the stage and before testing.MichaelB wrote: Yep, doctor, please report to the dive team. It’s your turn !!
- MichaelB
- Posts: 14866
- Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:29 am
- Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
Postby MichaelB » Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:45 pm
The excuses are being readied !!!biker jk wrote:Perhaps the UCI will have to throw its anti-doping chaperones under the bus given they allowed Froome to take puffs of his inhaler after the stage and before testing.MichaelB wrote: Yep, doctor, please report to the dive team. It’s your turn !!
- Thoglette
- Posts: 6627
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:01 pm
Chris Froome hires former Bruyneel and Contador lawyer for salbutamol case
Postby Thoglette » Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:03 pm
Less flippantlyThe Cruel Sea wrote:"Better get a lawyer son, better get a real good one"
Cycling News wrote:According to the Daily Mail and the Times, Froome has appointed London-based lawyer Mike Morgan, whose list of previous clients in cycling include Lizzie Deignan, Sergio Henao, Alberto Contador and Johan Bruyneel. Morgan was named sports lawyer of the year at the 2017 Who's Who Legal Awards
"People are worthy of respect, ideas are not." Peter Ellerton, UQ
- AUbicycles
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15592
- Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:14 am
- Location: Sydney & Frankfurt
- Contact:
Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling
Postby AUbicycles » Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:06 am
I still disagree, not with the above but the previous comment on changing the riding style to be more exciting. With the strong Sky Train I view Froome as a very protected rider where his team mates are almost always on-hand to immediately close down any challenges and his own moves are very calculated. It is part of tactics but I don't see team sky and Froomey taking the same risks in racing which others contenders are forced to, to have a chance. Of course it is part of the game, but for me it has been far less compelling to watch.vosadrian wrote:How so? I am not a fan of the Sky train control of the race, but I have seen some very different racing from Froome over the last 2 years than before that. I was watching the stage from last year TDF live and started viewing just as Froome attacked on the descent and won the stage. I did not believe it was real footage from the race it seemed so unlikely. Over the last couple of years we have seen him attack at unexpected times and mostly not up ascents. He has kept his opponents guessing. We have seen him ride ascents his own way while others attack each other (which may not be your cup of tea). He is doing things differently recently and it makes the race more exciting to watch. The Sky train is still there most of the time... but not all the time like it was. Even then, the Sky train is probably not anything an individual rider could change... and is something that will happen to any protected rider at Sky.
And worst still, the shadow of the 'tainted sport' and my naive wish to watch professional cycling where all the competitors are fair sports.
Return to “International and National Tours and Events”
- General Australian Cycling Topics
- Info / announcements
- Buying a bike / parts
- General Cycling Discussion
- The Bike Shed
- Cycling Health
- Cycling Safety and Advocacy
- Women's Cycling
- Bike & Gear Reviews
- Cycling Trade
- Stolen Bikes
- Bicycle FAQs
- The Market Place
- Member to Member Bike and Gear Sales
- Want to Buy, Group Buy, Swap
- My Bikes or Gear Elsewhere
- Serious Biking
- Audax / Randonneuring
- Retro biking
- Commuting
- MTB
- Recumbents
- Fixed Gear/ Single Speed
- Track
- Electric Bicycles
- Cyclocross and Gravel Grinding
- Dragsters / Lowriders / Cruisers
- Children's Bikes
- Cargo Bikes and Utility Cycling
- Road Racing
- Road Biking
- Training
- Time Trial
- Triathlon
- International and National Tours and Events
- Cycle Touring
- Touring Australia
- Touring Overseas
- Touring Bikes and Equipment
- Australia
- Western Australia
- New South Wales
- Queensland
- South Australia
- Victoria
- ACT
- Tasmania
- Northern Territory
- Country & Regional
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
- All times are UTC+10:00
- Top
- Delete cookies
About the Australian Cycling Forums
The Australian Cycling Forums is a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.
Bicycles Network Australia
Forum Information
Connect with BNA
This website uses affiliate links to retail platforms including ebay, amazon, proviz and ribble.