British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars including Br

[Lemonbaloon]

Kenworthy got bbq'ed. Looks like a complete amateur.
I realy can not comprehend the logic behind that tweet that warned about the doping test. Kenworthy claims this is a widely used tactic, where the gathering of intel is the main goal of whether an athletete turns up at the specific even or not. Kenworthy Logic behind this tactic is that doping tests are expensive and the logistics are too much work. However concrete information were given about people doping at a certian event and they decide to "gather intel" by observing who does not turn up.
I just can not understand that this gathering of intel can turn out cheaper than conducting tests, when names and event is known, and a positive test has to occure at some point anyway if they want to catch a doper.

The logic only holds water if there were some magical way of catching people by gathering information, rather than having a positive test.

 

[arcus]

Re:

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

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

UKAD's David Kenworthy's testimony is absolutely cringe-worthy

 

[thehog]

Re:

Kenworthy got bbq'ed. Looks like a complete amateur.
I realy can not comprehend the logic behind that tweet that warned about the doping test. Kenworthy claims this is a widely used tactic, where the gathering of intel is the main goal of whether an athletete turns up at the specific even or not. Kenworthy Logic behind this tactic is that doping tests are expensive and the logistics are too much work. However concrete information were given about people doping at a certian event and they decide to "gather intel" by observing who does not turn up.
I just can not understand that this gathering of intel can turn out cheaper than conducting tests, when names and event is known, and a positive test has to occure at some point anyway if they want to catch a doper.

The logic only holds water if there were some magical way of catching people by gathering information, rather than having a positive test.

Yes, I watched it today and cringed as well. It was like watching David Brent in the Office for the first time. The end game they really have no intention of catching anyone and then just release a document about how many tests they did etc. They make the efforts to actually test at times when they seriously won't catch anybody - ie no EPO tests at the ToB, even when actually testing, just looking for steroids in a endurance 1 week stage race.

Pre-announce testing is utterly absurd. He tried to make it sound like it was some form of sophicated cat and mouse game trapping the dopers at their secret game. When in fact it resulted in no positive tests when they had a red hot opportunity to catch known dopers from directly supplied evidence.

Dan Stevens testimony was to the point and concise. It's sad to think their might be others like him who went to UKAD and got nothing and either resorted to doping or gave up.

And spare a thought for JTL in all this, hung out to dry.

 

[samhocking]

Re: British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars includin

I thought Kenworthy actually told it like it was.

End of the day, at the time they banned Stevens and him coming forward to reduce ban with evidence that led to substantive evidence, they only had the name of one boxer with no evidence from Stevens and the name of a Dr which they have no jurisdiction over to even send an investigator to question like a newspaper has and 3 prescriptions from Stevens they cannot prove was not for low testosterone and anti-ageing and hormone replacement. I can understand how WADA wouldn't see that as substantive and so neither could UKAD.

The whole 150 athlete thing you see in the newspaper headline should actually read "1 unknown boxer and 3 NHS prescriptions". You can see how by simply distorting the timelines and plucking information out from Stevens 4 statements, but joining it upto the newspapers much later investigation with another amateur athlete undercover to mimic Stevens story with Bonar, it makes a juicy headline worth some ink.

The failure to inform GMC is unforgivable. There's not enough information to make a decision though. It might have been organisational failure to simply act on the note or it might be to cover-up. Kenworthy certainly didn't duck UKADs failure to follow it up though which is encouraging I thought.

The most interesting point in the whole case was Kenworthy's wish for the narrow substantive evidence in WADA code to be loosened. He repeated several times, it is far too narrow and limiting for individuals who come forward with lots of information, but WADA wouldn't class as evidence.

 

[thehog]

Re: British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars includin

I thought Kenworthy actually told it like it was.

End of the day, at the time they banned Stevens and him coming forward to reduce ban with evidence that led to substantive evidence, they only had the name of one boxer with no evidence from Stevens and the name of a Dr which they have no jurisdiction over to even send an investigator to question like a newspaper has and 3 prescriptions from Stevens they cannot prove was not for low testosterone and anti-ageing and hormone replacement. I can understand how WADA wouldn't see that as substantive and so neither could UKAD.

The whole 150 athlete thing you see in the newspaper headline should actually read "1 unknown boxer and 3 NHS prescriptions". You can see how by simply distorting the timelines and plucking information out from Stevens 4 statements, but joining it upto the newspapers much later investigation with another amateur athlete undercover to mimic Stevens story with Bonar, it makes a juicy headline worth some ink.

The failure to inform GMC is unforgivable. There's not enough information to make a decision though. It might have been organisational failure to simply act on the note or it might be to cover-up. Kenworthy certainly didn't duck UKADs failure to follow it up though which is encouraging I thought.

The most interesting point in the whole case was Kenworthy's wish for the narrow substantive evidence in WADA code to be loosened. He repeated several times, it is far too narrow and limiting for individuals who come forward with lots of information, but WADA wouldn't class as evidence.

You're a funny guy.

That's why the UKAD spent £50,000 on defending itself against Stevens via our very good friends at Bird & Bird (firm to Coe / IAAF who tried to silence Hajo).

That's how concerned they were with Boner, imagine how many tests that could have conducted with £50,000

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.

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

 

[More Strides than Rides]

Re: British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars includin

That's how concerned they were with Boner, imagine how many tests that could have conducted with £50,000

Don't worry though, the tweets about those coming dope tests are free

 

[smaryka]

At the time I wondered about the tweet too, but then they turned up at a different nearby event and caught someone so I assumed that the tweet was meant as a distraction. Surprised to hear yesterday that it wasn't (if it's the same tweet being discussed).

Original tweet, https://twitter.com/ukantidoping/status/515486531440893952

Then http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/jason-white-handed-two-year-ban-skipping-drugs-test-150819

 

[budegan]

Re: British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars includin

I've just watched the first part of the hearing (Steven's evidence).

He paints himself as falling into taking the PEDs all very innocently, being diagnosed with low testosterone and then being "coerced" by Dr B into taking banned substances, however does anyone else not call BS here? If he's a lifetime athlete (competing since 13.5 years of age) there's no way he didn't know what he was getting himself into at the outset. Of course his Test was low and he wasn't recovering - he was 38! Then he claims to find Bonar online ("as you'd find a dentist") however later it's discussed that the good doc was known as "Doctor Dope" on the amateur scene - surely a contradiction no?

Admittedly during the stream I was distracted a couple of times (it's pretty lengthy) so may have missed information that would contradict me.

I am also struck by Steven's courage in coming forward (even if his motivation for whistle blowing and exposing UKAD are ultimately selfish - the first driven to reduce his ban, the second for vengeance) - I wonder what his occupation is for his employers to have stood by him through this.

 

[sniper]

Re: British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars includin

I've just watched the first part of the hearing (Steven's evidence).

He paints himself as falling into taking the PEDs all very innocently, being diagnosed with low testosterone and then being "coerced" by Dr B into taking banned substances, however does anyone else not call BS here? If he's a lifetime athlete (competing since 13.5 years of age) there's no way he didn't know what he was getting himself into at the outset. Of course his Test was low and he wasn't recovering - he was 38! Then he claims to find Bonar online ("as you'd find a dentist") however later it's discussed that the good doc was known as "Doctor Dope" on the amateur scene - surely a contradiction no?

And Floyd had the timeline all wrong and was a proven liar.

Seriously, who cares whether or not Dan already doped prior to meeting Dr. Bonar.
UKAD's antidoping corruption is in focus here.
Dan's story about UKAD pans out and is corroborated by all the evidence subsequently gathered by the ST.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

Re:

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.

this sums it up well

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

Re: British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars includin

I thought Kenworthy actually told it like it was.

End of the day, at the time they banned Stevens and him coming forward to reduce ban with evidence that led to substantive evidence, they only had the name of one boxer with no evidence from Stevens and the name of a Dr which they have no jurisdiction over to even send an investigator to question like a newspaper has and 3 prescriptions from Stevens they cannot prove was not for low testosterone and anti-ageing and hormone replacement. I can understand how WADA wouldn't see that as substantive and so neither could UKAD.

The whole 150 athlete thing you see in the newspaper headline should actually read "1 unknown boxer and 3 NHS prescriptions". You can see how by simply distorting the timelines and plucking information out from Stevens 4 statements, but joining it upto the newspapers much later investigation with another amateur athlete undercover to mimic Stevens story with Bonar, it makes a juicy headline worth some ink.

The failure to inform GMC is unforgivable. There's not enough information to make a decision though. It might have been organisational failure to simply act on the note or it might be to cover-up. Kenworthy certainly didn't duck UKADs failure to follow it up though which is encouraging I thought.

The most interesting point in the whole case was Kenworthy's wish for the narrow substantive evidence in WADA code to be loosened. He repeated several times, it is far too narrow and limiting for individuals who come forward with lots of information, but WADA wouldn't class as evidence.

You're a funny guy.

That's why the UKAD spent £50,000 on defending itself against Stevens via our very good friends at Bird & Bird (firm to Coe / IAAF who tried to silence Hajo).

That's how concerned they were with Boner, imagine how many tests that could have conducted with £50,000

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.

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

 

[sniper]

Waiting for WADA to express their dismay over UKAD giving advance notice about testing.

WADA dismayed by latest doping allegations in Russian athletics
...
[A]n individual from the Russian Anti-Doping Agency (RUSADA) gave advance warning to athletes of testing plans
https://www.wada-ama.org/en/media/news/2016-03/wada-dismayed-by-latest-doping-allegations-in-russian-athletics

 

[Benotti69]

Re:

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.

Why would Bonar not prescribe doping that 15 years worked very well for those using it! It is not like amateurs get tested regularly!

Again that people take more of a shot at those doing the whistleblowing than those who are supposed to do their job gives us a big indication of their view point.

The best anti doping has come from the police and media. That has not changed. Till it comes from anti doping, independently and properly funded doping will be continue to be endemic.

Yep this is going nowhere because UKAD are not interested in catching dopers!

 

[sniper]

UKAD not acting upon doping intel? SSDD:
https://twitter.com/Digger_forum/status/743330298092359680

 

[thehog]

Re:

UKAD not acting upon doping intel? SSDD:
https://twitter.com/Digger_forum/status/743330298092359680

Good work by Benson; typical response from the AD four years later

Why has UKAD not approached the key witness who provided the majority evidence?

Why did UKAD not approach two leading riders from within the team who are from the United Kingdom?

Can UKAD confirm if they had contacted anyone in relation to this case?

The UKAD responded, saying, "we do not discuss or disclose information in relation to investigations, as doing so may serve to undermine the investigation itself."

The UKAD investigation into the British team was first announced in December 2012, after The Times newspaper passed on witness testimony of doping to UK Anti-Doping, yet there appears to have been little or no follow-up by UKAD in the aftermath.

Sean Yates who was a sport's director on the team, as well Max Sciandri and Matt Stephens, both of whom rode for the squad, have all confirmed to Cyclingnews that they have not been contacted by UK Anti-Doping. They, and the principal source of allegations of doping within the team, has told a source close to Cyclingnews that he has not been contacted by the anti-doping body. Cyclingnews has seen the majority of evidence between the two sources that confirms this.

Cyclingnews has also seen the testimony in which three members of the Linda McCartney team claim that there was doping within the squad. Speaking to The Times when the investigation was announced, then UKAD CEO Andy Parkinson said: "As is always the case, any information is assessed by UK Anti-Doping for its accuracy and relevance."

The Times report continued: "UK Anti-Doping's pursuit of the case is driven partly to establish whether there are any questionable links between the Linda McCartney Foods team and the professional units at the pinnacle of British cycling today."

Cyclingnews spoke to Sean Yates at the recent Criterium du Dauphine. He currently works for the Tinkoff team and was a director at Team Sky until 2012, before he briefly retired for personal reasons. He confirmed to Cyclingnews that UKAD had not contacted him at any point since their promise to launch their investigation. Yates was part of the management of the team and was their director at the Giro d'Italia in 2000.

Former British national champion Matt Stephens rode the 2000 Giro d'Italia for the McCartney team. He had a successful career in the UK, both before and after his time at the McCartney team.

"I saw the article back in 2012 in The Times, read it, and found it interesting," he told Cyclingnews.

"I expected that I would get a phone call or something. I was in the public eye a bit but I haven't had any contact with them at all."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/has-ukad-failed-to-investigate-the-linda-mccartney-team/

 

[MatParker117]

Re:

UKAD not acting upon doping intel? SSDD:
https://twitter.com/Digger_forum/status/743330298092359680

There is a fatal problem with the statue of limitations.

 

[MatParker117]

Re: British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars includin

I've just watched the first part of the hearing (Steven's evidence).

He paints himself as falling into taking the PEDs all very innocently, being diagnosed with low testosterone and then being "coerced" by Dr B into taking banned substances, however does anyone else not call BS here? If he's a lifetime athlete (competing since 13.5 years of age) there's no way he didn't know what he was getting himself into at the outset. Of course his Test was low and he wasn't recovering - he was 38! Then he claims to find Bonar online ("as you'd find a dentist") however later it's discussed that the good doc was known as "Doctor Dope" on the amateur scene - surely a contradiction no?

And Floyd had the timeline all wrong and was a proven liar.

Seriously, who cares whether or not Dan already doped prior to meeting Dr. Bonar.
UKAD's antidoping corruption is in focus here.
Dan's story about UKAD pans out and is corroborated by all the evidence subsequently gathered by the ST.

Floyd did narrowly escape jail for Fraud.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

UKAD not acting upon doping intel? SSDD:
https://twitter.com/Digger_forum/status/743330298092359680

There is a fatal problem with the statue of limitations.

First of all it's a "statute" not a "statue"

You have a little grasp on the realities.

The real issue is the UKAD is a publicly funded organisation. By which they are held accountable regardless of when doping might have occurred. Whether an athlete is sanctioned or not is of little consequence, the organisation can be held accountable indefinitely as can the information and names of athletes be released.

 

[thehog]

Re: British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars includin

I've just watched the first part of the hearing (Steven's evidence).

He paints himself as falling into taking the PEDs all very innocently, being diagnosed with low testosterone and then being "coerced" by Dr B into taking banned substances, however does anyone else not call BS here? If he's a lifetime athlete (competing since 13.5 years of age) there's no way he didn't know what he was getting himself into at the outset. Of course his Test was low and he wasn't recovering - he was 38! Then he claims to find Bonar online ("as you'd find a dentist") however later it's discussed that the good doc was known as "Doctor Dope" on the amateur scene - surely a contradiction no?

And Floyd had the timeline all wrong and was a proven liar.

Seriously, who cares whether or not Dan already doped prior to meeting Dr. Bonar.
UKAD's antidoping corruption is in focus here.
Dan's story about UKAD pans out and is corroborated by all the evidence subsequently gathered by the ST.

Floyd did narrowly escape jail for Fraud.

And David Millar went to jail, the irony

 

[sniper]

Re: British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars includin

I've just watched the first part of the hearing (Steven's evidence).

He paints himself as falling into taking the PEDs all very innocently, being diagnosed with low testosterone and then being "coerced" by Dr B into taking banned substances, however does anyone else not call BS here? If he's a lifetime athlete (competing since 13.5 years of age) there's no way he didn't know what he was getting himself into at the outset. Of course his Test was low and he wasn't recovering - he was 38! Then he claims to find Bonar online ("as you'd find a dentist") however later it's discussed that the good doc was known as "Doctor Dope" on the amateur scene - surely a contradiction no?

And Floyd had the timeline all wrong and was a proven liar.

Seriously, who cares whether or not Dan already doped prior to meeting Dr. Bonar.
UKAD's antidoping corruption is in focus here.
Dan's story about UKAD pans out and is corroborated by all the evidence subsequently gathered by the ST.

Floyd did narrowly escape jail for Fraud.

way to miss the point, which was: who cares if Floyd doped and/or frauded himself; when he released the emails it was clear to anybody with a quarter of a brain that he was telling the truth.
Translated to this case: who cares whether or not Dan already doped prior to meeting Dr. Bonar. It's clear to anybody with a quarter of a brain that he's telling the truth about what went down between him and UKAD.

 

[thehog]

Re: British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars includin

Don't worry they will erect a statue of limitations in honour of the British doping cyclists, lol!

 

[Benotti69]

Good to see some posters think if SOL has passed you get off Scot free from your past doping! Great! That's just great!!!

No wonder the UCI treats fans like drones!

 

[MatParker117]

Re: Re:

UKAD not acting upon doping intel? SSDD:
https://twitter.com/Digger_forum/status/743330298092359680

There is a fatal problem with the statue of limitations.

First of all it's a "statute" not a "statue"

You have a little grasp on the realities.

The real issue is the UKAD is a publicly funded organisation. By which they are held accountable regardless of when doping might have occurred. Whether an athlete is sanctioned or not is of little consequence, the organisation can be held accountable indefinitely as can the information and names of athletes be released.

In this case it can't as Dr Bonar isn't licenced by a sports federation (and soon will be struck off) then the names and records of his clients fall under confidentiality. It's the same problem that Puerto had, doping isn't a criminal offence here in the UK which means the police can't go to a judge either. UKAD should of passed his name to the GMC, I fully agree but the reality is from an anti doping perspective they were virtually powerless in this situation. I don't like it but there is a strong chance we will never know the full story.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

UKAD not acting upon doping intel? SSDD:
https://twitter.com/Digger_forum/status/743330298092359680

There is a fatal problem with the statue of limitations.

First of all it's a "statute" not a "statue"

You have a little grasp on the realities.

The real issue is the UKAD is a publicly funded organisation. By which they are held accountable regardless of when doping might have occurred. Whether an athlete is sanctioned or not is of little consequence, the organisation can be held accountable indefinitely as can the information and names of athletes be released.

In this case it can't as Dr Bonar isn't licenced by a sports federation (and soon will be struck off) then the names and records of his clients fall under confidentiality. It's the same problem that Puerto had, doping isn't a criminal offence here in the UK which means the police can't go to a judge either. UKAD should of passed his name to the GMC, I fully agree but the reality is from an anti doping perspective they were virtually powerless in this situation. I don't like it but there is a strong chance we will never know the full story.

The tweet you replied to was in reference to the (non) Investgation by UKAD into the Linda McCartney team not Bonar. Sometimes I think you don't actually read.

Again, the UKAD are publically funded and are accountable to the Government via the people. As we have already seen they have been questioned, a report will follow with mandates and recommendations. Additionally information gathered can be released under the freedom of information act. No "statute" can withhold the information bar one of national security.

Sporting sanctions are of little relevance here. This applies both to the Bonar case or any other (non) Investgation by UKAD. As you saw with USADA and Armstrong, they were toothless without government intervention.

Period.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

good post hog.

UKAD are powerless only if they choose to be.
i could think of a plethora of useful things they could do with the info, completely regardless of SoL.
Instead they spent 50k on defending themselves against Dan's accusations.