Now some science for the defence... https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22095651/
Positive tests for zeranol can be due to contamination with a natural cereal contaminant mycotoxin zearelenone, which is converted to zeranol (and subsequently to its metabolites). Whilst a positive test for zeranol has been reported (leaked), what matters will be the presence or absence of the mycotoxin zearelenone and its metabolites (which are not the same as zeranol's). The study linked above showed that of the four positive tests for zeranol in athletes at a German lab, all were positive for the mycotoxin as well. If you take the synthetic growth promotor, you won't have these additional positives.
Hence my suspicion is that they'll now be looking hard at the samples for other metabolites of the mycotoxin, and should they be present, this will go away. If they are absent, then squeaky bum time. This is why the process should not be public until concluded.
He pulled out of two races recently, I wonder if that’s because he know he was “over the limit”.
Antidoping agencies can (and do) turn up at any time not just at races. Dropping out of events because you are worried getting caught is surely likely to increase suspicion and make you more likely to get an at home visit.
Just chipping in to say TiRed’s I put is exactly the reason I was happy to chip in with a membership. Keep it coming please.
I’ve followed road cycling since 2008/9 so I’ve been hoovering up quite a bit of forum chatter on doping but nothing close to this level of insight 👍🏻
I thought the traditional way of avoiding an in competition test when you’re pretty sure you’ve not cycled off properly was to pull out of that even with something like a groin-strain (which is usually hard to prove and heals quickly). Now think back to all the sporting events you’ve watched where a top athlete has withdrawn at last minute with hamstring cramp, groin strain, etc?
If this was an equivalent road cyclist, the cycling media would be all over it; MTB is lucky for once that it's largely ignored, and very little has been reported - mostly the MTB websites/media.
Another to find the insights of TiRed most interesting.
I won’t comment on Froome, suffice to say that I wrote his defence, which was accepted by UCI and WADA, and showed up the shortcomings in the way that salbutamol is tested for in cycling in particular. Wiggins received a slow release injectable corticosteroid for longer action against rhinitis, whilst it may not be typical it was perfectly legal.
Can I change the tone of my "Hmmm...' to a "hmm?"
@prawny +1. Really interesting posts TiRed, I hadn't realised there was such direct expertise on here. Having read your posts I'd agree with what you say about this being something that shouldn't be public until further investigation. A void of detail and understanding gets filled with all kinds of emotive stuff from the fans.
Was it Operation Puerto that had details of various top sports people from various sports
Yes the Spanish authorities were quite keen not to investigate further.
Make of that what you will.
Cycling gets the news because it did actually try to tackle it. Whereas most sports are sitting there often trying the "this sport is about skill and hence peds wont help".
I mean it's not like his results have taken a dramatic upturn in recent months 😉
Petropolis (April) XCO 14th, XCC 6th so not subject to podium testing, just the chance of a random.
Albstadt (6th - 8th May) XCO 13th, XCC 11th again not subject to podium testing, just the chance of a random.
Nove Mesto (13th - 15th May) XCO 6th, XCC 19th so not subject to podium testing, just the chance of a random.
Swiss Nationals (4th - 5th June) XCO winner, tested, subsequently busted.
Lenzerheide (10th - 12th July) XC) 3rd after the infamous coming together, was leading, XCC 2nd in sprint finish.
Really interesting posts TiRed, I hadn’t realised there was such direct expertise on here.
Agreed on the TiRed posts, but come on, direct expertise on all subjects not just doping is more common on here than PEDs in professional sports. 😜
when mine plays up it doesn’t often have me gasping for breath but rather coughing
I know of at least one rugby coach* who doesn't believe that exercise induce asthma is a condition. I pointed out that the cough I had that morning was due to a hard commute 30 minutes ago and was probably that thing they think doesn't exist. (*Worrying as they coach juniors who may not have a formal diagnosis).
shouldn’t be public until further investigation
To be fair, had the Froome result not been leaked, I would not have known and become involved. That I had the expertise was fortuitous. I've dealt with a lot of cases since, none in cycling. They are all different but Froome's was probably the most newsworthy, but not the most scientifically challenging. Suffice to say that things are often more complex than they seem, and sometimes the science is less clear. Media does not do nuance.
I will note one thing that's pretty universal; Sports Science studies in general are woefully underpowered (too small), and analysed using statistics that are often poor (don't account for outliers). If I worked to the same standard in my day job, I wouldn't have a job!
Someone posted up a few days ago about getting a visit by a suspect doping test team but the rider wasn't at his place fo stay - is this linked to that visit?
@DickBarton That was me - no.
@Jameso Not at all, The expertise on here is fantastic, and I love it. Just amazes me the breadth and depth we have.
Ok, thanks.
To be fair, had the Froome result not been leaked, I would not have known and become involved.
Where were you for Diego!
https://www.dopeology.org/incidents/Ulissi-positive/
Very intersting info though.
My understanding then is you proved that it might not be a doping infraction and could be a natural occurence from correct use. It didn't prove he wasn't. Or is that incorrect? Sky would then have applied their muscle to ensure that there was a very unsatisfactory finish to it that was fudged by the UCI and WADA.
I disagree these things should be public from day 1 as there is no trust in sporting bodies as they have hidden them for many many years where possible. See Armstrong for example. Tennis is currently mired in a potential coverup.
Tennis has been mired in coverups as long as i've been aware of doping... Same as football.
Main difference seems to be the amount of money sloshing round to make sure nothing untoward is leaked to the press. Both from the clubs and the NGBs.
I don’t think football even bothers to cover up. Didn’t Rio Ferdinand once claim that his twice a year ‘random’ drug tests were too many?
FIFA just don’t bother and don’t care enough about it because “football is a game of skill and PEDs won’t make a difference”. Apparently being much stronger, faster and fitter than your opponents and less tired at the end of the match wonky effect their ability to perform.
It didn’t prove he wasn’t. Or is that incorrect?
Logically, one cannot prove a negative. You can however prove that the result is consistent with expected values even for normal regular dosing, and that if you test often enough, then a positive result is much more likely than common sense would predict. In this instance, the scientific explanation was accepted by WADA and the UCI unchallenged (it's a pretty obvious one when you think about it). Sadly for Diego, I was otherwise engaged but I have looked at the case since, same for Pettachi. Basically a qualitative test for salbutamol was being applied with a threshold that was poorly defined.
Were you to be accused of something professionally that was potentially career-limiting, you wouldn't want it all over the media before you've had a chance to address the accusations, no? Some negative cases are reported in full, Tennis included. Others are not. It's always going to be hard to satisfy the "no smoke without fire" pitchforks.
@tomlevel have you read any of the stuff about Froome and Salbutamol. It’s really interesting
Generally in sport the idea of testing is straight forward. You’re not allowed it in your system so if it’s found in system your in trouble.
The Salbutamol is so much harder from the off. You are allowed to take a certain amount with a TUI. How do you know much some one took? There is no simple relationship between what you take and the concentration in your urine. Why would there be?
Secondly I have never seen anything that suggests that there is any benefit to using salbutamol other than to relieve asthma symptoms. It’s not even clear from what I’ve read why there is a salbutamol limit other than possibly rider welfare.
FLÜCK!
It’s not even clear from what I’ve read why there is a salbutamol limit other than possibly rider welfare.
I thought it helped with weight loss? A quick Google suggests this is true but I didn't delve into sources
I thought it helped with weight loss? A quick Google suggests this is true but I didn’t delve into sources
I thought that was the one Wiggins took
I mean it’s not like his results have taken a dramatic upturn in recent months
the problem with this is it brings into question other results. Which is more natural, Rebecca McConnells utter dominance early season then sudden decline, or Courtney/Neff slowly coming to the front over the season? But in Neffs case winning XCC and XCO in the same weekend after only being top 20% all year and fading toward then end of all races.
I’m a strong believer that professional athletes like have a maximum of 2-3 peak periods in performance per annum, and those need to coincide with some great fortune and not clash with other athletes for that kind of clean dominance. I’m not saying Nino is clean although he very well could be, but he peaked for some wins, fell backward in the results, and appears to be coming forward again in time for the World Champs. Is this then a more natural and clean progressive cycle or perhaps an incredibly naive view of things?
It’s hard to know what to believe these days, which kind of forces you to bury your head in the sand if you want to actually enjoy what you are watching IMO.
I thought it helped with weight loss?
It does if you’re a mouse 😉 . The doses given in those studies are not really tolerable in humans. The tremors, hypokalaemia and increases in heart rate won’t be performance enhancing. Wiggins took a corticosteroid not a beta again most.
Both are commonly prescribed for asthma, the beta agonist (salbutamol) is a bronchodilator not a prevention and is taken up to four times a day. The notable thing for Wiggins was that he had a slow release corticosteroid injection rather than multiple sprays up the nose.
I took the grandchild of salbutamol into the clinic (along with four other beta agonists). It’s taken once a day. I also worked on the follow on for Flonase (corticosteroid) for rhinitis. Also once a day. Never worked on an injectable steroid. I’ve also worked on a few other drugs that are banned already and have not yet made it to medicines. One is a SARM and another boosts EPO levels. They’re already tested for - pharma notified WADA of drugs that have potential for abuse very early in development.
I thought it helped with weight loss
Not mixing it up with clenbuterol are you? I think bodybuilders have form for abusing that for weight loss.
Got a bit of loyalty to the swiss having spent a lot of time there over the yrs.
Interesting. The view I get is that the more time people spend with Swiss the less they feel for them.
Mainly Germans TBF so perhaps there's some national level animosity there.
