Drugs in other sports and the media.

LanterneRouge010

RichN95 wrote:

LanterneRouge010 wrote:

T There is no way of knowing whether the substances returns the sick athlete to an equilibirum level, or gives them an additional advantage over healthy athletes.

Yes there is. There are loads of studies done on these substances. How do you think WADA decide what goes on the list and what doesn't.
.

Really? Are there studies showing that an injection of corticosteroid (Wiggins) merely reduces inflammation to the level of a non-tue rider, and that there are no additional benefits derived from having that in your body? I'd love to read them.

ugo.santalucia

I have to confess that I am not overly imressed 3/4ers of the riders in the pelothon have some form of asthma that needs to be treated

bobmcstuff

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I have to confess that I am not overly imressed 3/4ers of the riders in the pelothon have some form of asthma that needs to be treated

Most of them will be on salbutamol which has been shown to be non performance enhancing so it doesn't really matter.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8781870

The one Yates got caught for is only performance enhancing for non-endurance sport (hence why it's on the wada banned list), for endurance athletes it's actually been shown to be detrimental.

lostboysaint

LanterneRouge010 wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

LanterneRouge010 wrote:

T There is no way of knowing whether the substances returns the sick athlete to an equilibirum level, or gives them an additional advantage over healthy athletes.

Yes there is. There are loads of studies done on these substances. How do you think WADA decide what goes on the list and what doesn't.
.

Really? Are there studies showing that an injection of corticosteroid (Wiggins) merely reduces inflammation to the level of a non-tue rider, and that there are no additional benefits derived from having that in your body? I'd love to read them.

Ross, is that you?

ugo.santalucia

bobmcstuff wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I have to confess that I am not overly imressed 3/4ers of the riders in the pelothon have some form of asthma that needs to be treated

Most of them will be on salbutamol which has been shown to be non performance enhancing for endurance athletes (in fact slightly negative) so it doesn't really matter.

That and steroids... one doesn't necessarily take a drug because it has an enhancing effect... but for instance it could interfere with an other (maybe legal) drug and have an enhancing effect, or help masking/removing more quickly another banned substance.
You have to question whether the abuse of drugs for ashtma is something acceptable or not... if it's genuine, then we should conclude cycling is bad for your health and as a sport is pointless

RichN95.

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I have to confess that I am not overly imressed 3/4ers of the riders in the pelothon have some form of asthma that needs to be treated

The drug that most of them are taking for it isn't banned so there's no need to fake it.

Most actually have exercise induced bronchoconstriction which is often incorrectly referred to asthma. It's caused by heavy exercise so many members of the public who have it will never find out

bobmcstuff

ugo.santalucia wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I have to confess that I am not overly imressed 3/4ers of the riders in the pelothon have some form of asthma that needs to be treated

Most of them will be on salbutamol which has been shown to be non performance enhancing for endurance athletes (in fact slightly negative) so it doesn't really matter.

That and steroids... one doesn't necessarily take a drug because it has an enhancing effect... but for instance it could interfere with an other (maybe legal) drug and have an enhancing effect, or help masking/removing more quickly another banned substance.
You have to question whether the abuse of drugs for ashtma is something acceptable or not... if it's genuine, then we should conclude cycling is bad for your health and as a sport is pointless

In which case it should be banned, but you really need some evidence for that because at the moment you're just casting aspersions.

Exercise induced asthma is a real thing and the extent of stress these guys put their respiratory systems under it doesn't seem that surprising really (ed: what Rich said)

Whether cycling as a sport is pointless - of course it is, isn't all sport pointless, in the end? Remember reading that more than 9 hours of cycling a week increases your risk of prostate cancer so yeah it does seem to have some negative health effects.

Richmond Racer 2

ugo.santalucia wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I have to confess that I am not overly imressed 3/4ers of the riders in the pelothon have some form of asthma that needs to be treated

Most of them will be on salbutamol which has been shown to be non performance enhancing for endurance athletes (in fact slightly negative) so it doesn't really matter.

That and steroids... one doesn't necessarily take a drug because it has an enhancing effect... but for instance it could interfere with an other (maybe legal) drug and have an enhancing effect, or help masking/removing more quickly another banned substance.
You have to question whether the abuse of drugs for ashtma is something acceptable or not... if it's genuine, then we should conclude cycling is bad for your health and as a sport is pointless

Who decides what's 'abuse' vs someone taking medication to enable them to breathe more easily?

Let me give you a clue. It's not someone pounding away on their keyboard on an Internet forum

lostboysaint

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I have to confess that I am not overly imressed 3/4ers of the riders in the pelothon have some form of asthma that needs to be treated

Most of them will be on salbutamol which has been shown to be non performance enhancing for endurance athletes (in fact slightly negative) so it doesn't really matter.

That and steroids... one doesn't necessarily take a drug because it has an enhancing effect... but for instance it could interfere with an other (maybe legal) drug and have an enhancing effect, or help masking/removing more quickly another banned substance.
You have to question whether the abuse of drugs for ashtma is something acceptable or not... if it's genuine, then we should conclude cycling is bad for your health and as a sport is pointless

Who decides what's 'abuse' vs someone taking medication to enable them to breathe more easily?

Let me give you a clue. It's not someone pounding away on their keyboard on an Internet forum

Yeah, everyone knows that it's Twitter!!

Richmond Racer 2

^Yay!

LanterneRouge010

lostboysaint wrote:

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I have to confess that I am not overly imressed 3/4ers of the riders in the pelothon have some form of asthma that needs to be treated

Most of them will be on salbutamol which has been shown to be non performance enhancing for endurance athletes (in fact slightly negative) so it doesn't really matter.

That and steroids... one doesn't necessarily take a drug because it has an enhancing effect... but for instance it could interfere with an other (maybe legal) drug and have an enhancing effect, or help masking/removing more quickly another banned substance.
You have to question whether the abuse of drugs for ashtma is something acceptable or not... if it's genuine, then we should conclude cycling is bad for your health and as a sport is pointless

Who decides what's 'abuse' vs someone taking medication to enable them to breathe more easily?

Let me give you a clue. It's not someone pounding away on their keyboard on an Internet forum

Yeah, everyone knows that it's Twitter!!

Riders and ex-riders have expressed concerns re the TUE regime, not just Twitter and teh forums. Nicholas Roche is pretty opposed to TUEs and prides himself on not taking anything on the Wada list, maybe thats why he didn't fit in at sky...

bobmcstuff

LanterneRouge010 wrote:

lostboysaint wrote:

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I have to confess that I am not overly imressed 3/4ers of the riders in the pelothon have some form of asthma that needs to be treated

Most of them will be on salbutamol which has been shown to be non performance enhancing for endurance athletes (in fact slightly negative) so it doesn't really matter.

That and steroids... one doesn't necessarily take a drug because it has an enhancing effect... but for instance it could interfere with an other (maybe legal) drug and have an enhancing effect, or help masking/removing more quickly another banned substance.
You have to question whether the abuse of drugs for ashtma is something acceptable or not... if it's genuine, then we should conclude cycling is bad for your health and as a sport is pointless

Who decides what's 'abuse' vs someone taking medication to enable them to breathe more easily?

Let me give you a clue. It's not someone pounding away on their keyboard on an Internet forum

Yeah, everyone knows that it's Twitter!!

Riders and ex-riders have expressed concerns re the TUE regime, not just Twitter and teh forums. Nicholas Roche is pretty opposed to TUEs and prides himself on not taking anything on the Wada list, maybe thats why he didn't fit in at sky...

Being a bit more fair to Sky, their TUE use seems to have been pretty minor compared to some. Froome's only got 2.

Also the UCI website showing the massive decline in the number of TUEs issued seems to show its a lot less common in cycling than it was.

Richmond Racer 2

Contador's daily medication to prevent fits. Do we need to discuss that?

I've never been bothered to do so before now, but if we're going to have a debate about whether asthmatics should be cycling (yeah, really), Contador's daily dose since 2004 would seem pertinent to debate. Should those vulnerable to epililepsy be on the road? Are they not a danger to themselves and their fellow riders, in fact ANY fellow road users?

lostboysaint

LanterneRouge010 wrote:

lostboysaint wrote:

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I have to confess that I am not overly imressed 3/4ers of the riders in the pelothon have some form of asthma that needs to be treated

Most of them will be on salbutamol which has been shown to be non performance enhancing for endurance athletes (in fact slightly negative) so it doesn't really matter.

That and steroids... one doesn't necessarily take a drug because it has an enhancing effect... but for instance it could interfere with an other (maybe legal) drug and have an enhancing effect, or help masking/removing more quickly another banned substance.
You have to question whether the abuse of drugs for ashtma is something acceptable or not... if it's genuine, then we should conclude cycling is bad for your health and as a sport is pointless

Who decides what's 'abuse' vs someone taking medication to enable them to breathe more easily?

Let me give you a clue. It's not someone pounding away on their keyboard on an Internet forum

Yeah, everyone knows that it's Twitter!!

Riders and ex-riders have expressed concerns re the TUE regime, not just Twitter and teh forums. Nicholas Roche is pretty opposed to TUEs and prides himself on not taking anything on the Wada list, maybe thats why he didn't fit in at sky...

The Nicholas Roche that Sky have tweeted a good luck message to as he rolls down TT start ramp at the Euros?

Or another one?

ugo.santalucia

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I have to confess that I am not overly imressed 3/4ers of the riders in the pelothon have some form of asthma that needs to be treated

Most of them will be on salbutamol which has been shown to be non performance enhancing for endurance athletes (in fact slightly negative) so it doesn't really matter.

That and steroids... one doesn't necessarily take a drug because it has an enhancing effect... but for instance it could interfere with an other (maybe legal) drug and have an enhancing effect, or help masking/removing more quickly another banned substance.
You have to question whether the abuse of drugs for ashtma is something acceptable or not... if it's genuine, then we should conclude cycling is bad for your health and as a sport is pointless

Who decides what's 'abuse' vs someone taking medication to enable them to breathe more easily?

Let me give you a clue. It's not someone pounding away on their keyboard on an Internet forum

Well, you are always going to win an argument by diminishing others, aren't you?

All I said is if 3/4ers of the riders use asthma drugs, I think the sport has a health problem or a drug problem

Richmond Racer 2

Thought not.

And Ugo, if I'd really wanted to diminish you, I'd have been rather stronger than that

LanterneRouge010

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

Contador's daily medication to prevent fits. Do we need to discuss that?

I've never been bothered to do so before now, but if we're going to have a debate about whether asthmatics should be cycling (yeah, really), Contadorms daily dose since 2004 would seem pertinent to debate. Wouldn't it?

Of course. If his meds gave him an unfair advantage then it should be looked at pretty seriously. As cycling fans we shouldn't be blinded by the nationality of a rider or his team in forming our opinion on what is a legitimate use of TUEs.

No one is saying asthmatics shouldn't be riding. Its whether asthmatics should be permitted to take a substance on the WADA prohibited list during competition (or literally mid-race). I think thats a fair question to ask and I dont know the answer to it.

dish_dash

lostboysaint wrote:

LanterneRouge010 wrote:

lostboysaint wrote:

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I have to confess that I am not overly imressed 3/4ers of the riders in the pelothon have some form of asthma that needs to be treated

Most of them will be on salbutamol which has been shown to be non performance enhancing for endurance athletes (in fact slightly negative) so it doesn't really matter.

That and steroids... one doesn't necessarily take a drug because it has an enhancing effect... but for instance it could interfere with an other (maybe legal) drug and have an enhancing effect, or help masking/removing more quickly another banned substance.
You have to question whether the abuse of drugs for ashtma is something acceptable or not... if it's genuine, then we should conclude cycling is bad for your health and as a sport is pointless

Who decides what's 'abuse' vs someone taking medication to enable them to breathe more easily?

Let me give you a clue. It's not someone pounding away on their keyboard on an Internet forum

Yeah, everyone knows that it's Twitter!!

Riders and ex-riders have expressed concerns re the TUE regime, not just Twitter and teh forums. Nicholas Roche is pretty opposed to TUEs and prides himself on not taking anything on the Wada list, maybe thats why he didn't fit in at sky...

The Nicholas Roche that Sky have tweeted a good luck message to as he rolls down TT start ramp at the Euros?

Or another one?

Wait, wait... it's finally becoming clear. Roche is the Manchurian candidate...

RichN95.

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Well, you are always going to win an argument by diminishing others, aren't you?

All I said is if 3/4ers of the riders use asthma drugs, I think the sport has a health problem or a drug problem

First of all where does this 3/4ers figure come from? You've just made that up.

Secondly who said professional sport is healthy - it's not. Just in cycling there are crashes every day - often serious, occasionally even fatal. Riding around Spain in 35 degree heat for three weeks is not healthy.

I seem to recall you were less concerned about riders' health when they were complaining about disc brakes.

Richmond Racer 2

Who's blinded, LanterneRouge? I see you are a new forum member, so welcome

RichN95.

LanterneRouge010 wrote:

No one is saying asthmatics shouldn't be riding. Its whether asthmatics should be permitted to take a substance on the WADA prohibited list during competition (or literally mid-race). I think thats a fair question to ask and I dont know the answer to it.

Very few of them are taking a prohibited substance. Sambutamol isn't on the banned list for the doses they use.

r0bh

LanterneRouge010 wrote:

No one is saying asthmatics shouldn't be riding. Its whether asthmatics should be permitted to take a substance on the WADA prohibited list during competition (or literally mid-race). I think thats a fair question to ask and I dont know the answer to it.

The question has been asked - and answered - by WADA. The information is freely available: https://wada-main-prod.s3.amazonaws.com ... 5.1-en.pdf

lostboysaint

I can't help thinking that the newbie has rather dragged this thread off topic. It's about drugs in OTHER sports and the media, not just in cycling and one team in particular.

dish_dash

lostboysaint wrote:

I can't help thinking that the newbie has rather dragged this thread off topic. It's about drugs in OTHER sports and the media, not just in cycling and one team in particular.

^
This.

You will also note that they have a youtube channel they are trying to promote elsewhere on the forum.

LanterneRouge010

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

Who's blinded, LanterneRouge? I see you are a new forum member, so welcome

British fans who believe that Froome, Sky, Farah and Radcliffe are just hard workers and marginal gains etc.
Columbian fans who think Nairo was born at altitude so thats why he is so strong.
Americans (and the english speaking world) who thought Lance was just a tough competitor with mental determination.

With the history of cycling and athletics, fans should think critically about the legitimacy of dominant performances.

Bit sad though.

bompington

dish_dash wrote:

lostboysaint wrote:

I can't help thinking that the newbie has rather dragged this thread off topic. It's about drugs in OTHER sports and the media, not just in cycling and one team in particular.

Ah, but for some people it's all about cycling and one team in particular... it's a pretty good diagnostic criterion, isn't it?

RichN95.

r0bh wrote:

LanterneRouge010 wrote:

No one is saying asthmatics shouldn't be riding. Its whether asthmatics should be permitted to take a substance on the WADA prohibited list during competition (or literally mid-race). I think thats a fair question to ask and I dont know the answer to it.

The question has been asked - and answered - by WADA. The information is freely available: https://wada-main-prod.s3.amazonaws.com ... 5.1-en.pdf

People have had enough of experts

lostboysaint

LanterneRouge010 wrote:

Bit sad though.

Couldn't have put it better myself. Run along.

LanterneRouge010

bompington wrote:

dish_dash wrote:

lostboysaint wrote:

I can't help thinking that the newbie has rather dragged this thread off topic. It's about drugs in OTHER sports and the media, not just in cycling and one team in particular.

Ah, but for some people it's all about cycling and one team in particular... it's a pretty good diagnostic criterion, isn't it?

One could talk about Nibali in stage 20 of the Giro, but I'm sure the forum reached a unanimous verdict on that performance.

LanterneRouge010

lostboysaint wrote:

I can't help thinking that the newbie has rather dragged this thread off topic. It's about drugs in OTHER sports and the media, not just in cycling and one team in particular.

Oh sorry my bad. Have you guys discussed Farah and Rupp re working with Salazar? Or is Farah off limits too because he's British.