Ban on clenbuterol doping drug may be relaxed

[Papparrazzi]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14952870

... presumably after current cases are completed.

 

[Cloxxki]

What effect would such a change of regulation have on the actual use of clenbuterol, compared to the current situation?

I fear that any limit in clen levels, especially considering it's short half-time in the body, will be better than any coolaid advertisement in the summer. People will want it.
Heck, they'll want it now, because friggin' I-bring-my-own-chef-to-win-my-TdF Contador gets caught with it. Yeah, most cyclists and other athletes will understand he didn't use it at the TdF, it just happened to be in his bloodbag, in minute quantities. The tests are just THAT good.
What signal do the non-winners get, when a winner gets caught with this, and rules are slackened? "You're bound to lose if you don't take clen and you know it".

If you want to stay clean, or refuse to have you beef tested, just eat chicken. I don't think lack of beef will ever keep anyone from setting a top performance.

"Sorry, I don't eat beef, I'm a professional sportsman"
"I understand. I still have some chicken in the fridge I'll prepare for you"

Can you see it?

BTW, to be devil's advocate, the same was just done with Salbutamol, which I in fact need in the summer time. In winter I'm fine. They set an IMO pretty high threshold. Is now everyone buying inhalers, taking a handful of inhales before a race, where actual athma patients often suffice with one?

 

[Mambo95]

If you want to stay clean, or refuse to have you beef tested, just eat chicken. I don't think lack of beef will ever keep anyone from setting a top performance.

"Sorry, I don't eat beef, I'm a professional sportsman"
"I understand. I still have some chicken in the fridge I'll prepare for you"

Can you see it?

But that would require a sportsman to have an encyclopedic knowledge of drugs used in agriculture worldwide, which is a little unrealistic. How many had heard of clenbuternol two years ago? What other drugs are farmers using, legally or illegally? Do you know?

In your example you say you would just avoid beef and eat chicken. Yet clenbuterol is used on chickens too (look it up). You've eaten the chicken, which you think is OK and tested positive. Now you serve a suspension because you haven't done sufficient research into the field of argicultural biochemistry

 

[Cloxxki]

But that would require a sportsman to have an encyclopedic knowledge of drugs used in agriculture worldwide, which is a little unrealistic. How many had heard of clenbuternol two years ago? What other drugs are farmers using, legally or illegally? Do you know?

In your example you say you would just avoid beef and eat chicken. Yet clenbuterol is used on chickens too (look it up). You've eaten the chicken, which you think is OK and tested positive. Now you serve a suspension because you haven't done sufficient research into the field of argicultural biochemistry

Not so long ago, it was supposed to be all the athlete's responsibility. Know what you eat.
Want to take supplements? Have them dope-tested yourself if it's that important to you.
Sure, chicken can be jacked also. Right now beef is just popular as an excuse, because use/intake of clen by athletes and its sometimes use by farmers.

WADA could stick to the no tolerance stance, and beef lovers would find a way to get clean beef. Even if the farmers would ignore the heck out of governmental objections to clen use. Private farmers would grow quality meat, have tested and sealed, and sold at huge prices to beef addicts like Contador. It won't give them an excuse to test positive, but they'll have a good piece of beef, and no bad publictity. Good business for the small clenfree farmer.

Recently cucumbers were in the news, possibly contaminated. If they'd be contaminate with a WADA regulated substances, could an athletes buy the heavily discounted cucumbers and act stupid when caught? No. It was in the news. As beef has been. Suck up the 2-year ban.
It was with reason that Contador supposed had his own piece of steak, right, as his teammate's meat was below his and his chef's standards? He knew steak was tricky. Just messed up, if his statements are honest.

 

[Mambo95]

Not so long ago, it was supposed to be all the athlete's responsibility. Know what you eat.

And now they're changing the rules. Rightly so.

Shouldn't a person have the right to eat the same foods (foods, not supplements) as any one else and expect not to test positive?

What are drugs tests for? Are they there to catch cheats or to find out which athletes know the most about world farming practices. Is someone who unknowingly eats a dodgy chicken and tests positive for minute amounts of a substance they've never heard of a cheat?

How many unlucky innocents is it justifiable to ruin just to catch one legitimate cheat?

could an athletes buy the heavily discounted cucumbers and act stupid when caught? No. It was in the news. As beef has been. Suck up the 2-year ban.

Chickens were in the news too, but you didn't know about it. These things are small news stories, forgotten in a day. They're not exactly 9/11. Do you know everything that has been in the news in the last year in every country?

No-one's going to buy dodgy cucumbers in an effort to cheat. It's a threshold they're talking about, not a doping free for all.

It seems to me you just want to see drugs scandals so you can point the finger, rather than actual fair justice.

 

[LaFlorecita]

But now that the Contador case will not be heard until November, it makes it very difficult for the anti-doping officials to change their rules.
If they do, it would almost be impossible to continue with their current prosecutions.
If Wada sticks with the status quo, as it is likely to, the possibility remains that eating contaminated beef in some parts of the world could lead to more than indigestion.

Let's hope they change the rules and the case gets dropped.

 

[Cloxxki]

And now they're changing the rules. Rightly so.

Shouldn't a person have the right to eat the same foods (foods, not supplements) as any one else and expect not to test positive?

What are drugs tests for? Are they there to catch cheats or to find out which athletes know the most about world farming practices. Is someone who unknowingly eats a dodgy chicken and tests positive for minute amounts of a substance they've never heard of a cheat?

How many unlucky innocents is it justifiable to ruin just to catch one legitimate cheat?



Chickens were in the news too, but you didn't know about it. These things are small news stories, forgotten in a day. They're not exactly 9/11. Do you know everything that has been in the news in the last year in every country?

No-one's going to buy dodgy cucumbers in an effort to cheat. It's a threshold they're talking about, not a doping free for all.

It seems to me you just want to see drugs scandals so you can point the finger, rather than actual fair justice.

Don't think you're getting me right.

When PEDs are also theoretically to be gotten from everyday food, extra attention is needed, not less. It's still PEDs, and food should not be used as an excuse. That effectively makes the PEDs allowed. Just don't get tested just after taking it. Miss an OoC test for it if you have to. Just be where you're supposed to for a couple of days. And feel free to take out some of your own blood before going back to regular scheduling, the clen traces will be divided by at least 1:10-1:30 when feeding the blood back into your system during a stage race or before something big. You'll be "clean". As long as you don't eat addditional beef/chicken/whatever clen carrier.

 

[Mambo95]

Don't think you're getting me right.

When PEDs are also theoretically to be gotten from everyday food, extra attention is needed, not less. It's still PEDs, and food should not be used as an excuse. That effectively makes the PEDs allowed. Just don't get tested just after taking it. Miss an OoC test for it if you have to. Just be where you're supposed to for a couple of days. And feel free to take out some of your own blood before going back to regular scheduling, the clen traces will be divided by at least 1:10-1:30 when feeding the blood back into your system during a stage race or before something big. You'll be "clean". As long as you don't eat addditional beef/chicken/whatever clen carrier.

It doesn't t effectively make doping allowed at all. Now your scenario may well be true, but so is someone being contaminated without their knowledge.

I think comes down to different philosophies. I would rather a guilty man walked free than an innocent man be convicted. You would rather convict both.

 

[Cloxxki]

It doesn't t effectively make doping allowed at all. Now your scenario may well be true, but so is someone being contaminated without their knowledge.

I think comes down to different philosophies. I would rather a guilty man walked free than an innocent man be convicted. You would rather convict both.

Innocence cannot be proven in case of clen. Few positive cows, lots of clen positives. In Contador's case, the rumored plasticizer test thing complicates it further.

It's not so hard for WADA to send out an official warning that it's come to their attention certain PEDs are contaminating grocery store and specialty shop foods. Have your food tested, or risk the ban. Make it a one-year ban then, for PEDs that exist in commercial foods. The no tolerance rule could be for top level athletes, the limit for those who are less likely (lower level of professionalism, money) to have expensive docs keeping them just-clean.

Another approach would be to have a threshold OoC, and a lower one or no tolerance in-competition. Like cocaine. Cool to get high OoC, not cool to still be positive by the time your next race is contested.

 

[hfer07]

Not so long ago, it was supposed to be all the athlete's responsibility. Know what you eat.
Want to take supplements? Have them dope-tested yourself if it's that important to you.
Sure, chicken can be jacked also. Right now beef is just popular as an excuse, because use/intake of clen by athletes and its sometimes use by farmers.

WADA could stick to the no tolerance stance, and beef lovers would find a way to get clean beef. Even if the farmers would ignore the heck out of governmental objections to clen use. Private farmers would grow quality meat, have tested and sealed, and sold at huge prices to beef addicts like Contador. It won't give them an excuse to test positive, but they'll have a good piece of beef, and no bad publictity. Good business for the small clenfree farmer.

Do you realize how unrealistic your approach can be for an athlete to do "in-house" testing for clen every time he/she fancies an stake? let alone the fact that riders "travel" constantly and have to rely on In situ food-and BTW even if they get to make a deal with a cattle farmer-how can the athlete manage to transport and preserve the meat during the calender?

 

[hrotha]

Let's hope they change the rules and the case gets dropped.

Let's hope they analize the data and establish whether the meat contamination hypothesis has any merit, and suspend him if it turns out it's highly unlikely compared to the doping hypothesis.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14952870

... presumably after current cases are completed.

If (and it is still an 'if') they put in place a threshold for clenbuterol it will only come in to effect on 1st January 2012.
Even if a threshold is put in place it will have no bearing on the ongoing Contador case as he is in violation of rules already in place.

From the WADA website;

At its third meeting in September, the List Expert Group, following consideration of the submissions received from the consultation process, recommends the new List to the Health, Medical and Research Committee which in turn makes recommendations to WADA's Executive Committee.

The Executive Committee finalizes the List at its September meeting.

The updated List is published by October 1 and comes into effect on January 1 the following year.

 

[LaFlorecita]

If (and it is still an 'if') they put in place a threshold for clenbuterol it will only come in to effect on 1st January 2012.
Even if a threshold is put in place it will have no bearing on the ongoing Contador case as he is in violation of rules already in place.

From the WADA website;

But a change in the rules would help Contador immensely. Even if it isn't in effect in November, Contador could make a point about how even WADA doesn't believe in it's own rule.

Also, Vidarte said that because the hearings are going to take place late November, a decision will not be reached before the new year, as it usually takes 6 or more weeks. Does any new rule have bearing on Contador's case if a decision is not reached before the 1st of January 2012?

 

[LaFlorecita]

Let's hope they analize the data and establish whether the meat contamination hypothesis has any merit, and suspend him if it turns out it's highly unlikely compared to the doping hypothesis.

The meat contamination story is the most likely hypothesis, according to the Commission that acquitted him.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

But a change in the rules would help Contador immensely. Even if it isn't in effect in November, Contador could make a point about how even WADA doesn't believe in it's own rule.

Also, Vidarte said that because the hearings are going to take place late November, a decision will not be reached before the new year, as it usually takes 6 or more weeks. Does any new rule have bearing on Contador's case if a decision is not reached before the 1st of January 2012?

As I stated already, no it won't.
Contador is in violation of current rules not any new rules.

Contador still has to prove his case - so the only way the current WADA meetings may help Contador is the release of new information or statistics, but again he probably has much of that already.

 

[LaFlorecita]

As I stated already, no it won't.
Contador is in violation of current rules not any new rules.

Contador still has to prove his case - so the only way the current WADA meetings may help Contador is the release of new information or statistics, but again he probably has much of that already.

OK, thanks.

 

[avanti]

Let's hope they change the rules and the case gets dropped.

I agree. In Contador's case he has conceivably been more punished by the 12+ months of rumor than if he had been suspended for two years.

 

[Merckx index]

There remains strong opposition by some in WADA to a threshold, and for good reason. There is NO level that would indicate with any certainty that the CB came from contaminated meat. The best way to judge, in the absence of actual meat samples, is where the meat was bought. Riders in Mexico, South America and China, have a reasonable chance of eating contaminated meat, and this should be taken into account in their cases (though it shouldn’t by itself get them off; the Mexican soccer players had levels high enough to make contaminated meat fairly unlikely). Riders in Europe really do not have a case on these grounds.

We still don’t know if WADA will bring up the plasticizer results in Bert’s case, but another paper was just published by the Spanish and German groups that published the original studies on DEHP in blood transfusions (abstract below). This latest study presumably would be used to validate DEHP levels as further evidence of transfusion, though the number of subjects, 25, is rather small, and the reported level of significance (< 0.05) not really great enough to rule out false positives. But I haven’t seen the full paper.

Arguably, studies like these are beside the point. There is no question that high levels of DEHP metabolites can result from transfusion of stored blood. The real question is whether such high levels can be found in individuals that did not transfuse. Studies of large numbers of subjects, in the thousands, suggest that a few outliers do exist, but they may have been exposed to DEHP through other environmental sources. If WADA is serious about using this test, they really need to get a fairly precise estimate of the false positive rate. OTOH, since it is not intended as a standalone test, but only supporting evidence of transfusion (and even that is not technically needed, since the burden of proof is supposed to be on the rider to show he didn't dope, not on WADA to show he did), even say 95% certainty that DEHP levels indicated transfusion would be very damning, when added to the evidence that CB-contaminated meat in Spain is so low.

Also note that this study found, as have others, that urine levels of DEHP metabolites dropped off quite rapidly--in this case, they said two days was the effective detection window. IOW, these levels spike following transfusion. Beyond the absolute levels allegedly found in Bert's urine, the report we have is of a spike disappearing within a day or two. If this analysis really is of Bert's samples, this spike would provide further evidence of transfusion, as opposed to background levels.

Transfusion. 2011 Sep 2. doi: 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2011.03331.x. [Epub ahead of print]

Plasticizers excreted in urine: indication of autologous blood transfusion in sports.

Monfort N, Ventura R, Platen P, Hinrichs T, Brixius K, Schänzer W, Thevis M, Geyer H, Segura J.
Source

From the Bioanalysis Research Group, IMIM Hospital del Mar Research Institute and the Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain; Department of Sports Medicine and Sports Nutrition, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany; and the Institute of Cardiology and Sports Medicine and the Center for Preventive Doping Research, German Sport University, Cologne, Germany.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:
Misuse of autologous blood transfusions in sports remains undetectable. The metabolites of the plasticizer di-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) were recently proposed as markers of blood transfusion, based on high urinary concentrations of these compounds observed in patients subjected to blood transfusion. This study evaluates DEHP metabolites in urine for detecting autologous blood transfusion.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS:
One blood bag was drawn from moderately trained subjects and the red blood cells (RBCs) were reinfused after different storage periods. Group 1 (12 subjects) was reinfused after 14 days, and Group 2 (13 subjects), after 28 days of storage. Urine samples were collected before and after reinfusion for determination of the concentrations of three DEHP metabolites, mono-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, mono-(2-ethyl-5-hydroxyhexyl)phthalate, and mono-(2-ethyl-5-oxohexyl)phthalate.

RESULTS:
Concentrations of DEHP metabolites on the days before reinfusion were in agreement with those described after common environmental exposure. A few hours after the reinfusion a significant increase was observed for all metabolites in all volunteers. Concentrations 1 day later were still higher (p < 0.05) than before reinfusion. Variations in urine dilution supported normalization by specific gravity. Concentrations of DEHP metabolites tended to be higher after longer storage times of RBCs.

CONCLUSION:
Autologous transfusion with RBCs stored in plastic bags provokes an acute increase in the urinary concentrations of DEHP metabolites, allowing the detection of this doping malpractice. The window of detection is approximately 2 days. The method might be applied to urine samples submitted for antidoping testing.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Good stuff, as usual. Thanks, MI.

 

[python]

to repeat for the thousandth time, as this thread has been around this forum about that often ( i bet it will re-appear in 2 weeks again)

- there is no confirmed evidence the dehp test was ever brought in front of cas. it is and remains an unconfirmed rumour for those believing in it. the test itself is rather a waste of energy as has been shown many times.
-there is hard evidence from one of the parties they will NOT bring the dhep test
- there is plenty of hard evidence (and it was brought over here dozens of times) in the published media that many wada lab directors (not all, of course) are for introducing some kind of threshold for clen. the reasons have been discussed to death.

will all the buzz affect the cas panel decision in november ?

imo it can go either way.

but when more and more media quote the actual people in charge of testing, (this time the very visible chief of the olympic testing) contador's chances look good.

means not much to those who went on record that declared cas should operate by the cn forums pseudo-scientist's criteria.

i care very little for that.

 

[Mambo95]

There remains strong opposition by some in WADA to a threshold, and for good reason. There is NO level that would indicate with any certainty that the CB came from contaminated meat. The best way to judge, in the absence of actual meat samples, is where the meat was bought. Riders in Mexico, South America and China, have a reasonable chance of eating contaminated meat, and this should be taken into account in their cases (though it shouldn’t by itself get them off; the Mexican soccer players had levels high enough to make contaminated meat fairly unlikely). Riders in Europe really do not have a case on these grounds.

Why do they not have that case?
Is it because the animals have not tested positive?
Are you saying not testing positive is proof of not doping?

I believe some farms have been tested 500 times with no positives. They're probably the most tested farms in the world ever.


(I say this to highlight the fact that many cycling fans see the EU agriculture drug tests as foolproof, but the cycling ones as meaningless)

 

[Siriuscat]

So the abbatoir they raided in northern Spain not long after the positive was announce which had cattle full of various chemicals including Clenbuterol is a unique establishment in Europe?? Like drugs cheats, I suspect there are hundreds of farmers trying to squeeze that extra euro any way they can, it's going on everywhere!

If there's a way that WADA can set a level that takes accidental ingestion into account the that has to be a good thing

 

[Merckx index]

there is no confirmed evidence the dehp test was ever brought in front of cas. it is and remains an unconfirmed rumour for those believing in it.

Since CAS has not even met yet, we can be quite sure it has not been brought in front of them. The question is whether it will be when they do meet. As I clearly said, “we still don’t know…”

the test itself is rather a waste of energy as has been shown many times.

If you think the test is a waste of energy, why don’t you write to Segura et al. and tell them so? Why are they still doing these studies?

This comment of yours is ironic. In other arguments, you take the approach that rather than second-guess the science, we should pay most attention to what WADA is actually thinking and planning on doing. Here, however, you take the opposite approach, and make a scientific judgment, which you then expect WADA to follow.

I don't have a problem with either approach, though personally I prefer to judge the science independently. But you are being very inconsistent in using whichever approach fits the point you want to make.

-there is hard evidence from one of the parties they will NOT bring the dhep test

which party is NOT WADA

- there is plenty of hard evidence (and it was brought over here dozens of times) in the published media that many wada lab directors (not all, of course) are for introducing some kind of threshold for clen. the reasons have been discussed to death.

Again, I clearly said “strong opposition by some”, which is correct. You seem to be intentionally ignoring my words in order to make a point which you very badly want to believe I have missed.

but when more and more media quote the actual people in charge of testing, (this time the very visible chief of the olympic testing) contador's chances look good.

If his chances look good—if they are willing to change the rules in the middle of his case—it’s because his suspension would hurt the sport. Not because of the science.

means not much to those who went on record that declared cas should operate by the cn forums pseudo-scientist's criteria.

Though you use that expression often, Python, you haven’t provided a shred of evidence to support the charge of pseudo-science. The lack of CB positives in Spanish meat is well-documented, and is all that is really needed. The implications of what I clearly stated as “alleged” DEHP levels are also very well-documented. If you have any evidence that you believe shows Bert should not be sanctioned—that you disagree with all the points made by WADA in the Caso Contador report--you are welcome to provide it. You’ve had a long time to do so, and so far have come up with absolutely nothing at all.

Why do they not have that case?
Is it because the animals have not tested positive?
Are you saying not testing positive is proof of not doping?

So the abbatoir they raided in northern Spain not long after the positive was announce which had cattle full of various chemicals including Clenbuterol is a unique establishment in Europe?? Like drugs cheats, I suspect there are hundreds of farmers trying to squeeze that extra euro any way they can, it's going on everywhere!

The issue is not whether cattle in Spain are given CB. As has been discussed here before, they are. The issue is whether, when they finally go to slaughter, there is enough CB left in the meat to account for Bert’s positive. No one has provided any evidence that there is.

 

[Siriuscat]

The issue is not whether cattle in Spain are given CB. As has been discussed here before, they are. The issue is whether, when they finally go to slaughter, there is enough CB left in the meat to account for Bert’s positive. No one has provided any evidence that there is.

Wasn't my point mate, I was aiming at the percieved assertion that there is "no" drug use in agriculture in Europe, that is a fallacy, no point just pointing at China and Mexico.

We have the UCI testing protocols and national testing, we have an organisation called WADA over seeing maybe 2000 cyclists, how many farms are there across Europe alone? How many times do the EU standards people test these farms and abattoirs? The fact that there is the risk that it can be ingested from cross contamination is something WADA needs to resolve sensibly. Either way, would CAS deem it prudent to prosecute a case on a point that WADA are now discussing??? I'm not talking about the specific intricacies and contexts of the rules, just common sense, if WADA are having to discuss the matter specifically there is obviously an issue with the rule as it stands.

I agree that from what we have seen Contador's team still have to prove the facts, i'd love to see the stuff we haven't!! It'll all come out in the wash!

 

[python]

the very fact that one of the local pseudo-scientists continues to cling on to the plasticizer tests (whilst it's not even been the intent of the thread originator nor was it mentioned by cowan when speaking of the clen thresholds), is evidence enough of the desperation of the said individual

having cornered yourself by statements like 'i will not accept the cas decision unless it meets my criteria', tells me enough about your 'science'.