If it's not illegal, is it still cheating/doping?>>XENON BAN

DeVlaeminck

Well he had a knee injury that was taped prior to the crash so you are wrong.

Richmond Racer

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Well he had a knee injury that was taped prior to the crash so you are wrong.

OOOOH...am I? If I am, mea culpa - got any pics of that? I just dont recall seeing him taped up till after that stage.

frenchfighter

Richmond Racer wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Well he had a knee injury that was taped prior to the crash so you are wrong.

OOOOH...am I? If I am, mea culpa - got any pics of that? I just dont recall seeing him taped up till after that stage.

This is from Stage 6, the bandage is visible

This is from Stage 7:

This is after his crash (nice legs):

This is at the end of the stage (cant see a bandage)

This is because it came loose midway:

Stage 9

Stage 10 he was also descending very badly and his team had to hold up for him.

DeVlaeminck

No I seemed to remember them saying his knee injury pre dated the Giro so I googled it to check and some article came up confirming that and saying he'd been having it taped - annoyingly none of the pics confirm that ! Who knows, it could be Sky spin that he'd had a long standing knee injury to explain his Tour absence which I've bought into.

Edit - posted that before seeing the pics above

Richmond Racer

DeVlaeminck wrote:

No I seemed to remember them saying his knee injury pre dated the Giro so I googled it to check and some article came up confirming that and saying he'd been having it taped - annoyingly none of the pics confirm that ! Who knows, it could be Sky spin that he'd had a long standing knee injury to explain his Tour absence which I've bought into.

Edit - posted that before seeing the pics above

Ah, well, I just didnt remember owt about this

I'm pretty certain that his head fell off during the Giro. He was noodling around the back and not up at the front of the race towards the end of stages early on - which is usually a sign with him. But thats the thing - everyone can speculate away - and there's no guarantee that my conviction's more accurate than your speculation!

DeVlaeminck

Yeah you are probably right, just floating the idea tongue in cheek as much as anything. I still find his meltdown in the Giro a bit odd though because he is a decent bike handler in most circumstances.

earth

powerbookboy wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Mad_Malx wrote:

I agree xenon is doing essentially the same thing as a hypoxic tent. Xenon will be cleared very rapidly, so unless you sleep in a room pumped with it I very much doubt it will have any effect at all, and either way will be pretty much undetectable unless caught in the act.

As far as I understand it, they are all (hypoxic tent, CO and xenon) mimicking altitude by reducing the amount of oxygen reaching the body tissues (and hence inducing EPO ), so functionally they are having the same effect. The difference in my mind is that with xenon or CO you are actively taking something, but with the hypoxic tent or altitude training you are depriving yourself of something - rather a small difference I agree. CO is on the worst end of the spectrum and would most likely be taken as a CO-releasing compound and a detection system could be made fairly easily I think.

How fast does CO clear? It's got a very high affinity for haemoglobin (far higher than O2). And does it do any lasting damage to the red blood cells?

AFAIR permanently (well as near as damnit) binds to heam molecules, therefore rendering RBC useless. Lifespan of RBC circa 60 days, although it's possible once CO 'poisoned' the immune system might recognise it as "damaged" and destroy more quickly?

Edit. Apparently that's all shite and you should read article cited above by Mad_Malx...

CO attaches into the haemoglobin molecule where O2 would but it does not detach. The red blood cell is effectively useless once exposed to CO. Which means you are initially reducing the ability to take up oxygen. This is how people die of CO poisoning. You would have to wait for the cell to be replaced before you have the same capacity for oxygen and a RBC can circulate for 120 days. Even if you have an increase in EPO the gain must be offset by the loss so is there any overall benefit?

No_Ta_Doctor

earth wrote:

powerbookboy wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Mad_Malx wrote:

I agree xenon is doing essentially the same thing as a hypoxic tent. Xenon will be cleared very rapidly, so unless you sleep in a room pumped with it I very much doubt it will have any effect at all, and either way will be pretty much undetectable unless caught in the act.

As far as I understand it, they are all (hypoxic tent, CO and xenon) mimicking altitude by reducing the amount of oxygen reaching the body tissues (and hence inducing EPO ), so functionally they are having the same effect. The difference in my mind is that with xenon or CO you are actively taking something, but with the hypoxic tent or altitude training you are depriving yourself of something - rather a small difference I agree. CO is on the worst end of the spectrum and would most likely be taken as a CO-releasing compound and a detection system could be made fairly easily I think.

How fast does CO clear? It's got a very high affinity for haemoglobin (far higher than O2). And does it do any lasting damage to the red blood cells?

AFAIR permanently (well as near as damnit) binds to heam molecules, therefore rendering RBC useless. Lifespan of RBC circa 60 days, although it's possible once CO 'poisoned' the immune system might recognise it as "damaged" and destroy more quickly?

Edit. Apparently that's all shite and you should read article cited above by Mad_Malx...

CO attaches into the haemoglobin molecule where O2 would but it does not detach. The red blood cell is effectively useless once exposed to CO. Which means you are initially reducing the ability to take up oxygen. This is how people die of CO poisoning. You would have to wait for the cell to be replaced before you have the same capacity for oxygen and a RBC can circulate for 120 days. Even if you have an increase in EPO the gain must be offset by the loss so is there any overall benefit?

CO does detach from the haemoglobin, see the articles Mad Malx posted. It just takes a while. So for a short period your body wont' have enough blood, will boost red cell production, then the CO poisoned cells come back to work.

r0bh

http://www.burnleycitizen.co.uk/uk_national_sport/11177702.Team_Sky_call_for_WADA_intervention/

Team Sky has called for opioid Tramadol to be added to the World Anti-Doping Agency's banned list in response to comments made by a former team-mate of Lance Armstrong.

Canadian Michael Barry, who rode for Team Sky until his retirement in 2012, revealed he used the powerful, yet legal, drug, which has potentially addictive side-effects, while racing for the British team.

Team Sky, which has won the last two Tours de France through Sir Bradley Wiggins and Chris Froome, insists it no longer uses the substance and called for Tramadol to be outlawed so its use can be regulated using therapeutic use exemption certificates (TUEs).

A Team Sky spokesperson said: "None of our riders should ride whilst using Tramadol - that's the policy of this team.

"Team Sky do not give it to riders whilst racing or training, either as a pre-emptive measure or to manage existing pain.

"We believe that its side effects, such as dizziness and drowsiness, could cause issues for the safety of all riders.

"We also feel that if a rider has the level of severe pain for its appropriate use they should not be riding.


"Tramadol is not prohibited by WADA, but this has been our firm position for the last two seasons and all medical staff and riders are aware of this.

"Our view is that it should be on the WADA list and any appropriate clinical use could be managed through the regulated TUE, or Therapeutic Use Exemption, system."

(The Burnley and Pendle Citizen should be everyone's first point of call for breaking cycling news)

RichN95.

r0bh wrote:

(The Burnley and Pendle Citizen should be everyone's first point of call for breaking cycling news)

**Dons tin foil hat**
Brian Cookson used to work for Pendle Council

DeVlaeminck

It may be their "firm position" but certainly last year not all their staff were aware of that.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/team-sk ... in-peloton

Personally if it isn't banned and it's a well known drug then I can't see that it can be used as a stick to beat any team that uses it.

RichN95.

DeVlaeminck wrote:

It may be their "firm position" but certainly last year not all their staff were aware of that.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/team-sk ... in-peloton

The two standpoints seem pretty compatible to me.

It seems to me that their doctors used to prescribe it (Barry's use was in 2010) and now they don't. Alan Farrell seems particularly against it, while I image some of their other doctors may have been less concerned

DeVlaeminck

Read the link though Rich - what they are saying today isn't compatible with what Farrell was saying last October.

“I can’t say who it would have been used with but we would have used it throughout the year for any moderate to severe injury if pain warranted it. It’s certainly something that we would have used in the past but very minimally. It’s something that we’d want to use in the future in order to provide adequate pain relief. But again, we would be very happy to see it on a list so that it was more regulated.”

So clearly if all staff were made aware that tramadol has been off limits for 2 seasons Farrell must have forgotten.

RichN95.

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Read the link though Rich - what they are saying today isn't compatible with what Farrell was saying last October.

“I can’t say who it would have been used with but we would have used it throughout the year for any moderate to severe injury if pain warranted it. It’s certainly something that we would have used in the past but very minimally. It’s something that we’d want to use in the future in order to provide adequate pain relief. But again, we would be very happy to see it on a list so that it was more regulated.”

So clearly if all staff were made aware that tramadol has been off limits for 2 seasons Farrell must have forgotten.

He doesn't say that they are riding while using it - just that they use it when pain warranted it. For example, when EBH broke his collarbone, they probably gave it to him. They didn't give it the Geraint Thomas though, which it appears they would have done in 2010.

Their position that riders not ride while using it - not that it is 'off limits' completely.

DeVlaeminck

The MPCC call for a drug to be banned so of course the journalist contacts Sky for their comment.

The team doctor refuses to deny its use during the Tour and says they don't use it for "training"- if a cyclist says they don't use something for training the implication is they use it for racing. If I say I don't use gels for training but I do use them would you assume I use them for racing or I have them for Sunday lunch? If he meant that they never use it in races he'd have said that when asked about the Tour and he wouldn't have specified "training".

Mad_Malx

(a) Rider in a stage race has a crash, lot of acute pain but finishes. Takes painkiller to get a reasonable sleep. Analgesia (and drowsyness etc) mostly gone after 6 hours, so limited effect following day but would still be detectable. Feels ok to start following day, without more painkiller.

(b) Rider in a stage race has a crash, lot of blood but finishes. Has stiches in hand and bandage. Feels ok to start following day.

Is there a difference?

Richmond Racer

Garmin and Sky seem to be the only two teams who allow their doctors to be interviewed by journos.

I can see why other teams don't.

Farrell's not trained to use every single word precisely. He's a GP who in summer 2012 moved into the role of a team doctor for a pro cycling team.

Even Garmin's Prentice Steffen who's much more experienced at dealing with the media thanks to being in cycling for donkeys years and with the cuddly media friendly Garmin since the team's beginning, made the gaff of giving away the fact that Garmin had considered using Xenon, when CN's Benson contacted him in Feb.

DeVlaeminck, I guess the question is, what's your take? That Sky are now lying through their back teeth in saying they havent allowed riders to use it for racing or training in the last two seasons?

I wonder why Thomas was on ibuprofen instead of the much more powerful Tramadol, in that case.

Or is it likely that Farrell didnt realised that he needed to spell it out in the most precise terms that they have not prescribed it for riders to train or ride on, for that interview?

Richmond Racer

Matter of interest, anyone connected the fact that Sky have a lot of DNFs and DNS this season with the possibility that their doctors have become very strict about signing off on riders starting or continuing races if they're not feeling well or have an injury?

I think they have had a lot of sickness and injury - and god knows, they're short on riders thanks to JTL/Henao/Rasch retirement etc etc - but I'm hearing that this is also a factor. If a rider's not well or carrying an injury, they're not being pressured to race, with or without any little 'helpers' in the way of pain relief.

Surely that's something that we need to welcome in cycling? Rather than deride a team for not fielding a full strength squad, or riders DNF'ing a stage race.

DeVlaeminck

My take is that any reasonable interpretation of that Farrell interview concludes that Sky make limited use of tramadol in races or at least did do in October 2013.

I don't actually care if they do, if it helps and is legal I'd do it myself. What makes me laugh is the way Sky try and take people for mugs by claiming to have had a clear policy of non use for 2 years when their own doctor was telling people they use it last Autumn.

Richmond Racer

DeVlaeminck wrote:

My take is that any reasonable interpretation of that Farrell interview concludes that Sky make limited use of tramadol in races or at least did do in October 2013.

I don't actually care if they do, if it helps and is legal I'd do it myself. What makes me laugh is the way Sky try and take people for mugs by claiming to have had a clear policy of non use for 2 years when their own doctor was telling people they use it last Autumn.

As Rich has said, you are interpreting 'use' as use in racing or training. Some will share that interpretation. Others do not. That's all.

If you take it in context of everything Farrell is quoted as saying - plus listen to his views on medication etc in the Cycling Podcast during the Tour when he was interviewed after st 17 by Richard Moore here:

https://player.fm/series/the-cycling-po ... to-chorges

and still believe that Farrell and his colleagues were handing it out to their riders during races last year...well, that's how you see it I guess.

frenchfighter

In response to Michael Barry’s interview with The Times, Team Sky has issued a statement suggesting that Tramadol isn’t administered to its riders.

“None of our riders should ride whilst using Tramadol — that’s the policy of this team,” said Sky in a statement. “Team Sky do not give it to riders whilst racing or training, either as a pre-emptive measure or to manage existing pain.

“We believe that its side effects, such as dizziness and drowsiness, could cause issues for the safety of all riders. We also feel that if a rider has the level of severe pain for its appropriate use they should not be riding.”

The team also called for a ban on Tramadol.

“Tramadol is not prohibited by WADA, but this has been our firm position for the last two seasons and all medical staff and riders are aware of this. Our view is that it should be on the WADA list and any appropriate clinical use could be managed through the regulated TUE, or Therapeutic Use Exemption, system.”

tuneskyline

Sky used it in the past. They don't use it now. It's not illegal. They do want it banned.
Those riders that are riding around on Tramadol must really be hard core users. This talk of Tramadol has all come about quite recently. Can someone tell me why it was never a concern before or do you think it has been one of the Pelotons naughty secrets? It does seem that he could be used to help performance.

BenderRodriguez

frenchfighter wrote:

In response to Michael Barry’s interview with The Times, Team Sky has issued a statement suggesting that Tramadol isn’t administered to its riders.

“None of our riders should ride whilst using Tramadol — that’s the policy of this team,” said Sky in a statement. “Team Sky do not give it to riders whilst racing or training, either as a pre-emptive measure or to manage existing pain.

“We believe that its side effects, such as dizziness and drowsiness, could cause issues for the safety of all riders. We also feel that if a rider has the level of severe pain for its appropriate use they should not be riding.”

The team also called for a ban on Tramadol.

“Tramadol is not prohibited by WADA, but this has been our firm position for the last two seasons and all medical staff and riders are aware of this. Our view is that it should be on the WADA list and any appropriate clinical use could be managed through the regulated TUE, or Therapeutic Use Exemption, system.”

So a clear admission that Sky were using this drug, it seems including when Wiggins won the Tour and, despite their claims, they may still have been using it as recently as last October.

OK, so now that Michael Barry has blown the whistle they have had to go on the defensive (much as they did when it It became clear that Geert Leinders was actually the 'Belgian Ferrari'). Whatever, that they were using it at all despite the 'safety' issues noted in their statement does make something of a mockery of Brailsford's 'Mrs Dombrowski test', which was mentioned earlier.

BenderRodriguez

tuneskyline wrote:

This talk of Tramadol has all come about quite recently. Can someone tell me why it was never a concern before or do you think it has been one of the Pelotons naughty secrets?

It does seem like it.

Asked if he believed that riders in the professional peloton were abusing the use of tramadol in order to boost their performances, Steffen gave an unwaveringly clear response.

“Absolutely. I know it’s a problem. It’s not a big performance enhancer but it could make the difference of a fraction of a per cent. It’s like nothing compared to EPO or blood doping but it’s more on the side of cortico-steroids. If blood doping is a ten then it’s a two, maybe.

“I can imagine it being used for training. Anything that makes an intense effort or suffering more tolerable is going to give you a training advantage.”

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/tramado ... loton#null

I am not sure that something that is possibly as effective as using cortico-steroids can be said to give only a 'Marginal gain'!

LeicesterLad

I'm guilty. I use Tramadol to numb the pain whenever Sky win a race. Trippin' 8)

LutherB

LeicesterLad wrote:

I'm guilty. I use Tramadol to numb the pain whenever Sky win a race. Trippin' 8)

Good to see ya LL!

LeicesterLad

Cheers Luther - Not sure how long I'll be sticking around!

Coriander

LeicesterLad wrote:

Cheers Luther - Not sure how long I'll be sticking around!

Do stay.

LeicesterLad

Aw, Ill try my hardest... Just getting up to date on this years results and trying to drum up some enthusiasm. Looking forward to the Giro quite a bit so that might help!

frenchfighter

LeicesterLad wrote:

Aw, Ill try my hardest... Just getting up to date on this years results and trying to drum up some enthusiasm. Looking forward to the Giro quite a bit so that might help!

Your favourite team is racing which should help in that regard!