View: https://twitter.com/seaningle/status/1192803866322067456?s=20
Poor Big Fat Sam had the same issue
Poor Big Fat Sam had the same issue
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.
Clenbuterol.uk used to do the job just fine. FYI.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
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.....
hahaha...keep on believin'.....the GMC doesn't have a 'defense', it's the arbitrorYet 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....
Yes, why would you want to cover up your rule-breaking? That really is the dog in the night of all this. Marvellous insight!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?
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)Yes, why would you want to cover up your rule-breaking? That really is the dog in the night of all this. Marvellous insight!
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?
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..
Sinkewitz scored a 24/1 T/E using a satchet [1], Kessler got it up to 85/1 with Andriol [2] - yet both drugs are much less potent than some injection. So bottom line is, it worked, it has always worked as intended.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.
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.
At the committee interview Shane hid behind trusting the medical team this is utter nonsense he directed the medical team he constantly bullied Richard Freeman
You'd have to ask Salazar...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?
There's a lot of statement of fact in this. Do you have any links showing that "Testogel is pretty much useless for enhancing strength, speed, muscle development etc"?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.
Can you provide translations of these articles please. Failing a doping test and doping being effective are two different things.Sinkewitz scored a 24/1 T/E using a satchet [1], Kessler got it up to 85/1 with Andriol [2] - yet both drugs are much less potent than some injection. So bottom line is, it worked, it has always worked as intended.
Both ratios are also lower than the probability that this was the first and only order of T by anyone from Sky/British Cycling.
[1] https://www.spiegel.de/sport/sonst/testosteron-gel-radprofi-sinkewitz-gesteht-doping-a-497493.html
[2] https://www.sueddeutsche.de/sport/doping-noch-mehr-testosteron-1.714113