Contador tests positive for Clenbuterol
Comments
-
Where does that quote come from? Oh yes, Contador's personal press officer...frenchfighter wrote:"The experts consulted so far have agreed also that this is a food contamination case, especially considering the number of tests passed by Alberto Contador during the Tour de France, making it possible to define precisely both the time the emergence of the substance as the tiny amount detected, ruling out any other source or intentionality."
0 -
Assuming that the UCI is reporting this correctly and is not just trying to raise doubts 'in the interests of the sport'.Pokerface wrote:I predict right now that Contador will slide on this. Levels are way too low.0 -
It's banned... but the EU bans American beef precisely because whilst it's not licenced, quite a few farmers slip clenbuterol into animal feed in the US.deal wrote:This drug is banned in American beef also.
But it's complicated, the EU also applies the ban because it helps to protect European beef farmers as well, the addition of steroids is a handy excuse, even though there have been outbreaks poisoning in the past in Europe from contaminated liver where high concentrations caused real illness. The whole subject has been part of a "trade war" requiring high level rulings from the World Trade Organisation.0 -
and the sample was taken on the second day of the TDF.The concentration found by the laboratory was estimated at 50 picograms (or 0,000 000 000 05 grams per ml) which is 400 times less than what the anti-doping laboratories accredited by WADA must be able to detect
So the question is if he does take it intentially how far in advance would he have had to take it to have made it worth his while, i.e. to provide an advantage. I assume that traces in the body diminish over time at a set rate, so someone should be able to estimate this.
I'd also like to understand why it takes the authorities so long to come to this conclusion. The sample was take on the second day of the Tour. It takes this long??!?!Can I upgrade???0 -
meggiedude wrote:
and the sample was taken on the second day of the TDF.The concentration found by the laboratory was estimated at 50 picograms (or 0,000 000 000 05 grams per ml) which is 400 times less than what the anti-doping laboratories accredited by WADA must be able to detect
So the question is if he does take it intentially how far in advance would he have had to take it to have made it worth his while, i.e. to provide an advantage. I assume that traces in the body diminish over time at a set rate, so someone should be able to estimate this.
I'd also like to understand why it takes the authorities so long to come to this conclusion. The sample was take on the second day of the Tour. It takes this long??!?!
Gotta give the spin doctors time to work out the response..0 -
BikingBernie wrote:
The only person for whom there is evidence indicating that the UCI have 'protected' him is Armstrong...RichN95 wrote:Still, the UCI never catch the big names, do they? They're protected, right?
How surprising you come along and try to turn this into an Armstrong debate :roll:
How about Armstrong bribed the chef to drop him a dodgy steak?0 -
Pokerface wrote:If the amount was so low ("400 times less than what WADA must be able to detect"), why is he suspended?
Because any of it is considered a doping infringment. That sentence says they *must* be able to detect 400x more but if they can do less, then that's great.
There's no lower limit for the amount detect in terms of a doping offence.
My impression : Doping offence, substance probably used in some kind of protocol. Interesting it's the same stuff that Chinese fellow was done for.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
meggiedude wrote:
and the sample was taken on the second day of the TDF.The concentration found by the laboratory was estimated at 50 picograms (or 0,000 000 000 05 grams per ml) which is 400 times less than what the anti-doping laboratories accredited by WADA must be able to detect
So the question is if he does take it intentially how far in advance would he have had to take it to have made it worth his while, i.e. to provide an advantage. I assume that traces in the body diminish over time at a set rate, so someone should be able to estimate this.
I'd also like to understand why it takes the authorities so long to come to this conclusion. The sample was take on the second day of the Tour. It takes this long??!?!
The sample was taken on the second REST day - near the END of the Tour.0 -
meggiedude wrote:
and the sample was taken on the second day of the TDF.The concentration found by the laboratory was estimated at 50 picograms (or 0,000 000 000 05 grams per ml) which is 400 times less than what the anti-doping laboratories accredited by WADA must be able to detect
So the question is if he does take it intentially how far in advance would he have had to take it to have made it worth his while, i.e. to provide an advantage. I assume that traces in the body diminish over time at a set rate, so someone should be able to estimate this.
I'd also like to understand why it takes the authorities so long to come to this conclusion. The sample was take on the second day of the Tour. It takes this long??!?!
2nd rest day not 2nd day.0 -
Why can't people read an article correctly. It clearly states that the test was taken on the second rest day- not the 2nd day of the TdF!
"The doping control in question was carried on July 21 during the second rest of the Tour in Pau, in the Pyrenees. The day after, Contador set up overall victory by finishing in the same time as Schleck at the summit of the Col du Tourmalet" (Cyclingnews.com)0 -
Probably a 'storm' in a tea cup.
The first person I thought of though was FF and whether he will be able to weather this 'storm'. Sad, but it's how much we care on this forum.Mens agitat molem0 -
meggiedude wrote:
and the sample was taken on the second day of the TDF.The concentration found by the laboratory was estimated at 50 picograms (or 0,000 000 000 05 grams per ml) which is 400 times less than what the anti-doping laboratories accredited by WADA must be able to detect
So the question is if he does take it intentially how far in advance would he have had to take it to have made it worth his while, i.e. to provide an advantage. I assume that traces in the body diminish over time at a set rate, so someone should be able to estimate this.
I'd also like to understand why it takes the authorities so long to come to this conclusion. The sample was take on the second day of the Tour. It takes this long??!?!
Seond rest day (21 July), not the second day of the tour.
Sorry, too slowI have only two things to say to that; Bo***cks0 -
Pokerface wrote:meggiedude wrote:
and the sample was taken on the second day of the TDF.The concentration found by the laboratory was estimated at 50 picograms (or 0,000 000 000 05 grams per ml) which is 400 times less than what the anti-doping laboratories accredited by WADA must be able to detect
So the question is if he does take it intentially how far in advance would he have had to take it to have made it worth his while, i.e. to provide an advantage. I assume that traces in the body diminish over time at a set rate, so someone should be able to estimate this.
I'd also like to understand why it takes the authorities so long to come to this conclusion. The sample was take on the second day of the Tour. It takes this long??!?!
The sample was taken on the second REST day - near the END of the Tour.
Oops my bad.
My second question still stands though. That was still a loooooonnnnggg time ago.Can I upgrade???0 -
bazbadger wrote:Probably a 'storm' in a tea cup.
The first person I thought of though was FF and whether he will be able to weather this 'storm'. Sad, but it's how much we care on this forum.
Forgive me if I seem a little slow but what is all this about FFI have only two things to say to that; Bo***cks0 -
Perhaps the supposedly low concentrations found are traces left over from his pre-race 'preparation'. I wonder if any of his earlier samples were tested for Clenbuterol, or will be? Perhaps this cannot be done if the 'A' sample has already been used.
This is what Willy Voet had to say about clenbuterol.
Banned from the market in France, Clenbuterol is one of the most powerful hormones when it comes to developing muscular mass. Beef rearers are well aware of its properties: the more meat they can sell, the more money they make. It can give spectacular muscle growth. To work out its effects precisely, we needed a guinea-pig, but it couldn't be one of the riders. They are so happy to be given something new that they tend to lose all restraint and the whole pelelon knows exactly what's happening over the next few weeks. We found the right man soon enough: me. Before the Dauphine Libere in 1996 I took ten pills over seven days, then urinated conscientiously into a jar from days five to eight after taking the final pill. The whole works was then sent to a laboratory in Ghent. The Clenbuterol had been eliminated from my system by day eight. For a cyclist, who will get rid of chemicals far more quickly than someone sedentary like me, the period was still shorter.
And the effects were felt almost immediately. Three hours after I took the first pill, I began shivering. I had the impression that my lungs were swelling, that I had a new battery somewhere in the system. I felt confident, full of energy, strong as a bull - on hormones. The effects lasted for more than a month, effects which we used with good results in the big Tours after that.
0 -
deal wrote:Presumably all the other Astana riders tested positive also since they almost certainly ate the same meals...
anyway some quotes from Victor Conte talking about this drug“It has faster clearance than any of the anabolic steroids, and it's an anabolic substance,”
“It will accelerate healing and tissue. It could also be used as a stimulant but would more likely be used between events to enhance recovery.”
ps. US swimmer Jessica Hardy got a 1 year ban for 'low levels' of clenbuterol.
As Deal has posted clenbuterol is more of a recovery drug therefore finding it the 2nd rest day makes sense.0 -
My second question still stands though. That was still a loooooonnnnggg time ago.
Contador was notified of the "a" result on 24th august, nothing was announced until the "b" sample had been tested. It's good to see the UCI following their own protocols this time unlike last time a tour winner tested positive!0 -
The Mechanic wrote:bazbadger wrote:Probably a 'storm' in a tea cup.
The first person I thought of though was FF and whether he will be able to weather this 'storm'. Sad, but it's how much we care on this forum.
Forgive me if I seem a little slow but what is all this about FF
FrenchFighter, a person on this forum who is not backwards in coming forwards in showing their appreciation for Contadors supreme skills.Mens agitat molem0 -
Not at all, RichN95 was the one trying to make a sideways reference to Armstrong...Gazzaputt wrote:
How surprising you come along and try to turn this into an Armstrong debateBikingBernie wrote:
The only person for whom there is evidence indicating that the UCI have 'protected' him is Armstrong...RichN95 wrote:Still, the UCI never catch the big names, do they? They're protected, right?0 -
Wow number one read story on the BBC at the moment.0
-
Sorry if I'm missing something here, but if it is a recovery drug, and it was found on a recovery/rest day wouldn't the levels have been higher if he'd taken it that day.Gazzaputt wrote:deal wrote:Presumably all the other Astana riders tested positive also since they almost certainly ate the same meals...
anyway some quotes from Victor Conte talking about this drug“It has faster clearance than any of the anabolic steroids, and it's an anabolic substance,”
“It will accelerate healing and tissue. It could also be used as a stimulant but would more likely be used between events to enhance recovery.”
ps. US swimmer Jessica Hardy got a 1 year ban for 'low levels' of clenbuterol.
As Deal has posted clenbuterol is more of a recovery drug therefore finding it the 2nd rest day makes sense.
To have got such low levels he must have ingested/injected it before the tour, if it had been deliberate.Can I upgrade???0 -
Let's not forget the REAL story here: Andy Schleck may just pick up his first TdF win after all. 8)0
-
On the plus side, we won’t have to sit through any Sidi or Selle Italia adverts during the Tour of Lombardy0
-
Any doping boffins out there: is anything else used to mask it? Anything that could explain why it wasn't detected earlier if it was anything else besides 'an accident'?0
-
BikingBernie wrote:Perhaps the supposedly low concentrations found are traces left over from his pre-race 'preparation'. I wonder if any of his earlier samples were tested for Clenbuterol, or will be? Perhaps this cannot be done if the 'A' sample has already been used.
Could it be he reinfused previously contaminated blood? Made the collection a day or so too soon after using the drug.0 -
True, but he won't enjoy winning it this way. Will have missed out on all the Champers and photos in Paris.Pokerface wrote:Let's not forget the REAL story here: Andy Schleck may just pick up his first TdF win after all. 8)
Mind you, you can do wonders with Photoshop.Can I upgrade???0 -
jimmythecuckoo wrote:Not good timing this close to the worlds. But is anyone truly surprised?
that he was caught yes but otherwise no
oh look the guy that won was a drug taking cheat
is he going to get a pass on the low concentration"If I was a 38 year old man, I definitely wouldn't be riding a bright yellow bike with Hello Kitty disc wheels, put it that way. What we're witnessing here is the world's most high profile mid-life crisis" Afx237vi Mon Jul 20, 2009 2:43 pm0 -
How many times did Armstrong get caught out? Regardless of being guilty or not. Oh dear Mr C. Naughty boy. What does all his fans say now about "Mr Wonderful"?0
-
Simplest explanation would be that it simply wasn't tested for. Due to the cost and other factors only a few tests are usually done on each sample, and these are more likely to focus on drugs known to be in widespread use, such as Epo. At other times tests won't be run unless there is already a suggestion that a certain drug has been used. One example is the way the IRMS tests for testosterone weren't done on Landis' samples until an abnormal T/E ratio test had suggested something was amiss.Pokerface wrote:Anything that could explain why it wasn't detected earlier if it was anything else besides 'an accident'?0
