It’s in the public interest to know why he doubled the dose during the Vuelta

This is my biggest problem with this story. I thought he has been asked to explain why he had double the permitted amount in his urine. This has been twisted into he has taken double the amount allowed. Two very different things.

As an asthma sufferer and if it flares up then 32 puffs in a day would be very easy to do.

Surely you should be looking at a better control drug, rather than being reliant of using subutamol to relieve the symptoms.

Froome has been busted as he’s been using Salbutamol (taken orally) during the off season to control his weight. He has also extracted a blood bag. When he’s microdosed the blood after his bad stage 17 performance, the amount of Sal was enough that, when combined with his normal usage of Sal the next day, it tripped the test for excessive Sal.

It’s not impossible. Except he was tested pretty much every day, so I’d want to see the inter-occasional variability in his urine tests during the race, along with his previous Tour tests. As I said, it is possible to fail a test by taking the legal dose.

I am just dipping into this thread having read as much of the coverage as I could, and I agree with you TiRed. I am no chemist, but it does seem entirely possible that Froome’s results are a result of taking the legal dose.

I am inclined to accept his own suggestion that, as someone under scrutiny and subject to testing every day he was in the red jersey, there is no way he would be so stupid as to deliberately exceed what was permitted.

In any case, I am afraid that, after Lance Armstrong’s industrial-strength doping – it is hard to convince me that something like salbutamol is all that scandalous.

From that +4.1% maximal power link – sounds more like a sprinter’s drug, doesn’t it

Interestingly, the provision of salbutamol did not have an effect on maximal voluntary contractile force (MVC), exercise performance at 110% of VO2max or isometric endurance (all could have been accomplished by adding caffeine, though

I think maybe TiRed’s explanation is favourite over nerd’s but a quick look at st7 reports suggests that Froome finished in the sky-driven peloton on a blustery day when a bit of rain fell. Can’t see a temperature figure but no mention of “blistering heat” etc. Seems unlikely that he was unable to hydrate properly.

They’d better have some good science 😕

They’d better have some good science

Well if it’s possible to fail a test by taking the legal dose then surely the only conclusion you can draw from that is that the test is not fit for purpose. It looks like maybe the testing authorities are the ones needing some better science.

It may be possible, but it isn’t probable, however the rider/team are given a chance to argue their case before the authorities decide.

atlaz – Member

There’s a scientific paper to read but I can’t be arsed paying for it. The conclusion though:

here you go

it is hard to convince me that something like salbutamol is all that scandalous.

If it helps in any way at all and gives advantage over those not using it then it needs an element of control – How many riders suffer from asthma, is it more than the general population and is that suspect ?

Well if it’s possible to fail a test by taking the legal dose then surely the only conclusion you can draw from that is that the test is not fit for purpose. It looks like maybe the testing authorities are the ones needing some better science

Trouble is the presumption of guilt unless they can demonstrate how it happened – and presumably how it hadn’t happened on other days to the satisfaction of the authorities’ scientists/docs

How many riders suffer from asthma, is it more than the general population and is that suspect ?

There is a higher incidence among riders, I think. You could argue that pro-riders with medical support are more likely to be diagnosed because their lung capacity and performance are under far more scrutiny day-to-day.

Also I believe that there was some suggestion that the kind of efforts that pro-riders make may increase the likelihood of asthmatic symptoms – perhaps they cause a tiny bit of damage or scarring over time.

Having said that, if there was a genuine advantage to a non-asthmatic rider (dubious) then I’m sure a lot more would receive the diagnosis.

Prevalence of training at altitude, cold weather and long aerobic efforts make eia more likely according to the BBC coverage

someone needs to check what the hell was going on with the 35 year old Contador in the Vuelta.

He’s got an uphill battle to get into the Giro/TdF next year, I’d say, looking at these previous cases which were pursued very heavily by WADA. Nine months seems to be the standard tariff.

Alessandro Petacchi scored 1352ng/mL and was initially cleared by the Italian federation following a test from the 2007 Giro d’Italia. WADA appealed and he was banned for a year because if was over the permitted limit he could not prove how much he had inhaled
Diego Ulissi scored 1900ng/mL during the 2014 Giro d’Italia and underwent PK tests but these did not replicate the results. His lawyer argued a crash on Stage 11 had caused his levels to jump up and he got a nine month ban, down from the two year tariff
Alexandr Pliuschin got a nine month ban in 2015
Norwegian cross country skier Martin Johnsrud Sundby was cleared by skiing governing body but WADA appealed and he got a two month ban. He was taking this for therapeutic reasons but the excess dose still meant a ban and he was stripped of his 2015 World Cup title

Source

If he fares much better than this (not sure how any athlete can prove how many puffs he’s taken) then the screaming about favouritism for Sky will be deafening.

if there was a genuine advantage to a non-asthmatic rider (dubious) then I’m sure a lot more would receive the diagnosis.

Well as athletes across all sports have a much higher rate of asthma than the general population, then it’s possible that plenty are ‘helpfully’ diagnosed.

Well as athletes across all sports have a much higher rate of asthma than the general population, then it’s possible that plenty are ‘helpfully’ diagnosed.

It’s possible, but as above, there are also genuine reasons why endurance athletes in pro-teams would be more likely to have mild asthmatic symptoms, and to have these picked up by the medics. So it’s not all people gaming the system, by any means, particularly as the benefits of the drugs are debateable to say the least in non-asthmatic riders.

Regardless of whether Froome gets off, it high time that this asthma and general TUE bollocks got some scrutiny.

It’s been abused for years and there seems to be no real will to stop it.

someone needs to check what the hell was going on with the 35 year Contador in the Vuelta this year

It occurred to me that the Vuelta this year was Bertie’s equivalent of a footballer’s benefit match from a dope testing point of view. He stayed just off the daily podium apart from the last competitive day on the Angrilu, thus avoiding having to take a test immediately after the stage. His overall result was also under the radar although he did make it onto the podium in Madrid due to a team combativity award or some such nonsense. The air time and adoration he received for his performance totally eclipsed Froomes win, his interview on Spanish tv actually blocked out the winners podium presentations and speeches. I commented at the time that I was sure that the Angrilu sample that he gave will never see the light of day, provided he retires and stays that way.

genuine reasons why endurance athletes in pro-teams would be more likely to have mild asthmatic symptoms, and to have these picked up by the medics

true enough
I just bet there’s an awful lot of hypothyroidism needing supplementation amongst pro athletes too. Must be all that training they do, I guess

It’s not impossible. Except he was tested pretty much every day.

Forgot to mention that tests for plasticisers, not to mention age distribution of Red Blood Cells, is effective in looking for blood doping now. One assumes he was tested for both of these too.

The Secret Pro is worth a read on this. The more a read, the stranger it seems, very odd indeed.

The Secret Pro: My thoughts on Froome’s positive and the bikes we ride

Agreed, it doesn’t make any sense – but the rules have to be the same for everyone.

Also liked this from TSP…

Did you know Powerbars turn to rocks when it gets a bit cold?

Yes because I live in England and take them up mountains with me. The berry ones are delish, but strictly for summer use only.

[video]https://youtu.be/SkBT13_ELCM[/video]

I think a good result would be a 12 month ban and the Vuelta title going to a proper racer we can trust, Vincenzo Nibali.

Did you know Powerbars turn to rocks when it gets a bit cold?

It was partly that fact that won Pantani the Tour in 1998. Ulrich and his Telekom team was sponsored by PowerBar. Ulrich suffered in the cold and bonked badly losing almost 9 minutes and the Tour on a cold wet stage 15, partly because he couldn’t chew down the cold PowerBars. Pantani had more traditional Italian Piadinas which were easy to much on in the cold.

I find it a little bit sad that doping scandals have been reduced to whether someone had 5 puffs on an inhaler or 6….

Two Sky riders, two TdF winners, Two Asthma sufferers, Two drug controversies

All seems a bit too much of a coincidence to me

Two Asthma sufferers

Wiggins? That was allergies 🙂

I wonder if Landa will now be ruing his decision to go ride for Quintana at next years Tour 😉

I find it a little bit sad that doping scandals have been reduced to whether someone had 5 puffs on an inhaler or 6….

You do know it’s twice the legal maximum limit and that he’s now guilty until proven innocent?

Popped the day after a bad day…. hmm, col de jeux plane and Landis springs to mind.

My guess is he probably had a nebuliser, that would be about 10-20 times the usual amount of salbutamol you would take via a puffer. Not very convenient to take during a race, so I would imagine the test picked up the remnance of this. If this is the case they would have records to cover it.

I can confirm that taking loads of salbutamol does not increase performance, just heart rest and hyperactivity!

Is there still a limit for cafeine?

Surely caffeine self-limits? Just two espressos and I’m rapidly approaching Dresden. Can’t see that helping with cycling performance.

If this is the case they would have records to cover it.

Assuming the laptop hasn’t been nicked again… 8)

Have they checked to see what Emma Pulley was doing that day yet?

Caffeine has a limit – about nine espressos. has a heart-rate increasing effect on me that is measurable, but little other effects.

WADA are monitoring it and do test for abuse.

And metalheart, to abuse salbutamol, you’d just take it orally. It’s available in tablet and suspension forms, a nebuliser is overkill.

TiRed – Member
Caffeine has a limit – about nine espressos. has a heart-rate increasing effect on me that is measurable, but little other effects.

Nine espressos would enable me to achieve significant short term weight losses!

Mrblobby you stand corrected

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-37465803/wiggins-drugs-were-to-cure-medical-condition

Not looking good for Froome.
He doesn’t carry much public empathy going into this to begin with.

I asure I have read of other trials that show it to be performance enhancing – even for non asthma people.

to get those levels he has been seriously hitting it. Not just a few puff on a puffer. You can also take it as tablets.

I am afraid this shows sky again in a very bad light. Basically they are all at it. I have always thought Froome to be a drugs cheat that had not been caught. Now he has.

Mrblobby you stand corrected

Ok, asthma triggered by pollen allergies, or something like that. Story changed quite a few times 🙂

If he doesn’t get banned, stripped of the Vuelta because he manages to weasel his way out s it will make a mockery of the whole uci/pro cycling drugs stance!