Drugs in other sports and the media.

ugo.santalucia

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.

There was article on cycling weekly that quoted 40% of GB olympic cyclists.

Just under the picture of Froome

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/com ... ing-223300

This one points at 70% for the olympic swimmers, against an 8-10% in the general population

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/ ... y-swimmers

This one also mentiones 1/3 of team Sky cyclists

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... yclist-eid

blazing_saddles

I guess Team Novo Nordisk's days would also be numbered, under Ugo's UCI chairmanship.....

yorkshireraw

ugo.santalucia 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.

There was article on cycling weekly that quoted 40% of GB olympic cyclists.

Just under the picture of Froome

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/com ... ing-223300

This one points at 70% for the olympic swimmers, against an 8-10% in the general population

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/ ... y-swimmers

This one also mentiones 1/3 of team Sky cyclists

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... yclist-eid

Hang on tho - your argument is that a lot of these people are using inhalers but don't actually have the condition. From your own Guardian link ref. swimmers:
"John Dickinson from Kent University’s school of sport & exercise sciences, a world expert on asthma in sport, tested all 33 UK-based members of the British swimming squad and found 70% had some form of asthma, against a national asthma rate of about 8% to 10%. It is believed the chlorinated atmosphere of a pool could be a factor in this."

So that's an actual diagnosis, not just using inhalers.

ugo.santalucia

YorkshireRaw wrote:

"John Dickinson from Kent University’s school of sport & exercise sciences, a world expert on asthma in sport, tested all 33 UK-based members of the British swimming squad and found 70% had some form of asthma, against a national asthma rate of about 8% to 10%. It is believed the chlorinated atmosphere of a pool could be a factor in this."

So that's an actual diagnosis, not just using inhalers.

He's not a doctor of medicine he can't make diagnoses... but let's assume his conclusions are accurate. If this is the case, then there is an argument for getting rid of swimming at the olympics... if it makes you sick, it has no reason to exist.

Personally I think we are comparing apples and pears... 70% of swimmers according to his stringent tests, Vs 8-10% of medical diagnoses in the population... could well be they use a different set of criteria to define asthma and where the borderline above which one requires medications is

EDIT: it is exaclty my point... fewer team doctors, fewer experts in sport medicine (the Ferrari, the Conconi) and sport performance and more real consultants that treat athletes like normal people, not like machines to fine tune for the race

haydenm

Also, it might be possible that someone doing regular intense exercise might be far more likely to notice the fact they have mild asthma than the general population. Unless you have had serious asthma attacks you are probably unlikely to go to the doctors for a diagnosis. My inhaler does next to nothing when I am feeling healthy anyway

ugo.santalucia

HaydenM wrote:

Also, it might be possible that someone doing regular intense exercise might be far more likely to notice the fact they have mild asthma than the general population. Unless you have had serious asthma attacks you are probably unlikely to go to the doctors for a diagnosis. My inhaler does next to nothing when I am feeling healthy anyway

That's exactly the point... where is the "medication" line? Is it the general public one or the one sport adopts? I lean towards the former

EDIT: question... who defined an athlete as an "ill person"? Answer: Michele Ferrari... 'nuff said

haydenm

Yes but being an athlete isn't something you can get a diagnosis from the GP for. The medication line (in terms of severity) is the same in the general population, it's just fewer people bother if they only have mild asthma. Asthma is a clearly definable condition whether it's mild or not, it would be difficult to introduce an arbitrary level of severity where they can prescribe, especially not if doctors can and do prescribe mild asthma in the general population too to a lesser percentage. And why would they if it has no performance benefits to people who don't have mild asthma?

ugo.santalucia

HaydenM wrote:

Yes but being an athlete isn't something you can get a diagnosis from the GP for. The medication line (in terms of severity) is the same in the general population, it's just fewer people bother if they only have mild asthma. Asthma is a clearly definable condition whether it's mild or not, it would be difficult to introduce an arbitrary level of severity where they can prescribe, especially not if doctors can and do prescribe mild asthma in the general population too to a lesser percentage. And why would they if it has no performance benefits to people who don't have mild asthma?

Ok, let's assume you are right and the excess of training/competition makes athletes sick... one more reason to get rid of all team doctors and medications and bring sport to a more human level, where if you train too hard you get sick and can't compete...
Athletes would adapt to a more human regime within a year or two... let's rewrite books and records... let's make sport what it is supposed to be.
I don't mind if they average 45 Km/h or 43... if they have a VAM of 1750 or 1650... it makes no difference to me.

Thinking that professional sport is made up of essentially sick people is a revolting thing... it really is no good

haydenm

I didn't say training makes them sick, I said training makes them notice they had the condition in the first place. Hereditary mild asthma is something that can be treated and counts as medical condition

ugo.santalucia

HaydenM wrote:

I didn't say training makes them sick, I said training makes them notice they had the condition in the first place. Hereditary mild asthma is something that can be treated and counts as medical condition

Devil's advocate: Is it not the same thing? You need to train so hard that the symptoms crop up... train less hard and keep them dorment then...

Paul 8v

Above The Cows wrote:

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

OCDuPalais wrote:

I regularly scored highly in PE by doing a forward roll and a "present" in my pants and vest... It's scary to think where I could be now if I'd had concentration-enhancing drugs...

You had a present in your pants and vest? :shock: My oh my. Advanced child.

I was thinking a 'present' in this instance was a poo. I am about as mature as Fancy Bear and his Dope War of revenge against the Evil Empire.

No, I thought it meant that too!

haydenm

ugo.santalucia wrote:

HaydenM wrote:

I didn't say training makes them sick, I said training makes them notice they had the condition in the first place. Hereditary mild asthma is something that can be treated and counts as medical condition

Devil's advocate: Is it not the same thing? You need to train so hard that the symptoms crop up... train less hard and keep them dorment then...

I see your point but would the same not be said for anyone finding they have a condition which they only bothered to find once they started training? Such as a genetic curvature of the spine or something? I have a problem with my elbow but it only flares up when I ride, would I be able to get that sorted? A mountain biker was forced to retire in 2013 with asthma but later found it was Vocal Chord Dysfunction which required different treatment and now he is back, would he be allowed treatment? If it is an actual diagnose-able condition then I really don't see there being a problem

r0bh

Ugo's vision is a world where only the genetically pure may compete in sports.

Sounds a bit like a dystopian sci-fi movie.

ugo.santalucia

HaydenM wrote:

A mountain biker was forced to retire in 2013 with asthma but later found it was Vocal Chord Dysfunction which required different treatment and now he is back, would he be allowed treatment? If it is an actual diagnose-able condition then I really don't see there being a problem

I don't see a problem either, if they are a minority. Are we accepting as a fact that 70% of swimmers have asthma and take medications? Are we happy with that figure and conlcude that more than half the population are inherently sick, sport cause the symptoms to flare up and therefore the majority of athletes will be treated for some chronic condition or other and happy days... that's life, get on with it in the know that (for some reason) sport is still good for you, because instead of asthma you could have type 2 diabetes, which is worse...

bobmcstuff

Paul 8v wrote:

Above The Cows wrote:

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

OCDuPalais wrote:

I regularly scored highly in PE by doing a forward roll and a "present" in my pants and vest... It's scary to think where I could be now if I'd had concentration-enhancing drugs...

You had a present in your pants and vest? :shock: My oh my. Advanced child.

I was thinking a 'present' in this instance was a poo. I am about as mature as Fancy Bear and his Dope War of revenge against the Evil Empire.

No, I thought it meant that too!

I thought it meant dropping your pants...

ugo.santalucia

r0bh wrote:

Ugo's vision is a world where only the genetically pure may compete in sports.

Sounds a bit like a dystopian sci-fi movie.

Obviously the temptation of branding someone as a nazi is too hard to resist, innit?

bobmcstuff

hypster 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

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.

Answer to that is yes, there is a net benefit: https://ig.ft.com/sites/urban-cycling/

RichN95.

ugo.santalucia wrote:

HaydenM wrote:

A mountain biker was forced to retire in 2013 with asthma but later found it was Vocal Chord Dysfunction which required different treatment and now he is back, would he be allowed treatment? If it is an actual diagnose-able condition then I really don't see there being a problem

I don't see a problem either, if they are a minority. Are we accepting as a fact that 70% of swimmers have asthma and take medications? Are we happy with that figure and conlcude that more than half the population are inherently sick, sport cause the symptoms to flare up and therefore the majority of athletes will be treated for some chronic condition or other and happy days... that's life, get on with it in the know that (for some reason) sport is still good for you, because instead of asthma you could have type 2 diabetes, which is worse...

Here's a compromise. We allow sportsmen the medication that is their basic, so that those of us who believe in human rights are satisfied, however we make it all very public so that you are able to pass judgement.

Asthmatics will wear a big scarlet coloured 'A' on their kit so that you can know that they are of lower moral standing.
Those with a TUE will wear an asterisk so that you can know that they are of lesser genetic composition.

ugo.santalucia

RichN95 wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

HaydenM wrote:

A mountain biker was forced to retire in 2013 with asthma but later found it was Vocal Chord Dysfunction which required different treatment and now he is back, would he be allowed treatment? If it is an actual diagnose-able condition then I really don't see there being a problem

I don't see a problem either, if they are a minority. Are we accepting as a fact that 70% of swimmers have asthma and take medications? Are we happy with that figure and conlcude that more than half the population are inherently sick, sport cause the symptoms to flare up and therefore the majority of athletes will be treated for some chronic condition or other and happy days... that's life, get on with it in the know that (for some reason) sport is still good for you, because instead of asthma you could have type 2 diabetes, which is worse...

Here's a compromise. We allow sportsmen the medication that is their basic, so that those of us who believe in human rights are satisfied, however we make it all very public so that you are able to pass judgement.

Asthmatics will wear a big scarlet coloured 'A' on their kit so that you can know that they are of lower moral standing.
Those with a TUE will wear a yellow asterisk so that you can know that they are of lesser genetic composition.

I don't know if there is a solution... I think we don't seem to agree whether there is a problem or not.

The question all those articles I quoted above raise is legitimate... then of course it is up to society and the bodies that govern sport to decide what to do, if to do anything at all

above_the_cows

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

Jeez, what's with the shouting

So much anger

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

Yeah but they were exciting racers. Sure some of them died but, you know, entertainment!

above_the_cows

So let's compile a list of cyclists and other sportspeople with known medical conditions. It can be known as the 'Untermensch With Uberstrength List'.

1. Beryl Burton - ventricular tachycardia.
2. Jack Bobridge - rheumatoid arthritis.
3. Greg Lemond - ADHD.
4. Steve Redgrave - diabetes and crohns disease.

stagehopper

First they came for the Diabetics, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Diabetic.

Then they came for the Asthmatics, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Asthmatic.

Then they came for the Hypothyroidism sufferers, and I did not speak out—
Because I did not have Hypothyroidism.

Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me and I'd only had a steak.

RichN95.

Delete

RichN95.

In criminal law there is a principle called Blackstone's Formulation which says: "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"

Rich's Formulation of TUEs says: "It is better for ten persons to abuse TUEs than that one innocent sufferer be barred from competition"

dinyull

stagehopper wrote:

First they came for the Diabetics, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Diabetic.

Then they came for the Asthmatics, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Asthmatic.

Then they came for the Hypothyroidism sufferers, and I did not speak out—
Because I did not have Hypothyroidism.

Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me and I'd only had a steak.

rick_chasey

Above The Cows wrote:

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

Jeez, what's with the shouting

So much anger

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

Yeah but they were exciting racers. Sure some of them died but, you know, entertainment!

What's your take on technical/fast/difficult descents with respect to the danger they pose to riders?

tailwindhome

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?

I think the tone of that comment is a tad unnecessary

I've never been one for throwing round accusations* with regard to any rider irrespective of nationality and have always been of the view that all riders should be presumed innocent until there is compelling evidence otherwise and been happy to take the view that, for want of a better word, the authorities have a better handle on the facts/evidence in each case and accept their judgements. I've applied this consistently over various cases, Henao's BP, Impey's chemist, Yate's missing TUE, Armistead's whereabouts etc etc

Specifically with respect to Froome's LBL14 test and TUE for Romandie I've accepted at face value the explanation given by Sky and argued that it's unfair to condemn Froome/Sky for failings in the UCI's procedures. Moreover I've argued against those who have, maliciously in my view, continued to describe an 'expedited' TUE as a backdated TUE in order to link Froome and Armstrong.

Then the TUEs are leaked and it turns out that the first TUE written by Zorzoli was approved on the 29th with an effective date of the 27th. A date which covers the test at LBL.

TUE 229124645 is a backdated TUE

Now I can see the 3rd TUE (also technically backdated I suppose) clearly corrects the 2nd (written for a year to 2015)

But I'll make no apology to anyone for having an uneasy feeling** with regard to the idea that Zorzoli's first TUE 'typo' just happens to be for the day which covers the test and DNS.




* apart from Horner
** still managed to get up and go to work so I'm grand really.

ugo.santalucia

Above The Cows wrote:

So let's compile a list of cyclists and other sportspeople with known medical conditions. It can be known as the 'Untermensch With Uberstrength List'.

1. Beryl Burton - ventricular tachycardia.
2. Jack Bobridge - rheumatoid arthritis.
3. Greg Lemond - ADHD.
4. Steve Redgrave - diabetes and crohns disease.

5. Franco Bitossi has a pretty serious case of cardiac arrhythmia... it costed him the worlds in 1972... if only he was allowed to inhale something...

RichN95.

TailWindHome wrote:

Specifically with respect to Froome's LBL14 test and TUE for Romandie I've accepted at face value the explanation given by Sky and argued that it's unfair to condemn Froome/Sky for failings in the UCI's procedures. Moreover I've argued against those who have, maliciously in my view, continued to describe an 'expedited' TUE as a backdated TUE in order to link Froome and Armstrong.

Then the TUEs are leaked and it turns out that the first TUE written by Zorzoli was approved on the 29th with an effective date of the 27th. A date which covers the test at LBL.

I'll use a screen grab of the first TUE report to make this simple for you.



First notice the Effective Date and the Expiration. They say the TUE is from 27 April-2 May.

Now read the Comments. That says the TUE is for 29 April-6 May.

The two don't correspond to each other. So there is a clearly an error which needs amendment. So a second corrected report is filed to replace it. Froome isn't covered for 27th April. No malice, just incompetence.

ugo.santalucia

Why Sky have dealings with Zorzoli?

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/zorzoli-to-leave-uci/

EDIT: is Zorzoli still in UCI?