Contador tests positive for Clenbuterol

bsm2dj

What you need to remember is that the concentrations of drug detected in plasma and urine are always significantly lower (by orders of magnitude in some cases) than what was actually administered/ingested.

Although if the half-life of the drug is 25-30h, as stated, then to have 'trace' amounts would imply that it was taken days before the actual doping test was performed. Whether or not these 'trace' amounts are sufficient to aid recovery is another question?

You do start to wonder what the drug was taken for, aid performance or recovery, or both?

BikingBernie

Pokerface wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

The major points brought up by Dr. de Boer's opinion are as follows:

* Alberto Contador underwent sport drug testing during many days of the 2010 Tour de France, including July 19, 20, 21, and 22.
* No Clenbuterol was detected in any of the tests prior to July 21.
* An extremely low trace concentration of Clenbuterol was found in the urine sample taken on July 21; the concentration found in the urine sample taken on July 22 was even lower.
* The half-life of Clenbuterol is 25-39 hours.
*These facts show that Clenbuterol was ingested after the urine testing on July 20 in an amount that could have never enhanced his performance.
* There are numerous documented cases of humans ingesting Clenbuterol accidentally by eating meat from animals that have been fed the substance to stimulate growth.

See full here:
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5837/ ... z1104hMz9d

This all assumes that he was tested for clenbuterol in previous tests.

Exactly, and so far I have seen no definitive sources showing that earlier tests for Clenbuterol were in fact conducted. I wonder if de Boer is able to provide such confirmation, or is he just extrapolating from the fact that non of his earlier tests were declared positive? (Something which means little without knowing what tests were actually conducted).

bsm2dj

I should have also added that since his urine test the day before the positive result was negative, if he took it after that test then amounts in urine/plasma should have been much higher. Which is why I asked whether or not you only need a small amount to aid recovery etc...

calvjones

Richrd2205 wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

So, given the info in my above post, can someone explain why Contador would intentionally ingest totally insignificant amounts if it would have zero effect on his performance?

Upthread, someone mentioned the possibility of using a contaminated blood top up. As is also stated up-thread, using a thermogenic drug mid-race might be a little odd, but using off season as a fat burner & taking blood a day or so too soon, then re-infusing on a rest day wouldn't be a particularly unlikely scenario, it seems.

Rich, I think you may have it.

BikingBernie

Neil Buckley wrote:

Willy Voets, great bloke, the person who pretty much helped the rot start in cycling.

:roll: More like he was one of the first people to break the 'omerta' and to reveal just how rotten pro cycling really is, so opening up the possibility of rebuilding the sport free of the doping and corruption that currently dominates it.

BikingBernie

calvjones wrote:

Richrd2205 wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

So, given the info in my above post, can someone explain why Contador would intentionally ingest totally insignificant amounts if it would have zero effect on his performance?

Upthread, someone mentioned the possibility of using a contaminated blood top up. As is also stated up-thread, using a thermogenic drug mid-race might be a little odd, but using off season as a fat burner & taking blood a day or so too soon, then re-infusing on a rest day wouldn't be a particularly unlikely scenario, it seems.

Rich, I think you may have it.

I also agree that this would fit the facts, as we currently know them.

FransJacques

The facts raise some valid questions that need to be answered, namely:

1. If the amount detected was 0.25% of the minimum required level for dectection, is there a defined accuracy/calibration of the testing apparatus for such small levels of the substance?

2. Given that the level was so low, and that Clenbuterol is know to be a substance that is retained in the body for extended periods of time (36 - 39 hours half-life), if it was taken at micro-dose levels, then it would have been present in his system at earlier tests done in Le Tour.

3. Are any of his other samples from the race showing similar amounts?

4. Why would a rider take such a drug at the second rest day of Le Tour? The weight-loss, lean muscle - fat ratio enhancing properties are not going to give him any benefit within the next 5-7 days, where it might be of benefit?

5. I can understand why he might take it , given his propensity for asthma and allergy problems, which are well documented, but if the dosage was administered on the rest day, would such a small amount make a difference to his breathing, that could not be obtained from other similar drugs such as Salbutamol or similar?

6. The drug is widely available to farmers, there is a history of the drug being used to improve animals lean-fat ratio, to get better prices at market, and there are clearly documented cases of poisoning of humans from eating meat from Clenbuterol-fed animals.

I see a potential mis-carriage of justice in any case of substances such as Clenbuterol which are available (and used) in the food production chain, are long-lasting drugs, and can be detected in such miniscule amounts.

The metabolites of such drugs can easily be passed through the food chain as documented in multiple cases in China (Shanghai and Guangzhou cases come to mind).

Also some comments of Don Catlin from a US-based Co doing drug testing to the effect that the most commonly detected contamination in food supplements is Clenbuterol.
As a manufacturer, if you were wanting to improve your weight-loss drink/additive product, then a microdose of Clenbuterol might give your product the edge on the competitors.

I am not saying Contador is innocent, but there are probably good grounds to question the result.

pb21

BikingBernie wrote:

calvjones wrote:

Richrd2205 wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

So, given the info in my above post, can someone explain why Contador would intentionally ingest totally insignificant amounts if it would have zero effect on his performance?

Upthread, someone mentioned the possibility of using a contaminated blood top up. As is also stated up-thread, using a thermogenic drug mid-race might be a little odd, but using off season as a fat burner & taking blood a day or so too soon, then re-infusing on a rest day wouldn't be a particularly unlikely scenario, it seems.

Rich, I think you may have it.

I also agree that this would fit the facts, as we currently know them.

Sloppy doping.

iainf72

Damsgaard has said on Danish telly that contamination from a blood transfusion is a likely explaination.

Spiny_Norman

mrushton wrote:

Echoing earlier thoughts.If this was Armstrong there would be delirious cries of joy all over thisforum along with torrents of figures/historical data and 'I knew it'

We can't discuss this properly without a graph. I demand a graph!

meggiedude

surista wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

So, given the info in my above post, can someone explain why Contador would intentionally ingest totally insignificant amounts if it would have zero effect on his performance?

The amounts wouldn't have been ingested to enhance performance. It was to aid -recovery-.

He waited for after possible post-stage testing on the 20th, took the PED to aid recovery with the rest day on the 21st. I'm sure he was gambling that he wouldn't be tested on the rest day, having been tested for the last few days prior.

It's by far the simplest, and most reasonable, explanation.

Food contamination is a convenient excuse, but pretty much unbelievable given that pro teams have teams of professional chefs that I'm sure are extremely rigorous about what food goes into the rides' bodies. And I haven't heard of any other Astana riders testing positive.

There's no wiggle room here. He's going to be stripped of the title. Best case scenario he's able to convince the regulators to reduce his ban to one year.

Who knows if he did it intentially or not. Its kind of irrelevent at this point.
If he was riding the tour with a banned substance, then he will be stripped of his title.
If he isn't stripped of his title all the other teams will have good grounds to cry foul.
I fully exect him to be stripped of his title - guity or not.

SunWuKong

bsm2dj wrote:

What you need to remember is that the concentrations of drug detected in plasma and urine are always significantly lower (by orders of magnitude in some cases) than what was actually administered/ingested.

Although if the half-life of the drug is 25-30h, as stated, then to have 'trace' amounts would imply that it was taken days before the actual doping test was performed. Whether or not these 'trace' amounts are sufficient to aid recovery is another question?

You do start to wonder what the drug was taken for, aid performance or recovery, or both?

but he was tested on those days. He's now the most tested athlete in universe you know. I don't know if the incredibly low levels combined with preceding tests may help him or not?

Was the drug taken by cows to get a bigger profit?

I doubt he's clean personally and maybe it's part a of a micro-dosing program. He may come clean and tell us if he is sanctioned.

frenchfighter

FransJacques wrote:

The facts raise some valid questions that need to be answered, namely:

1. If the amount detected was 0.25% of the minimum required level for dectection, is there a defined accuracy/calibration of the testing apparatus for such small levels of the substance?

2. Given that the level was so low, and that Clenbuterol is know to be a substance that is retained in the body for extended periods of time (36 - 39 hours half-life), if it was taken at micro-dose levels, then it would have been present in his system at earlier tests done in Le Tour.

3. Are any of his other samples from the race showing similar amounts?

4. Why would a rider take such a drug at the second rest day of Le Tour? The weight-loss, lean muscle - fat ratio enhancing properties are not going to give him any benefit within the next 5-7 days, where it might be of benefit?

5. I can understand why he might take it , given his propensity for asthma and allergy problems, which are well documented, but if the dosage was administered on the rest day, would such a small amount make a difference to his breathing, that could not be obtained from other similar drugs such as Salbutamol or similar?

6. The drug is widely available to farmers, there is a history of the drug being used to improve animals lean-fat ratio, to get better prices at market, and there are clearly documented cases of poisoning of humans from eating meat from Clenbuterol-fed animals.

I see a potential mis-carriage of justice in any case of substances such as Clenbuterol which are available (and used) in the food production chain, are long-lasting drugs, and can be detected in such miniscule amounts.

The metabolites of such drugs can easily be passed through the food chain as documented in multiple cases in China (Shanghai and Guangzhou cases come to mind).

Also some comments of Don Catlin from a US-based Co doing drug testing to the effect that the most commonly detected contamination in food supplements is Clenbuterol.
As a manufacturer, if you were wanting to improve your weight-loss drink/additive product, then a microdose of Clenbuterol might give your product the edge on the competitors.

I am not saying Contador is innocent, but there are probably good grounds to question the result.

Indeed, good points.

surista

frenchfighter wrote:

FransJacques wrote:

The facts raise some valid questions that need to be answered, namely:

1. If the amount detected was 0.25% of the minimum required level for dectection, is there a defined accuracy/calibration of the testing apparatus for such small levels of the substance?

2. Given that the level was so low, and that Clenbuterol is know to be a substance that is retained in the body for extended periods of time (36 - 39 hours half-life), if it was taken at micro-dose levels, then it would have been present in his system at earlier tests done in Le Tour.

3. Are any of his other samples from the race showing similar amounts?

4. Why would a rider take such a drug at the second rest day of Le Tour? The weight-loss, lean muscle - fat ratio enhancing properties are not going to give him any benefit within the next 5-7 days, where it might be of benefit?

5. I can understand why he might take it , given his propensity for asthma and allergy problems, which are well documented, but if the dosage was administered on the rest day, would such a small amount make a difference to his breathing, that could not be obtained from other similar drugs such as Salbutamol or similar?

6. The drug is widely available to farmers, there is a history of the drug being used to improve animals lean-fat ratio, to get better prices at market, and there are clearly documented cases of poisoning of humans from eating meat from Clenbuterol-fed animals.

I see a potential mis-carriage of justice in any case of substances such as Clenbuterol which are available (and used) in the food production chain, are long-lasting drugs, and can be detected in such miniscule amounts.

The metabolites of such drugs can easily be passed through the food chain as documented in multiple cases in China (Shanghai and Guangzhou cases come to mind).

Also some comments of Don Catlin from a US-based Co doing drug testing to the effect that the most commonly detected contamination in food supplements is Clenbuterol.
As a manufacturer, if you were wanting to improve your weight-loss drink/additive product, then a microdose of Clenbuterol might give your product the edge on the competitors.

I am not saying Contador is innocent, but there are probably good grounds to question the result.

Indeed, good points.

Actually, these are horrible points. Far from being known as being 'retained in the body for extended periods of time', clenbuterol is widely known for being one of the fastest drugs to clear the body. It's the ideal choice to take in-competition, precisely because it clears the body so fast.

The drug would be taken on the evening before a rest day to aid recovery. Taking it before a stage day would hinder the recovery benefit.

None of the other Astana riders that I'm aware of have tested positive. No idea if other rides were also tested or not. If this was a case of 'tainted meat', then it should be very very easy to prove and get the ban reduced to one year. I'm sure the team chefs have exact records (invoices etc for tax purposes) on what and where they bought their food, what they ate each night, etc.

While people keep talking about 'minute amounts', I'm quite sure that the mere presence alone is sufficient to trigger a positive test, and I'm equally sure that the positive test threshold has a built-in buffer for 'accuracy/calibration'.

I don't see any 'miscarriage of justice here'. I see a dirty rider getting caught, both A and B samples tested positive for the substance (and it appears later tests also tested positive). If he's lucky and/or has really good lawyers, he *might* get the ban reduced to a year.

mroli

Wasn't the "contamination" issue the precise reason why Robert Millar was a vegetarian? I remember reading this somewhere (possibly the biog) that he didn't trust that meat wasn't injected with something that might be detrimental to his performance and only ate veg accordingly. As someone whose wife is a veggy, I remember discussing this with her and thinking that was a very understandable decision.

must-tri-harder

Thanks for the spoiler on the World TT champs result a few posts back numb nuts.

There goes my fun evening sitting down to watch that with a bottle of vino and my giro TT pointy hat on .. .

Gutted about Contador, dissapointed more than anything else, although it seems a very very low dose and awfully suspicious, if it's as black and white as positive = ban regardless of circumstances and he was indeed spiked then that's some seriously hard luck there.

Bernardus

They shouldn't be too sad in Spain, they might loose some of their dominance in cycling, but they're still pretty much dominating every other major sport...

rick_chasey

iainf72 wrote:

Damsgaard has said on Danish telly that contamination from a blood transfusion is a likely explaination.

Ian, how surprised are people in the know?

Gazzaputt

Any news on the press conference he called for 10.00am GMT?

FJS

mtjallingii

Times are changing: Joop won the tour in bed... Andy in the pub!
10 minutes ago via Twitter for BlackBerry®

smithy21

Gazzaputt wrote:

Any news on the press conference he called for 10.00am GMT?

Thats 11am BST which is 20 mins or so away.

iainf72

Rick Chasey wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

Damsgaard has said on Danish telly that contamination from a blood transfusion is a likely explaination.

Ian, how surprised are people in the know?

Some seem suprised, others not.

It's odd though.

matterai

must-tri-harder wrote:

Thanks for the spoiler on the World TT champs result a few posts back numb nuts. quote]

Yes, i thought that :roll:

mikey_748

FransJacques wrote:

6. The drug is widely available to farmers, there is a history of the drug being used to improve animals lean-fat ratio, to get better prices at market, and there are clearly documented cases of poisoning of humans from eating meat from Clenbuterol-fed animals.

.

May be a stupid question but why dope cattle with a drug that has benefits for months within a few weeks of slaughter.

Doesn't make sense - don't know any farmers who are prepared to spend anything on cattle that they can't earn back.....

rick_chasey

iainf72 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

Damsgaard has said on Danish telly that contamination from a blood transfusion is a likely explaination.

Ian, how surprised are people in the know?

Some seem suprised, others not.

It's odd though.

What's odd?

That he got caught?

Or that he got caught in this way?

bigmat

Sounds like the possible explanations are:

1) Contaminated meat;
2) Contaminated transfusion.

Either way, strict liability so likely to be stripped of Tour title and probable one year ban. Its either very harsh, or very good news. I have always had doubts about Bertie due to his dubious associations. The "dodgy" transfusion does seem a bit reminiscent of Vino's Tour ejection. Hopefully the truth will out, but its a bad bad day for Contador either way.

frenchfighter

"You can put your hand in the fire and not get burned," Contador meanwhile told Spanish radio on Thursday morning. "If it had been a clear case of doping it would have come out that week. The food poisoning occurred due to a eating a steak that had come from Spain."

frenchfighter

"Laboratories must be able to find 1.00 ng/mL, while a normal threshold value is considered to be 2.00 ng/mL," he said. "The value of 0.05-0.10 ng/mL that was found in Fuyu Li's body points clearly in the direction of a contamination. On top of that, such a low dose would not help his performance in any way."

alanmcn1

You gotta love the conjecture!!!!!!!!!

Its like Flandis all over again, suddenly everyone has a PhD in analytical biochemistry (sadly mine is in molecular biology.....so rather than join the conjecture I will sit with a very sad, but knowing face)

Kléber

Everyone can believe what they want. Some want to imagine it was just a dodgy steak and kidney pie, others are suggesting blood doping and more.

Actually folks, we don't know.

Maybe we could dunk Contador in a pond? If he floats, he's guilty but if he sinks and drowns then he's innocent. OK?