Contador tests positive for Clenbuterol

rick_chasey

iainf72 wrote:

FJS wrote:

"RobbieHunter Mmmmm RT @PaulSherwen: WADA-accredited lab showed that 22/28 people recently back from China tested positive 4 low levels of clenbuterol"

My reaction is "and?" Wow, people eating meat in a country that uses clen widely in meat production show traces of it? Amazing.

Maybe Paul can make up another "African proverb" about it. I'll give him double points for making it quaint and involving some kind of animal.

I once walked into a nightclub and saw loads of drugs.

I once saw David Millar in a nightclub.

Thus, David Millar is a gurning face chomper.

:?

FJS

iainf72 wrote:

FJS wrote:

"RobbieHunter Mmmmm RT @PaulSherwen: WADA-accredited lab showed that 22/28 people recently back from China tested positive 4 low levels of clenbuterol"

My reaction is "and?" Wow, people eating meat in a country that uses clen widely in meat production show traces of it? Amazing.

Exactly. Don't shoot the messenger. Nothing to do with Bertie.
But, if true (and part of a more systematic study) it's higher than I expected though. So much for Qinghai Lake. Or table tennis.

patchy

Retrospective testing for all Olympics 2008 athletes!

shinyhelmut

iainf72 wrote:

FJS wrote:

"RobbieHunter Mmmmm RT @PaulSherwen: WADA-accredited lab showed that 22/28 people recently back from China tested positive 4 low levels of clenbuterol"

My reaction is "and?" Wow, people eating meat in a country that uses clen widely in meat production show traces of it? Amazing.

Maybe Paul can make up another "African proverb" about it. I'll give him double points for making it quaint and involving some kind of animal.

Well it explains my recent half marathon pb soon after a work trip to shanghai

cajun_cyclist

patchy wrote:

Retrospective testing for all Olympics 2008 athletes!

For all we know and this is another angle to the story, perhaps Olympians were warned not to eat the local meat / pork just the way one doesn't drink the water in some countries.

There must be pros and cons to retro testing for athletes but in general, it sounds like a fair idea.

Pokerface

Bertie's lawyer explains some of their arguments:

Ramos then lists the indirect evidence that he says helped clear Contador including the extremely low level of clenbuterol testing amongst cattle in Europe, citing a European regulation.

"We showed that the testing for clenbuterol [in livestock] is not infallible in Europe," Ramos told The Independent.

"There is a European Union norm - 96/23/CE, dating from 1996 - which states that only 0.25 per cent of cattle should be tested for clenbuterol. So 99.75 per cent are not."

"During the very same period the Spanish Ministry of Agriculture says that there have been no positives for clenbuterol in [Spanish] cattle. But we've shown that the police have gone on arresting people for using clenbuterol and other banned substances in their livestock."

As for the source of the beef itself, "The Basque Government gave us three possibilities [of different cattle], and curiously enough, the owner of the one that was most likely to be it is in partnership with his brother, who was penalised a few years back for using clenbuterol."

Homer J

What about the plastic thing, i take it nothing ever come of it?

Monkeypump

Pokerface wrote:

As for the source of the beef itself, "The Basque Government gave us three possibilities [of different cattle], and curiously enough, the owner of the one that was most likely to be it is in partnership with his brother, who was penalised a few years back for using clenbuterol."

How convenient.

What evidence did they have that this particular beef source was the most likely one?

bazbadger

bazbadger wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

Also have a read again:

Ex-cyclist Ramón Riestra, member of the Board of Governors of ASAJA (Asociación Agraria Jóvenes Agricultores) of Asturias, exposes the hypothetical entrance into Spain of South American cattle contaminated with clenbuterol. To him, Contador is “a scapegoat.”

You’re going to tell.
I want to blow the whistle that clenbuterol-contaminated meat from South America is imported into Spain, and that Contador is only a scapegoat. It makes me angry, because he seems like a good guy, and besides, I was a cyclist.

Explain, please.
Look. The European Union signed an agreement with Mercosur, the South American customs union, to import 20 million tons of meat in three years to 27 European countries. In Spain, which is a country with a shortfall in meat, this is equivalent to a minimum of two million tons. And they have to know that in South America, fattening cattle with clenbuterol is not prohibited.

But they have to pass controls, don't they?
I’d like to see those controls. It’s very easy. They send a proper first batch and, after the controls, the bulk of the lot. Or they fix it with a bribe. I have a relative who was a health inspector and he told me that there wasn’t anything to do.

Then, you think that Contador could have eaten this meat?
It’s more than possible. Look, one of the ports where most of this meat is unloaded is Saint-Jean-de-Luz (France), a French city that’s very close to Irun (15 kilometers to be exact). It’s not strange that some butcher shop in Irun provided this meat. This is a business, and what they’re most interested in is importing to Holland and especially, to France, which after the United States has the biggest meat-processing industry in the world (ham, sausages…).

And all that export hurts the Spanish cattle farmers, right?
Naturally. We have to go through three controls a year. They take blood from all our animals. Everything has to be right, and we’re at a disadvantage to the Mercosur countries, where they have between 600 to 700 million head of beef. We told the authorities that they were headed for trouble, but they’re city people that have no idea of agriculture or ecology.

You said that you were a cyclist.
Yes, amateur. But there were a lot of open races and I got to ride a Paris-Nice with Eddy Merckx, who won it. And a lot of times with Luis Ocaña. (By Chema Bermejo, AS.com)

Done.

Right, so we are expected to believe that Contador will eat "just any old meat?" - I thought the original story was that he wanted some good old home cooking - not some supermarket stuff which he could have got in France. There may well be some truth in the imported meat, but it's more than likely to end up in sausages, mince etc. Quality butchers would be getting their beef from sources they know and trust - ie local farmers - hence it being nice to eat - hence Contador apparently wanting some to be brought all the way from home.

I refer to my earlier post about this. It does not make sense. Ask a decent butcher in this country where their meat comes from and they will tell you with confidence.

The sooner the WADA wade in, the better as then Contador will have to either find some real evidence or find another excuse.

rockmount

Homer J wrote:

What about the plastic thing, i take it nothing ever come of it?

The meat was vacuum packed ...

andrewjoseph

The south american meat argument is even more suspect than the spanish beef one. Ramón Riestra seems to be saying that it more likely that contador ate doped south american beef because spanish beef has too many controls.

"We have to go through three controls a year. They take blood from all our animals."

This is not what contadors lawyers are saying.

"There is a European Union norm – 96/23/CE, dating from 1996 – which states that only 0.25 per cent of cattle should be tested for clenbuterol. So 99.75 per cent are not."

then he says:

"In Europe it's not impossible [to eat contaminated meat], merely improbable."

I thought they said it was the most probable explanation?

I still don't believe he ate tainted beef.

bazbadger

andrewjoseph wrote:

...

I still don't believe he ate tainted beef.

Cue, rehash of the Soft Cell classic Tainted Beef.

Snorebens

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/gene ... 22669.html

"During the very same period the Spanish Ministry of Agriculture says that there have been no positives for clenbuterol in [Spanish] cattle. But we've shown that the police have gone on arresting people for using clenbuterol and other banned substances in their livestock." As for the offending cow itself, "The Basque Government gave us three possibilities, and curiously enough, the owner of the one that was most likely to be it is in partnership with his brother, who was penalised a few years back for using clenbuterol."

Presumably that livestock could be racehorses or other animals? If they mean cattle, why not say cattle?

frenchfighter

Pokerface wrote:

Bertie's lawyer explains some of their arguments:

Ramos then lists the indirect evidence that he says helped clear Contador including the extremely low level of clenbuterol testing amongst cattle in Europe, citing a European regulation.

"We showed that the testing for clenbuterol [in livestock] is not infallible in Europe," Ramos told The Independent.

"There is a European Union norm - 96/23/CE, dating from 1996 - which states that only 0.25 per cent of cattle should be tested for clenbuterol. So 99.75 per cent are not."

"During the very same period the Spanish Ministry of Agriculture says that there have been no positives for clenbuterol in [Spanish] cattle. But we've shown that the police have gone on arresting people for using clenbuterol and other banned substances in their livestock."

As for the source of the beef itself, "The Basque Government gave us three possibilities [of different cattle], and curiously enough, the owner of the one that was most likely to be it is in partnership with his brother, who was penalised a few years back for using clenbuterol."

All perfectly logical. The case is so clear cut for probability of innocence it is borderline ridiculous.

The paragraph is pretty damning. Just another thing on top of all other things pointing at a proper result.

Pross

dennisn wrote:

Pross wrote:

So the cows have never failed a dope test and therefore cannot have been injected with clen? By that rationale we have to accept the defense of [insert name of well known TdF winner] when they say they haven't ever tested positive and have therefore never doped

Sounds more like a statement than a defense to me. He doesn't have to defend himself, particularly against you or I. He never tested positive therefore he never tested positive.
The "therefore never doped" thing is your idea. That's the difference between you and I, he doesn't have to prove anything to me, you on the other hand feel he "owes" you something. Here's the bad news, he doesn't owe you anything. So you can either sit around for the rest of your life b*tching and moaning about doping in cycling and certain riders in particular OR you can make you own way in this world instead of living vicariously through the exploits of others.

Big assumption on who I was talking about, I didn't mention any names and was talking hypothetically (the same is claimed by almost every cyclist who comes under suspicion and even many of those caught to show the failed test is wrong). However, as you raised his name yes it is a defence as he uses it whenever he gets accussed of the issue and has quoted it several times since he has been under investigation. I don't think he owes me anything as I believe he was competing on level terms with pretty much everyone he beat at that time (see comments on his retirement) . I'm more concerned about doping in the sport now than in the past especially as there are apparently riders and teams making big efforts to compete cleanly. There's also quite a few deaths that may or may not have been down to doping practices and I think it something owed to the young riders coming through to drive doping out. From a purely spectating point of view the doping has lead to more exciting viewing as riders perform ridiculous feats.

Pross

Moray Gub wrote:

Pokerface wrote:

dennisn wrote:

Pross wrote:

But he DID test positive. Just because he got out of it doesn't mean he didn't test positive.

Armstrong didn't fail the test, though. Something people seem to constantly overlook. He was well below the allowable threshold, as were several others.

You can read the reports of the time here: http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/results/ ... ul22.shtml

Taken from a post from Rich from few days ago, its not a positive if you are below the allowable limit.

I didn't make that comment in your quote, feel free to put it right

iainf72

frenchfighter wrote:

All perfectly logical. The case is so clear cut for probability of innocence it is borderline ridiculous.

The paragraph is pretty damning. Just another thing on top of all other things pointing at a proper result.

Is it? So if certain farmers were systematically using clen on cattle, would they suddenly stop? Logic says no, so shouldn't they give a fair good chance of finding some tainted beef?

It's a nonsense argument.

term1te

How sensitive is the cattle clenbuterol test? Do they send the samples to the special German lab, or to the local trading standards lab? Most labs wouldn't have found Contador's positive, wasn't it something like 100 times lower than that accredited labs need to find? If the cattle test is say 500 times less sensitive, a cow may show up as negative, but whoever eat a half pound steak positive. Seems unlikely however.

dougzz

Term1te wrote:

How sensitive is the cattle clenbuterol test? Do they send the samples to the special German lab, or to the local trading standards lab? Most labs wouldn't have found Contador's positive, wasn't it something like 100 times lower than that accredited labs need to find? If the cattle test is say 500 times less sensitive, a cow may show up as negative, but whoever eat a half pound steak positive. Seems unlikely however.

Yeah but that's not right is it. The supposed method of the Clen being transferred via digesting some tainted meat (I simply can't type this without laughing) would mean the low level in the recipients blood, the level in the tainted meat would be considerably higher.

attica

Term1te wrote:

How sensitive is the cattle clenbuterol test? Do they send the samples to the special German lab, or to the local trading standards lab? Most labs wouldn't have found Contador's positive, wasn't it something like 100 times lower than that accredited labs need to find? If the cattle test is say 500 times less sensitive, a cow may show up as negative, but whoever eat a half pound steak positive. Seems unlikely however.

This is the first point someone has made that has made me question my belief that Bertie is as guilty as sin.

It's a fair point, perhaps we're all awash with microdoses of Clen.

Buuuuuut, why was Bertie the only one caught? Either he was cheating, or it's a conspiracy, or his was the only sample subjected to such a stringent test. How many other results of clen tests are there of pro cyclists using that accuracy?

bompington

Term1te wrote:

How sensitive is the cattle clenbuterol test? Do they send the samples to the special German lab, or to the local trading standards lab? Most labs wouldn't have found Contador's positive, wasn't it something like 100 times lower than that accredited labs need to find? If the cattle test is say 500 times less sensitive, a cow may show up as negative, but whoever eat a half pound steak positive. Seems unlikely however.

Unlikely indeed. For a start, a half pound steak dispersed among even a skinny 10 stone cyclist is 270 times diluted. And that's assuming all of the clen in the meat is absorbed - I don't know the answer to that one but it's probably not all of it by a long way.

The other "defense" that irks me a lot is the one about "only 14,000 cattle were tested so he must have eaten one that wasn't".
If you get no positives in 14,000 tests, that suggests with a very, very high probability that you won't get any in the rest as well. It's called sampling and is one of the most basic of all statistical methods: most quality control relies on it.

So statistically, there may be a tiny probabiliity that the meat was contaminated, but it is about as diametrically oppposed to "The case is so clear cut for probability of innocence it is borderline ridiculous" as it is possible to get.

term1te

I have somewhat of an understanding of statistics and analytical techniques from my day job, and I fully agree that the probability of contaminated meat leading to his positive is vanishingly small. However, my point was around the sensitivity of the analysis applied to the cattle. I've no idea how sensitive the assay is, but if 14,000 cattle were tested (I assume at the abattoir) with an assay that could detect it at say 100ppb, then all of them could have been contaminated with say 50ppb clen, and no one would know. Also, the day a cow is sent to the butcher is probably known for a long time. If I where an unscrupulous cattle farmer I wouldn't be micro dosing a couple of days before it could be possible tested. I'm sure if the riders knew exactly when they would be tested a few months in advance no one would ever get caught.

That said, the contaminated blood top up is my favourite theory.

moray_gub

Pokerface wrote:

I was talking of testing positive for EPO. It can be spun any way you want - but the EPO was there. That is a positive test. Just because he got away with it doesn't change that particular fact.

When was there anything for him "to get out of or get away with" with respect to his 1999 samples ? As i understand it he never tested positive within the codes applicable at the time with those samples so never faced any procedures.......unless i missed his case being brought before USAC.

iainf72

A great new source

http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/sports/ci_17481412?

Pokerface

Moray Gub wrote:

When was there anything for him "to get out of or get away with" with respect to his 1999 samples ? As i understand it he never tested positive within the codes applicable at the time with those samples so never faced any procedures.......unless i missed his case being brought before USAC.

Like I said - you can spin it any way you want.

Are you REALLY trying to tell me that regardless of when the test was done, that no EPO was ever found in his samples?

cajun_cyclist

CAS overturns ban on Chinese Judoka on 'procedural failures' ,

Tong Wen was suspended on Clenbuterol. http://sports.globaltimes.cn/moresports ... 27366.html

International sport's top court Thursday threw out a two-year doping ban imposed on Chinese Olympic judo champion Tong Wen last year due to procedural failure.

Tong, who won the women's 78+ kg title at the Beijing Olympic Games, was banned for two years by the International Judo Federation after she tested positive for clenbuterol during the World Judo Championships in 2009.

Its panel of arbitrators underlined that she had not been able to exercise her right under international rules to be present when her B sample was tested by the IJF without informing her.

So, I don't see CAS reverse doping findings often, other coverage of this story says this decision is being criticised http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/judo/news ... id=6158705 . Of course, I know little of this athlete and sport in the first place like I'm sure a # here.

Not sure what purpose it would serve, doesn't she look a bit chubby if I may say? Though one can't tell from a photo of the head alone.

Garry H

cajun_cyclist wrote:

Not sure what purpose it would serve, doesn't she look a bit chubby if I may say? Though one can't tell from a photo of the head alone.

She competes in a sport that has weight categories.

cajun_cyclist

I said and so I declare I might be wrong that I didn't think you could get Clen merely eating beef. I acknowledge now, that seems to be a hazy area.

Here is something from Italy but circumstances still are not clear. It's a bit of a scientific treatise and looks translated as well.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10713468

Long-acting beta adrenergic agonists, such as clenbuterol accumulate in the liver, but not meat of treated farm animals, and result in epidemic poisonings in consumers. We describe an outbreak of poisoning in 15 people, following the consumption of meat. Clinical symptoms (distal tremors, palpitations, headache, tachipnoea-dyspnoea, and also moderate hyperglycaemia, hypokalemia and leucocytosis) were seen in nine hospitalised patients, starting about 0.5-3 h after poisoning, and disappearing within 3-5 days later. Clenbuterol was found in the urine of all the symptomatic patients, at higher levels than pharmacokinetic computing (mean level 28 ng/ml, 36 h after ingestion), based on the levels found in the meat (1140-1480 ng/g edible tissue). Thus, epidemic poisoning can be produced following the consumption of contaminated meat. The need for a better definition of pharmaco- and toxico-kinetics, not only for drugs ingested as parent drug, but also when ingested as residues with animal tissues, is recommended.

But they don't actually say the patients got it from beef, the webpage title does it seems.

"Clinical and pharmacological profile in a clenbuterol epidemic poisoning of contaminated beef meat in Italy."

Sortof thinking out loud here.

bazbadger

iainf72 wrote:

A great new source

http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/sports/ci_17481412?

Interesting read. I think the key phrase to the whole affair is in the first paragraph:

"no convincing evidence"

Quite.

moray_gub

Pokerface wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

When was there anything for him "to get out of or get away with" with respect to his 1999 samples ? As i understand it he never tested positive within the codes applicable at the time with those samples so never faced any procedures.......unless i missed his case being brought before USAC.

Like I said - you can spin it any way you want.

Are you REALLY trying to tell me that regardless of when the test was done, that no EPO was ever found in his samples?

Its not case of spinning it anyway i want that is way it was, clearly thats not to your liking but hey ho and all that.