No surprise to see who the authors are. These are proper journalists, and hopefully they have time to keep pushing this.Discgear said:
-
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
Excellent stuff. Wont get my hopes up just yet, but this might turn ugly if the bubble bursts properly.
In Finland Seppälä of Finnish antidoping has voiced some concerns, as quoted upthread. However, the media has not been in any sort of frenzy / schadenfraude mode. Perhaps they are playing it safe - the next WC is held in Lahti afterall...
In Finland Seppälä of Finnish antidoping has voiced some concerns, as quoted upthread. However, the media has not been in any sort of frenzy / schadenfraude mode. Perhaps they are playing it safe - the next WC is held in Lahti afterall...
From the todays article in VG:kosmonaut said:
This honorable professor seems to be one of the key guys in this whole mess. When Norges Skiforbund and FIS time after time say that asthma medication doesn’t “forbedre prestasjonene” and that studies shows the same (studies that often involves the very same professors and doctors connected to NSF), nobody refers to scientific articles that shows the opposite.
If those journalists are as good as you say, please pass on the following links so they could ask follow up questions!
Studie fra 2000 som viser at inntak av 12mg oral salbutamol daglig er prestasjonsfremmende:
http://jap.physiology.org/content/89/2/430.full
Studie fra 2004 som viser at 800 mikrogram inhalert salbutamol er prestasjonsfremmende:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BzyWvJ0zpMgAYUJRcGM1azc3TG8
Following claims in this article http://www.dn.se/arkiv/sport/astmam...-ny-undersokning-baddar-for-het-dopingdebatt/: already in 1993:
This article where medical director of Anti-Doping Committee in Finland ADT, Timo Seppälä says that the very high concentrations of salbutamol in MJS urin has anabolic effects. http://www.iltasanomat.fi/maastohiihto/art-2000001223864.html
And finally this article about Salazars Oregon Nike project including runners like Mo Farah:
https://www.propublica.org/article/elite-runner-had-qualms-alberto-salazar-asthma-drug-performance
Re: The press conference
Since I spent so much time doing the cutting and pasting in my last long post I'll cheat and do it like this:
I'm sorry about your own experiences with Asthma. I find it strange that you believe asthma precludes anyone from being prominent in aerobic sports. With such a belief, I understand you think everything is doping.
As for completing Wasaloppet, a Danish TV commentator said something interesting during the Olympics that I find pretty accurate. XC Skiing is 1/3 physique, 1/3 technique and 1/3 materiel.
In your case you would need to focus on technique and material in order to compensate for your physique.
On the Nebulizer. I don't see a need to get into the too and from arguments about nebulizers. The discussion is in the CAS paper, with both sides having good points, and both sides being experts.(I doubt either of us could add anything valuable there)
Also this was not something he used regularly. My understanding was he used it in 2009 and for 3-4 weeks in the 13/14 season. He had a TUE in 2009 but the doctor thought he didn't need one in 13/14. And this quote from CAS panel in page 54:
I'm sorry if you felt offended, but I spent a lot of time looking into your points and felt I had been lied to throughout. That makes me a bit lets say dissapointed. And I feel it insults my intelligence. My Norwegianess was not insulted.
Again. Wada decides the limits, rules and regulation based on their expert interpretation of the available research. Quoting out of context research does not prove anything other than you took the time to read and find research you think proves your point. I don't have the time or interest in digging into asthma research and finding errors or weak points in studies. Wada has already done that. And see quote above about not believing he intended to enhance his performance.
I think it's good that your errors are not intentional. Only sick people would use their time to purposely mislead others on an internet forum.
The problem of selective reading remains. This is something one has to be very aware of. For example, in this case, you might ask yourself, why haven't wada read this, or if they have, why haven't they agreed with my/the papers conclusions.
As for your final point. I don't see the logic in your argument.
Discgear said:
Since I spent so much time doing the cutting and pasting in my last long post I'll cheat and do it like this:
I'm sorry about your own experiences with Asthma. I find it strange that you believe asthma precludes anyone from being prominent in aerobic sports. With such a belief, I understand you think everything is doping.
As for completing Wasaloppet, a Danish TV commentator said something interesting during the Olympics that I find pretty accurate. XC Skiing is 1/3 physique, 1/3 technique and 1/3 materiel.
In your case you would need to focus on technique and material in order to compensate for your physique.
On the Nebulizer. I don't see a need to get into the too and from arguments about nebulizers. The discussion is in the CAS paper, with both sides having good points, and both sides being experts.(I doubt either of us could add anything valuable there)
Also this was not something he used regularly. My understanding was he used it in 2009 and for 3-4 weeks in the 13/14 season. He had a TUE in 2009 but the doctor thought he didn't need one in 13/14. And this quote from CAS panel in page 54:
I'm sorry if you felt offended, but I spent a lot of time looking into your points and felt I had been lied to throughout. That makes me a bit lets say dissapointed. And I feel it insults my intelligence. My Norwegianess was not insulted.
Again. Wada decides the limits, rules and regulation based on their expert interpretation of the available research. Quoting out of context research does not prove anything other than you took the time to read and find research you think proves your point. I don't have the time or interest in digging into asthma research and finding errors or weak points in studies. Wada has already done that. And see quote above about not believing he intended to enhance his performance.
I think it's good that your errors are not intentional. Only sick people would use their time to purposely mislead others on an internet forum.
The problem of selective reading remains. This is something one has to be very aware of. For example, in this case, you might ask yourself, why haven't wada read this, or if they have, why haven't they agreed with my/the papers conclusions.
As for your final point. I don't see the logic in your argument.
About the latest Asthma article:
http://www.vg.no/sport/langrenn/doping/eks-langrennsloeper-var-frisk-fikk-astmamedisin/a/23749728/
The article also reveals the background and explanation for this. Of course we wouldn't want to think this was anything other than hard core doping.
http://www.vg.no/sport/langrenn/doping/eks-langrennsloeper-var-frisk-fikk-astmamedisin/a/23749728/
The article also reveals the background and explanation for this. Of course we wouldn't want to think this was anything other than hard core doping.
I sincerely hope the real truth comes out of this whole thing, whatever that may be, and I hope they go beyond Sundby. Can't believe it's just coincidence or a 'one time error' by the doctors.
Re:
It could be they know better and understand there is no bubble that needs bursting, or that at least this is no bubble. Seppala was head of Finnish AD in 2001, and he tried to minimize the Finnish doping at the time by intimating that every one else doped too. This has been at the core of a lot of arguments from Finland towards the Norwegians.
They think they got caught while the Norwegians were able to get of scott free. The problem is the assumption of doping. The dopers rationalize their own doping to themselves with an idea that others are doing this too. It's still surprising that Seppala seems to still hang onto this after 15 years. He should know better by now.
meat puppet said:Excellent stuff. Wont get my hopes up just yet, but this might turn ugly if the bubble bursts properly.
In Finland Seppälä of Finnish antidoping has voiced some concerns, as quoted upthread. However, the media has not been in any sort of frenzy / schadenfraude mode. Perhaps they are playing it safe - the next WC is held in Lahti afterall...
It could be they know better and understand there is no bubble that needs bursting, or that at least this is no bubble. Seppala was head of Finnish AD in 2001, and he tried to minimize the Finnish doping at the time by intimating that every one else doped too. This has been at the core of a lot of arguments from Finland towards the Norwegians.
They think they got caught while the Norwegians were able to get of scott free. The problem is the assumption of doping. The dopers rationalize their own doping to themselves with an idea that others are doing this too. It's still surprising that Seppala seems to still hang onto this after 15 years. He should know better by now.
Re: Re:
But sure, there is no doping. Only stoned grinding.
First, and for the record, I have no sympathy towards Finnish skiers or skiing brass. They got what they needed to get. Point is, others got to get got too.ToreBear said:meat puppet said:Excellent stuff. Wont get my hopes up just yet, but this might turn ugly if the bubble bursts properly.
In Finland Seppälä of Finnish antidoping has voiced some concerns, as quoted upthread. However, the media has not been in any sort of frenzy / schadenfraude mode. Perhaps they are playing it safe - the next WC is held in Lahti afterall...
It could be they know better and understand there is no bubble that needs bursting, or that at least this is no bubble. Seppala was head of Finnish AD in 2001, and he tried to minimize the Finnish doping at the time by intimating that every one else doped too. This has been at the core of a lot of arguments from Finland towards the Norwegians.
They think they got caught while the Norwegians were able to get of scott free. The problem is the assumption of doping. The dopers rationalize their own doping to themselves with an idea that others are doing this too. It's still surprising that Seppala seems to still hang onto this after 15 years. He should know better by now.
But sure, there is no doping. Only stoned grinding.
When head of Antidoping Finland, Timo Seppälä, calls out for an international investigation of doping within the Norwegian Ski Association and how it handles positive tests, he might have a very valid point.
In the pressconference Norwegian Ski Association did send out the following comments:
and
This is really the key issue. WADA makes clear that it is the amount of drug that is put into the inhaling device that the limits are based upon. But Norway has clearly used a much more creative interpretation. By cherry-picked studies (CAS wording) they’ve come to conclusion it would be alright to meter up an almost 10 times bigger dose when using Nebulizers.
No one what I can recall, have asked the question how much of the inserted dose an ordinary inhaler delivers to the lung? I’ve seen different numbers, but this well-referenced scientific study claims the following:
So Timo Seppälä have a valid point that an international investigation is needed. Because, why should we assume that the Norwegian Ski Association have narrowed down this view of “the amount of medicine reaching the lungs” only to Nebulizers? It would take a fool to believe they haven't done the same with ordinary inhalers and also maybe other medicaments.
In the pressconference Norwegian Ski Association did send out the following comments:
http://www.skiforbundet.no/Images/2.2.%20Short%20summary%20of%20the%20award%20%28english%29.pdf
and
http://www.skiforbundet.no/Images/The%20Case%20-%20Engelsk%20versjon%20av%20Dette%20er%20saken[4].pdf
This is really the key issue. WADA makes clear that it is the amount of drug that is put into the inhaling device that the limits are based upon. But Norway has clearly used a much more creative interpretation. By cherry-picked studies (CAS wording) they’ve come to conclusion it would be alright to meter up an almost 10 times bigger dose when using Nebulizers.
No one what I can recall, have asked the question how much of the inserted dose an ordinary inhaler delivers to the lung? I’ve seen different numbers, but this well-referenced scientific study claims the following:
https://www.scopus.com/record/display.uri?eid=2-s2.0-0035117761&origin=inward&txGid=0
So Timo Seppälä have a valid point that an international investigation is needed. Because, why should we assume that the Norwegian Ski Association have narrowed down this view of “the amount of medicine reaching the lungs” only to Nebulizers? It would take a fool to believe they haven't done the same with ordinary inhalers and also maybe other medicaments.
@Discgear I think USADA had the same understanding of the rules as the NSF. So i'ts not like it's a unique misunderstanding.
Re:
Why in the world would USADA get involved in this? Wouldn't this be between WADA, FIS, the NSF, NADA, Sundby and his coaches/team doctors??
ToreBear said:
Why in the world would USADA get involved in this? Wouldn't this be between WADA, FIS, the NSF, NADA, Sundby and his coaches/team doctors??
I must admit that I did not pass on your links, because I don't know than any better than you, but they are following up the story neverthelessDiscgear said:
http://www.vg.no/sport/langrenn/langrenn/strid-om-astmamedisin-gir-fordeler-i-skisporet/a/23749560/
http://www.vg.no/sport/fis/roestes-selektive-virkelighet/a/23751307/
The latter is an opinion piece, which is rather okay. Nothing new and quite similar points as the Facebook post that where passed around – but still good that the public and fanboys gets to read it.
This seems like a real turning point. Also in Dagbladet it was maybe an even more outspoken article that discuss nearly everything we have lifted in this thread the last days.kosmonaut said:I must admit that I did not pass on your links, because I don't know than any better than you, but they are following up the story neverthelessDiscgear said:
http://www.vg.no/sport/langrenn/langrenn/strid-om-astmamedisin-gir-fordeler-i-skisporet/a/23749560/
http://www.vg.no/sport/fis/roestes-selektive-virkelighet/a/23751307/
The latter is an opinion piece, which is rather okay. Nothing new and quite similar points as the Facebook post that where passed around – but still good that the public and fanboys gets to read it.
http://www.dagbladet.no/kultur/doping-i-skisporet/60344447
Now I only wish that the journalists could ask NSF how much they are overdosing with ordinary inhalers, since scientific articles points to only 10-15% of the dose reaching the lungs......
A fair article about a Russian for a change...
https://www.nrk.no/sport/legkov-sliter-med-motivasjonen-etter-dopingsporsmal-1.13064385
https://www.nrk.no/sport/legkov-sliter-med-motivasjonen-etter-dopingsporsmal-1.13064385
Half the swedish team on astma meds.
http://www.svt.se/sport/artikel/halften-tar-dopingsklassade-preparat/
http://www.svt.se/sport/artikel/halften-tar-dopingsklassade-preparat/
Re:
Yes, it would be nice to hear the Swedish ski federation clarify how they treat asthma and in what doses. They were considerably more open about the blood values in the aftermath of Blodracet documentary than the NSF. Hopefully Swedish journalists starts to add some pressure.John de Savage said:
Maybe the most devastating article against the press-conference claims of NSF, FIS, Antidoping Norge and Sundby so far.
http://www.tv2.no/sport/8478304/
FIS Antidoping cleared MJS but FIS central quarters had the same view as WADA (a two year ban).
Their expert was prof. Ken Fitch from Australia. His main critique:
In the first answers team doctor Gabrielsen and Johnsrud Sundby gave to FIS, nothing is mentioned about the rules and uncertainty about Ventolin together with nebulizer. That explanation is given much later, after three other explanations were given regarding MJS positive tests
Fitch strongly rejects all those explanations.
Finally Fitch says:
http://www.tv2.no/sport/8478304/
FIS Antidoping cleared MJS but FIS central quarters had the same view as WADA (a two year ban).
Their expert was prof. Ken Fitch from Australia. His main critique:
And maybe the most stunning thing:
In the first answers team doctor Gabrielsen and Johnsrud Sundby gave to FIS, nothing is mentioned about the rules and uncertainty about Ventolin together with nebulizer. That explanation is given much later, after three other explanations were given regarding MJS positive tests
Vow! :surprised: So much later the explanation came, that it was due to severe asthma and intense treatment with Nebulizer. (not intense training which doesn’t really cohere with severe asthma)
Fitch strongly rejects all those explanations.
Finally Fitch says:
Re:
Short addition from dr Fitch in this article:
http://www.nrk.no/sport/ekspert-i-sundby-saken_-_-derfor-kunne-jeg-ikke-forsvare-utoveren-1.13065436
So "the acute exacerbation of the illness in December 2014" was just communicated over the phone to the team doctor. No foregoing examination. Prescription of a drug almost 10 times allowed dose. And everyone trust MJS in this. No need to investigate, decides FIS antidoping, Antidoping Norge and NSF.
Discgear said:Maybe the most devastating article against the press-conference claims of NSF, FIS, Antidoping Norge and Sundby so far.
http://www.tv2.no/sport/8478304/
FIS Antidoping cleared MJS but FIS central quarters had the same view as WADA (a two year ban).
Their expert was prof. Ken Fitch from Australia. His main critique:
And maybe the most stunning thing:
In the first answers team doctor Gabrielsen and Johnsrud Sundby gave to FIS, nothing is mentioned about the rules and uncertainty about Ventolin together with nebulizer. That explanation is given much later, after three other explanations were given regarding MJS positive tests
Vow! :surprised: So much later the explanation came, that it was due to severe asthma and intense treatment with Nebulizer. (not intense training which doesn’t really cohere with severe asthma)
Fitch strongly rejects all those explanations.
Finally Fitch says:
Short addition from dr Fitch in this article:
http://www.nrk.no/sport/ekspert-i-sundby-saken_-_-derfor-kunne-jeg-ikke-forsvare-utoveren-1.13065436
So "the acute exacerbation of the illness in December 2014" was just communicated over the phone to the team doctor. No foregoing examination. Prescription of a drug almost 10 times allowed dose. And everyone trust MJS in this. No need to investigate, decides FIS antidoping, Antidoping Norge and NSF.
Re: Re:
To the bolded: If this were a case of high hemoglobin, that would be a nice explanation, a simple one, but a valid one, however it is not a case of high hemoglobin. It seems that the NSF and FIS, tippy toed around the issue, wanting to clear Sundby and the doctors of any wrongdoing. WADA and anti-doping officials wanted a two year ban, but FIS rejected it.
Discgear said:Discgear said:Maybe the most devastating article against the press-conference claims of NSF, FIS, Antidoping Norge and Sundby so far.
http://www.tv2.no/sport/8478304/
FIS Antidoping cleared MJS but FIS central quarters had the same view as WADA (a two year ban).
Their expert was prof. Ken Fitch from Australia. His main critique:
And maybe the most stunning thing:
In the first answers team doctor Gabrielsen and Johnsrud Sundby gave to FIS, nothing is mentioned about the rules and uncertainty about Ventolin together with nebulizer. That explanation is given much later, after three other explanations were given regarding MJS positive tests
Vow! :surprised: So much later the explanation came, that it was due to severe asthma and intense treatment with Nebulizer. (not intense training which doesn’t really cohere with severe asthma)
Fitch strongly rejects all those explanations.
Finally Fitch says:
Short addition from dr Fitch in this article:
http://www.nrk.no/sport/ekspert-i-sundby-saken_-_-derfor-kunne-jeg-ikke-forsvare-utoveren-1.13065436
So "the cute exacerbation of the illness in December 2014" was just communicated over the phone to the team doctor. No foregoing examination. Prescription of a drug almost 10 times allowed dose. And everyone trust MJS in this. No need to investigate, decides FIS antidoping, Antidoping Norge and NSF.
To the bolded: If this were a case of high hemoglobin, that would be a nice explanation, a simple one, but a valid one, however it is not a case of high hemoglobin. It seems that the NSF and FIS, tippy toed around the issue, wanting to clear Sundby and the doctors of any wrongdoing. WADA and anti-doping officials wanted a two year ban, but FIS rejected it.
Matti Heikkinen was interviewed today in Helsingin sanomat, Finlands biggest daily, on this topic. Basically says MJS is my mate, yes there was a clear cut violation of rules, but that's that. Wont say anything about whatever anyone does in a sports context. Also underlines that nothing doping related in the media concerns him anymore in any way, since he developed a thick skin after 2001. He is cleans, of course.
So, MJS cheats. But it does not bother heikkinen because - well, guess everyone can fill their preferred interpretation here.
No further questions were asked, of course. Funny that.
So, MJS cheats. But it does not bother heikkinen because - well, guess everyone can fill their preferred interpretation here.
No further questions were asked, of course. Funny that.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Liege Bastogne Liege-7 hour monument, Sunday, April 21, 2024- Started by topcat
- Replies: 985
-
Paris - Roubaix 2024, one day monument, April 7- Started by Dreginald
- Replies: 2K
-
-
De Ronde van Vlaanderen (270.8 km), 2024 March 31 (Sunday)- Started by Netserk
- Replies: 1K
-
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 24K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram