Froome Vuelta salbutamol problem

Beatmaker

btw i m not a Sky or Froome fan but to me he is reaping the backlash from the abuses of past riders/teams

This is where I am with it. I think without the last few years of increasing murky stories/rumours about Sky, the Froome news would have been received in a similar fashion to Simon Yates anti doping rule violation.

Matthewfalle

as an sside, if this wad a random Astana (or other) rider, would people on here be supporting him as much as they are supporting Froome?

sherer

maybe cycling needs to take a leaf out of football or tennis's book, where people can get a ban and sit out without it even being reported.

I'm still in two minds on this case.. according to what I've been told asthma drugs don't actually seem to offer any performance, but yet WADA have set limits for that that riders seem to push to the limits

tailwindhome

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

Mr Rapha, Simon Mottram

https://www.theguardian.com/small-busin ... ping-stuff

29 more sleeps

dish_dash

Matthewfalle wrote:

as an sside, if this wad a random Astana (or other) rider, would people on here be supporting him as much as they are supporting Froome?

No, and we wouldn't be talking about it nearly as much either. We have the Ulissi example, that thread barely hit four pages.

No_Ta_Doctor

dish_dash wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

as an sside, if this wad a random Astana (or other) rider, would people on here be supporting him as much as they are supporting Froome?

No, and we wouldn't be talking about it nearly as much either. We have the Ulissi example, that thread barely hit four pages.

Four pages that culminate in a general feeling that it was all a lot of fuss about nothing and that Ulissi was maybe hard done by.

shirley_basso

https://www.idrottsforskning.se/astmame ... explosiva/

Can anyone read/translate this (Swedish) as it's blocked at work for some reason.

Picked up off Weightweenies, saying that Salbutamol does have an affect on performance.

cld531c

Translated by google...

Asthma medicine is used diligently among elite riders. Doctors have previously claimed that medications are not performance-enhancing, but several studies now show that high doses can provide clear benefits to athletes.
"Medicines give positive effects regardless of whether you have asthma or not," says Professor Vibeke Backer.
The use of asthma medicine among elite riders has increased in recent years. Athletes with an asthma diagnosis today dominate the medal in the major championships in several endurance athletes. For example, 69 percent of all Norwegian Olympic medals from 1992 onwards have been taken by asthmatics.

What does actually mean asthma medication for the results in endurance athletes?

Discussed question
Research has previously shown that respiratory asthma medicine (Beta2 agonists) in normal doses does not have an effect on physical performance.


SPORTS AND ASTHMA
Compared to the general population, it is much more common for elite riders to have asthma diagnosis, especially in endurance and swimming. For example, astronauts are eight times more common than the people in general.

Asthma medicine is allowed if the athlete has been given the dispensation to use it, something that is provided by a physician-diagnosed asthma. The medicine (Beta2 agonists) works by helping the muscles in the trachea to relax.

EXPAND
The two heaviest Swedish experts - Professor Kjell Larsson and Chief Medical Officer Åke Andrén-Sandberg - have also long believed that asthma-related asthma medicine is not performance-enhancing and that the practice in sport should not be questioned. A conclusion Kjell Larsson also expressed in the discussion of asthma medication that has been conducted in the media in recent years.

But what happens if the intake is significantly higher than normal dosage, for example, Salbutamol is 200 micrograms per day?

The rules set up by Wada (World Anti-Doping Agency) provide space for doses up to 800 micrograms every twelve hours - and thus 1600 micrograms Salbutamol in a day before the use is classified as doping.

Would such a large intake be able to give physical benefits that can partly explain the overrepresentation of athletes with asthma diagnosis in medal contexts?

Clear proof of benefits
Professor Vibeke Backer and her Danish research team at Rigshospitalet in Copenhagen have just studied this and seen remarkable results. The research provides clear evidence that athletes get clear benefits when taking asthma medicine in higher doses.

THESE BENEFITS PROVIDE HIGH DOSES OF ASTHMA MEDICINE (BETA2 AGONISTS)
Increases muscle strength and the degree of relaxation in the muscles of the trachea, providing a more effective recovery.
Increases Peak power output and average power during maximum cycle work.
EXPAND
"We have recently shown that muscle strength is improved when taking asthma medicine Terbutaline. Does it matter if, for example, you are a professional cyclist and will put you on a tough mountain trail? Yes, it does matter. Your recovery will be more efficient, "says Vibeke Backer.

The latest study of Danish researchers included high doses of Salbutamol, and the result was improvements in a so-called Wingate test that measures anaerobic capacity.

In other words, it appears that strength and explosivity are improved by Beta2 agonists such as Salbutamol, Formaterol and Salmeterol - not oxygen uptake ability.

Gave increased muscle strength
The researchers also decided to find out what happened to the athletes' strength when they received a mix of these preparations, which according to Vibeke Backer is quite common.

"We saw that asthmatics who took a combination of these drugs gained better power than the placebo group. Interestingly, it turned out that even those who did not have asthma - but got the medications - also performed better. So, the positive effect is, in other words, independent of whether you have the disease or not.

Professor Kjell Larsson, the Swedish scientist who pointed out sport Sweden in the early 1990s on the increasing problems with asthma has nothing to object to the conclusions of Danish research.

"It is clear that Beta2 agonists in high doses give an increased muscle strength. However, in the case of lower doses, there is no support for improving performance. So with the doses used in clinical practice we can be quite calm.

Fixed in doping controls
But the question is how calm those who want fair conditions in sport can actually be. When Wada allows doses five to ten times higher than normal doses, it opens up a lot of "medication" in the ethics gray areas of the elite riot, "says Vibeke Backer.

In recent years, several major stars have been caught in doping controls with very high levels of asthma medicine in the body. The Norwegian cross-country leader Martin Johnsrud Sundby - one of the major Olympic favorites in PeyongChang - was fired in 2016 for doping with Salbutamol's asthma preparation (in conjunction with the 2014-2015 races) and was exodus, including the victory of Tour de Ski.

British bicycle star Chris Froome tested positively for Salbutamol in 2017 during the cycling competition Vuelta a España. He then had twice as high a dose as that allowed in the urine. The case has evolved into a legal battle allegedly ongoing for months, where Chris Froome and Team Sky argue that the high concentrations were due, among other things, to dehydration.

Used by athletes
How could sports stars like Martin Johnsrud Sundby and Chris Froome get so high concentrations of asthma dementia? Is it just due to technical misunderstandings (as claimed in the case of Sundby) and unusual physiological circumstances? Or did the athletes deliberately seek the positive effects that appear to be of high doses?

Vibeke Backer believes that the high limit values ​​are certainly used by athletes and their teams. The case Martin Johnsrud Sundby belongs to that category, she believes.

"Sundby knew what was going on. Everything was aware and it was the national physician who prescribed the medicine. The ethics of the physicians who treat elitactives is unfortunately not always the best, she says.

Is it your opinion that in the Sundby case there was an attempt that failed at the time to lay just below the permitted limit?

"Yes, I'm totally convinced," says Vibeke Backer.

It's about economy
Why has Wada set such high limits? Kjell Larsson is one of many who has been critical of this. Vibeke Backer has been in Wada for several years and believes he has the answer.

- It's about economy and law. Positive test results may be dealt with by a court before a jury. That is why the limit values ​​are so high.

If the limit values ​​are lowered further, she explains, so more actives will fall. This requires first and foremost that all of these conduct B tests - and such costs are money.

Appealed after the decisions, new tests will be conducted to see what the urine concentration will be if the active takes the doses he or she claims to take. Given how many people have asthma symptoms around the world, it would be an expensive story.

"The new rule of 2017 of no more than 800 micrograms per twelve hours is a consequence of many days' internal discussions," says Vibeke Backer.

cld531c

My favourite quote from that was "For example, astronauts are eight times more common than the people in general."

DeVlaeminck

Hmmmm. So it appears there are at least some experts claiming salbutamol towards the top end of the legal dose is a performance enhancer? Even if this is a matter of debate amongst that scientific community it would provide a motive.

cld531c

Surely with the money Sky have (and their alleged attention to detail) they could get inhalers and pump out the excess so that only 800 micrograms was left in each one, and give Froome a new one every 12 hours? Thats what I would be doing to avoid any 'accidental' overdose.

RichN95.

Shirley Basso wrote:

https://www.idrottsforskning.se/astmamedicin-gor-idrottare-starkare-och-mer-explosiva/

Can anyone read/translate this (Swedish) as it's blocked at work for some reason.

Picked up off Weightweenies, saying that Salbutamol does have an affect on performance.

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Hmmmm. So it appears there are at least some experts claiming salbutamol towards the top end of the legal dose is a performance enhancer? Even if this is a matter of debate amongst that scientific community it would provide a motive.

The abstract from the study referenced

Authors: Hostrup, Morten ; Kalsen, Anders ; Auchenberg, Michael ; Bangsbo, Jens ; Backer, Vibeke

Abstract:
Our objective was to investigate effects of acute and 2-week administration of oral salbutamol on repeated sprint ability, exercise performance, and muscle strength in elite endurance athletes. Twenty male elite athletes [VO2max : 69.4 ± 1.8 (Mean ± SE) mL/min/kg], aged 25.9 ± 1.4 years, were included in a randomized, double-blinded and placebo-controlled parallel study. At baseline, after acute administration, and again after 2-week administration of the study drugs (8 mg salbutamol or placebo), subjects' maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) of m. quadriceps and isometric endurance of m. deltoideus were measured, followed by three repeated Wingate tests. Exercise performance at 110% of VO2max was determined on a bike ergometer. Acute administration of salbutamol increased peak power during first Wingate test by 4.1 ± 1.7% (P < 0.05). Two-week administration of salbutamol increased (P < 0.05) peak power during first and second Wingate test by 6.4 ± 2.0 and 4.2 ± 1.0%. Neither acute nor 2-week administration of salbutamol had any effect on MVC, exercise performance at 110% of VO2max or on isometric endurance. No differences were observed in the placebo group. In conclusion, salbutamol benefits athletes' sprint ability. Thus, the present study supports the restriction of oral salbutamol in competitive sports.

So it suggests that it may have a effect for sprinters if taken in large amounts over a long period of time. A one-off dose is going do sod all for Froome except maybe help his cough.

Matthewfalle

well, its all marginal gains innit, see.

DeVlaeminck

RichN95 wrote:

So it suggests that it may have a effect for sprinters if taken in large amounts over a long period of time. A one-off dose is going do sod all for Froome except maybe help his cough.

Well it does say sprint ability, peak power, that's not just applicable to sprinters, and by acute dose I take it to mean a single dose not loaded over a number of days or weeks.

It's saying it's not EPO but there is some benefit from the dose they tested even as a one off.

Matthewfalle

DeVlaeminck wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

So it suggests that it may have a effect for sprinters if taken in large amounts over a long period of time. A one-off dose is going do sod all for Froome except maybe help his cough.

Well it does say sprint ability, peak power, that's not just applicable to sprinters, and by acute dose I take it to mean a single dose not loaded over a number of days or weeks.

It's saying it's not EPO but there is some benefit from the dose they tested even as a one off.

which ties into his performance on the day of the test....

RichN95.

DeVlaeminck wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

So it suggests that it may have a effect for sprinters if taken in large amounts over a long period of time. A one-off dose is going do sod all for Froome except maybe help his cough.

Well it does say sprint ability, peak power, that's not just applicable to sprinters, and by acute dose I take it to mean a single dose not loaded over a number of days or weeks.

It's saying it's not EPO but there is some benefit from the dose they tested even as a one off.

So if Froome took a huge one off dose then it might have had an effect if he had to do sprint, but probably wouldn't, maybe saving him as much a second or two. And would certainly create a positive test if he was to be tested, which as race leader was certain.

As a doping strategy it's hopelessly inept. Akin to trying to lose weight by just eating chocolate.

Matthewfalle

as a long term strategy - as evindenced by the above report - it works.

cld531c

Presumably 'repeated sprint ability' could apply to repeated hill efforts too.

cld531c

Duplicate post deleted

cycleclinic

eating properly befiore a race enhances performance where does it end.

Also eating nitrate rich foods helps performance. is beetroot going to be banned too. This whole drugs thing has gone too far. Medication is taken for a reason. Not being able to take it inhibits performance and while there may or may not be an advantage to a single large dose it does not change the fact the urine test tells you nothing about blood concentration. The test just tells you the ammount in the urine which is affected by the ammount in the subjects blood but also how quickly they have metabalised it it. the test is junk there the limit is junk. Why is that so hard to accept. 61 pages of merry go round.

Matthewfalle

it ends at people sticking to the rules with no random jiffy bags, dodgy dealings or any of the such like.

unfortubately in this case none of the above was adhered to.

DeVlaeminck

thecycleclinic wrote:

eating properly befiore a race enhances performance where does it end.

Also eating nitrate rich foods helps performance. is beetroot going to be banned too. This whole drugs thing has gone too far. Medication is taken for a reason. Not being able to take it inhibits performance and while there may or may not be an advantage to a single large dose it does not change the fact the urine test tells you nothing about blood concentration. The test just tells you the ammount in the urine which is affected by the ammount in the subjects blood but also how quickly they have metabalised it it. the test is junk there the limit is junk. Why is that so hard to accept. 61 pages of merry go round.

In which case SKY take legal action claiming the test is junk and away they go. I suspect this hasn't happened because the test is not junk and has a large margin of error built in as referred to in the translation on the previous page.

No_Ta_Doctor

Personally I'm more worried regarding the rumours that large parts of the peloton have been experimenting with dihydrogen monoxide and maillard reacted carbonyls. These have been proven to aid hydration and uptake of carbohydrates. There's no doubt they're performance enhancing.

norvernrob

Matthewfalle wrote:

it ends at people sticking to the rules with no random jiffy bags, dodgy dealings or any of the such like.

unfortubately in this case none of the above was adhered to.

Where were the random Jiffy bags and dodgy dealings in this case? Are you just blending every Sky story/non-story together to come to the conclusion that Froome is a cheat, because he may or may not have taken too much asthma medication (and if he had, it would 100% result in an adverse reading).

It’s like people have been so desperately searching and waiting for a Sky ‘smoking gun’ that they’ll make up their own details and cling to anything whatsoever.

Do you not think it would be incredibly idiotic for a race leader, who is 100% going to get tested, to take so much medication that he’s definitely going to flag up a reading?

That’s the part nobody shouting ‘cheat’ seems to be able to provide a reasonable explanation for.

larkim

There's still not been any credible argument why someone who is 100% guaranteed to have a urine doping test after the stage (i.e. the current leader, and someone who is trying to stay in the lead) would deliberately / intentionally / knowingly take a very large dose of a drug which has a mild potential performance boost (if any at all) and would with 100% certainty show up in the next days urine test.

If you're a tin foil hat wearer it's likely to be because it's masked a currently unknown / undocumented significant performance enhancer.

If you've got any sense of balance and reasonable judgement, you'll conclude that there is almost zero chance of it being taken intentionally (in those volumes) or to cheat (at all) and that either it is a massive cockup on Sky's part (i.e. they popped out to a local pharmacy and got an inhaler that delivered 3x the dose of a normal one, or something similar) or there is a transient physiological reason for this having happened. For all we know, this could have happened to Froome several times already in his career, and been resolved due to medical evidence, for example.

One way or another, I really hope it is resolved soon enough!

larkim

Looks like I nearly duplicated your post there NR!

larkim

No tA Doctor wrote:

Personally I'm more worried regarding the rumours that large parts of the peloton have been experimenting with dihydrogen monoxide and maillard reacted carbonyls. These have been proven to aid hydration and uptake of carbohydrates. There's no doubt they're performance enhancing.

I've heard those rumours too - I've seen first hand young kids practising with that at local events, can't believe it's got that bad that young kids are experimenting with these things too. Some schools actually insist on kids having dihydrogen monoxide with them throughout the day!! I have to admit, I even use it with my kids, even though they want me to stick with the normal stuff like lucozade.

RichN95.

No tA Doctor wrote:

Personally I'm more worried regarding the rumours that large parts of the peloton have been experimenting with dihydrogen monoxide and maillard reacted carbonyls. These have been proven to aid hydration and uptake of carbohydrates. There's no doubt they're performance enhancing.

There are rumours that some riders were using dihydrogen monoxide during last year's Tour and were going to be punished until it turned out Bardet had been using it too.

RichN95.

larkim wrote:

There's still not been any credible argument why someone who is 100% guaranteed to have a urine doping test after the stage (i.e. the current leader, and someone who is trying to stay in the lead) would deliberately / intentionally / knowingly take a very large dose of a drug which has a mild potential performance boost (if any at all) and would with 100% certainty show up in the next days urine test.

If you're a tin foil hat wearer it's likely to be because it's masked a currently unknown / undocumented significant performance enhancer.

If you've got any sense of balance and reasonable judgement, you'll conclude that there is almost zero chance of it being taken intentionally (in those volumes) or to cheat (at all) and that either it is a massive cockup on Sky's part (i.e. they popped out to a local pharmacy and got an inhaler that delivered 3x the dose of a normal one, or something similar) or there is a transient physiological reason for this having happened. For all we know, this could have happened to Froome several times already in his career, and been resolved due to medical evidence, for example.

One way or another, I really hope it is resolved soon enough!

The problem is that none of the explanations - from any perspective - make much sense.

tailwindhome

RichN95 wrote:

The problem is that none of the explanations - from any perspective - make much sense.

You don't buy the Illegal use of the nebuliser theory?