CMS Doping in sport revelations/discussion

[thehog]

Re: Dr. Freeman, what do we know about him?

Crazy how, as time goes by, a lot of snipers early theories and assumptions turn out to be quite close to the truth

Agreed, good to see Dr. Maz and Race Radio trying to shut down the claims

What are they vortex and RR trying to do? I must have missed it. Twitter?

It's a reference to older posts in this thread. When Sniper started it DM and RR weren't impressed with the premise.

Correct and RR is still trying to link this to Lance:

Race Radio‏ @TheRaceRadio

Speaking of sharing drugs, Johan used take a shot of Kenacort before the TdF so he'd look lean on camera
3 Mar 2017

Lance Armstrong‏ @lancearmstrong
@TheRaceRadio you are truly a *** idiot..

Thank-you Lance.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re: Dr. Freeman, what do we know about him?

Crazy how, as time goes by, a lot of snipers early theories and assumptions turn out to be quite close to the truth

Agreed, good to see Dr. Maz and Race Radio trying to shut down the claims

What are they vortex and RR trying to do? I must have missed it. Twitter?

It's a reference to older posts in this thread. When Sniper started it DM and RR weren't impressed with the premise.

Correct and RR is still trying to link this to Lance:

Race Radio‏ @TheRaceRadio

Speaking of sharing drugs, Johan used take a shot of Kenacort before the TdF so he'd look lean on camera
3 Mar 2017

Lance Armstrong‏ @lancearmstrong
@TheRaceRadio you are truly a **** idiot..

Thank-you Lance.

Same with DQ'ed his first post on the subject was outright trolling. But don't ever try to point something out to him. EVERYTHING goes back to Lance.

DR FREEMAN probably called Lance to find out how to get this stuff.

 

[GraftPunk]

The RR/Lance exchange was good for an LOL though.

 

[thehog]

Re: Dr. Freeman, what do we know about him?

Anyway, apparently Freeman has asked to provide his evidence in private, I assume his request will be granted.

 

[pastronef]

Re: Dr. Freeman, what do we know about him?

Anyway, apparently Freeman has asked to provide his evidence in private, I assume his request will be granted.

nice to know. I hope so

 

[Catwhoorg]

I hope so as well.

that way he can actually freely talk rather than hide behind confidentially.

 

[TourOfSardinia]

Re: Dr. Freeman, what do we know about him?

Anyway, apparently Freeman has asked to provide his evidence in private, I assume his request will be granted.

More likely to spill the beans
but
may leave us out of the loop

 

[B_Ugli]

Re: Dr. Freeman, what do we know about him?

In answer to the question this topic poses:

That he is now a man with nothing to lose, and that is a real problem for others involved attempting to throw him under a bus. At this stage he could implicate everyone who had knowledge including riders and management.

 

[Irondan]

I'm going to move this (new thread: Dr. Freeman, what do we know about him) back into the CMS Doping in sport/Discussion thread as these conversations are all over the place and it's getting too difficult to follow.

The RR/Lance exchange was good for an LOL though.

I agree it was funny, but Lance calling RR a !@#$%^& idiot is not worthy of a new thread.

 

[T_S_A_R]

"Sapstead did not specify the quantity but stated: “You would think there was an excessive amount of triamcinolone being ordered for one person, or quite a few people had a very similar problem.”

Team Sky confirmed to the website cyclingnews.com on Friday that, as part of the staff medical service, Freeman treated some members with triamcinolone, while a report on Thursday evening claimed Freeman might have treated, “not just riders but staff, family and friends”."

Staff, family and friends.

We must be talking about a lot of triamcinolone.......

 

[GraftPunk]

Has a date been set for this private Freeman testimony?

 

[T_S_A_R]

Re:

Has a date been set for this private Freeman testimony?

Why would he be allowed to give it in private?

 

[Irondan]

Re: Re:

Has a date been set for this private Freeman testimony?

Why would he be allowed to give it in private?

Because he's not compelled by law to provide testimony. If they want any testimony at all, apparently it will be by his terms.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

Has a date been set for this private Freeman testimony?

Why would he be allowed to give it in private?

Because he's not compelled by law to provide testimony. If they want any testimony at all, apparently it will be by his terms.

He is "compelled" but like the American form of justice no one should have to provide evdence which may incriminate themselves. Under this principle you could either not provide testimony and allow judgment or provide testimony without the prejudice of a public hearing.

He should be allowed to speak but his current employer British Cycling seem very intent on discrediting him - I foresee employment tribunals, libel, criminal proceedings. Brailsford backed by Sky will play dirty, Freeman is well advised to seek protection and a Queens Counsel.

 

[Robert5091]

http://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/39161037
"Nicholl said she was "shocked and disturbed" by the failure, and that there were various "fires" at the governing body."
"Fires" ?! :surprised:

Dr Freeman will need legal advice if he talks, as there's doctor/patient confidentiality and probably NDA's (none disclosure agreements). Could explain why he's asked for a private (closed) meeting. If he sticks to just the jiffy bag incident, UKAD/CMS will have to widen their investigation.

 

[T_S_A_R]

Re: Re:

Has a date been set for this private Freeman testimony?

Why would he be allowed to give it in private?

Because he's not compelled by law to provide testimony. If they want any testimony at all, apparently it will be by his terms.

I understand that.

He may be allowed to give his testimony in a closed room without cameras, media and the public if he manages to dream up a medical excuse but he will not be allowed to give it in secret, that is usually reserved for matters of national security. There is no chance that his evidence will not be part of the public record.

Rupert Murdoch, Phillip Green and Mike Ashley have all appeared in front of committees in recent years. Dr Freeman is going to have a hell of a time explaining why he needs to appear in private unless he wants to confess to fraud, malpractice or doping at which point he will be directed to UKAD, the GMC or the police.

 

[Dan2016]

To King Boonen and any other medics here, I wonder if you could give any insight as to how the medical system works in the context of Freeman? I don't understand how Sky/BC could have all of this Kenalog in stock at their HQ.

In the UK I have never once been given any medication directly by a doctor, they give us a paper prescription and we have to go to a pharmacist, hand the prescription over and buy the medication. I always thought if the doctor needs to both prescribe and administer a drug then they need to order the specific drug for the specific patient, with prescription justification for the order.

So we have a doctor here, Freeman, working privately for Sky. He has ordered a quantity of prescription drugs, corticosteroids. It would appear they are of the intravenous type. The different types can't be confused, as Boonen explained in a previous reply ie., intravenous, topical, nasal etc are all separate.

So we know Wiggins had a TUE for 40mg Kenalog intravenous or intramuscular (?). This prescription was apparently given by a separate expert and Freeman administered it. So let's say, hypothetically, UKAD found 50 vials of 40mg Kenacort in Sky/BC head quarters. I assume there also has to be a large number of needles in store for these drugs.

My questions are:
- How does Freeman actually go about ordering these drugs? (Let's assume he ordered legit, not via ebay or whatever).
- Can he just order them as he pleases from the supplier and the supplier doesn't ask any questions?
- Does he not need to justify the order with the supplier, with prescriptions for his supposed patients?

I understand things are probably different for hospitals where large stocks of drugs are needed on site. But for a private practice doctor, are they allowed to just stock up? That would seem crazy to me.
If he needed to justify the order then surely there will be records at the suppliers of what the justification was. Could this not be an avenue for investigation? If, for example, the justification for all the orders was simply 'asthma' that would clearly be preposterous and grounds for action. Isn't falsifying the reasons for drug orders fraud and therefore a criminal charge?

Maybe I'm way off with the above, I'm clueless how it really works. Just curious.

 

[buckle]

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/mar/05/team-sky-doctor-richard-freeman-was-allegedly-sent-banned-testosterone-patches-doping

 

[Electress]

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/mar/05/team-sky-doctor-richard-freeman-was-allegedly-sent-banned-testosterone-patches-doping

And that article has this interesting little inconsistency:

"It is understood that the box of testosterone patches was opened by a British Cycling employee who was unaware of its contents. The employee confronted Freeman, who was responsible for ordering medical supplies. The doctor’s explanation, according to a former head of medicine at British Cycling quoted by the Sunday Times – and corroborated to the Guardian by a source close to British Cycling and Sky with knowledge of the story – was that the package had been delivered in error.

Freeman has, apparently, told Ukad it was not destined for any riders."

How can a package that wasn't actually ordered but sent by mistake have a destination?

 

[ScienceIsCool]

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/mar/05/team-sky-doctor-richard-freeman-was-allegedly-sent-banned-testosterone-patches-doping

And that article has this interesting little inconsistency:

"It is understood that the box of testosterone patches was opened by a British Cycling employee who was unaware of its contents. The employee confronted Freeman, who was responsible for ordering medical supplies. The doctor’s explanation, according to a former head of medicine at British Cycling quoted by the Sunday Times – and corroborated to the Guardian by a source close to British Cycling and Sky with knowledge of the story – was that the package had been delivered in error.

Freeman has, apparently, told Ukad it was not destined for any riders."

How can a package that wasn't actually ordered but sent by mistake have a destination?

Well you know. It's kind of like ordering a pair of shoes online and you end up receiving three kilos of coke instead. Happens all the time...

John Swanson

 

[buckle]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-4280402/Sir-Dave-Brailsford-received-steroid-Richard-Freeman.html

I guess that Spanish soigneur can count himself unlucky ...

 

[bigcog]

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/mar/05/team-sky-doctor-richard-freeman-was-allegedly-sent-banned-testosterone-patches-doping

And that article has this interesting little inconsistency:

"It is understood that the box of testosterone patches was opened by a British Cycling employee who was unaware of its contents. The employee confronted Freeman, who was responsible for ordering medical supplies. The doctor’s explanation, according to a former head of medicine at British Cycling quoted by the Sunday Times – and corroborated to the Guardian by a source close to British Cycling and Sky with knowledge of the story – was that the package had been delivered in error.

Freeman has, apparently, told Ukad it was not destined for any riders."

How can a package that wasn't actually ordered but sent by mistake have a destination?

Well you know. It's kind of like ordering a pair of shoes online and you end up receiving three kilos of coke instead. Happens all the time...

John Swanson

If only :lol:

 

[Cake]

Re:

http://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/39161037
"Nicholl said she was "shocked and disturbed" by the failure, and that there were various "fires" at the governing body."
"Fires" ?! :surprised:

Presume she was talking metaphorically. You'd hope so anyway.

 

[Electress]

Re:

http://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/39161037
"Nicholl said she was "shocked and disturbed" by the failure, and that there were various "fires" at the governing body."
"Fires" ?! :surprised:

Dr Freeman will need legal advice if he talks, as there's doctor/patient confidentiality and probably NDA's (none disclosure agreements). Could explain why he's asked for a private (closed) meeting. If he sticks to just the jiffy bag incident, UKAD/CMS will have to widen their investigation.

The title of that article being 'UK sport not responsible for standards'. Their own website saying:

UK Sport is committed to inspiring organisations to be world leading in terms of governance, not just to prove they are fit to receive public funds but so their governance and leadership can positively impact and support athlete success. The leadership and governance of organisations can often have knock on effects to the performance of our sports against their medal targets.

UK Sport works with funded organisations to support the development of governance and leadership, and ensure that organisations are run professionally and efficiently, with a commitment to achieving the highest standard of corporate governance and financial management all levels. Funded bodies must be able to evidence that equality, safeguarding and ethical standards are visibly integrated into their structures and operations. A key driver for our governance work is the impact that improved governance and leadership will have on the well-being and performance of athletes; improving the ethics of sport for the benefit of everyone.'

She says: "'We're only as good as the information shared with us" Good lord, these people aren't fit to run a charity fun run.

Comforting to know that they have been considering whether to put money behind Cookson's UCI re-election campaign...

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

To King Boonen and any other medics here, I wonder if you could give any insight as to how the medical system works in the context of Freeman? I don't understand how Sky/BC could have all of this Kenalog in stock at their HQ.

In the UK I have never once been given any medication directly by a doctor, they give us a paper prescription and we have to go to a pharmacist, hand the prescription over and buy the medication. I always thought if the doctor needs to both prescribe and administer a drug then they need to order the specific drug for the specific patient, with prescription justification for the order.

So we have a doctor here, Freeman, working privately for Sky. He has ordered a quantity of prescription drugs, corticosteroids. It would appear they are of the intravenous type. The different types can't be confused, as Boonen explained in a previous reply ie., intravenous, topical, nasal etc are all separate.

So we know Wiggins had a TUE for 40mg Kenalog intravenous or intramuscular (?). This prescription was apparently given by a separate expert and Freeman administered it. So let's say, hypothetically, UKAD found 50 vials of 40mg Kenacort in Sky/BC head quarters. I assume there also has to be a large number of needles in store for these drugs.

My questions are:
- How does Freeman actually go about ordering these drugs? (Let's assume he ordered legit, not via ebay or whatever).
- Can he just order them as he pleases from the supplier and the supplier doesn't ask any questions?
- Does he not need to justify the order with the supplier, with prescriptions for his supposed patients?

I understand things are probably different for hospitals where large stocks of drugs are needed on site. But for a private practice doctor, are they allowed to just stock up? That would seem crazy to me.
If he needed to justify the order then surely there will be records at the suppliers of what the justification was. Could this not be an avenue for investigation? If, for example, the justification for all the orders was simply 'asthma' that would clearly be preposterous and grounds for action. Isn't falsifying the reasons for drug orders fraud and therefore a criminal charge?

Maybe I'm way off with the above, I'm clueless how it really works. Just curious.

I'm afraid I'm not a medic, I know about the regulatory side as I have family who work in it and I know about the actual drugs but when it comes to the logistics here I can only speculate. I'm pretty sure that a doctor who is going to dispense drugs has to do a separate qualification. It is a pharmacist who usually does it and it's a much more complicated job than most think. A lot of the time prescriptions will be wrong or patients will be on products that are contraindicated for the new drug so it has to be sorted out. I would guess that doctors can qualify to dispense certain drugs, but not everything, and possibly there is a qualification for sports medicine that allows them to deal with the kind of products being used here.

I'm also not sure about how the medical cabinet works within such an organisation. It is possible they are registered as a pharmacy and so order things the way a normal pharmacy would, but if they are someone is in big, big trouble as there has to be a pharmacist in charge who is responsible for everything coming in and out. It sounds more like there is some sort of exemption in place, possibly for certain drugs that allow them to order them in. 60-70 vials though is an enormous amount! I don't think "excessive" even covers it to be honest and I'm almost certain that number has come out because BC/Sky were trying to kill it with tails of everyone and their mum who works at BC/Sky getting an injection. If those 60-70 vials were ordered in 2011 it would be very interesting to know how many are left or if there were any more orders.

I don't think he would need to justify the order. The aim of having a medicines cabinet (store-room more like it sounds like) is that you can get what you need to treat someone without having to wait (even though pharmaceuticals can be delivered next day...). The supplier will ship what is ordered and they're unlikely to ask questions unless you're ordering 50L of methadone or something. It's up to whoever is in charge of the store to keep track of what is coming in, going and to whom.



Whatever is the case here I can't see this ending well for BC or for Sky. If this was the Russian cycling team or the Kenyan marathon team then the British press would be screaming for them to be banned for the next decade. Even if they can suddenly find the info needed to show that not much has been used, who it went to, stockpiling a well-known PED on the pretence of treating one rider for allergies with a product that would only be suitable in the most extreme cases is inexcusable in the so-called, cleaner than clean, BC/Sky set up. Add in the "mistakely" delivered testosterone patches and it gets even more ridiculous.