Drugs in other sports and the media.

RichN95.

TailWindHome wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

What am I missing here?

Why is no one asking why the TUE has a 'Effective Date' of 27/04 for treatment which Zorloli notes begins 29/04 (which is what Sky reported)

The 27/04 being the morning of LBL 2014 when Froome DNSed after a drug test.

Zorzoli can't fill forms out properly. That's why a second corrected report gets posted on the same day. (And even that has a mistake, which is spotted and corrected when WADA do their review in June)

So - Froome doesn't have a TUE which would be in effect for 27/04?

That is correct. And also didn't have a TUE effective for a year as the typo in the second version suggested.

blazing_saddles

Zorzoli probably wrote the first two out by hand to begin and being a doctor..................

I mean, from 5 days to a year, for the want of a flipping week.

itboffin

ugo.santalucia wrote:

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

thats nothing compared to olympians

Not that i'm in any way capable of competing but I found out that the drugs given to me for my nerve damage around my crushed C6 is also used to treat ADHD and is being reclassified due to its narcotic side effects, couldn't say I noticed when I was taking them regularly, so in that situation if you're an amateur how easy is it to find out what's on the banned list this week?

blazing_saddles

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

Just a guess but I suspect some of the accounts TWH follows have put about a theory that Froome tested pos on the morning of LBL, Sky pulled him and Zorzoli whipped him up a nice little TUE as a cover-up. Just a wild guess.

Amiright, TWH?

Does not compute. The first cock up had that covered. The second and final one doesn't.



(But, I thought the same thing.........)

RichN95.

itboffin wrote:

so in that situation if you're an amateur how easy is it to find out what's on the banned list this week?

It's fairly easy. This website does the job for you: http://www.globaldro.com/

The problem comes when a drug is reclassified as you say and people assume that it's still OK (as with the Russians and their Melodonium)

above_the_cows

bobmcstuff wrote:

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.

Sh1t, should I be worried?

above_the_cows

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I think the sport has a health problem or a drug problem

Says the person who wants exciting cycling. Guess what if you want cycling to be healthy and drug free be prepared for even more 'boring' racing.

above_the_cows

LanterneRouge010 wrote:

Columbian

Colombian.

joelsim

Above The Cows wrote:

LanterneRouge010 wrote:

Columbian

Colombian.

Brouhahaha.

ugo.santalucia

Above The Cows wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I think the sport has a health problem or a drug problem

Says the person who wants exciting cycling. Guess what if you want cycling to be healthy and drug free be prepared for even more 'boring' racing.

I don't think my point is getting across. I am not talking about PED... I am talking about over-medication. I don't believe so many athletes need so many drugs, I don't belive 40% or more of cyclists need ventolin... just as I don't believe so many people need statins, ibuprofene, antibiotics or beta-blockers. There is a general abuse of drugs and sport excels in that field.

Exciting racing is not about 6 Watt/Kg, it's about designing races and rules which are meaningful for the purpose of the sport, which is guess what... entertainment! You can have an exciting race between fat mamils if the coverage is good enough

Get rid of team doctors... race doctors for all... drugs when they are necessary... ventolin is not a "today I don't feel 100%, I can't breathe properly" drug... we all have bad days.. get on with it, or go home and rest...

joe2008

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Above The Cows wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I think the sport has a health problem or a drug problem

Says the person who wants exciting cycling. Guess what if you want cycling to be healthy and drug free be prepared for even more 'boring' racing.

I don't think my point is getting across. I am not talking about PED... I am talking about over-medication. I don't believe so many athletes need so many drugs, I don't belive 40% or more of cyclists need ventolin... just as I don't believe so many people need statins, ibuprofene, antibiotics or beta-blockers. There is a general abuse of drugs and sport excels in that field.

Exciting racing is not about 6 Watt/Kg, it's about designing races and rules which are meaningful for the purpose of the sport, which is guess what... entertainment! You can have an exciting race between fat mamils if the coverage is good enough

Get rid of team doctors... race doctors for all... drugs when they are necessary... ventolin is not a "today I don't feel 100%, I can't breathe properly" drug... we all have bad days.. get on with it, or go home and rest...

I agree. Asthma has gone from something that kept you off a school games lesson to a prerequisite for pro cycling.

How do all these 'asthmatics' become pro sports people in the first place.

fat daddy

ugo.santalucia wrote:

You can have an exciting race between fat mamils if the coverage is good enough

I am thinking naked .... Paris Roubaix !

ugo.santalucia

joe2008 wrote:

I agree. Asthma has gone from something that kept you off a school games lesson to a prerequisite for pro cycling.

How do all these 'asthmatics' become pro sports people in the first place.

The answer is simple, they are not asthmatics... simply their team doctors prescribe drugs so that when they can't breathe 100% (we all have days when we are mildly congested), then they can perform at the level they perceive as being 100%.

Basically it's socially acceptable doping because it shouldn't bring you to 110% of your potential, but IMO it is abuse of pharmaceuticals, which is just as bad

Sport.......................................................................................................Medicine

This is how far apart they should be

Daz555

If any journos manage to get a camera or mic in front if Wiggo today after the headlnes I've seen then we could all be in for a treat.

RichN95.

joe2008 wrote:

I agree. Asthma has gone from something that kept you off a school games lesson to a prerequisite for pro cycling.

How do all these 'asthmatics' become pro sports people in the first place.

So cycling has shown you that your prejudiced stereotype was wrong and shown you the reality of the condition - that it's no barrier to anything . That's as good a reason as any for allowing asthma medication in sport.

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Get rid of team doctors... race doctors for all... drugs when they are necessary... ventolin is not a "today I don't feel 100%, I can't breathe properly" drug... we all have bad days.. get on with it, or go home and rest...

It's primarily a preventative drug. But if they feel bad, why shouldn't they take something that makes tehm feel better? We all do, so why not athletes? Do you think you're better than them?

ugo.santalucia wrote:

The answer is simple, they are not asthmatics... simply their team doctors prescribe drugs so that when they can't breathe 100% (we all have days when we are mildly congested), then they can perform at the level they perceive as being 100%.

If you're congested, you take a decongestant, not asthma meds.

Do you really think that you know more than WADA and all the experts they consult? Your opinions are draconian knee jerk reactions based on a lack of understanding and lack of empathy.

ugo.santalucia

RichN95 wrote:

If you're congested, you take a decongestant, not asthma meds.

Do you really think that you know more than WADA and all the experts they consult? Your opinions are draconian knee jerk reactions based on a lack of understanding.

I DON'T CARE ABOUT WADA... IS THIS CLEAR ENOUGH?

I do believe abuse of medications and doping are separate issues. I cannot accept that half (or more) the peloton have a chronic asthma condition... I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT... I do believe team doctors over subscribe drugs as a shortcut to resting and that is bad... it is not in the interest of sport, it is not in the interest of the athlete

Do me a favour, go to your GP and tell him over the past two weeks you have not been able to match your PB on Strava because you feel you are not breathing well enough... see if you get an inhaler prescribed

Richmond Racer 2

Jeez, what's with the shouting

So much anger

If only this was directed at blood dopers, EPO merchants and clen ingesters

ugo.santalucia

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

Jeez, what's with the shouting

So much anger

I've seen worse between folks discussing synthetic lubricants vs mineral oil

Richmond Racer 2

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

Jeez, what's with the shouting

So much anger

I've seen worse between folks discussing synthetic lubricants vs mineral oil

Well chill out, you'll do yourself a mischief

RichN95.

ugo.santalucia wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

If you're congested, you take a decongestant, not asthma meds.

Do you really think that you know more than WADA and all the experts they consult? Your opinions are draconian knee jerk reactions based on a lack of understanding.

I DON'T CARE ABOUT WADA... IS THIS CLEAR ENOUGH?

I do believe abuse of medications and doping are separate issues. I cannot accept that half (or more) the peloton have a chronic asthma condition... I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT... I do believe team doctors over subscribe drugs as a shortcut to resting and that is bad... it is not in the interest of sport, it is not in the interest of the athlete

Do me a favour, go to your GP and tell him over the past two weeks you have not been able to match your PB on Strava because you feel you are not breathing well enough... see if you get an inhaler prescribed

"People have had enough of experts"

You cling to you're ill thought out prejudices then.

If you don't have asthma, asthma meds will do absolutely nothing for you.

Step outside cycling for one moment and suggest you ideas to people in other sports and they will quite correctly view you as a lunatic.

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I've seen worse between folks discussing synthetic lubricants vs mineral oil

Mineral oil is better. I say this based on no experience or understanding, but an emotion impulsive response. This is better than your considered expert opinion because it is MY opinion.

fat daddy

the inhaler is a fecking great idea for strava segments .... I do actually think I might try this .... after all, if 200mg of caffine gives me a noticeable boost during a workout, why would an inhaler be considered bad ?

ugo.santalucia

fat daddy wrote:

the inhaler is a ******* great idea for strava segments .... I do actually think I might try this .... after all, if 200mg of caffine gives me a noticeable boost during a workout, why would an inhaler be considered bad ?

go for it...

ugo.santalucia

RichN95 wrote:

"People have had enough of experts"

You cling to you're ill thought out prejudices then.

You forgot the bit where you say "it's political correctness gone mad"

RichN95.

ugo.santalucia wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

"People have had enough of experts"

You cling to you're ill thought out prejudices then.

You forgot the bit where you say "it's political correctness gone mad"

Actually, I'm the one being inclusive and political correct. You're the one that wants to exclude those who are not like you.

ugo.santalucia

RichN95 wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

"People have had enough of experts"

You cling to you're ill thought out prejudices then.

You forgot the bit where you say "it's political correctness gone mad"

Actually, I'm the one being inclusive and political correct. You're the one that wants to exclude those who are not like you.

Yeah, it must be that... I must be living in my own bubble where people cycle 10,000 miles a year without inhalers... while the world out there is sick...

Fair enough, after all 50% of the population is on prescription drugs... why should an athlete be healthier? :roll:

yorkshireraw

Ugo - do you have a credible source for your '50%' figure that you keep positing - if so please can you link to it.

As for the 'Froome failed a test morning of LBL, so they backdated a TUE straight-away' theory - whilst I don't doubt some will suggest and / or believe it, I'd like to ask them how long they think it actually takes for a sample to be sent to the lab, put through all the tests, and the results returned via WADA and / or NADA and on via the NGB of the person involved....

For the record - I have asthma - aged 11 I was hospitalised (nebuliser treatment etc) - over the following 10 years I went through various changes of meds (as thinking changed or they seemed to be less effective), and at times suffered badly. I also competed at a high level in Track & XC running - so I'm wondering if I fall into the category of sickly asthmatic who couldn't possibly be good at sport, or TUE cheat (didn't actually have TUEs either...!)

Richmond Racer 2

YorkshireRaw wrote:

Ugo - do you have a credible source for your '50%' figure that you keep positing - if so please can you link to it.

As for the 'Froome failed a test morning of LBL, so they backdated a TUE straight-away' theory - whilst I don't doubt some will suggest and / or believe it, I'd like to ask them how long they think it actually takes for a sample to be sent to the lab, put through all the tests, and the results returned via WADA and / or NADA and on via the NGB of the person involved....

For the record - I have asthma - aged 11 I was hospitalised (nebuliser treatment etc) - over the following 10 years I went through various changes of meds (as thinking changed or they seemed to be less effective), and at times suffered badly. I also competed at a high level in Track & XC running - so I'm wondering if I fall into the category of sickly asthmatic who couldn't possibly be good at sport, or TUE cheat (didn't actually have TUEs either...!)

Yes. I believe your pants are on fire, Rawman. Alternatively you won't get a pass to join Ugo's Master Race Christmas outing

blazing_saddles

YorkshireRaw wrote:

Ugo - do you have a credible source for your '50%' figure that you keep positing - if so please can you link to it.

As for the 'Froome failed a test morning of LBL, so they backdated a TUE straight-away' theory - whilst I don't doubt some will suggest and / or believe it, I'd like to ask them how long they think it actually takes for a sample to be sent to the lab, put through all the tests, and the results returned via WADA and / or NADA and on via the NGB of the person involved....

For the record - I have asthma - aged 11 I was hospitalised (nebuliser treatment etc) - over the following 10 years I went through various changes of meds (as thinking changed or they seemed to be less effective), and at times suffered badly. I also competed at a high level in Track & XC running - so I'm wondering if I fall into the category of sickly asthmatic who couldn't possibly be good at sport, or TUE cheat (didn't actually have TUEs either...!)

Sorry sickly, but I'm afraid it's the Gimpics or nothing for you.

hypster

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

Any physical activity taken to excess is going to have a detremental affect on the body leading to damage and possible early death which is probably why many pro athletes seemingly die relatively young. Cycling a few hours a week at the level we ride at is probably going to have a net beneficial effect compared to sitting on the sofa watching Strictly.

yorkshireraw

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

YorkshireRaw wrote:

Ugo - do you have a credible source for your '50%' figure that you keep positing - if so please can you link to it.

As for the 'Froome failed a test morning of LBL, so they backdated a TUE straight-away' theory - whilst I don't doubt some will suggest and / or believe it, I'd like to ask them how long they think it actually takes for a sample to be sent to the lab, put through all the tests, and the results returned via WADA and / or NADA and on via the NGB of the person involved....

For the record - I have asthma - aged 11 I was hospitalised (nebuliser treatment etc) - over the following 10 years I went through various changes of meds (as thinking changed or they seemed to be less effective), and at times suffered badly. I also competed at a high level in Track & XC running - so I'm wondering if I fall into the category of sickly asthmatic who couldn't possibly be good at sport, or TUE cheat (didn't actually have TUEs either...!)

Yes. I believe your pants are on fire, Rawman.

It's ok though I've got a Doctor's note for that condition.