The Clean Protocol™ is administered by the World Clean Sports Organisation (WCSO) which is a not for profit global organisation based in Switzerland founded by sports fans, former professional & Olympic athletes, legal professionals and anti-doping experts who are not current employees of any professional team or any official sports body or federation.
The WCSO is to be run by committed fans and former athletes who are passionate clean sport advocates.
The WCSO relies upon advice from relevant experts and will remain independent from the existing sports hierarchy. It is this independence that ensures the Clean Protocol ™ can stay true to its vision in facilitating clean sport.
It is hoped the existing anti-doping hierarchy will support and work to assist clean sport and the Clean Protocol™.
I agree. Who are those who organize this and which is their "integrity protocol". And how can they publish blood profiles?? I don't get it.. There are laws that don't allow to publish private data and medical records.Dear Wiggo said:There's usually an "About us" section that lists the key stake holders, but there does not appear to be anything of the sort here. I'd like to know who is organising this, as it speaks to the foundation of the credibility IMO.
I do like the whole "publish blood profiles" option
That's true, without consent.alitogata said:There are laws that don't allow to publish private data and medical records.
If the contractual arrangement includes consent, then the data can be disclosed (to whatever level and method is included in the contract).The first step for the athlete is to sign the Clean Contract which is a simple contractual commitment to abide by the rules of the sport and to submit themselves to the Clean Protocol™ which requires the provision of certain information and to be available for certain testing procedures explained below.
Some thoughts here. I found it weird that the only individual name that appears in the whole site is this guy:Dear Wiggo said:There's usually an "About us" section that lists the key stake holders, but there does not appear to be anything of the sort here. I'd like to know who is organising this, as it speaks to the foundation of the credibility IMO.
I do like the whole "publish blood profiles" option
A few recent article subtracts belowThe Clean Protocol™ is a system to support clean athletes and to promote social change toward clean sport. It is the highest standard for athletes complying with the rules of their sport.
The Clean Protocol™ is a system designed by enthusiastic and like minded athletes, sports professionals and relevant experts to enable clean athletes to obtain and independent certification of their compliance with the rules.
http://veloclinic.com/imminent-arrival-reward-side-anti-doping/Conventional anti-doping measures struggle to keep pace with ever-newer drugs and tricks. But a lie detector can catch doping long after drugs have left the body, said Czislowski. And because he isn’t accusing people of doping, the test doesn’t have to be as airtight as the drug tests, he said. Rather than replace standard anti-doping tests, he sees the Clean Protocol as a compliment to them—a way to plug the gaps in the current system.
Off the record, some pros have expressed reluctance at being guinea pigs in an unproven experiment, Cunnama said. But he sees little downside. He passed the test. But even if he hadn’t there would have been no consequences from race officials.
“So what have we got to lose?” he said. “For the moment, the WADA system just isn’t catching enough dopers.”
http://megabicicleta.com/2014/10/13/is-there-a-better-approach-to-anti-doping/Without any modification to the current testing whatsoever, an alternative approach would be to take a reward side anti-doping model. Since the goal here is to reward clean athletes with an endorsement and no harsh penalties are involved, the thresholds can be shifted so that the vast majority of doped athletes are excluded. Under this approach the majority of clean athletes can be given the far less ambiguous endorsement of very likely clean. Such a designation would be far more likely to be embraced by fans. It would also provide sponsors with a far more secure investment. The potential issue of course, is if nobody is banned then individuals will be given the option to trade credibility for podiums.
Fortunately, the punitive/deterrent and reward based models are not mutually exclusive. Instead, they are obviously quite complementary. By including both top down and bottom thresholds the greatest advantage can be had from the imperfect tests. As illustrated here, the very likely clean athletes can benefit from reward based endorsement, meaningful penalties can be kept in place, and the number of clean riders left in the “not positive” grey zone can be minimized.
The bar for proving someone is clean can be placed in a very different area, statistically, than the bar for proving someone is dirty. It can be much tougher.
For the majority of clean riders, the current status quo is frustrating because there is no way of separating them from riders who are in the grey area of ‘doping but getting away with it’.
By signing up for the Clean Protocol (or similar, as long as the methodology is trustworthy) riders would have a way of proving (to a very high degree of certainty) to fans and sponsors that they are not doping.
It creates an incentive to be fastidiously clean, because the commercial implications for sponsors, and teams hiring only certified riders, would potentially be huge.
It's just a couple of chancers with a half baked scheme built around ropey science handing out worthless 'certificates' (for a fee, I imagine)mrhender said:If I was managing a clean team in Pro-Cycling I would sign up for this in a heartbeat.. Why not ask Brailsford and Vaughters to do so...
What have they got to loose? It's not a sanction tool, and "negatives" doesn't get published right..
If they really wanted to put pressure on other teams to become clean they would be all over things like this..
Why let all the cheaters cheat them for their victories....
Ohh I forgot.. They also do win a lot...
All must be fine and clean then........ LOL...........!
Maybe they are afraid of what such scrutiny would reveal.................?
Yup... You seem to imagine a lotParker said:It's just a couple of chancers with a half baked scheme built around ropey science handing out worthless 'certificates' (for a fee, I imagine)
Lie detectors? Please. It would have as much credibility if it was based on astrology and palm reading.
But I expect there will be no shortage of suckers willing to fork out good cash for a useless piece of paper.
First of all lie detectors are a load of baloney. The person selling the lie detector only claims 85% accuracy - which will be their own tests in lab conditions, so a lot less in reality.mrhender said:Yup... You seem to imagine a lot
And the lie detector is not the strongest in their armory...
But don't tell me you've never seen an interview with a rider asked about doping and wished that some device was attached so that the obvious lying could be detected... And again... It is not a sanction tool... It is the opposite of the ABP with the possibility of showing a high possibility of cleanliness..
And again.. The lie detector test is not the only premise... They would want numbers and profiles hardly ever seen in the clinic... Is that really a bad thing?
So what you see is a scam disrupting the (anti)+doping-environment at the hefty cost of 100 CHF per year.. I guess all those opposing doping should work for free. Nice idea... By your logic everyone involved in anti-doping is merely part of a scam.... That would explain a lot though...Parker said:First of all lie detectors are a load of baloney. The person selling the lie detector only claims 85% accuracy - which will be their own tests in lab conditions, so a lot less in reality.
Then they want numbers and profiles - which will be examined by self-appointed 'experts' - and they can't tell you if someone is clean or dirty anyway.
And here's the test. If a cyclist who you think is doping gets one of these certificates, will you then believe the rider is clean. Or will you discredit the test to maintain your opinion.
And as for the fee. The website says "The initial cost to each person taking the Clean Protocol is set at 100CHF per year". Nice little earner for an online test and a certificate. And that's just the initial cost.
It's a scam. But as you've shown plenty will enthusiastically embrace it as something meaningful.
No, what I see is people being expected to pay 100 CHF per year (initially) for a worthless scrap of paper. It doesn't actually certify anything of merit.mrhender said:So what you see is a scam disrupting the (anti)+doping-environment at the hefty cost of 100 CHF per year.. I guess all those opposing doping should work for free. Nice idea... By your logic everyone involved in anti-doping is merely part of a scam.... That would explain a lot though...
That is assuming this will never be adopted as a credible indicator...Parker said:No, what I see is people being expected to pay 100 CHF per year (initially) for a worthless scrap of paper. It doesn't actually certify anything of merit.
I will never consider anyone clean because that can never be proved...I ask again, if a cyclist you are sure is doping (and you've posted and tweeted about how he's doping) got one of these certificates, would you then consider him to be clean
Given that the lie detector tests it relies on are not credible that's a pretty safe assumption. They belong in the movies and the Jeremy Kyle show, not reality.mrhender said:That is assuming this will never be adopted as a credible indicator...
Correct. Cleaniness can't be proved. So, the certificate - like I said - is meaningless. It has no clout, credibility or authority. It wouldn't convince anyone of anything. They're selling pieces of A4 paper for 100 CHF.mrhender said:I will never consider anyone clean because that can never be proved...
But I would use it as a factor in my personal perception..