CMS hearings into the alleged culture of doping and bullying at British Cycling

12467…37

Comments

  • cq20
    cq20 Posts: 207
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    cq20 wrote:
    So, IMV, proven incompetence but not proven malpractice with respect to the drug (lose term) usage and administration.

    But there's a fair bit of lying there too by someone. Either to cover incompetence or malpractice. And there's the problem. If it's the former, then people will also assume the latter.

    Maybe but when witnesses say "As I understand it" and what they then say later proves to be false, it does not follow that they were lying; it only proves that their understanding or what they had been told was not correct.

    Yesterday, there were a couple of unresolved points. Did Cope and Sutton bring anything back on their return trip (conflicting statements) and the issue of Cope's expense claim
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,270
    cq20 wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    cq20 wrote:
    So, IMV, proven incompetence but not proven malpractice with respect to the drug (lose term) usage and administration.

    But there's a fair bit of lying there too by someone. Either to cover incompetence or malpractice. And there's the problem. If it's the former, then people will also assume the latter.

    Maybe but when witnesses say "As I understand it" and what they then say later proves to be false, it does not follow that they were lying; it only proves that their understanding or what they had been told was not correct.

    Yesterday, there were a couple of unresolved points. Did Cope and Sutton bring anything back on their return trip (conflicting statements) and the issue of Cope's expense claim

    Absolutely - no idea who lied and to who. Brailsford has been quite careful after initially coming out with a couple of statements that were proved to be wrong to only effectively say "I know what I've been told".
  • Hinaultscrapcousin
    Hinaultscrapcousin Posts: 647
    RichN95 wrote:
    Hinaultscrapcousin wrote:
    Anyone who is a fan of Sky/BC should take a step back and imagine what they would think if this had come out about Astana, Katusha, Russian, US, French Track Cycling etc. I feel many will be desperate to brush this aside as nothing new or playing to the rules as closely as possible. I'm pretty sure that if this weren't Sky many people would see this evidence in a very different light.
    Remember Maria Sharapova and all those Russians with their heart drug last year. No-one thought they had a heart disease, but similarly I can't remember anyone getting their knickers in a twist about them using pre-2015 when it was legal.

    I've said on many occasions, sport is just a contest according to an arbitrary set of rules. Stay within those rules. The spirit of the rules, morals or ethics don'come into it. And the fact is Wiggins could be injecting Kenalog by the litre out of competition and he's within the rules.

    Many people were outraged but none of those athletes had built a narrative about how they were doing everything clean and put themselves on a pedestal.

    To the bolded I'm afraid you are wrong. UCI regulations article 13.3.052 clearly states that the injection must be medically justified. There must be no alternative and the UCI must be informed within 24 hours if no valid TUE exists.

    Article 13.3.053 states that this applies to any substance, whether prohibited or not.

    Article 13.3.054 states that the prohibition applies to any type of injection.


    Here is a link to the regulations:

    http://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/Rule ... nglish.pdf

    The fact that there was an excess of triamcinolone suggests that several riders were using it. It is extremely unlikely that triamcinolone happened to be the best treatment for several riders out of competition but if BC/Sky have followed the rules then they should easily be able to point to the documentation submitted to the UCI.
  • pedro118118
    pedro118118 Posts: 1,102
    Vino'sGhost wrote:
    pedro118118 wrote:
    This does present as rather shambolic.

    That said, am I correct in my understanding that UKAD's remit was to investigate the 'package' and, as such, only the period during the Dauphine in 2011? Is it this period (say 2 weeks in June 2011), where record keeping was exposed as being absent? Or did UKAD reveal a systematic issue with record keeping for ordering/issuing/administering medication at BC/Sky extending beyond June 2011?

    Similarly re: Sky protocol, which compelled team doctors to upload their files to drop box. Are UKAD saying that this protocol was not followed at the Dauphine in 2011 with Wiggins, or this protocol was not complied with, full stop?

    Surely this is an important consideration?

    The PSC have said the reputation/credibility of BC/Sky is "in tatters". If that is because Sky/BC cannot provide documentary evidence of what was in a single package delivered to Dr Richard Freeman at the Dauphine in June 2011, it seems very harsh/misleading to me.

    Read this then

    A Jiffy bag that simply won’t go away http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/missi ... 5c9003f73b

    Read it and they could've saved a lot of time/effort/energy by boiling down to one element of the piece; "In the absence of documents, and answers, we are left with suspicion."
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 21,816
    edited March 2017
    joe2008 wrote:
    pedro118118 wrote:
    Similarly re: Sky protocol, which compelled team doctors to upload their files to drop box. Are UKAD saying that this protocol was not followed at the Dauphine in 2011 with Wiggins, or this protocol was not complied with, full stop?

    Sapstead said that team doctors adhered to the dropbox protocol, except Freeman who didn't upload anything, everything was on the stolen laptop.

    Really?

    What she actually said was that: "he did not do that, for one reason or another."
    Whether or not he never used Sky's dropbox protocol was not specifically addressed.
    However, the question that Mr Collins asked, that led to the above response was specific and in regard to Fluimucil.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,270
    Hinaultscrapcousin wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    Hinaultscrapcousin wrote:
    Anyone who is a fan of Sky/BC should take a step back and imagine what they would think if this had come out about Astana, Katusha, Russian, US, French Track Cycling etc. I feel many will be desperate to brush this aside as nothing new or playing to the rules as closely as possible. I'm pretty sure that if this weren't Sky many people would see this evidence in a very different light.
    Remember Maria Sharapova and all those Russians with their heart drug last year. No-one thought they had a heart disease, but similarly I can't remember anyone getting their knickers in a twist about them using pre-2015 when it was legal.

    I've said on many occasions, sport is just a contest according to an arbitrary set of rules. Stay within those rules. The spirit of the rules, morals or ethics don'come into it. And the fact is Wiggins could be injecting Kenalog by the litre out of competition and he's within the rules.

    Many people were outraged but none of those athletes had built a narrative about how they were doing everything clean and put themselves on a pedestal.

    To the bolded I'm afraid you are wrong. UCI regulations article 13.3.052 clearly states that the injection must be medically justified. There must be no alternative and the UCI must be informed within 24 hours if no valid TUE exists.

    Article 13.3.053 states that this applies to any substance, whether prohibited or not.

    Article 13.3.054 states that the prohibition applies to any type of injection.


    Here is a link to the regulations:

    http://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/Rule ... nglish.pdf

    The fact that there was an excess of triamcinolone suggests that several riders were using it. It is extremely unlikely that triamcinolone happened to be the best treatment for several riders out of competition but if BC/Sky have followed the rules then they should easily be able to point to the documentation submitted to the UCI.

    Was it clarified that it was triamcinolone for injections? I'm guessing this can be assumed. Also, was it way more than would be needed for one person? Do we know there weren't other TUEs that haven't been leaked?

    All this would be relatively easy to answer if there are easy answers.
  • Mikey23
    Mikey23 Posts: 5,306
    They have dug themselves into a massive hole. I am a massive fan of team sky and british cycling but i have to say that the whole debacle looks like a cover up, smells like a cover up and probably is a cover up. If this related to contador or nibali or valverde i would be the first out with the burning torches but...

    As some have said, nowt can be proved, nowt will be proved but i will never look at these people in the same light again. The mealy mouthed statements by brailsford et al and the way they have dealt with those in their ranks such as JTL sounds like so much hypocrisy and hot air right now...
  • Rodrego Hernandez
    Rodrego Hernandez Posts: 1,436
    Richmond Racer 2 wrote:
    Rodrego Hernandez wrote:
    As someone pointed out on Twitter yesterday, ride a race with disc brakes and the entire Pro peloton has something to say. Unravel the murky dealing of a team that promised to be transparent and squeaky clean and no one says a thing.

    The sky fanatics are being very quiet, Fran Millar must be in an internet free zone, Richard Moore has gone silent, all those that swore blind that Dave B (who they had never met) would never do anything remotely dodgy have all been conspicuous by their absence. The only sound really coming from David Walsh who is obviously in a panic as his current Golden Goose is teetering at the edge of a precipice so he's trying to protect Froome.

    Whilst this is al fascinating to watch, it is such a wasted opportunity and has put the credibility of Pro cycling back to the Armstrong years.



    How so? I can see tweets on his Twitter feed - and have since all this started - and its been the subject of several Cycling Podcasts - again, since it all broke. His name has also been the byline on articles on the subject in The Scotsman

    Wasn't he with the team when all of this was going on. He was embedded with them for a period and has happily cashed in on the whole marginal gains BS. Same as Matthew Syed.

    And as for Fran Miller, being on holiday has never stopped her before. She was Dave Bs attack dog when they were riding high on the crest of magical marginal gains.
  • carbonclem
    carbonclem Posts: 1,605
    Footage online from Dan Roan of Wiggo and his neighbours shoeing off doorstepping journos this morning :lol:
    2020/2021/2022 Metric Century Challenge Winner
  • joe2008
    joe2008 Posts: 1,531
    pedro118118 wrote:
    Read it and they could've saved a lot of time/effort/energy by boiling down to one element of the piece; "In the absence of documents, and answers, we are left with suspicion."

    or even an suspicion :D
  • Hinaultscrapcousin
    Hinaultscrapcousin Posts: 647
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    Hinaultscrapcousin wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    Hinaultscrapcousin wrote:
    Anyone who is a fan of Sky/BC should take a step back and imagine what they would think if this had come out about Astana, Katusha, Russian, US, French Track Cycling etc. I feel many will be desperate to brush this aside as nothing new or playing to the rules as closely as possible. I'm pretty sure that if this weren't Sky many people would see this evidence in a very different light.
    Remember Maria Sharapova and all those Russians with their heart drug last year. No-one thought they had a heart disease, but similarly I can't remember anyone getting their knickers in a twist about them using pre-2015 when it was legal.

    I've said on many occasions, sport is just a contest according to an arbitrary set of rules. Stay within those rules. The spirit of the rules, morals or ethics don'come into it. And the fact is Wiggins could be injecting Kenalog by the litre out of competition and he's within the rules.

    Many people were outraged but none of those athletes had built a narrative about how they were doing everything clean and put themselves on a pedestal.

    To the bolded I'm afraid you are wrong. UCI regulations article 13.3.052 clearly states that the injection must be medically justified. There must be no alternative and the UCI must be informed within 24 hours if no valid TUE exists.

    Article 13.3.053 states that this applies to any substance, whether prohibited or not.

    Article 13.3.054 states that the prohibition applies to any type of injection.


    Here is a link to the regulations:

    http://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/Rule ... nglish.pdf

    The fact that there was an excess of triamcinolone suggests that several riders were using it. It is extremely unlikely that triamcinolone happened to be the best treatment for several riders out of competition but if BC/Sky have followed the rules then they should easily be able to point to the documentation submitted to the UCI.

    Was it clarified that it was triamcinolone for injections? I'm guessing this can be assumed. Also, was it way more than would be needed for one person? Do we know there weren't other TUEs that haven't been leaked?

    All this would be relatively easy to answer if there are easy answers.

    I'm almost certain the only administration route for triamcinolone is by injection, happy to be corrected though. Sapstead said that the amount stored was excessive for one rider. No, we don't know if there are other TUEs, but triamcinolone is pretty aggressive and there are many other treatment options that would be preferable. Arguing triamcinolone use for a single rider, before a GT I'm actually OK with. Using it for several riders however is very suspicious.
  • Mad_Malx
    Mad_Malx Posts: 5,006
    Systemic (to affect the whole body) preps are by injection.
    Topical preps are available (nasal spray for rhinitis or dermal cream for eczema) but systemic dose will be very low with these.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,270
    Hinaultscrapcousin wrote:
    I'm almost certain the only administration route for triamcinolone is by injection, happy to be corrected though.

    A quick google shows oral, nasal spray and ointment as well as intramuscular injection. Oral and nasal spray not branded Kenalog.
  • Richmond Racer 2
    Richmond Racer 2 Posts: 4,698
    Rodrego Hernandez wrote:
    Richmond Racer 2 wrote:
    Rodrego Hernandez wrote:
    As someone pointed out on Twitter yesterday, ride a race with disc brakes and the entire Pro peloton has something to say. Unravel the murky dealing of a team that promised to be transparent and squeaky clean and no one says a thing.

    The sky fanatics are being very quiet, Fran Millar must be in an internet free zone, Richard Moore has gone silent, all those that swore blind that Dave B (who they had never met) would never do anything remotely dodgy have all been conspicuous by their absence. The only sound really coming from David Walsh who is obviously in a panic as his current Golden Goose is teetering at the edge of a precipice so he's trying to protect Froome.

    Whilst this is al fascinating to watch, it is such a wasted opportunity and has put the credibility of Pro cycling back to the Armstrong years.



    How so? I can see tweets on his Twitter feed - and have since all this started - and its been the subject of several Cycling Podcasts - again, since it all broke. His name has also been the byline on articles on the subject in The Scotsman

    Wasn't he with the team when all of this was going on. He was embedded with them for a period and has happily cashed in on the whole marginal gains BS. Same as Matthew Syed.

    And as for Fran Miller, being on holiday has never stopped her before. She was Dave Bs attack dog when they were riding high on the crest of magical marginal gains.



    And if you read his posts, you'll learn what he's saying, instead of inventing a scenario in which he's said absolutely zippo


    I made no comment about Ms Millar so there's no point in having a pop in response to my post, is there
  • Hinaultscrapcousin
    Hinaultscrapcousin Posts: 647
    Mad_Malx wrote:
    Systemic (to affect the whole body) preps are by injection.
    Topical preps are available (nasal spray for rhinitis or dermal cream for eczema) but systemic dose will be very low with these.
    Thanks. I don't think either of those diseases have ever been claimed for Wiggins so I think that we're safe to assume it was an injectable formulation. I think Sapstead would have mentioned it if it were a cream or something else. Easy for BC/Sky to prove otherwise though...
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,158
    edited March 2017
    Hinaultscrapcousin wrote:

    To the bolded I'm afraid you are wrong. UCI regulations article 13.3.052 clearly states that the injection must be medically justified. There must be no alternative and the UCI must be informed within 24 hours if no valid TUE exists.

    Article 13.3.053 states that this applies to any substance, whether prohibited or not.

    Article 13.3.054 states that the prohibition applies to any type of injection.


    Here is a link to the regulations:

    http://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/Rule ... nglish.pdf
    "Version entering into force on 1st January 2015". 2011 predates 2015. The injection rules have changed considerably since they were introduced.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • Hinaultscrapcousin
    Hinaultscrapcousin Posts: 647
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    Hinaultscrapcousin wrote:
    I'm almost certain the only administration route for triamcinolone is by injection, happy to be corrected though.

    A quick google shows oral, nasal spray and ointment as well as intramuscular injection. Oral and nasal spray not branded Kenalog.

    Thanks, I was just checking on the MHRA site. Injectable, nasal spray and ointment formulations are licensed in the UK, oral doesn't seem to be unless Ledermix is oral but that's for dental use. As I said to mad_malx though, I'm pretty sure Sapstead would have said if the rest was ointment of nasal sprays.
  • Richj
    Richj Posts: 240
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    joe2008 wrote:
    pedro118118 wrote:
    Similarly re: Sky protocol, which compelled team doctors to upload their files to drop box. Are UKAD saying that this protocol was not followed at the Dauphine in 2011 with Wiggins, or this protocol was not complied with, full stop?

    Sapstead said that team doctors adhered to the dropbox protocol, except Freeman who didn't upload anything, everything was on the stolen laptop.

    Really?

    What she actually said was that: "he did not do that, for one reason or another."
    Whether or not he never used Sky's dropbox protocol was not specifically addressed.
    However, the question that Mr Collins asked, that led to the above response was specific and in regard to Fluimucil.

    Sapstead stated early on that the investigation was only focused on a couple of weeks around the time of the package/dauphine. But like Blazing I wasn't sure if the not adhering to the dropbox at all or just during this period. But basically she seems to be saying they have no idea/proof/evidence of what was in the jiffy bag, just one source has claimed it was something else.
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 21,816
    edited March 2017
    Rodrego Hernandez wrote:

    Competition is classed as the entire day until midnight. If the team / doc administered something on the last day of competition that isn't allowed in competition, then they are in trouble.

    This is the crux of the matter.
    Sky and as a result, BC have pushed right up the legal, moral and ethical boundaries.
    They should be held to account, up to this point.
    The mess from the fallout is one of their own making.

    However, I am yet to see anyone, anywhere come up with a viable scenario to explain why the team would risk giving someone this specific, banned medication, that in a matter of a very few hours, became legal again.
    With the unlikelihood of any clarification being forthcoming, such might aid to move the debate forward.

    As it stands, as far as the wider use of triamcinolone is concerned, I can't see UKAD pushing ahead with the attempted invasion of several hundred medical records.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,158
    Rodrego Hernandez wrote:
    Wasn't he with the team when all of this was going on. He was embedded with them for a period and has happily cashed in on the whole marginal gains BS.
    You clearly haven't read his book about Sky.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • Hinaultscrapcousin
    Hinaultscrapcousin Posts: 647
    RichN95 wrote:
    Hinaultscrapcousin wrote:

    To the bolded I'm afraid you are wrong. UCI regulations article 13.3.052 clearly states that the injection must be medically justified. There must be no alternative and the UCI must be informed within 24 hours if no valid TUE exists.

    Article 13.3.053 states that this applies to any substance, whether prohibited or not.

    Article 13.3.054 states that the prohibition applies to any type of injection.


    Here is a link to the regulations:

    http://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/Rule ... nglish.pdf
    "Version entering into force on 1st January 2015". 2011 predates 2015. The injection rules have changed considerably since they were introduced.

    The No Needles policy was introduced before the '11 Giro. It stated that injections were only allowed when medically necessary and no alternatives were available. For the period we are discussing Wiggins could not "be injecting Kenalog by the litre out of competition" and be "within the rules".
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,158
    Richmond Racer 2 wrote:
    I made no comment about Ms Millar so there's no point in having a pop in response to my post, is there
    Ms Millar is being held captive by Queen and they have said on several occasions that they will not let her go.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • Richmond Racer 2
    Richmond Racer 2 Posts: 4,698
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    Rodrego Hernandez wrote:

    Competition is classed as the entire day until midnight. If the team / doc administered something on the last day of competition that isn't allowed in competition, then they are in trouble.

    This is the crux of the matter.
    Sky and as a result, BC have pushed right up the legal, moral and ethical boundaries.
    They should be held to account, up to this point.
    The mess from the fallout is one of their own making.

    However, I am yet to see anyone, anywhere come up with a viable scenario to explain why the team would risk giving someone this specific, banned medication, that in a matter of a very few hours, became legal again.
    With the unlikelihood of any clarification being forthcoming, such might aid to move the debate forward.

    As it stands, as far as the wider use of triamcinolone is concerned, I can't see UKAD pushing ahead with the attempted invasion of several hundred medical records.



    This. All of this.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,158
    Hinaultscrapcousin wrote:
    medically necessary
    Medically Justified - not medically necessary. There's a big difference between those phrases.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • Rodrego Hernandez
    Rodrego Hernandez Posts: 1,436
    Richmond Racer 2 wrote:
    Rodrego Hernandez wrote:
    Richmond Racer 2 wrote:
    Rodrego Hernandez wrote:
    As someone pointed out on Twitter yesterday, ride a race with disc brakes and the entire Pro peloton has something to say. Unravel the murky dealing of a team that promised to be transparent and squeaky clean and no one says a thing.

    The sky fanatics are being very quiet, Fran Millar must be in an internet free zone, Richard Moore has gone silent, all those that swore blind that Dave B (who they had never met) would never do anything remotely dodgy have all been conspicuous by their absence. The only sound really coming from David Walsh who is obviously in a panic as his current Golden Goose is teetering at the edge of a precipice so he's trying to protect Froome.

    Whilst this is al fascinating to watch, it is such a wasted opportunity and has put the credibility of Pro cycling back to the Armstrong years.



    How so? I can see tweets on his Twitter feed - and have since all this started - and its been the subject of several Cycling Podcasts - again, since it all broke. His name has also been the byline on articles on the subject in The Scotsman

    Wasn't he with the team when all of this was going on. He was embedded with them for a period and has happily cashed in on the whole marginal gains BS. Same as Matthew Syed.

    And as for Fran Miller, being on holiday has never stopped her before. She was Dave Bs attack dog when they were riding high on the crest of magical marginal gains.



    And if you read his posts, you'll learn what he's saying, instead of inventing a scenario in which he's said absolutely zippo


    I made no comment about Ms Millar so there's no point in having a pop in response to my post, is there

    I'm basing it on more than his twitter feed and I wasn't having a 'pop' - sorry if you took it that I was.
  • Hinaultscrapcousin
    Hinaultscrapcousin Posts: 647
    RichN95 wrote:
    Hinaultscrapcousin wrote:
    medically necessary
    Medically Justified - not medically necessary. There's a big difference between those phrases.
    There is actually, justified makes it much harder to explain as arguably any treatment for allergies can be deemed necessary. Thanks for pointing it out. Still doesn't change the fact that he can't freely inject triamcinolone OOC and be within the rules, even in 2011.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,158
    edited March 2017
    Hinaultscrapcousin wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    Hinaultscrapcousin wrote:
    medically necessary
    Medically Justified - not medically necessary. There's a big difference between those phrases.
    There is actually, justified makes it much harder to explain as arguably any treatment for allergies can be deemed necessary. Thanks for pointing it out. Still doesn't change the fact that he can't freely inject triamcinolone OOC and be within the rules, even in 2011.
    What's the reason for taking it if there is no medical benefit? If it helps recovery during training blocks - that's a medical justification. It assists weight loss - that's a medical justification. It's a very loose term - and largely unenforceable.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • vinnymarsden
    vinnymarsden Posts: 560
    My personal view now is that the committee as it stands are not going to get anything new from anyone...they are just going round and round and round..there is no smoking gun..there is no evidence..as such it is very difficult to perceive any further line of enquiry..TeamSky and the entourage around it at the time have circled the wagons, they are simply NOT going to reveal any more info.The complete lack of records is a brilliant ploy too, yes it makes them look stupid/amateurish..but it also closes off another avenue of enquiry, there simply are NO records, end of!
    The committee was set up to investigate doping in sport..I think now, it's high time to move along to Footy/Rugby/Snooker, etc.
    I'm not saying there isn't something clearly amiss with TeamSky and British Cycling, but in the spirit of fairness surely it's time for the other sports to go under the microscope, you are not telling me that the Premier League and its VAST fortunes are not tempted by the darker side!!!!
  • Hinaultscrapcousin
    Hinaultscrapcousin Posts: 647
    RichN95 wrote:
    Hinaultscrapcousin wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    Hinaultscrapcousin wrote:
    medically necessary
    Medically Justified - not medically necessary. There's a big difference between those phrases.
    There is actually, justified makes it much harder to explain as arguably any treatment for allergies can be deemed necessary. Thanks for pointing it out. Still doesn't change the fact that he can't freely inject triamcinolone OOC and be within the rules, even in 2011.
    What's the reason for taking it if there is no medical benefit? If it helps recovery during training blocks - that's a medical justification. It assists weight loss - that's a medical justification.
    Sorry, that's quite possibly the stupidest thing I've read here or anywhere with regard to this. I can see you are desperate to divert attention from this but exactly the same logic would be applied to every PED and it's patently ridiculous to suggest it.

    I'll remind you that it was you who said Wiggins could basically inject as much triamcinolone as he wanted OOC and be within the rules. You are wrong, it's really easy to admit it and move on.
  • pedro118118
    pedro118118 Posts: 1,102
    Sorry, that's quite possibly the stupidest thing I've read here or anywhere with regard to this. I can see you are desperate to divert attention from this but exactly the same logic would be applied to every PED and it's patently ridiculous to suggest it.

    Eh? Aren't we talking about substances, which are ordinarily not permitted (in competition), unless a rider has a TUE? That can hardly be applied to every PED.

Categories