• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

CMS Doping in sport revelations/discussion

Page 32 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Probably worth stating any sports doctor will be ordering substances that will be prohibited for certain athletes continuously (that's why they are there afterall, to prescribe medication legally). Take a typical team of 20-30 riders (more in BC, closer to 100 riders he's looking after). You'll have some injured maybe requiring IA Cortisone medically from hospital/surgery. You might have riders requiring a prohibited substance under TUE, you might have a member of staff on the road who busted his arm falling down hotel stairs and needs prohibited painkillers etc etc. Clearly all of that is going to come from a central location via the doctors prescription and is going to be ordered from and delivered where he works. WADA don't prevent medical supplies that are prohibited from being ordered and stored, so long as they are not intended to dope an athlete outside WADA code.
Obviously the charges so far by MPTS only involve what they call non-athlete Persons A,B & C and mostly one of poor GP-related admin, lack of a medical management policy and not informing A, B & C'sr GPs of prescribed treatment. The lies re. Testosterone order/delivery are really all still dependent on what is still yet to be determined. If this ends up Sutton bullied Freeman to the point Freeman was lying to cover for Sutton to obtain Testosterone for either himself or an athlete through Freemans prescription rights, this could all end a very different outcome where in terms of athletes there is nothing on Freeman and the sum of it, is primarily record keeping and admin of 3 people for what has taken years to get to the bottom of.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: fmk_RoI
Are you joking. Loads of people who are not sports organisations get drugs sent to them. Any of us could go online right now and get Viagra and whatnot sent to us
Do you have an example? Can you show me a website that I (not a doctor or pharmacist) can order Testogel to be delivered to any UK address,

Here's a place you can buy it: https://www.ukmeds.co.uk/testogel-sachets
Note the disclaimers that says a prescriber needs to be involved. The prescriber can send it to the address, a wholesaler can't.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: fmk_RoI
Oh I know that. But as all the allegations involve non-athletes I'm not sure what UKAD pursue. So anyone getting excited that this will have much direct relevance on cycling is likely to be disappointed. Middle aged men wanting to hold back ageing is hardly Balco.

To both, it's ostensibly about a doc and his ability to practice but its all about doping and its all about athletes........if it wasn't there really would be nothing to see here...but there is something to see...lie after lie after lie and yesterday...despite his role (I'll forget his and others hype) his QC trying to pass him off as a "jobbing GP". Lies and spin......now then........what was happening in the background that these lies and spin might be trying to hide?? two specific UK riders getting really, really skinny and turning from crap into brilliant with resultant flowing of millions of £s and other UK riders gaining and shedding weight at the drop of a hat...........or some ageing bloke worrried about his masculinity.........
PS anyone made the G&T joke yet?????:D:D
 
Probably worth stating any sports doctor will be ordering substances that will be prohibited for certain athletes continuously (that's why they are there afterall, to prescribe medication legally). Take a typical team of 20-30 riders (more in BC, closer to 100 riders he's looking after). You'll have some injured maybe requiring IA Cortisone medically from hospital/surgery. You might have riders requiring a prohibited substance under TUE, you might have a member of staff on the road who busted his arm falling down hotel stairs and needs prohibited painkillers etc etc. Clearly all of that is going to come from a central location via the doctors prescription and is going to be ordered from and delivered where he works. WADA don't prevent medical supplies that are prohibited from being ordered and stored, so long as they are not intended to dope an athlete outside WADA code.
Obviously the charges so far by MPTS only involve what they call non-athlete Persons A,B & C and mostly one of poor GP-related admin, lack of a medical management policy and not informing A, B & C'sr GPs of prescribed treatment. The lies re. Testosterone order/delivery are really all still dependent on what is still yet to be determined. If this ends up Sutton bullied Freeman to the point Freeman was lying to cover for Sutton to obtain Testosterone for either himself or an athlete through Freemans prescription rights, this could all end a very different outcome where in terms of athletes there is nothing on Freeman and the sum of it, is primarily record keeping and admin of 3 people for what has taken years to get to the bottom of.
Of course Sam...I'm not quite sure you've thought things through...as I'm sure your loyalties lie with BC/SKY and not Freeman per se...........perhaps Freeman might start looking like the vulnerable and bullied doc...however the far more serious and wider question then arises about why a cycling coach with no medical qualifications might want T?? Sutton is, in a way, one step closer to the athletes (and SDB) than the doc and hence a more serious indictment on the riders .....and of course you seem to continue to labour under the illusion that poor record keeping was poor admin....it was policy...that's how you hide in plain sight....keep up the good work though...it's a good read :D:D
 
Are Freeman and his team so bad that they would try to use Suttons alleged ED as a defense?

Yeah, probably. Sky/Ineos/BC seems to come up with the most ridiculous arguments when trying to defend themselves. But it's been working so far. As the bus rolls over Freeman.
 
Are Freeman and his team so bad that they would try to use Suttons alleged ED as a defense?

Yeah, probably. Sky/Ineos/BC seems to come up with the most ridiculous arguments when trying to defend themselves. But it's been working so far. As the bus rolls over Freeman.
But they leave no stone unturned dont forget. They're the best
 
Surely the bigger picture here is Daily Mails affidavit signed by Sutton to Lawton & his Lawyer as defamation insurance for what Sutton claims is in the package as the whistleblower is probably the fabrication of a lie? This is a potentially explosive next week if true.

O'Rourke claims the affidavit is a lie and that it's a signed statement of Sutton's word to Lawton & Daily Mail's lawyer the package contents contains evidence of wrongdoing to use as defamation insurance for Daily Mail in Court (I assume).

Sutton however then told the parliamentary select committee:
"I cannot tell you what was in the package. You need to ask who opened the package and who packed the package"
O'Rourke has Burt who packed it as Freemans witness & Peters who will be witness to Sutton bullying Freeman.

Sutton also said:
"I am upset you doubt the integrity of our team. Team Sky is a clean team. There is no wrongdoing"


So, either O'Rourke is taking a huge risk & Burt has also lied to her about what he put in the package or Sutton has lied to Lawton and made it up and Daily Mail/Sutton is then subject to several defamation claims they will undoubtedly have trouble defending.
 
Reactions: fmk_RoI
Surely the bigger picture here is Daily Mails affidavit signed by Sutton to Lawton & his Lawyer as defamation insurance for what Sutton claims is in the package as the whistleblower is probably the fabrication of a lie? This is a potentially explosive next week if true.

O'Rourke claims the affidavit is a lie and that it's a signed statement of Sutton's word to Lawton & Daily Mail's lawyer the package contents contains evidence of wrongdoing to use as defamation insurance for Daily Mail in Court (I assume).

Sutton however then told the parliamentary select committee:
"I cannot tell you what was in the package. You need to ask who opened the package and who packed the package"
O'Rourke has Burt who packed it as Freemans witness & Peters who will be witness to Sutton bullying Freeman.

Sutton also said:
"I am upset you doubt the integrity of our team. Team Sky is a clean team. There is no wrongdoing"


So, either O'Rourke is taking a huge risk & Burt has also lied to her about what he put in the package or Sutton has lied to Lawton and made it up and Daily Mail/Sutton is then subject to several defamation claims they will undoubtedly have trouble defending.
sorry the bigger picture is not a flaky doc, a dodgy journo and a really dodgy aussie...they are ten a penny.....the bigger picture, which you have clearly missed is that the most scessful track team and GT team of the last decade now very much appear to have been built on PEDs....

BTW the package is so last year............we're now on T and corticosteriods lying around.....
 
sorry the bigger picture is not a flaky doc, a dodgy journo and a really dodgy aussie...they are ten a penny.....the bigger picture, which you have clearly missed is that the most scessful track team and GT team of the last decade now very much appear to have been built on PEDs....

BTW the package is so last year............we're now on T and corticosteriods lying around.....
Yet GMC only has Sutton as their witness and their defense depends on Sutton's credibility in front of the panel even to remotely have a chance this goes back to UKAD again to look at what you think the big picture reall is? O'Rourke will use the affidavit signed with Lawton as evidence it doesn't match what he told DCMS to destroy his credibility in front of the panel under cross-examination. Given the affidavit signed with Lawton is no-doubt for Sutton confirming the contents of the jiffy contained wrongdoing as true in return for payment and to go through legal and be published, it was signed believing his whistleblowing would be anonyous and never compared to his later completely opposite claim to DCMS under oath yet to still happen.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: fmk_RoI
sorry the bigger picture is not a flaky doc, a dodgy journo and a really dodgy aussie...they are ten a penny.....the bigger picture, which you have clearly missed is that the most scessful track team and GT team of the last decade now very much appear to have been built on PEDs....

BTW the package is so last year............we're now on T and corticosteriods lying around.....
It doesn't matter what it appears to you, the only opinion that matters is that of Sir Jim. Also without those records, which were remotely wiped when the laptop was stolen there's likely nothing that UKAD or WADA to any riders or personnel.
 
Yet GMC only has Sutton as their witness and their defense depends on Sutton's credibility in front of the panel even to remotely have a chance this goes back to UKAD again to look at what you think the big picture reall is? O'Rourke will use the affidavit signed with Lawton as evidence it doesn't match what he told DCMS to destroy his credibility in front of the panel under cross-examination. Given the affidavit signed with Lawton is no-doubt for Sutton confirming the contents of the jiffy contained wrongdoing as true in return for payment and to go through legal and be published, it was signed believing his whistleblowing would be anonyous and never compared to his later completely opposite claim to DCMS under oath yet to still happen.
hahaha...keep on believin'.....the GMC doesn't have a 'defense', it's the arbitror ;)..Freeman has already plead guilty to a number of the charges and has admitted lying to everyone including UKAD about the T...you can focus on the Tribunal and its niceities however the bigger picture...as you like to talk about.... is that the the sky doc has been buying doping products....simples....I'm sure if he told you it was for his dog you'd believe him though....
 
The Spodcast takes up the Freeman story. They're of the view that the lies alone mean Freeman's licence is gone, he's going to be struck off. Most of what they say is at this stage in the proceedings bland, heard it all before, background waffle, but they do link the Testogel, the Jiffy bag and Leinders.

A comment from it that's been picked up elsewhere in the pom-pom waving world of fandom:"The quantity that we're talking about of the Testogel ordered was about a month's worth, for one person. They didn't order a cupboard full of it that was ... there's certainly nothing to suggest here there was widespread, systematic doping with testosterone going on either in British Cycling or Team Sky. But there would have been enough to dope someone for a month."
 
Reactions: BrikoRaiderExtreme
hahaha...keep on believin'.....the GMC doesn't have a 'defense', it's the arbitror ;)..Freeman has already plead guilty to a number of the charges and has admitted lying to everyone including UKAD about the T...you can focus on the Tribunal and its niceities however the bigger picture...as you like to talk about.... is that the the sky doc has been buying doping products....simples....I'm sure if he told you it was for his dog you'd believe him though....
I mean Suttons defense for not having erectile dysfunction and his credibility re. Lawton.
At the moment, we know Freeman lied. Innocent people lie though, guilty people lie more. The bully at school will make you lie for them however as will the boss at work threatening to sack you etc etc and Sutton we know bullied Freeman and others. Until we know 'why' Freeman ordered a box of Testogel and then immediately proceeded to tell lies to not only UKAD, but Peters the boss of BC & Sky medical team, Burt (who packed the jiffy bag) has never added up because in 2011 there was no investigation, BC were on their 2012 wave and everyone loved them-ish. Why would you be covering up an order to a doping program/rider that you conciously wanted to use and nobody at the time would know about it other than you and those involved in delivering that performance enhancement if that was the objective of the order anyway?
 
Reactions: fmk_RoI
Why would you be covering up an order to a doping program/rider that you conciously wanted to use and nobody at the time would know about it other than you and those involved in delivering that performance enhancement if that was the objective of the order anyway?
Yes, why would you want to cover up your rule-breaking? That really is the dog in the night of all this. Marvellous insight!
 
Reactions: BrikoRaiderExtreme
Question for medical geeks hereabouts: Freeman ordered and received Testogel, which is gel in a sachet, 30 sachets to a box, 50mg of gel per sachet? Is this correct so far?

Typically, what are the micro-dosing levels? How little would you be using, and how often?
 
Yes, why would you want to cover up your rule-breaking? That really is the dog in the night of all this. Marvellous insight!
I read the question from Sam to be why would Freeman be trying to cover his tracks with Burt and Peters if this was part of some wider systemic doping practice at BC/Sky (as some people seem to be suggesting it is proof of)

Valid question I think..
 
Question for medical geeks hereabouts: Freeman ordered and received Testogel, which is gel in a sachet, 30 sachets to a box, 50mg of gel per sachet? Is this correct so far?

Typically, what are the micro-dosing levels? How little would you be using, and how often?
The problem with Testogel is that it’s an incredibly inefficient means of delivering synthetic testosterone, so the 50mg sachet will only be good for a fraction of that dose when absorbed into the body.

Intramuscular injections are the only efficient means of delivery for true performance enhancement.

In any dose Testogel is pretty much useless for enhancing strength, speed, muscle development etc

What Testogel does do is provide enough of a dose when applied daily to restore depleted levels in individuals (wether that depletion is age related or from the inevitable decline experienced by athletes during heavy endurance training blocks) back to ‘normal’ ranges. Hence it’s historic use in cycling I think.

So to answer the question, 30 x 50mg sachets really is a very minimal level for one individual for a month to see any benefit at all. ‘Microdosing’ with anything less would be pretty pointless ime.
 
Last edited:
I read the question from Sam to be why would Freeman be trying to cover his tracks with Burt and Peters if this was part of some wider systemic doping practice at BC/Sky (as some people seem to be suggesting it is proof of)

Valid question I think..
Yes, that was the point. fmk will continually attempt to belittle any opinion I have though here. It's interesting looking back to him hounding me for evidence Sutton's erectile dysfunction would be Freeman's defence and when providing it making out like I was foolishly linking two articles together to fabricate some alternate Sky fan reality I want to see.

But, yes, my point was. Why would Freeman lie and make excuses to to his own team (Burt) and manager (Peters) about a doping product you wanted to order, you wanted to receive and you wanted to administer to an athlete ? Was Freeman acting entirely alone doping British Cycling & Sky without Peters and Burt knowing, considering it was Burt who packaged the jiffy bag for him and was the first to open the Testogel order? It really doesn't sound like a cover story would need to be fabricated. Why would you then also go to the supplier and get them to make up a story for you too - just for Peters satisfaction is odd? I smell fear in Freeman from Sutton and I smell fear Freeman was aware Testosteron at the velodrome outside the medical teams knowledge was a sackable offence under his BC contract if Peters didn't think it was an error. If it was consciously ordered and Peters knew, he would be sacked on the spot and couldn't tell the truth Sutton was bullying him for a variety of reasons, all common to being bullied.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: fmk_RoI

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS