because it is used to control weight.
Say what? Please explain.
[url= http://www.letmegooglethat.com/?q=salbutamol+weight+loss ]lmgtfy[/url]
So are you saying Salbutamolm is a masking agent?
Wada do
Diuretics and masking agents
If a Substance or Method is not defined in this list, please verify with your Anti-Doping Organization.The following diuretics and masking agents are prohibited, as are other substances with a similar chemical structure or similar biological effect(s).
Including, but not limited to:
Desmopressin; probenecid; plasma expanders, e.g. glycerol and intravenous administration of albumin, dextran, hydroxyethyl starch and mannitol.
Acetazolamide; amiloride; bumetanide; canrenone; chlortalidone; etacrynic acid; furosemide; indapamide; metolazone; spironolactone; thiazides, e.g. bendroflumethiazide, chlorothiazide and hydrochlorothiazide; triamterene and vaptans, e.g. tolvaptan.Except:
Drospirenone; pamabrom; and ophthalmic use of carbonic anhydrase inhibitors (e.g. dorzolamide, brinzolamide).
Local administration of felypressin in dental anaesthesia.The detection in an Athlete’s Sample at all times or In-Competition, as applicable, of any quantity of the following substances subject to threshold limits: formoterol, salbutamol, cathine, ephedrine, methylephedrine and pseudoephedrine, in conjunction with a diuretic or masking agent, will be considered as an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) unless the Athlete has an approved Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) for that substance in addition to the one granted for the diuretic or masking agent.
It does have an affect, it is just his fanbois who wish to ignore it.lmgtfy
Nice selective quoting. Do you work hard to be such a massive **** or is it natural? What I said, as if you don't know, was that if we believe what he says and he was using only the puffer, it'd have no real effect. Taken in tablet form it's different as we already know.
Klunk - that's not what they say in your quote though. What it says that IF there is a masking agent present in the test, ANY volume of salbutamol will be considered an AAF not just exceeding the 1000 ng/ml limit unless they have a TUE for both salbutamol and the masking agent.
So they're not saying it's a masking agent.
^ wot he said
Cock, now will this mean I will have to hand back my Strava KOMs because I is an asthmatic sand regularly 'puff' before hitting the trails?
Klunk - that's not what they say in your quote though. What it says that IF there is a masking agent present in the test, ANY volume of salbutamol will be considered an AAF not just exceeding the 1000 ng/ml limit unless they have a TUE for both salbutamol and the masking agent.So they're not saying it's a masking agent.
So you have a TUE for the masking agent and not salbutamol ?
Cock, now will this mean I will have to hand back my Strava KOMs because I is an asthmatic sand regularly 'puff' before hitting the trails?
Perhaps Strava can add a 'drug cheat' section as well as age-groups.
[s]Live chat on this about to kick off:[/s]
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/live/2017/dec/14/chris-froome-failed-drug-test-live-webchat
Ahem - I was a bit late and some of you lot are there already... 🙂
This is just like everyone was with Armstrong before that all came out in the wash. Just watching docus about sky makes me think the management have that same ruthless determination as Armstrong and everything that went along with that.
I think it's telling (in a bad way for Sky) that it seems to be the more casual/less-informed fans who are taking this the worst.
Thats true to some extent ^^
But I hardly think the Media that is SKY have a 17yr old intern checking out STW threads for potential slanderous remarks and innuendos.
They might though eh.. 😆
If the Disney deal goes through, I really can't see Mickey Mouse riding a bike up the Ventoux, Goofy Yes, yes I can see a similarity..
[img] 
/revision/latest?cb=20160521222237[/img]
This is just like everyone was with Armstrong before that all came out in the wash.
Not quite. The behaviour on the road is pretty different.
So you have a TUE for the masking agent and not salbutamol ?
The masking agent could, I suppose, have a genuine use so it's possible to get a TUE for it. I would imagine then that the concern is if you have a diuretic or other masking agent in your sample as well as a drug permissible in specific doses that you might be exceeding the dose then using the diuretic/whatever to make it appear you're at a lower level of that drug than you are. Which is why, then, if you have a masking agent TUE and salbutamol present in your sample that you'd also need a TUE for salbutamol.
Seems a bit labyrinthine but makes sense.
Is there an assumption here that pro sports are clean?
What quite is the news?
Any dodgy SPOTY betting going on at the same time 😉
Given that this would have stayed private if not for the guardian/le monde, anyone have any feeling for how many other adverse analytical findings there are that get explained and dismissed and nver brough to the publics attention?
Given that this would have stayed private if not for the guardian/le monde, anyone have any feeling for how many other adverse analytical findings there are that get explained and dismissed and nver brough to the publics attention?
Its a fair question. It'd be nice for the UCI and anti-doping agencies to publish anonymised stats for this sort of thing but I have a feeling all it would do is generate allegations of coverups and protecting Team Sky/French teams/whatever the bete noir of the reader is.
Given that this would have stayed private if not for the guardian/le monde, anyone have any feeling for how many other adverse analytical findings there are that get explained and dismissed and nver brough to the publics attention?
It'd be very useful to have that info, agreed.
Given that this would have stayed private if not for the guardian/le monde, anyone have any feeling for how many other adverse analytical findings there are that get explained and dismissed and nver brough to the publics attention?
The thing is it should have stayed private untill the investigations had run their course. Le Monde/ Guardian aren't concerned about the public interest only their own.
I know it's fun for all the forum "experts" to debate and criticise, but as an Ashmatic I'd trade all the salbutimol in the world for healthy working lungs, pretty sure Froome would do the same.
as an Ashmatic I'd trade all the salbutimol in the world for healthy working lungs
Absolutely!
I know it's fun for all the forum "experts" to debate and criticise, but as an Ashmatic I'd trade all the salbutimol in the world for healthy working lungs, pretty sure Froome would do the same
You're assuming that Froome actually *is* an asthmatic. It's not mentioned in his autobiography.
taxi25 - MemberThe thing is it should have stayed private untill the investigations had run their course. Le Monde/ Guardian aren't concerned about the public interest only their own.
Completely agree, its their job to sell papers / generate clicks
as an [b]Ashmatic[/b] ...
Asthma brought on by 40 Lambert and Butler a day?? 😆
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/42351111 ]Tony Martin ain't happy[/url]
Katusha-Alpecin rider Martin, 32, suggested other cyclists would have been suspended immediately.
Tony Martin might be a great cyclist, but perhaps he should read the rule book !!!!
Tony Martin ain't happy
From the article;
"I am totally angry," said Martin.
Am I the only one who read that and said it out loud in the voice of Vicky Pollard?
If you've ever seen an interview with Froome after a hard climbing stage you'll hear that little cough that he does constantly. That's pretty good evidence of his asthma for me.
That's pretty good evidence of his asthma for me.
I don't think there's any dispute over him having asthma.
Am I the only one who read that and said it out loud in the voice of Vicky Pollard?
Not anymore 🙂
I don't think there's any dispute over him having asthma.
I'm not so sure.
You're assuming that Froome actually *is* an asthmatic. It's not mentioned in his autobiography.
As far as things go I doubt writing about asthma is likely to sell any books. It’s not particularly interesting. About 9% of the public have asthma and about 20% of athletes - why would he need to write about it?
aP - Member
If you've ever seen an interview with Froome after a hard climbing stage you'll hear that little cough that he does constantly. That's pretty good evidence of his asthma for me.
There speaks a man who has never raced a hill climb or mountain stage race. I have no trace of asthma at all but cough my lungs out after a decent hill effort.
David, I probably agree wholeheartedly, though never competed at a high level, 2(5 alright I'm not good) minutes of qualifying for the mega has me in bits coughing and spluttering for a good while after crossing the finish line. Exercise effs you up.
Anyway surely Sky have Calpol on the team bus for all the little warriors.
About 9% of the public have asthma and about [s]20%[/s] 99% of [s]athletes[/s] professional cyclists
FTFY
As someone else pointed out on here..
"It's certainly a much better day today than yesterday"
"It's great to bounce back after difficult day (yesterday)"
"I felt quite within myself today"
[i]100% fit and healthy today?[/i] "Yeah - I felt fine today"
Not the words of someone who had was suffering that badly he had to take an excessive amount of (or go right up to the limit on) his asthma drugs..
About 9% of the public have [u]diagnosed[/u] asthma and about 99% of athletes professional cyclists
FTFY
He isn't going to turn around to the media and say 'you know what one more attack and I'm finished - I just cant keep up with those guys anymore' is he. He says what he needs to portray the right message to his rivals. Its all a game as far as the media interviews go.
Richie_B - MemberAbout 9% of the public [who are on the whole untested] have diagnosed exercise induced asthma and about 99% of [s]athletes[/s] people who actually get tested and exert themselves to the level of being symptomatic [s]professional cyclists[/s]
FTFY
Ftfy. It's not a conspiracy, it's just basic maths, test a small sample of a large diverse population and you'll get a very different result than by testing all of a small very select population.
He says what he needs to portray the right message to his rivals
exactly. Froome often tells a different story after a race is completed, but never shows any suffering in interview, even if he's crashed or blown up.
If the majority of a group, when tested, are found to exhibit the same results then it begs the question as to what is "normal". And if we accept that a level of what we call asthma is normal then why should there be a program of drugs made available to competitors at all?Ftfy. It's not a conspiracy, it's just basic maths, test a small sample of a large diverse population and you'll get a very different result than by testing all of a small very select population.
I know Froome has hinted that his levels were higher than the number of puffs he took (and his clinical approach to everything would make it seem ridiculous for him to accidentally have too many), but 20+ puffs on the inhaler in one day would be pretty insane. If mine is off (to the point where just standing up and walking around is having me wheeze/cough/get out of breath) 99% of the time 1 puff will have me fine again for 4 hours. Only when the inhaler is nearly empty would I need 2.
Also after the inhaler I tend to cough up a lot of rubbish which clears out the lungs, Froome always has a dry cough after the stages.
Everyone is different though!
If the majority of a group, when tested, are found to exhibit the same results then it begs the question as to what is "normal".
More than anything it begs how you selected your group.
And if we accept that a level of what we call asthma is normal then why should there be a program of drugs made available to competitors at all?
That's a fair but very different question.
Ah yes, that too 🙂 But let's say you tested the whole population and found the true incidence to be at least as high as seems to be reported amongst pro athletes.More than anything it begs how you selected your group.
Ah yes, that too But let's say you tested the whole population and found the true incidence to be at least as high as seems to be reported amongst pro athletes
Fair do, if i recall from an interview on radio 4 earlier in the week (with a chap who did some of the testing) incidence in athletes is about 25% (happy to be corrected) that's still way below normal.
If it were 99% we'd call it normal and likely not test for it in the first place. If we could we'd treat for it as a matter of course (see fortified breakfast cereals etc), if we couldn't we'd just accept it.
The problem in [s]athletics[/s] sports is we want a level playing field, in most things we do that by banning the use of [lots of but not all] substances and allowing certain accommodations to bring the small* percent of people with manageable disadvantage, up to the same base as the others (I'd prefer a horse racing style handicap tbh).
Its all bs of course, the reason i can't thrash froome up a hill is biological disadvantage, with good enough drugs i should be able to overcome that disadvantage, but that would be cheating.
[Pure supposition] Without drugs to manage his asthma froome wouldn't make the pro circuit[/supposition] but taking meds for that's fine because "normals" have the same problem and take the same meds.
Where you should draw the line is a very hard question which [complete guess] comes down to "if John public might suffer you can treat it the same way Joe would, so long as we have no evidence it does anything but treat your condition"* (for me at least I'd just sod it and say fill your boots folks, you want to put that stuff in, more fool you).
*statistically significant but still <50%
**another complete guess, i imagine this is the reason managing asthma is more difficult for athletes than Joe public.
is there not a test to prove asthma ? I think there might be, but regardless if you are struggling to breath mid way through a race, maybe you should withdraw just as you would if you came off your bike and broke your collar bone.
If it keeps happening, maybe you are not suited to being a pro cyclist just like the 99% of other people who for various genetic reasons will never be a elite athlete.
is there not a test to prove asthma ? I think there might be, but regardless if you are struggling to breath mid way through a race, maybe you should withdraw just as you would if you came off your bike and broke your collar bone.If it keeps happening, maybe you are not suited to being a pro cyclist just like the 99% of other people who for various genetic reasons will never be a elite athlete.
As a lifelong asthmatic it’s this kind of comment that gets me. You want to apply that exclusion to diabetics etc as well? I could hypothetically be an amazing endurance athlete, except for when certain triggers set off my asthma (pollen, cats, cold air etc.). I can control these attacks through salbutamol. Why can’t I race?
The above has nothing to do with whether Froome doped or not. I can understand theories around blood bags etc., but I can also understand why he might be nailing the salbutamol IF he doesn’t feel able to take a preventer (I.e a cortico steroid). He got vilified for his prednisone TUE, so maybe he’s having to suboptimally manage his asthma. I know from experience that stopping the preventer leaves you open to more severe attacks, which need more salbutamol - indeed the NHS guidance has completely changed on this over the years - the last I was told was that salbutamol was a last resort, and that cortico steroid inhalers were the primary treatment, even for mildish asthma like mine.
I also haven’t seen mention of nebuliser use either - it would be stupid of his doctor but I can see how dosage could increase significantly with that delivery method.
The other, but related, issue is one of over-compensation, when attempting to level the playing field tilts it too far the other way. For a more immediately visible example, if Oscar Pistorius was winning all his races and setting new records would he still have been allowed to compete against "full bodied" athletes?
Is it possible that pro cycling teams deliberately select asthmatic riders because they are allowed Salbutomol?
Bradley Wiggins wife Cath has referred to Froome as a "slithering reptile" http://road.cc/content/news/234018-bradley-wiggins-wife-calls-chris-froome-slithering-reptile
Stay classy Cath 
Onzadog - MemberI always wanted to be a pro cyclist growing up but I couldn't cut it at the sharp end because I didn't have asthma.
Posted 2 days ago #
I liked that one.
Plus, I imagine the physical examination for asthma in pro cyclists is something along the lines of:
Doctor (cupping the cyclist's particulars): "Can you just cough for me, please?"
Cyclist: (Coughs)
Doctor: "That's great, thanks".
Cyclist: "So my tackle is in order, then?"
Doctor: "Oh, no, I'm not testing for that - but I can confirm that you do have asthma, though " (winks).
Is it possible that pro cycling teams deliberately select asthmatic riders because they are allowed Salbutomol?
Much more likely is that, if you exercise to the point they do you'll display symptoms of exercise induced asthma.
I know I'd be displaying symptoms of actual death tying to achieve what they do let alone maintain it. The various treatment I'd be allowed aren't going to off set my being rubbish or actually ill.
If it was genuinely performance enhancing (as opposed to enabling) and since it is permissible everyone would be diagnosed (getting asympathetic dr isn't difficult) asthmatic in every athletic discipline, they're not. It's around a third in team sky, [url= https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/apr/29/elite-athletes-asthma-simon-yates-team-sky-swimmers ][guardian link][/url] and I'd guess that's fairly standard across the peloton. It's significantly higher in swimming (and at a guess a lot lower in discus).
is there not a test to prove asthma
Yes there is. Professional athletes have to submit themselves for a methacholine/allergen challenge. Basically you provoke bronchoconstriction by inhalation of acetycholine and then show that it can be reversed by inhalation of a bronchodilator. It's known as "reversibility" in the trade. Healthy subjects do not have the same response to challenge.
Also healthy subjects do not show bronchodilation when given a beta-agonist. As measured by peak flow and FEV1 (amount you can blow out in 1 second). If you use a very sensitive measure (airway conductance using a "body box"), you can just about detect it. I worked on validating bronchodilation in healthy volunteers for a few years with a view to testing new generation long-acting beta-agonists.
Bradley Wiggins wife Cath has referred to Froome as a "slithering reptile" http://road.cc/content/news/234018-bradley-wiggins-wife-calls-chris-froome-slithering-reptile /p>Stay classy Cath
It' always gets interesting when the wives get get involved. 😆
Bitter much Cath?
So Sky have known about this since Sep 20. I reckon they've been desperately trying to recreate the results, in prep for Froome doing a demo for the authorities.
And the fact that it's now mid-December suggests they ain't having much luck.
Needs 30 days on a turbo, 4hrs a day, with chronic dosing of salbutamol. Not a nice pharmacokinetic study for anyone!
And if he gets a spot test in the meantime does that count as another pop?
😀
Cath wiggins can f right off.
Trying to blame froome for doubts over her bloke is pathetic. Clearly she's as much of an absolute tool as her husband.
Not the words of someone who had was suffering that badly he had to take an excessive amount of (or go right up to the limit on) his asthma drugs..
Someone clearly doesn't understand that pro cyclists desperately don't want to show their competitors any sighn of weakness.
This whole asthama thing is odd though, I have always has asthama, and get it at the start of almost every ride or run. However, when I race I almost never ever get it, even in warm up. I have discussed this with my doctor and they couldn't come up with an explanation, we did wonder if adrenaline could act as a suppressor, but that is just guessing. However, it does seem odd that Froome's asthama gets worse during a race, I'd not expect that.
However, I personally am well off to the side of the bell curve with my asthama. I've sat in a room having a full chat with the doctor and tested for values that were so low, that most people with those numbers would be in A&E. I'm a super human 😆
Pat McQuaid has waded in.
Brass necked or what...
[img] 
[/img]
FatMcQuid has no place in any commentary in Froome or the UCI's regard. He's just a bloke with a big Wallet and a backhander dealing personality.
The only reason Journo's flock to him is because he sticks of dog poo.
Dragon - as an asthma sufferer for the best part of 35 years (the amount of holes in trouser pockets caused by the point corners of an inhaler I understand this. I very rarely (possibly never) need to take my inhaler mid race. I’ve needed it before and at the end but not during. However, this is just wheezing. When I’m having a full blown attack I can barely move let along get myself out of the house and to a race (my asthma isn’t exercise induced).
I agree that adrenaline might have a lot to do with it. In the same way that I can go out for a ride at the end of May and feel fine but when I stop I turn in to a sneezing, snotty blood shot eyed mess.
Needs 30 days on a turbo, 4hrs a day, with chronic dosing of salbutamol. Not a nice pharmacokinetic study for anyone!
Presumably it also needs replicated dehydration, timed delivery of the Salbutamol, the use of any other medicines he might have been taking at the time - which could, I guess be a medical issue - etc. Almost impossible.
I guess it depends on whether he needs to show in theory the urine test can misrepresent the actual dosage - in which case you'd have to say it's a less than ideal way of measuring intake - or that the specific circumstances on that day actually did cause that result. Enter a bunch of lawyers with open wallets...
The UCI ought to have sorted this out sooner.
The former British Cycling performance director is correct that some studies have found that athletes who take the legal amount of puffs, particularly if they take a large quantity just before the test, will excrete more than 1,000 ng/ml – but Ukad’s statistics show this does not happen often.
<i>it</i> only has to happen once to show the test can't be relied on
Another nothing story IMO. I'm beginning to get fed up iwth the guardian, was always my favourite newspaper but seems to be going more and more clickbaity.