AICAR / France 2

iainf72

Report on AICAR usage tonight - Test coming shortly.

It seems there was a lot of nudge nudge, wink wink type of talk in it. Summarised nicely by inrng

https://twitter.com/inrng/status/287975754355056641

TheBigBean

Forgive my ignorance - is AICAR some sort of drug?

iainf72

Yes, a currently undetectable one that amongst other thing promotes significant weight loss.

When it first emerged a lot of riders looked very very lean

iainf72

Here's some decent background on it

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/11395 ... lance.aspx

RichN95.

Can you still lose weight by eating less food? Because if not the New Year diet is screwed already.

zammmmo

Presumably the test could be used retrospectively? Obviously pro riders and usually pure climbers have always been lean but can't think of many in the last couple of years particularly standing out as taking things to a new level apart from the inrng.com intimation.

Richmond Racer

Some shots of David Millar look Wiggo-esque - REALLY skinny and long legs and body - and have since Wiggo left the track after 08

Richmond Racer

Seems to be a bit of confusion. I saw one cycling journo tweet last week that he thought a test was already developed for this, and also Daniel Friebe's just tweeted that he thought one had been developed in 2011

The_Slowboat

Further to Zammmmo's post, in general to what extent do authorities test retrospectively, I assume all samples are held for future use? I must confess things like blood values or testing procedures are things I know nothing about.

I recall reading whispers about USADA having Armstrong samples that were re tested.

TheBigBean

zammmmo wrote:

Presumably the test could be used retrospectively?

It could be and should be, but they only take two samples:A and B, and A will already have been used.

Personally, I think they should take three samples, and re-test everyone a set number of years later, but that wouldn't be very popular with the pros - like the LA stuff.

EKIMIKE

What, so they use the entire sample to do the test? Surely not?

rick_chasey

iainf72 wrote:

Yes, a currently undetectable one that amongst other thing promotes significant weight loss.

When it first emerged a lot of riders looked very very lean

When was this? Need to fire up youtube and have a look.

Richmond Racer

TheBigBean wrote:

zammmmo wrote:

Presumably the test could be used retrospectively?

It could be and should be, but they only take two samples:A and B, and A will already have been used.

Personally, I think they should take three samples, and re-test everyone a set number of years later, but that wouldn't be very popular with the pros - like the LA stuff.

I wonder how it worked with the re-testing of the 100 samples from the Athens Olympics that they did last year, with 5 coming up positive? I last heard that was being discussed by the IOC.

iainf72

Rick Chasey wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

Yes, a currently undetectable one that amongst other thing promotes significant weight loss.

When it first emerged a lot of riders looked very very lean

When was this? Need to fire up youtube and have a look.

09.

I remember at the time a couple of brothers were noted as looking exceptionally thin.

rick_chasey

Hmm.

Can't say I noticed. They always look pretty damn thin. A totally-not-exact google image search puts them as thin as any other year prior....

I guess that year points mainly to one bloke right?

Corrolation, not necessarily causation obviously.

*ahem*

Richmond Racer

Whilst at Garmin...hardly credible, is it, never mind any other consideration

rick_chasey

Richmond Racer wrote:

Whilst at Garmin...hardly credible, is it, never mind any other consideration

It's an unfortunate corrolation you'll agree though.

Richmond Racer

Makes an unfortunate roundel target.

After consideration I've decided that I'm bloody glad that I would never have had even the smallest percentage of talent, mental strength, physiology, skillz - well, anything that's needed basically - to become a top pro and win the Tour. I couldnt cope with all the crap off the bike that goes along with being a Tour winner right now.

rick_chasey

Richmond Racer wrote:

Makes an unfortunate roundel target.

After consideration I've decided that I'm bloody glad that I would never have had even the smallest percentage of talent, mental strength, physiology, skillz - well, anything that's needed basically - to become a top pro and win the Tour. I couldnt cope with all the crap off the bike that goes along with being a Tour winner right now.

Professional sports eh?

You gets what you gets paid for.

Richmond Racer

Rick Chasey wrote:

Richmond Racer wrote:

Makes an unfortunate roundel target.

After consideration I've decided that I'm bloody glad that I would never have had even the smallest percentage of talent, mental strength, physiology, skillz - well, anything that's needed basically - to become a top pro and win the Tour. I couldnt cope with all the crap off the bike that goes along with being a Tour winner right now.

Professional sports eh?

You gets what you gets paid for.

Show me another popular global sport where its like this

mididoctors

how do you pronounce AICAR?

Ay-CAR Ayce-R what?

rick_chasey

mididoctors wrote:

how do you pronounce AICAR?

Ay-CAR Ayce-R what?

Prepping for the office chat tomorrow? .

LeicesterLad

Richmond Racer wrote:

Makes an unfortunate roundel target.

After consideration I've decided that I'm bloody glad that I would never have had even the smallest percentage of talent, mental strength, physiology, skillz - well, anything that's needed basically - to become a top pro and win the Tour. I couldnt cope with all the crap off the bike that goes along with being a Tour winner right now.

The sport and riders havn't exactly helped themselved have they? All the questions now are a direct result of two decades of drug abuse and lies. Basically, tough sh*t. Or shall we just brush everything back under the carpet?

Richmond Racer

LeicesterLad wrote:

Richmond Racer wrote:

Makes an unfortunate roundel target.

After consideration I've decided that I'm bloody glad that I would never have had even the smallest percentage of talent, mental strength, physiology, skillz - well, anything that's needed basically - to become a top pro and win the Tour. I couldnt cope with all the crap off the bike that goes along with being a Tour winner right now.

The sport and riders havn't exactly helped themselved have they? All the questions now are a direct result of two decades of drug abuse and lies. Basically, tough sh*t. Or shall we just brush everything back under the carpet?

Dont put words in my mouth. The sport has brought this on itself. I just couldnt cope with it myself. OK?

disgruntledgoat

Can you not understand the frustration of riders who get accused on absolutely no evidence though?

Some on here are already trying to hang Wiggins on the basis of a documentary about a drug there is currently no evidence to link him to other than him having a breakout year at the same time it may have been in use.

I've no problem with allegations based on evidence but it really frustrates me to see riders subject to innuendo based on nothing at all. Any rider.

rick_chasey

Richmond Racer wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Richmond Racer wrote:

Makes an unfortunate roundel target.

After consideration I've decided that I'm bloody glad that I would never have had even the smallest percentage of talent, mental strength, physiology, skillz - well, anything that's needed basically - to become a top pro and win the Tour. I couldnt cope with all the crap off the bike that goes along with being a Tour winner right now.

Professional sports eh?

You gets what you gets paid for.

Show me another popular global sport where its like this

Every sport has its own baggage to a degree.

I'm sure the millions in your bank and the memories of the champs elysees would soften the blow.

LeicesterLad

disgruntledgoat wrote:

Can you not understand the frustration of riders who get accused on absolutely no evidence though?

Some on here are already trying to hang Wiggins on the basis of a documentary about a drug there is currently no evidence to link him to other than him having a breakout year at the same time it may have been in use.

I've no problem with allegations based on evidence but it really frustrates me to see riders subject to innuendo based on nothing at all. Any rider.

Of course I can see the frustration! Nobody likes being accused of things they havn't done. Thing is that statement about Brad works both ways, yes theres some who want to see the back of him, others who are suspicious, but there also some on here who 90% of their time talk about dopers/doping/cheating with such strong anti-doping views until of course it concerns somebody they like, and then of course it becomes 'a load of crap surrounding the sport' or 'twitter taliban' or 'guesswork' or the like.

TBH I'm sick of the talk of Wiggins and accusations of him doping, I don't believe them for one minute, not rationally anyway, but I'm a little sick of all the knee-jerk reaction, holier than thou, twitter taliban talk as well or the complete jump from vocal anti-doping to 'omg, why are they accusing Brad, omg this is so unfair, these people are animals'

Richmond Racer

Personally the only current riders who I cant be doing with on that front, are 2 who've both been done, sanctioned and returned to the sport still denying everything - Bertie and Valverde. So here's a bit of a differentiator - they've been done and they remain in denial.

But I really dont want to do off one about them now because it gets very tedious very quickly.

mfin

If and when there's anything pinned solidly against a rider then things become an issue, before that people who sort of 'believe' in people are the ones who enter the discussions and go on the defensive etc. I suppose though that just like any sport, most fans are those who have heroes, there's all the Sky fancy-dressers at the moment for example... myself I really enjoy watching and following cycling but don't have a single hero, don't need to, can absolutely love it without idolising anyone. (I suppose that's why I see cheats as cheating every single clean cyclist from their right to compete in a fair sport as well as cheating everyone who follows cycling from viewing a clean sport).

Telmisartan is very interesting as is Aicar, I would assume its been quite prevalent in the last few years. I wouldn't join an opinion that just because someone looks so skinny its because of a drug that's just had its media presence upped, that would be stupid.

I would expect it likely that some high profile people could be exposed for using this group of drugs this year though.

mididoctors

disgruntledgoat wrote:

Can you not understand the frustration of riders who get accused on absolutely no evidence though?

Some on here are already trying to hang Wiggins on the basis of a documentary about a drug there is currently no evidence to link him to other than him having a breakout year at the same time it may have been in use.

I've no problem with allegations based on evidence but it really frustrates me to see riders subject to innuendo based on nothing at all. Any rider.

hardly surprising thou..

I doubt wiggo or a host of other skinnys are on this gear, doesn't amount to much this story TbH.

inkyfingers

The problem with all this is where do we stop? Inferring that somebody is a doper because they suddenly start winning loads or climbing much better is one thing, inferring it because they lost some weight...it's a slippery slope.

You don't become a pro cyclist without being extremely dedicated, and losing weight is all about dedication.

I'm not saying that Tom, Dick or even Bradley didn't dope, just that to me this sounds a bit premature, though no doubt some will have convicted him in their own mind already.

(Anybody know where I can buy some...?)