Sainz : doping fight a hoax

iainf72

http://www.newspress.com/Top/Article/ar ... 9661066073

He's got a bit of a point - The BBC ran a documentry a while ago about HGH and when you saw the size of the factory producing it in China you got the impression there was no hope.

Kléber

He would say that, the good ol' "it's not my fault guv, everyone's at it these days" defence. :roll:

As for that factory in China, half of it's going to kids who want to bodybuild to look tough and then get liver cancer, the other half's for domestic consumption before the Games this summer.

andyp

My initial thought was "well he would say that wouldn't he". However, it can't be that much of a hoax when he's looking at an 18 month jail sentence surely?

That said, he's spent the last 40 years working in cycling without reprimand. :shock:

iainf72

Kléber wrote:

He would say that, the good ol' "it's not my fault guv, everyone's at it these days" defence. :roll:

That true, but it doesn't make his point less valid.

The whole thing is a farce - All anyone is interested in is maintaining an illusion.

LangerDan

He is talking a certain amount of bull plop, though. There won't be any Balco-type labs producing EPO for two reasons. Firstly manufacturing biologics like EPO is staggeringly expensive and fraught with issues such as maintaining sterility. Synthesis of steroids can be achieved under much less rigorous conditions. The second reason is that athletes would pay a premium for a "designer" steroid which is aimed at evading detection. You wont get any premium for EPO as the standard product is not easy to detect and is widely available.

(The coverage of the Chinese HGH facility is a bit of a red herring - commercial production of most pharmaceuticals is a large-scale operation, plus most facilities are dssigned to produce an array of products. I could show you a picture of any number of large pharmaceutical facilities down the road here and intone in my best BBC accent that this is where the active ingredient for Viagra / Lipitor / Prozac is produced, and allow you to make your own inferences about the horniness, fatness or mental state of the locals.. However, production actually takes place in just one of the site buildings and usually only for small portion of the year. I suspect the same applies to the Chinese facility)

iainf72

LangerDan wrote:

He is talking a certain amount of bull plop, though. There won't be any Balco-type labs producing EPO for two reasons. Firstly manufacturing biologics like EPO is staggeringly expensive and fraught with issues such as maintaining sterility.

Didn't Fuentes use dodgy cheap Chinese EPO?

German magazine Der Spiegel reported that the Spanish Guardia Civil found fake EPO, originating from China, at Dr Eufemiano Fuentes Madrid laboratory, as well as anabolic products from a "secret laboratory".

By fake EPO I assume they mean a generic copy.

LangerDan

It could be variety of things - fakes (syringes and packaging for an EPO product such as DynEpo or Epogen but containing only water or actually containing EPO but not manufactured by Amgen etc) or more dilute doses labelled as stronger ones or generics. It could even be a fully legit and approved material but just made in China.

IIRC, the wholesale price from the maufacturer for the smallest dose of the most dilute version of EPO form the usual suspects (Amgen, Wyeth etc) is around $25-30, running up to $300 or 400 per dose for the more expensive variants. Would make sense to try and source the cheapest versions to maximise the profit. Its not as if valv.piti is going to complain to the Spanish version of BUPA about the cost of the stuff.

drenkrom

Whatever merits his insinuations may have, this has nothing at all to do with Sainz' own case.It's simply a smoke screen. If anti-doping is such a hoax, how exactly did he come to be accused? If anti-doping is a hoax and BALCO should be some kind of demonstration of this, why did they get busted? The "real culprits" are the labs (maybe) producing the goods? I kind of thought there was no act of doping until a needle was stuck into an athlete, which is where Sainz came in. How full of sh!t can you get?

He got caught, he faces a good sentence, hence the people accusing him don't know how to do their job and their actions are part of a grand hoax? I'll just smile and nod to that. :roll:

DaveyL

iainf72 wrote:

LangerDan wrote:

He is talking a certain amount of bull plop, though. There won't be any Balco-type labs producing EPO for two reasons. Firstly manufacturing biologics like EPO is staggeringly expensive and fraught with issues such as maintaining sterility.

Didn't Fuentes use dodgy cheap Chinese EPO?

German magazine Der Spiegel reported that the Spanish Guardia Civil found fake EPO, originating from China, at Dr Eufemiano Fuentes Madrid laboratory, as well as anabolic products from a "secret laboratory".

By fake EPO I assume they mean a generic copy.

I believe that some recombinant EPO (r-EPO or rhEPO), which is the stuff athletes use to dope, is produced in China from transgenic mice, as well as companies like Amgen etc. In the above, I would read "fake" as "synthetic", i.e. rhEPO. Though it could be black market versions of a tradenamed EPO like Aranesp.

iainf72

drenkrom wrote:

Whatever merits his insinuations may have, this has nothing at all to do with Sainz' own case.It's simply a smoke screen. If anti-doping is such a hoax, how exactly did he come to be accused?

Because there have to be some fall guys to make it look like they're actually doing something. Can you honestly say in your heart of hearts you believe the sports governing bodies or race organisers really give 2 hoots about doping.

It works - Look at all the mugs out there who think 2008 is cleaner.

DaveyL

iainf72 wrote:

It works - Look at all the mugs out there who think 2008 is cleaner.

Am I buying into a load of cack when I believe Vaughters when he says that he believes, for the first time since he started as a pro, that it is possible to win races clean?

I'd say 2008 is cleaner than 1998.

iainf72

DaveyL wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

It works - Look at all the mugs out there who think 2008 is cleaner.

Am I buying into a load of cack when I believe Vaughters when he says that he believes, for the first time since he started as a pro, that it is possible to win races clean?

I'd say 2008 is cleaner than 1998.

Maybe overall percentages are cleaner but at the sharp end I very much doubt it is. And really, that's what counts, eh?

It's always been possible to win races clean. Chris Boardman did it and he did it back in the bad old days [tm]

DaveyL

So are you a mug if you think the percentage of clean riders is greater in 2008 than before?

I do agree with that. But it can now go one of two ways - either they will keep chipping away a few more % at a time until they basically have a clean sport, or they will get down to just a group of guys who will never give up the juice no matter what. The main thing for me is that the UCI do everything they can within reason to root the problem out - in every sport, and in every walk of life, there will always be people who choose to cheat. You just have to make sure you're making life as hard as possible for them.

Kléber

DaveyL wrote:

Am I buying into a load of cack when I believe Vaughters when he says that he believes, for the first time since he started as a pro, that it is possible to win races clean?

Where did he say this? And if so, would he like to comment on his wins achieved as a pro, such as his Ventoux stage win and how he operated with the US Postal team?

DaveyL

Sorry, what he said was “Right here, right now, the sport is cleaned up enough that you can win clean. I’m not saying that it’s easy, and I’m not saying that the odds are in your favour, but it can be done. And that hasn’t been true in a little while.”

It's about 27 min to his interview on Competitor Radio. I posted a while ago that this interview was required listening for anyone who wanted to comment on Vaughters/Slipstream/the whole doping thing, but I don't think anyone bothered checking it out. Which is a real shame. It's very interesting and enlightening and would probably set a few things straight with some people here.

Jez mon

iainf72 wrote:

It works - Look at all the mugs out there who think 2008 is cleaner.

I resent being called a mug! Personally I believe that 2008 is cleaner than the past. Cycling does often seem rotten to the core, and obviously the UCI will have a somewhat ambivalent attitude to the fight against drugs. On the one hand, it can't be seen to be doing nothing, on the other, when a cyclist gets caught the sport gets dragged through the press.

Personally, however, i feel Slipstream's attempts are honest. The other clean teams may be less so. However, we should remember that a higher budget means more talented leaders and backup therefore the team is more likely to get wins...drugs or no drugs.

Slipstream does not have the highest budget, in the past i have been unfair in describing them as boring, however, in retrospect, for a non pro tour team, they have had a good classics season and hopefully will do well in the pro tours.

iainf72

Jez mon wrote:

Personally, however, i feel Slipstream's attempts are honest. The other clean teams may be less so. However, we should remember that a higher budget means more talented leaders and backup therefore the team is more likely to get wins...drugs or no drugs.

Not to simplify things too much, but Millar on the gear was world champion, Millar without gear seems not quite so good.

Slipstreams attempts might be, probably are "honest", but just because they're being invited to big races doesn't make the sport and cleaner, does it? What have they done in the classics? Great ride in Paris-Roubaix but aside from that? Milan-San Remo out in the initial break which is the function usually performed by the no-hoper Italian teams.

The same guys who won the races last year are winning races this year. That indicates, to me at least, that it's more of the same. Whatever that is.

phil s

Maybe you should start following another sport. Nothing's ever good enough for you, is it?

DaveyL

Iain's these two guys all rolled into one:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8b/StatlerAndWaldorf.jpg

iainf72

phil s wrote:

Maybe you should start following another sport. Nothing's ever good enough for you, is it?

I'm playing devils advocate a lot of the time. If you're happy to look at the weight of evidence and think things are cleaner, then that's fine.

I'd be happy if they were all on it and getting away with it consistantly. At least it would be consistant.

DaveyL

iainf72 wrote:

I'd be happy if they were all on it and getting away with it consistantly. At least it would be consistant.

Really? Maybe the WWF is for you then!

iainf72

DaveyL wrote:

Iain's these two guys all rolled into one:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8b/StatlerAndWaldorf.jpg

ROFL.

It's hilarious because I've been accused of being them at work this week! So I'm obviously like this all the time.

DaveyL

"The dancing girls are coming on - synchronise pacemakers!"

phil s

You do play devil's advocate very well, I must admit. I reckon the acid test will be once the Grand Tours kick off, then we'll perhaps see how things pan out. Until then please let us hold onto a little shred of hope

iainf72

phil s wrote:

You do play devil's advocate very well, I must admit. I reckon the acid test will be once the Grand Tours kick off, then we'll perhaps see how things pan out. Until then please let us hold onto a little shred of hope

I'll even admit the clean guys - And I'd probably be happy to say Gilbert is clean, have made some of the races very exciting this year.

I might follow the Afx model for a while and only talk about the racing!

phil s

That's a deal Iain, £1 to charity everytime you mention the D word or allude to it in the next month!

flattythehurdler

LangerDan wrote:

He is talking a certain amount of bull plop, though. There won't be any Balco-type labs producing EPO for two reasons. Firstly manufacturing biologics like EPO is staggeringly expensive and fraught with issues such as maintaining sterility. Synthesis of steroids can be achieved under much less rigorous conditions. The second reason is that athletes would pay a premium for a "designer" steroid which is aimed at evading detection. You wont get any premium for EPO as the standard product is not easy to detect and is widely available.

(The coverage of the Chinese HGH facility is a bit of a red herring - commercial production of most pharmaceuticals is a large-scale operation, plus most facilities are dssigned to produce an array of products. I could show you a picture of any number of large pharmaceutical facilities down the road here and intone in my best BBC accent that this is where the active ingredient for Viagra / Lipitor / Prozac is produced, and allow you to make your own inferences about the horniness, fatness or mental state of the locals.. However, production actually takes place in just one of the site buildings and usually only for small portion of the year. I suspect the same applies to the Chinese facility)

Langerdan, your turn of phrase never fails to brighten my day.

drenkrom

My very reliable source in the PT peloton reports the number of guys on the juice is falling, and those remaining on it are taking it a lot easier this year. He wasn't in Europe last year and says he saw a big difference between 2006 and 2008. And saying the same guys are winning this year as last is just plain wrong, Iain. You missed the start of the season or something?

forearms Van Petegem

Denkrom, would that ryder say his team is clean. Does he say Healthnet were? Because Healthnet were known as a doping squad. And is some Canadian circles, a few ryders were not thought of as clean. Remember he came out of Phonak and USPS.

You hear of Symmetrics as a clean team. My mail is that those trailers out the back of Cunninghams place may not be as clean as their reputation.

andyp

drenkrom wrote:

And saying the same guys are winning this year as last is just plain wrong, Iain. You missed the start of the season or something?

Eh? Cancellara, Leipheimer, Contador, Boonen, Rebellin et al? Sounds like the usual suspects to me.

The only rider who has won a few races this year that you wouldn't expect to based on previous results is Sylvain Chavanel.