Contador tests positive for Clenbuterol

moray_gub

Pokerface wrote:

I wasn't talking about 'changing the rules'. I was just saying they should take their time and get it right - not rush to judgement (as most of us have done).

I .

As they should do in all cases the thought that they should make this a special case as you are suggesting is ridiculous .

cajun_cyclist

In sports though, I saw Manchester United given enough extra time to defeat Aston Villa and on the other side of the coin, those UEFA officials seemed to have hard done Chelsea a few times, these are widely held opinions by many and not that I'm really talking about teams where I know in the UK, people can be very adamant. Or even the cockeyed example of Republic of Ireland vs. France with that Henry handball leading to a goal yet in the end, that France team has been a fiasco and took up space at the world cup where a worthy team could have gone. So we see things like this happen in sports.

And here, it dawned on me, we may or 'could' have a parallel to the way LA was treated with the TUE, exempt prescription drug.

I don't know about PokerFace but when I was younger and even a few years ago, positively I could seeth at sports injustices, it raise the blood pressure, one might feel like going on a crusade against some sports team or entity and in fact, I probably still feel that way with some things.

No comment on the story per se, thought I would put that out there, I kind of understand the sentiment. I don't think PokerFace is saying treat 'em with kid gloves. Yes, I doubted AC before, I doubt him more now and did not cheer him on any. I was unhappy he won the TdF but was able to accept it. Cycling has already had these kinds of winners already for a long time, even when they talk about Merckx I sigh, yeh, he's pretty cool but still, seems he even did things.

luckao

cajun_cyclist wrote:

In sports though, I saw Manchester United given enough extra time to defeat Aston Villa

They do announce it as "the minimum amount of added time". I don't get why so many people think that it's an injustice perpetrated on United's behalf.

frenchfighter

“The UCI has always asked me not to tell this to anyone,” Contador told TV2 Sport. “[The reason was] so it could be resolved in the best way. For it was not a positive event, but a very detailed matter that requires very detailed analysis.”

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5879/ ... z11GwuLwng

No_Ta_Doctor

There are so many questions that need to be answered by the UCI on how they've handled this.

There credibility (hah) rests on being able to show they have a transparent, effective, impartial protocol for their anti doping program.

So I'd like to know the following:

When did the B result come in?
At what point did WADA become informed? (the UCI say straight away, I'd like it confirmed)
Did WADA allow them to sit on the news? On what basis? Is there a precedent or a clause that allows them to do this?
At what point was Contador officially suspended, was this prior to the announcement of his positive?
What is the correct protocol for handling a positive result, why do some riders have positive a samples announced publicly and others not? Is this at the discretion of the rider or the UCI? Why not a procedure that applies to all riders?


Currently the picture looks like in the worst case they've attempted and botched a cover up, in the best case they've handled this unprofessionally.

dougzz

frenchfighter wrote:

“The UCI has always asked me not to tell this to anyone,” Contador told TV2 Sport. “[The reason was] so it could be resolved in the best way. For it was not a positive event, but a very detailed matter that requires very detailed analysis.”

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5879/ ... z11GwuLwng

Which he did when it suited him. But the minute Team Bertie knew the German's had the story they went public in an effort to control the event. Classic manipulation. Not telling Riis was disgraceful behaviour. He is generally good to watch, but you can't pretend there isn't a problem here just because you like him.

micron

+1 doug, and I like Contador a good deal more than some other notable dopers

I think there are a couple of 'elephants in the room' for the UCI here:

1)The Li Fuyu (Radioshack) clen positive - funny one of the few Bruyneel +ves is for the same substance
2) the OCLAESP investigation into transfusion equipment found at 09 TdF which again links Bruyneel/Armstrong to Contador/blood doping

Plasticizers test is 'partially validated' which seems to mean it can't be used to establish a +ve but can be used in a tribunal as additional evidence - just can't see UCI wanting to touch that one with a barge pole.

I think they'll throw Contador to the wolves because there's too much at stake if people start looking at UCI cover ups...

ratsbeyfus

Can anyone answer this one for me?

Surely if a sportsperson tests positive for PED, and the test is verified, isn't it up to the sportsperson to defend themselves against the charge not the sports governing body? Sometimes the sportsperson will get assistance (e.g. financial, technical, legal, etc) from their national association, but surely the governing body shouldn't be involved in defending those that they catch being doped. How does it work with other sports and their governing bodies?

IMO once it has been verified that a sportsperson has tested positive the result should be announced immediately. Then the athlete should have a certain amount of time to prepare their case (or defense) which should be submitted to some form of expert panel on the governing body. They can then decide whether there are mitigating circumstances (e.g. whether the doping was intentional or unintentional, whether that person had tested positive as result of drinking Jack Daniels, etc.).

Kléber

ratsbeyfus, that's the right idea. Only the UCI seem to have kept the news secret for some time whilst they "investigated" the matter. But oddly this investigation didn't include a search for the dodgy butchers in Spain.

As you say the test is verified and Contador is positive. The rules say he's got to show the clenbuterol came from the steak, it's no good just saying it's small amount, that it's probably from a bad steak and asking for favours.

ratsbeyfus

This should probably go on a different thread, but how do you get change at the UCI? Is the president elected like in FIFA? If so, how often are they? Could a candidate run with the aim of regaining the UCI's credibility and making them more transparent? Anyone got any answers?

micron

think what happened with AC is that what could have been discounted as an 'abnormal' reading (though WADA code says there is zero level for clen) was complicated by the presence of plasticizers

UCI are meeting in a couple of days time - there were rumours of a write in campaign calling for a vote of no confidence in McQuaid. Think that's the way you'd have to proceed but he was elected unopposed last time so it's hard to know whether that's a) cronyism or b) nobody wanting the job

dennisn

Kléber wrote:

ratsbeyfus, that's the right idea. Only the UCI seem to have kept the news secret for some time whilst they "investigated" the matter. But oddly this investigation didn't include a search for the dodgy butchers in Spain.

As you say the test is verified and Contador is positive. The rules say he's got to show the clenbuterol came from the steak, it's no good just saying it's small amount, that it's probably from a bad steak and asking for favours.

Not sure how a "dodgy butcher"(if there is such a thing) would know whether a cow
had been given PEDS. I'm sure the person(s) who raised said cow(s) weren't bragging about it.
I wish AC luck in PROVING it came from a steak. Not at all sure how that's going to happen or can be done.

Buckled_Rims

dennisn wrote:

Kléber wrote:

ratsbeyfus, that's the right idea. Only the UCI seem to have kept the news secret for some time whilst they "investigated" the matter. But oddly this investigation didn't include a search for the dodgy butchers in Spain.

As you say the test is verified and Contador is positive. The rules say he's got to show the clenbuterol came from the steak, it's no good just saying it's small amount, that it's probably from a bad steak and asking for favours.

Not sure how a "dodgy butcher"(if there is such a thing) would know whether a cow
had been given PEDS. I'm sure the person(s) who raised said cow(s) weren't bragging about it.
I wish AC luck in PROVING it came from a steak. Not at all sure how that's going to happen or can be done.

I've been suggesting for a long time all cyclists deficate into a plastic bag and keep it in cold storage as proof of what they've ate. Then if any disputes arise they can rattle their bags at the UCI.

Mettan

Pokerface wrote:

Don't get me wrong - I personally think he's guilty.

+ 1 Agreed.

But I have a feeling Contador, Spain, World cycling and the multi-billion dollar cycling industry will no doubt find some poor Spanish meat seller with some Clen infested stock soon - there's too much at stake for it not to be found ......

(A trivial task logistically tbh)

slowondefy2

How frequent are samples taken?

It seems odd to me (from a naive standpoint) that there's only the A and B samples available. Of course, not every sample has to be tested, but multiple samples could be stored and only tested in case of an issue (i.e. if there's a positive on a random test).

If AC (and every other participant) had a sample taken on a monthly basis for 6 months prior to an event it'd easily differentiate between a small accidental contamination from food and a nefarious dose taken during training.

Pokerface

slowondefy2 wrote:

How frequent are samples taken?

It seems odd to me (from a naive standpoint) that there's only the A and B samples available.

Very simply - when you get tested - the sample for that day is split into two parts - one labelled "A" and one "B". The split is done in front of you at the time you give the sample and you verify it.

Testing is done much later.

Gazzetta67

What gets me is that McQuaid cant get to a microphone quick enough to rubbish landis regarding his armstrong/bruyneel allegations - and when it`s contador he not talking about the subject ! Just like his interview on irish radio regarding Armstrong giving the UCI money for a drug testing machine.
McQuaid & his cronies at the UCI are like the mafia - lets keep it indoors eh Pat ?

Anyway am of to get my dinner a Large piece of sirloin steak for my bike ride tomo lets hope its got loads of clenbuytyrol (wrong spelling lol) in it

BikingBernie

Pokerface wrote:

I'd really like to see this test for plasticizers in the blood ratified/verified so they can detect blood transfusions - and possibly prove that is what happened in this case. A valid test for blood transfusions will drastically change cycling forever and will be a HUGE step towards cleaning up the sport.

Urinary di-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate metabolites in athletes as screening measure for illicit blood doping: a comparison study with patients receiving blood transfusion

Núria Monfort†, Rosa Ventura†, Ana Latorre, Viviana Belalcazar, Mercè López, Jordi Segura

Article first published online: 18 AUG 2009

DOI: 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2009.02352.x

BACKGROUND: Subjects submitted to intravenous (IV) blood transfusions for medical reasons or blood doping to increase athletic performance are potentially exposed to the plasticizer di-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) found in IV bags. Exposure to DEHP has been evaluated by measuring DEHP metabolites in selected groups of subjects.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Urinary DEHP metabolites, mono-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, mono-(2-ethyl-5-hydroxyhexyl)phthalate (MEHHP), and mono-(2-ethyl-5-oxohexyl)phthalate (MEOHP) were measured in a control group with no explicit known exposure to DEHP (n = 30), hospitalized patients receiving blood transfusions (n = 25), nontransfused hospitalized patients receiving other medical care involving plastic materials (n = 39), and athletes (n = 127). Patients were tested in the periods 0 to 24 and 24 to 48 hours after exposition.

RESULTS: Urinary concentrations of all three DEHP metabolites were significantly higher in patients receiving blood transfusion than in nontransfused patients and the control group, except for MEHHP and MEOHP in the period 24 to 48 hours. Samples from four athletes showed increased concentrations of DEHP metabolites comparable to urinary concentrations of patients receiving blood transfusion.

CONCLUSION: Elevated concentrations of urinary DEHP metabolites represent increased exposure to DEHP. High concentrations of DEHP metabolites present in urine collected from athletes may suggest illegal blood transfusion and can be used as a qualitative screening measure for blood doping.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 352.x/full

Of course, if this test is introduced, the riders will just start to use old-fashioned glass containers.

rdt

frenchfighter wrote:

“The UCI has always asked me not to tell this to anyone,” Contador told TV2 Sport. “[The reason was] so it could be resolved in the best way. For it was not a positive event, but a very detailed matter that requires very detailed analysis.”

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5879/ ... z11GwuLwng

With its "cover-up" and "special treatment" intentions laid bare, is it possible the UCI, giving it the benefit of the doubt, is just amateurish, incompetent and clueless? Or is the situation worse than that?

WTF has the world of cycling done to deserve such an organisation?

cajun_cyclist

Briefly, apparently there is now an 'expert' saying one could absorb the Clenbuterol through steak vs. Liver which is surely the prime way victims have eaten it.

Canadian expert Brendon Gurd does indeed say one could absorb the Clenbuterol through steak.

A contaminated steak is all that Tour de France champion Alberto Contador of Spain had to consume to test positive for the banned substance clenbuterol, according to Brendon Gurd, a professor in the school of kinesiology and health studies at Queen’s University.
...

There is considerable residue of clenbuterol in tissues taken from cattle, sheep and pigs that have been fed the substance, Gurd said. “This supports the contention that humans could be exposed to clenbuterol by eating meat from an animal that had been administered dietary clenbuterol.”

http://www.barcelonareporter.com/index. ... nts/18770/

So this could be a point of contention.

The earlier Clenbuterol cases in Spain:

... Dozens of people were sickened in 1992 in Spain's Catalonia region by eating clenbuterol-laced veal liver or veal tongue and cannelloni, also thought to have been contaminated.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101002/ap_ ... er100209_1

So, at the least, eating liver is much more common in getting this in one's system, perhaps even such small amounts of Clen would not even poison someone so not being reported or even being known by the recipient. I would think they would need to find a case where one gets Clenbuterol in their system through eating a steak, still, there is an expert now saying it can happen.

frenchfighter

So you eat liver and there are how many pico grams after 1 day? 50,000? And meat, 50? Haven't seen any info on the levels yet?

dennisn

rdt wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

“The UCI has always asked me not to tell this to anyone,” Contador told TV2 Sport. “[The reason was] so it could be resolved in the best way. For it was not a positive event, but a very detailed matter that requires very detailed analysis.”

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5879/ ... z11GwuLwng

With its "cover-up" and "special treatment" intentions laid bare, is it possible the UCI, giving it the benefit of the doubt, is just amateurish, incompetent and clueless? Or is the situation worse than that?

WTF has the world of cycling done to deserve such an organisation?

Remember, this "special treatment" and "cover up" is according to you. It IS possible that they are trying to handle this in a correct and legal manner.
As for your "amateurish,........." that sounds like so many other people who watch the games on TV and then claim to know exactly why their team lost, who's to blame for it, how it can be corrected, and that if they were head coach, well, things would be different.

cajun_cyclist

frenchfighter wrote:

So you eat liver and there are how many pico grams after 1 day? 50,000? And meat, 50? Haven't seen any info on the levels yet?

All I see is there is a counter-expert saying it could be absorbed this way versus what that Portuguese Professor was saying. All the way from Canada so we'll have to see.

---

As to the topic of coverup, I'm just wondering that perhaps the Tour has been told that all this doping makes for bad TV ratings, it's absolutely embarrassing to see a tour with all the ruinations of doping. Perhaps the sponsours, etc. talked to them. Economic considerations.

So this year, it appeared like the Tour was squeaky clean really until this episode.

In a way it would be understandable to try to quell all of the scandals, imagine if we saw this in Major League Baseball which does have a little of that or in the NFL or the Football leagues in Europe. In cycling, it seems to be a constantly dominant story.

---

I'd also like to make clear when I said I don't cheer Contador, I am sorry, I speak Spanish, cheered for Spain and in fact, picked them 2 months prior to the Euro '08 to win their first major football trophy in many many years.

But it seems their riders, those of Spain have in fact, been flying under the radar regarding the doping scene and some caught yes like Iban Mayo, the Basque. Spain has also had two related heart failure related deaths in their football La Liga in the past 3 years and another player who had heart problems. Of course, you can find these kinds of incidences everywhere. Combine that with Operation Puerto and one wonders.

Actually, the Liga probably has had 'match fixing' or 'ref bribing' scandals like Serie A has but the fact is it hasn't been played up or received the same kind of coverage.

So, I hope no one would take it personal if I say, I'll put it this way, there is definitely a cloud hanging over the Spanish riders but as someone else stated in this thread, there is a good chance the next in line would also have been using. Too you can look at the US with Landis and Hamilton and say the US has it's doped riders or most other countries but the Spanish have been winning a lot of the Grand Tours in recent years andf of course, some are sceptical of Indurain as well way back.

I understand Spain has been strengthening their doping laws. In Marca the just yesterday, it showed McQauid saying that Spain had a major problem with doping they needed to confront. Nothing against any of these riders personally.

frenchfighter

cajun_cyclist wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

So you eat liver and there are how many pico grams after 1 day? 50,000? And meat, 50? Haven't seen any info on the levels yet?

All I see is there is a counter-expert saying it could be absorbed this way versus what that Portuguese Professor was saying. All the way from Canada so we'll have to see.

No I got you and the point you posted. Just a lot of people saying how it only could be liver, but I would be curious to know what type of levels would be in the blood a day later. Because 50 trillionths of a gram is absolutely tiny.

dougzz

ratsbeyfus wrote:

This should probably go on a different thread, but how do you get change at the UCI? Is the president elected like in FIFA? If so, how often are they? Could a candidate run with the aim of regaining the UCI's credibility and making them more transparent? Anyone got any answers?

FIFA, poor analogy if you're looking for credibility in a Sporting Authority. Blatter is as bent as a nine bob note.

RichN95.

dougzz wrote:

ratsbeyfus wrote:

This should probably go on a different thread, but how do you get change at the UCI? Is the president elected like in FIFA? If so, how often are they? Could a candidate run with the aim of regaining the UCI's credibility and making them more transparent? Anyone got any answers?

FIFA, poor analogy if you're looking for credibility in a Sporting Authority. Blatter is as bent as a nine bob note.

+1. Blatter makes McQuaid look like Nelson Mandela.


(Not literally. He doesn't pin him down and cover him in boot polish at IOC meetings)

iainf72

RichN95 wrote:

+1. Blatter makes McQuaid look like Nelson Mandela.

Does Pat have a similar ex-wife?

To be fair, Pat is a pussy cat compared to most governing bodies. Hell, isn't being welcomed to the IOC family kind of like becoming a freemason, a scientologist and a druid all in one go?

That job (running the UCI) is a poison chalice. They've got to promote the sport and to do that they need the big events and big stars. If you went at doping head on you'd not have much left to promote. We can slag off the UCI, but they just put on a great worlds, the 2 Canadian races were excellent

The governing body and anti-doping needs to be done separately.

ratsbeyfus

dougzz wrote:

ratsbeyfus wrote:

This should probably go on a different thread, but how do you get change at the UCI? Is the president elected like in FIFA? If so, how often are they? Could a candidate run with the aim of regaining the UCI's credibility and making them more transparent? Anyone got any answers?

FIFA, poor analogy if you're looking for credibility in a Sporting Authority. Blatter is as bent as a nine bob note.

Fair enough - it was just the only governing body I could think of off the top of my head that has an elected president who campaigns on a specific platform.

iainf72

ratsbeyfus wrote:

Fair enough - it was just the only governing body I could think of off the top of my head that has an elected president who campaigns on a specific platform.

Pat is elected.

And he's quite popular with a lot of the smaller federations I believe which is why he wins.

Pokerface

Toys out of the pram - or blackmail:

http://velonews.competitor.com/2010/10/ ... ing_144526


“If this is not resolved favorably and in a just fashion, then I would have to reconsider or not I would ever come back to the bike,” Contador said