British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars including Br

[PremierAndrew]

Nice to see this story completely swept under the carpet

 

[wrinklyvet]

Actually, for what it is worth, he remains discredited for the purposes of his profession. Bonar was found guilty of other misconduct on charges unrelated to the terminally ill American woman and is entirely likely to be sanctioned - see http://www.aol.co.uk/living/2016/05/28/doctor-represents-potential-future-risk-of-harm-to-patients-tribunal-finds/

 

[PremierAndrew]

Re:

Actually, for what it is worth, he remains discredited for the purposes of his profession. Bonar was found guilty of other misconduct on charges unrelated to the terminally ill American woman and is entirely likely to be sanctioned - see http://www.aol.co.uk/living/2016/05/28/doctor-represents-potential-future-risk-of-harm-to-patients-tribunal-finds/

Just out of interest are you the same user as the one who was always commenting in the old comments system under articles on CN?

 

[thehog]

Re: British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars includin

http://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/cms-committee-to-question-stevens-calvert-kenworthy/

The Culture, Media and Sport (CMS) Committee of the UK Parliament is to question Dan Stevens, Jonathan Calvert and David Kenworthy tomorrow as part of its ongoing inquiry into blood doping in athletics. Dan Stevens is a former professional cyclist that collaborated with the Sunday Times Insight team – led by Calvert – on its investigation into Dr. Mark Bonar, who claimed to have supplied prohibited substances to over 150 athletes

Stevens, Calvert and Kenworthy will be interviewed at 10:15am tomorrow in the Thatcher Room at Portcullis House, opposite the House of Commons. Members of the public are free to attend the session, which will be broadcast live on Parliament TV. It will also be covered live by The Sports Integrity Initiative.

 

[sniper]

sounds good.

 

[thehog]

Re: British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars includin

Good day for UKAD

 

[sniper]

Re: British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars includin

Good day for UKAD

watching the podcast right now.
Dan Stevens makes a really composed impression.

 

[sniper]

During his 20 year-long carreer Dan Stevens had only been tested once.

 

[sniper]

Dan Stevens raised the Bonar issues (including the PED prescriptions for EPO, HGH and testosterone) over three meetings with 4 UKAD senior officials (including head of legal).
They told him the evidence was of no use to them.

 

[sniper]

WADA code stipulates Dan should've been given a 75% reduction of punishment.
UKAD gave him nothing.

 

[sniper]

UKAD giving advance notice about testing through twitter.
Shocker.

 

[thehog]

Re: British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars includin

Good day for UKAD

watching the podcast right now.
Dan Stevens makes a really composed impression.

Surely he must be a bitter ex-doper

I did like how he informed UKAD of another athlete doping, so UKAD tweeted they would be testing at the event, said athlete dropped out. Hilarious stuff.

But, hey, look over there at those Russians!

 

[sniper]

Dan says he feels UKAD don't want to investigate anything.

 

[sniper]

Re: British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars includin

Good day for UKAD

watching the podcast right now.
Dan Stevens makes a really composed impression.

Surely he must be a bitter ex-doper

I did like how he informed UKAD of another athlete doping, so UKAD tweeted they would be testing at the event, said athlete dropped out. Hilarious stuff.

But, hey, look over there at those Russians!

this.

 

[sniper]

Based on the transcriptions of Dan's interviews with UKAD, ST journalists says UKAD never showed any real interest in Dr. Bonar.

 

[sniper]

Dan says doping endemic,
hardly any testing,
Bonar not an isolated case (similar, more sophisticate anti-aging docs out there);
Bonar was known as Dr. Dope in the cycling circuit.
Says doping provides *massive* gains, as opposed to *marginal* gains achieved from training/technique/equipment.

 

[sniper]

Dan repeats the JTL case: tested 4 times in the Tour of Britain 2012; but not a single EPO test.

 

[thehog]

Re:

Dan says doping endemic,
hardly any testing,
Bonar not an isolated case (similar, more sophisticate anti-aging docs out there);
Bonar was known as Dr. Dope in the cycling circuit.
Says doping provides *massive* gains, as opposed to *marginal* gains achieved from training/technique/equipment.

They need Walsh or Brailsford to take the stand. Tell them that pillows really do work

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

Dan says doping endemic,
hardly any testing,
Bonar not an isolated case (similar, more sophisticate anti-aging docs out there);
Bonar was known as Dr. Dope in the cycling circuit.
Says doping provides *massive* gains, as opposed to *marginal* gains achieved from training/technique/equipment.

They need Walsh or Brailsford to take the stand. Tell them that pillows really do work

Good idea.
They could additionally point out to the parliament that PEDs are really much more endemic at the amateur level than at the pro-level. Dan Stevens was telling some ugly lies about that this morning:

“We’re a long way behind what athletes are using at elite level, at amateur level they are potentially using what the elites did 15 years ago.”
Read more at http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/dan-stevens-gives-evidence-parliament-harley-st-doping-doctor-233264#mRafJo5gWCTyTK7j.99

 

[thehog]

Re: British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars includin

Reasonable summary. The advance warning of testing is no surprise.

Is this the robust testing system Froome was talking about?

“I can’t comment how much doping is going on [in amateur cycling] because I don’t know factually, but what I can say is that there’s not a lot of testing going on,” said Stevens. “And when testing is happening the athletes are being given advance notice that they are going to be tested.”

“It’s very clear there are a lot of people doping, it’s very clear there aren’t the resources to catch everyone. Do we carry on it’s pretending it’s going on, or not going on. So what do we do?”

“We’re a long way behind what athletes are using at elite level, at amateur level they are potentially using what the elites did 15 years ago.”

Stevens also said that he did not think that Bonar was alone as a doctor prescribing performance-enhancing drugs to athletes. “He isn’t an isolated case, there are a number of doctors doing the same thing.”

Part of Stevens’s statements were related to the intelligence that he gave to UKAD relating to Bodnar’s activities, and how UKAD acted on that evidence. Stevens maintains that UKAD was ‘reluctant’ to take the information and act on it.

Stevens said that he spoke about Bonar and his activities with four senior members of UKAD over three meetings. He said that he handed UKAD copies of prescriptions from Bonar for HGH, EPO and testosterone. Graham Arthur of UKAD told Stevens during the cyclist’s appeal hearing that the information was of “little or no use to UKAD”.

Kenworthy reiterated that UKAD had no direct jurisdiction over Bonar as he was operating outside sport, but did admit that UKAD had shown an ‘operation failure’ in not reporting Bonar to the General Medical Council earlier than it did.

One area mentioned by Stevens for which UKAD came under scrutiny was the broadcast via Twitter of an up-coming anti-doping test two days before an amateur cycling event. This was perceived by Stevens as a tip-off to athletes that they might be caught.

Kenworthy acknowledged that UKAD had given prior warning of dope testing via Twitter, but defended the decision to do so.

“It’s absolutely true,” said Kenworthy. “We put out the tweet after lists are closed for that event, and we see who doesn’t turn up [at the event] as that gives us good intelligence on who might be doping, rather than doing blind tests.”

This was met with some criticism from the panel, with the chair replying: “Right, so someone who stubs their toe the night before is functionally indistinguishable to someone who is doping?”

At the end of the hearing, Kenworthy was asked by the committee to provide a written explanation of the Twitter incident

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/dan-stevens-gives-evidence-parliament-harley-st-doping-doctor-233264#mRafJo5gWCTyTK7j.99

 

[thehog]

Re: British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars includin

Video here:

http://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/analysis-ukad-admits-failings-in-dan-stevens-case/

Further write up:

The information about Dr. Bonar was given to UKAD in 2014 by cyclist Dan Stevens, who in 2015 went to the Cycling Independent Reform Commission (CIRC) after UKAD decided that his evidence did not warrant a reduction for ‘substantial assistance’ as defined in the World Anti-Doping Code, and issued him with a two-year ban. UKAD was subsequently forced to reduce its sanction after the CIRC recommended reducing Stevens’ ban, but did not publicise the reduction.

In that initial response (PDF below), UKAD claimed that Stevens had given it ‘over 100 names, 69 of which related to sport’, as well as information that Dr. Bonar was treating an unnamed boxer. At the CMS Committee hearing, Kenworthy said that Stevens had only given them four names, and the first he had heard about Dr. Bonar’s other activities was in the Sunday Times’ article.

Stevens also alleged that UKAD had spent £50,000 on defending itself against allegations that it had not properly investigated his information, retaining London law firm Bird & Bird to argue its case. Stevens argued that the money could have been better spent investigating Dr. Bonar. “It cannot be possible for a national anti-doping organisation to regard a doctor prescribing EPO as not significant”, said Stevens, arguing that UKAD’s reluctance to use his information was what had promoted him to go to the CIRC.

UKAD has not come out of this session smelling of roses, however there is a basic lack of understanding about what power anti-doping organisations have to investigate those suspected of doing wrong. UKAD is right to point out that it has no jurisdiction over Dr. Bonar. If it had investigated him, what could it have done? Banned him from sport? However, serious questions remain as to why the information was not passed to the GMC, who could have taken action against him.

Kenworthy was also right to point out a lacuna in the World Anti-Doping Code, which allows a reduction in sanction for substantial assistance, but only for evidence that can lead to a conviction. As organisations such as UKAD can only sanction athletes, this only allows a reduction for what might be considered ‘grassing up’ another athlete.

In Stevens’ case, the information he came forward with was potentially much more useful, however UKAD was forced to discount it under the strict letter of the law, as they could not take any action against Dr. Bonar. That needs to change, and hopefully this case will lead to Code revisions that encourage athletes to come forward with such information rather than discourage them, as appears to be the case here.

http://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/analysis-ukad-admits-failings-in-dan-stevens-case/

 

[arcus]

If anyone is interested in hearing the testimony.....

http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/b6038652-2276-4f90-9d90-25e3b541aab1

 

[More Strides than Rides]

Re: British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars includin

Stevens also alleged that UKAD had spent £50,000 on defending itself against allegations that it had not properly investigated his information, retaining London law firm Bird & Bird to argue its case. Stevens argued that the money could have been better spent investigating Dr. Bonar. “It cannot be possible for a national anti-doping organisation to regard a doctor prescribing EPO as not significant”, said Stevens, arguing that UKAD’s reluctance to use his information was what had promoted him to go to the CIRC.

Bird and Bird. Where have I heard that before?

The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) has instructed its solicitors to send another letter of warning to Hajo Seppelt, the investigative journalist who produced a series of documentaries alleging systemic Russian doping and IAAF collusion in covering up positive tests. The letter, sent by law firm Bird & Bird on 21 December, warns Seppelt against publishing an email sent by Nick Davies in 2013, while he was IAAF Communications Director. Davies stepped aside as Director of the IAAF President’s Office just before Christmas after Le Monde published the emails, which suggest that the IAAF was planning to delay announcing Russian doping positives until after the 2013 IAAF World Championships for commercial reasons. The letter is dated 21 December 2015, the same date as Le Monde’s article.

The IAAF also confirmed that Jonathan Taylor, Head of Sports at Bird & Bird, will advise the IAAF Inspection Team that will verify whether the Russian athletics federation (ARAF) has implemented the necessary reforms in order to be reinstated as an IAAF member. “Jonathan Taylor is acting as counsel to the Taskforce, engaged by the IAAF at the request of Rune Andersen”, said an IAAF spokesperson. Taylor is not part of the IAAF Inspection Team, which was announced in November.

 

[rhubroma]

Why is it that in the Latin countries everybody knows what's going on in the amateur levels? Not that there is any interest in stopping it.

But let us not be surprised.

 

[samhocking]

Stevens statements are clearly confused. He claims doping in cycling is 'endemic', while also saying: "I can’t comment how much doping is going on because I don’t know factually, but what I can tell you, is what I can say is, that there’s not a lot of testing going on in amateur cycling".

That's simply an opinion and even then, only based on not knowing how many are doping in amateur cycling because there's no testing? How this scales up to Pro Level cycling i'm not sure when all he's got on that is his opinion that "We are a long way behind what athletes could be using at elite level. At amateur level people are potentially using what elites were using 15 years ago"? Stevens choice to use the words 'could' and 'potentially' suggests, again, this is simply his own opinion without any facts at all to base it on. Again, UKAD can't do anything with his own opinion and a prescription to a rider they've already caught from a Dr they have no jurisdiction over to ban.

At least his opinion on Bonar prescribing him 15 years out of date doping products/methods, seems to refute Bonar's own claims he treats pro cyclists too unless Bonar uses detectable methods for amateur and undetectable for elite? I'm sure that's part of it, but i'm sure Steven's would not have used the words 'potentially' and 'could' if he knew Bonar could sell him an undetectable 'elite doping programe'. I mean Bonar is a salesman too essentially. I'm sure he would have offered Stevens the chance to spend much more money to be on the same doping program as the 'British Tour de France Cyclist' he claims to be on his books.


From what I can tell this is going nowhere - fast other than a wrap on the knuckles for not reporting Bonar to GMC. At least now, neither GMC or UKAD can hide because it's fully out in the open.