Doping in XC skiing

[BullsFan22]

Re:

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.

Funny. I don't want to go into personalities and making things personal, but Heikkinen seems like an 'odd' fellow. Not even 'reserved odd.' Reminds me a little of Ivan Lendl. I watched the Lysebotn Opp a couple days ago, and they interviewed him before and after the race (which he won, of course), and he had an arrogance/weirdness about him. "Developed a thick skin after 2001?" He was 17 at the time of the scandal, and then made the Finnish National Junior Team. I'd like to know what developing a thick skin after 2001 means? Not caring about any suspicions relating to Finnish skiers post 2001? Or the actual scandal? Or just not caring at all what anyone says and just worrying about himself? He Said he's been training hard since he was 9...blah, blah...Last year he won the same race, in record time, beating Legkov after a 1 on 1 battle until the last few hundred meters. Then not long after, he had an injury and was sidelined the entire fall and also missed the entire season. We'll see what happens this year.

 

[Armchaircyclist]

Re: Re:

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:

• That the national association economically compensates a doping convicted athlete
• That the national association, in conflict with WADA-code, takes away the responsibility from the athlete
• He emphasizes that the explanations from the team doctor “lacks credibility” and is like “clinging to a straw”
• He asks rethorically if the Norwegian Ski Association would have handled the case in the same way, if it was about a foreigner

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

1. Sundby was dehydrated
2. Test results positive due to the high altitude in Toblach and Davos
3. Test results due to intense training by Sundby

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:

1-2 times before I’ve come across other athletes that have tested positive for Salbutamol due to use of Nebulizer. But they didn’t use it every day for one month, only once due to severe asthma.

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

It was impossible for me to defend the athlete in this case due to the two following specific things, says prof Fitch to NRK:
-a) I cannot support the advice from the team doctor, especially since it was given over the phone and without an examinaning the patient. :surprised:
-b) the decision by the athlete to use the Nebulizer three times in a time-span less than five hours, on days of competition.

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.

-------------

The most embarrassing part as a Norwegian, is that the Norwegian ski Association pays Sundby the Money that he loses from his ban. Weird that they have such a low understanding of moral that they don't even see what total hypocrites they are in doing so. Apart from that, the "Sundby miracle" of being somebody who hardly can win anything, and suddenly becoming this unbeatable machine, smells worse and worse.

 

[ToreBear]

@Armchaircyclist

The reason they take this upon themselves is that Sunby has to follow the National team doctors advice per Sundbys contract with the national team.

As for Sundbys sudden transformation. In my eyes Sundby is remarkable in that his progression has been so steady. Nothing sudden about it. A bit better every year, while those who could beat him have had down years due to injuries and motivation etc(Northug, Cologna, Olsson etc).

 

[BullsFan22]

Re:

@Armchaircyclist

The reason they take this upon themselves is that Sunby has to follow the National team doctors advice per Sundbys contract with the national team.

As for Sundbys sudden transformation. In my eyes Sundby is remarkable in that his progression has been so steady. Nothing sudden about it. A bit better every year, while those who could beat him have had down years due to injuries and motivation etc(Northug, Cologna, Olsson etc).

He went from not being able to finish 50kms, to crushing his competition, including all those 'state-sponsored' Russians. At least Northug, Cologna, Legkov, Ustiugov, Hellner, showed excellent results as juniors and U23 skiers. Sundby wasn't a bad junior or U23 skier, but to say he hasn't had a sudden transformation the last few years is just refusing to acknowledge it at this point. His first WC win was in early 2008/2009 season. Then he went four years before he could win his second WC. Then the following year, he goes on an unbeaten streak, hasn't lost a mini tour, tour de ski or the overall WC...Well, he lost a few of them last week, where he was found out to have doped.

 

[ToreBear]

Re: Re:

@Armchaircyclist

The reason they take this upon themselves is that Sunby has to follow the National team doctors advice per Sundbys contract with the national team.

As for Sundbys sudden transformation. In my eyes Sundby is remarkable in that his progression has been so steady. Nothing sudden about it. A bit better every year, while those who could beat him have had down years due to injuries and motivation etc(Northug, Cologna, Olsson etc).

He went from not being able to finish 50kms, to crushing his competition, including all those 'state-sponsored' Russians. At least Northug, Cologna, Legkov, Ustiugov, Hellner, showed excellent results as juniors and U23 skiers. Sundby wasn't a bad junior or U23 skier, but to say he hasn't had a sudden transformation the last few years is just refusing to acknowledge it at this point. His first WC win was in early 2008/2009 season. Then he went four years before he could win his second WC. Then the following year, he goes on an unbeaten streak, hasn't lost a mini tour, tour de ski or the overall WC...Well, he lost a few of them last week, where he was found out to have doped.

But he still got better in those four years. Just because you don't win doesn't mean you don't get better. Try looking at top 3 placings, then his top 10. He has made a remarkably steady progression.
http://data.fis-ski.com/dynamic/athlete-biography.html?sector=CC&competitorid=89621&type=result&category=WC&season=2011&sort=&discipline=ALL&position=10&place=&Submit=Search&limit=50

 

[BullsFan22]

Re: Re:

@Armchaircyclist

The reason they take this upon themselves is that Sunby has to follow the National team doctors advice per Sundbys contract with the national team.

As for Sundbys sudden transformation. In my eyes Sundby is remarkable in that his progression has been so steady. Nothing sudden about it. A bit better every year, while those who could beat him have had down years due to injuries and motivation etc(Northug, Cologna, Olsson etc).

He went from not being able to finish 50kms, to crushing his competition, including all those 'state-sponsored' Russians. At least Northug, Cologna, Legkov, Ustiugov, Hellner, showed excellent results as juniors and U23 skiers. Sundby wasn't a bad junior or U23 skier, but to say he hasn't had a sudden transformation the last few years is just refusing to acknowledge it at this point. His first WC win was in early 2008/2009 season. Then he went four years before he could win his second WC. Then the following year, he goes on an unbeaten streak, hasn't lost a mini tour, tour de ski or the overall WC...Well, he lost a few of them last week, where he was found out to have doped.

But he still got better in those four years. Just because you don't win doesn't mean you don't get better. Try looking at top 3 placings, then his top 10. He has made a remarkably steady progression.
http://data.fis-ski.com/dynamic/athlete-biography.html?sector=CC&competitorid=89621&type=result&category=WC&season=2011&sort=&discipline=ALL&position=10&place=&Submit=Search&limit=50

Look, of course skiers, top level skiers can make improvements, and Sundby hitting his stride in his late 20's, early 30's isn't surprising, that's generally when skiers peak physically. Not every skier, but if hours, development, maturity is consistent, then 27-33 is generally where skiers can peak. In that regard, Sundby is right there, but dominating in such fashion is another thing.

 

[Discgear]

Re:

@Armchaircyclist

The reason they take this upon themselves is that Sunby has to follow the National team doctors advice per Sundbys contract with the national team.

Torebear, you are just repeating NSFs version. To avoid being accused of trolling, why not give your view on this post instead?
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/viewtopic.php?p=1990249#p1990249

I find Armchaircyclist post both brave and refreshing considering the standpoint he/she has had before. Personally I'm really worried about the silence from the Swedish Ski Association. I see two outcomes. Either NSF and Antidoping Norge puts everything on the table and wipes out the rotten eggs together with the Swedes or otherwise continue to put the lid on. If they choose the second alternative, every other nation will just get confirmation on, that antidoping is about getting your own people out of the net, and push the limits as far as possible.

 

[MrRoboto]

Re:

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...

I'm guessing asthma is about as common among finnish skiers, so there is that problem (correct me if I'm wrong).

Cologna also suffers from asthma.

The interesting part is the russians. They have been complaining about asthma medicine use since the 90's. I wonder what the numbers of asthma sufferers are among their skiers.

 

[BullsFan22]

Re:

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:

• That the national association economically compensates a doping convicted athlete
• That the national association, in conflict with WADA-code, takes away the responsibility from the athlete
• He emphasizes that the explanations from the team doctor “lacks credibility” and is like “clinging to a straw”
• He asks rethorically if the Norwegian Ski Association would have handled the case in the same way, if it was about a foreigner

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

1. Sundby was dehydrated
2. Test results positive due to the high altitude in Toblach and Davos
3. Test results due to intense training by Sundby

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:

1-2 times before I’ve come across other athletes that have tested positive for Salbutamol due to use of Nebulizer. But they didn’t use it every day for one month, only once due to severe asthma.

Speaking of Ken Finch, this article is from July 2000, just before Sydney:

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/stories/s155405.htm

 

[ToreBear]

Re: Re:

@Armchaircyclist

The reason they take this upon themselves is that Sunby has to follow the National team doctors advice per Sundbys contract with the national team.

Torebear, you are just repeating NSFs version. To avoid being accused of trolling, why not give your view on this post instead?
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/viewtopic.php?p=1990249#p1990249

I find Armchaircyclist post both brave and refreshing considering the standpoint he/she has had before. Personally I'm really worried about the silence from the Swedish Ski Association. I see two outcomes. Either NSF and Antidoping Norge puts everything on the table and wipes out the rotten eggs together with the Swedes or otherwise continue to put the lid on. If they choose the second alternative, every other nation will just get confirmation on, that antidoping is about getting your own people out of the net, and push the limits as far as possible.

Well the NSF should know since they wrote the contract the athletes have to sign. Oh yes, being called a troll for pointing out simple facts. Now that would be horrible.

Ok lets. Start, point one:
• That the national association economically compensates a doping convicted athlete
As I stated above, according to his contract he has to abide by the NSF docs recommendations. Refusing would have violated his contract of employment.

• That the national association, in conflict with WADA-code, takes away the responsibility from the athlete
Se above, same issue. Perhaps they might look at redoing their contract, or their doctors adopt a routine with double checking with ADN/WADA on issues with potential for missunderstanding.

• He emphasizes that the explanations from the team doctor “lacks credibility” and is like “clinging to a straw”
I question the basis for his opinion. The Fis anti doping panel found it credible. CAS didn't rule on it. And wada did not argue that the doctor should be punished. So I view it as a sign of his lack of understanding of how mistakes happen when combining therapeutic thinking with an anti doping thinking.

• He asks rethorically if the Norwegian Ski Association would have handled the case in the same way, if it was about a foreigner
Yes they would have. But I don't see how this could have hypothetically happened.

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

Well, it's not so strange, since it might have taken that time for him to realize that Wada had another understanding of inhale.

1. Sundby was dehydrated
2. Test results positive due to the high altitude in Toblach and Davos
3. Test results due to intense training by Sundby

I read this as the doctor pointing up possible sources of error in the measurement. Not a definitive explanation.

And with all due respect to Fitch, he is an Australian. I don't see how he could know so much about the issues facing an elite cross country skier. It's a small sport, and hence the amount of quality studies available would not be high. He came across as a bit arrogant in IMHO.

It was impossible for me to defend the athlete in this case due to the two following specific things, says prof Fitch to NRK:
-a) I cannot support the advice from the team doctor, especially since it was given over the phone and without an examinaning the patient. :surprised:
-b) the decision by the athlete to use the Nebulizer three times in a time-span less than five hours, on days of competition.

With all due respect to Fitch. He is talking out of his ass. Gabrielsen had been his doc for some time. Sundby received the same treatment in 2009. It's not like some unknown patient is calling him. The max allowed dosage over 24 hours was 1600ug. Sundby took 1500ug. The rule says nothing about not taking it as a single dose or over a shorter interval. If that was important perhaps the rule should have specified max 530 every 8 hours or something.

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.

They trusted him with what they thought was the allowed dose. Not 10 times the allowed dose. This was established later.

I find Armchaircyclist post both brave and refreshing considering the standpoint he/she has had before. Personally I'm really worried about the silence from the Swedish Ski Association. I see two outcomes. Either NSF and Antidoping Norge puts everything on the table and wipes out the rotten eggs together with the Swedes or otherwise continue to put the lid on. If they choose the second alternative, every other nation will just get confirmation on, that antidoping is about getting your own people out of the net, and push the limits as far as possible.

Yes Armchaircyclist is brave for arguing the same as more or less everyone else in this thread.

Here is the Swedish team doctor:

SVT Sport reder ut härvan, tillsammans med en påtaglig berörd svensk landslagsläkare Per Andersson: ”Det är inte gjort medvetet för att nå en prestationsförbättring”, säger han.

http://www.svt.se/sport/vintersport/darfor-falls-sundby-for-dopning/

You are assuming there is more to this, and that ADN is part of a conspiracy together with the Swedes.

How about this is all their is to it? This is not Doping, WADA, CAS, FIS ANTIDOPING. Everyone says this is not doping.

You could argue they are owned by the Norwegians of course and this is all some plot. But then we would be moving closer to making this issue about mental illness, or weird personality types.

 

[Blaaswix]

"And with all due respect to Fitch, he is an Australian. I don't see how he could know so much about the issues facing an elite cross country skier."

Why? Is endurance sports physiology somehow different in the southern hemisphere? Do you not think that they ski Down Under? Really?

 

[ToreBear]

@ BullsFan22

It's about US anti-doping efforts before the 2000 olympics. Usada started operation in october after the olympics.

It's interesting historically and shows how far AD has come since then.

 

[ToreBear]

Re:

"And with all due respect to Fitch, he is an Australian. I don't see how he could know so much about the issues facing an elite cross country skier."

Why? Is endurance sports physiology somehow different in the southern hemisphere? Do you not think that they ski Down Under? Really?

I know they ski. But I don't think they have elite skiers.There is also the question of understanding altitude effects in winter on elite skiers. You can't for example translate directly what you know about cycling automatically transfers to XC.

 

[BullsFan22]

Re:

@ BullsFan22

It's about US anti-doping efforts before the 2000 olympics. Usada started operation in october after the olympics.

It's interesting historically and shows how far AD has come since then.

I know it, I just posted this because Ken Fitch was one of people interviewed. WADA was established in 1999. USADA not long after. It doesn't mean there weren't any 'anti-doping efforts,' it just means that these two institutions were established at the time.

I am not sure that AD has come that 'far,' to be honest. Hiding positives, collusion, manipulation, letting known dopers compete and winning medals.

This article, along with numerous others I have shared on various threads in the Clinic, show just how much corruption ruled in the USOC in the 80's up to the early 2000's. Perhaps it still does, but it's convenient to have the Russians with their own problems, it deflects from its own issues!

Staying on point with doping in xc skiing, Falla was interviewed about asthma use, and like Bjoergen and Sundby, says she wouldn't be where she was today without asthma medications.

 

[ToreBear]

Re: Re:

@ BullsFan22

It's about US anti-doping efforts before the 2000 olympics. Usada started operation in october after the olympics.

It's interesting historically and shows how far AD has come since then.

I know it, I just posted this because Ken Fitch was one of people interviewed. WADA was established in 1999. USADA not long after. It doesn't mean there weren't any 'anti-doping efforts,' it just means that these two institutions were established at the time.

I am not sure that AD has come that 'far,' to be honest. Hiding positives, collusion, manipulation, letting known dopers compete and winning medals.

This article, along with numerous others I have shared on various threads in the Clinic, show just how much corruption ruled in the USOC in the 80's up to the early 2000's. Perhaps it still does, but it's convenient to have the Russians with their own problems, it deflects from its own issues!

Staying on point with doping in xc skiing, Falla was interviewed about asthma use, and like Bjoergen and Sundby, says she wouldn't be where she was today without asthma medications.

But unlike the Russians, the FBI under government instructions didn't collude with USOC. Russian doping is on a whole nother level. Or at least it was after 2010. Before that I doubt the state was as involved.

I'm sure a lot of athletes if they were honest would say the same thing as Falla. I think a lot of asthmatics in general would say the same thing. In fact I think people who need glasses would say the same thing.

 

[Discgear]

Re: Re:

Well the NSF should know since they wrote the contract the athletes have to sign. Oh yes, being called a troll for pointing out simple facts. Now that would be horrible.
Ok lets. Start, point one:
• That the national association economically compensates a doping convicted athlete
As I stated above, according to his contract he has to abide by the NSF docs recommendations. Refusing would have violated his contract of employment.
• That the national association, in conflict with WADA-code, takes away the responsibility from the athlete
Se above, same issue. Perhaps they might look at redoing their contract, or their doctors adopt a routine with double checking with ADN/WADA on issues with potential for missunderstanding.

Would you raise the same kind of arguments it this was about doping-convicted Polish or Russian skiers? That they should be compensated by the National Federation in conflict with the WADA-code, because they had a contract to follow the team doctor orders? Where would that bring Anti-doping work?

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
1. Sundby was dehydrated
2. Test results positive due to the high altitude in Toblach and Davos
3. Test results due to intense training by Sundby

Well, it's not so strange, since it might have taken that time for him to realize that Wada had another understanding of inhale.
I read this as the doctor pointing up possible sources of error in the measurement. Not a definitive explanation.

Well, you have a deep reliance and a truly generous attitude of forgiveness to the maneuvers of the Norwegian team doctor and NSF. I’ll give you that.

And with all due respect to Fitch, he is an Australian. I don't see how he could know so much about the issues facing an elite cross country skier. It's a small sport, and hence the amount of quality studies available would not be high. He came across as a bit arrogant in IMHO.

For us who have participated in the thread over the years, your outburst against a foreigner, questioning his competence and give condescending comments about his person, doesn’t come as a surprise. In fact that has been a pattern in your argumentation. We remember your condescending words about the late Saltin when he dared to question the Norwegians. Maybe you should reflect over who comes across as a bit arrogant.

It was impossible for me to defend the athlete in this case due to the two following specific things, says prof Fitch to NRK:
-a) I cannot support the advice from the team doctor, especially since it was given over the phone and without an examinaning the patient. :surprised:
-b) the decision by the athlete to use the Nebulizer three times in a time-span less than five hours, on days of competition.

With all due respect to Fitch. He is talking out of his ***.

Well there we go again.

Gabrielsen had been his doc for some time. Sundby received the same treatment in 2009. It's not like some unknown patient is calling him. The max allowed dosage over 24 hours was 1600ug. Sundby took 1500ug. The rule says nothing about not taking it as a single dose or over a shorter interval. If that was important perhaps the rule should have specified max 530 every 8 hours or something.

Well you are lying. Sundby took 15000 ug not 1500 ug, almost 10 times the allowed dose. That’s a fact. The WADA rule maybe doesn’t say anything about the intervals, but Fitch is questioning the reason to use the Nebulizer three times in a time-span less than five hours, on days of competition.
And finally, since there was no examination, we just have to assume MJS did suffer from acute asthmatic problems when he phoned the team doctor. But in the same time –out of the arguments from NSF – we know that he was training very hard, since they tried to explain the high levels of salbutamol in his urin samples due to intense training. And also, we have to trust MJS, that it was relevant to treat severe asthma attack with extreme dosage during a time-span of 30 days.

Here is the Swedish team doctor:

SVT Sport reder ut härvan, tillsammans med en påtaglig berörd svensk landslagsläkare Per Andersson: ”Det är inte gjort medvetet för att nå en prestationsförbättring”, säger han.

http://www.svt.se/sport/vintersport/darfor-falls-sundby-for-dopning/

Yes, this statement was done just after the press-conference. Since then it has been disturbingly silent from Swedish officials. We do know a lot more now. There has been time to study the CAS-sentence and we have the interviews with Fitch. There has been testimonies by Norwegian athlets that they have been pushed to test for asthma without having any problems. We have had very outspoken critique by the head of Finnish Antidoping and so on.

You are assuming there is more to this, and that ADN is part of a conspiracy together with the Swedes.

Were on earth have I said that?

How about this is all their is to it? This is not Doping, WADA, CAS, FIS ANTIDOPING. Everyone says this is not doping.

Maybe you missed it, but Sundby is actually convicted for doping.

You could argue they are owned by the Norwegians of course and this is all some plot. But then we would be moving closer to making this issue about mental illness, or weird personality types.

????

 

[BullsFan22]

Re: Re:

@ BullsFan22

It's about US anti-doping efforts before the 2000 olympics. Usada started operation in october after the olympics.

It's interesting historically and shows how far AD has come since then.

I know it, I just posted this because Ken Fitch was one of people interviewed. WADA was established in 1999. USADA not long after. It doesn't mean there weren't any 'anti-doping efforts,' it just means that these two institutions were established at the time.

I am not sure that AD has come that 'far,' to be honest. Hiding positives, collusion, manipulation, letting known dopers compete and winning medals.

This article, along with numerous others I have shared on various threads in the Clinic, show just how much corruption ruled in the USOC in the 80's up to the early 2000's. Perhaps it still does, but it's convenient to have the Russians with their own problems, it deflects from its own issues!

Staying on point with doping in xc skiing, Falla was interviewed about asthma use, and like Bjoergen and Sundby, says she wouldn't be where she was today without asthma medications.

But unlike the Russians, the FBI under government instructions didn't collude with USOC. Russian doping is on a whole nother level. Or at least it was after 2010. Before that I doubt the state was as involved.

I'm sure a lot of athletes if they were honest would say the same thing as Falla. I think a lot of asthmatics in general would say the same thing. In fact I think people who need glasses would say the same thing.

We certainly don't know whether or not the FBI or CIA or whoever didn't or did collude with USOC. And we certainly don't know whether or not the stories about the FSB collusion in Sochi or elsewhere is true and how true it is. What we do now is that the USOC and USATF helped athletes dope and if someone had tested positive, there was good chance they would be cleared of any wrongdoing, certainly the medal contenders were. It happened as early as Carl Lewis. Surely the USOC and USATF had to get some orders from somewhere? I very much doubt that, with all the resources and knowledge and spying, that the US authorities didn't know what was going on. In the end, doping is doping, whether you choose to do it yourself, or someone else encouraged you, or your national federation encouraged you and gave you the resources, or whatever. I didn't see the Americans being banned from Seoul, or Barcelona, or Atlanta, or Sydney, or Athens, when this was all going on, did you? And the Russians would all of a sudden involve themselves post 2010? Why so late? Olympics are a big deal in Russia, from what I understand.

 

[Blaaswix]

Re: Re:

"And with all due respect to Fitch, he is an Australian. I don't see how he could know so much about the issues facing an elite cross country skier."

Why? Is endurance sports physiology somehow different in the southern hemisphere? Do you not think that they ski Down Under? Really?

I know they ski. But I don't think they have elite skiers.There is also the question of understanding altitude effects in winter on elite skiers. You can't for example translate directly what you know about cycling automatically transfers to XC.

I think a competent physiologist could gain an understanding of altitude and temperature effects very well, wherever they come from. This sounds like an excuse to keep the XC world in a cosy loop that has lead to a culture where asthma has become a competitive advantage, and any critical voices from outside are rejected. XC desperately needs more voices from outside the Nordic countries if it's going to recover any credibility.

My personal opinion now is for an outright ban on asthma medication.

 

[ToreBear]

@Discgear
I don't know which arguments I would use since it hasn't happen. You'll find out if it happens and I care enough about the issue to post on it.

* I don't see NSF or the doctors maneuvering anywhere. Then again I don't suspect a big doping ring, so I might not be as suspicious.

* I know I can come across as a bit arrogant. But I'm arguing as an amateur on a forum, not as a WADA expert in a CAS proceeding.

* Sorry I should have said behind.


* No I'm not lying. I don't think you get the point. Your point is it would be irresponsible to hand out 10 times the maximum legal dose. But in the doctors mind he was handing out below the maximum dose. And the rest: it's in the cas report.

* a report from an athlete does not testimonies from athletes make. But it's sounds more nefarious/insidious the way you massage it. Though the factual content might have suffered.

viewtopic.php?p=1991520#p1991520

Either NSF and Antidoping Norge puts everything on the table and wipes out the rotten eggs together with the Swedes or otherwise continue to put the lid on.

Doping:

Doping means athletes taking illegal substances to improve their performances.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/athletics/33997246

Cas page 54

WADA is not claiming that the anti-doping rule violation was intentional

It's an anti-doping rule violation, but it is not doping.

 

[ToreBear]

Re: Re:

@ BullsFan22

It's about US anti-doping efforts before the 2000 olympics. Usada started operation in october after the olympics.

It's interesting historically and shows how far AD has come since then.

I know it, I just posted this because Ken Fitch was one of people interviewed. WADA was established in 1999. USADA not long after. It doesn't mean there weren't any 'anti-doping efforts,' it just means that these two institutions were established at the time.

I am not sure that AD has come that 'far,' to be honest. Hiding positives, collusion, manipulation, letting known dopers compete and winning medals.

This article, along with numerous others I have shared on various threads in the Clinic, show just how much corruption ruled in the USOC in the 80's up to the early 2000's. Perhaps it still does, but it's convenient to have the Russians with their own problems, it deflects from its own issues!

Staying on point with doping in xc skiing, Falla was interviewed about asthma use, and like Bjoergen and Sundby, says she wouldn't be where she was today without asthma medications.

But unlike the Russians, the FBI under government instructions didn't collude with USOC. Russian doping is on a whole nother level. Or at least it was after 2010. Before that I doubt the state was as involved.

I'm sure a lot of athletes if they were honest would say the same thing as Falla. I think a lot of asthmatics in general would say the same thing. In fact I think people who need glasses would say the same thing.

We certainly don't know whether or not the FBI or CIA or whoever didn't or did collude with USOC. And we certainly don't know whether or not the stories about the FSB collusion in Sochi or elsewhere is true and how true it is. What we do now is that the USOC and USATF helped athletes dope and if someone had tested positive, there was good chance they would be cleared of any wrongdoing, certainly the medal contenders were. It happened as early as Carl Lewis. Surely the USOC and USATF had to get some orders from somewhere? I very much doubt that, with all the resources and knowledge and spying, that the US authorities didn't know what was going on. In the end, doping is doping, whether you choose to do it yourself, or someone else encouraged you, or your national federation encouraged you and gave you the resources, or whatever. I didn't see the Americans being banned from Seoul, or Barcelona, or Atlanta, or Sydney, or Athens, when this was all going on, did you? And the Russians would all of a sudden involve themselves post 2010? Why so late? Olympics are a big deal in Russia, from what I understand.

So your point is a double standard compared to 30 years ago, even though what happened 30 years ago is not the same as happened now? ok

The FSBs involvement in Sochi is in the report, deemed to have been proven by the Lawyer dude writing the report.

 

[ToreBear]

Re: Re:

"And with all due respect to Fitch, he is an Australian. I don't see how he could know so much about the issues facing an elite cross country skier."

Why? Is endurance sports physiology somehow different in the southern hemisphere? Do you not think that they ski Down Under? Really?

I know they ski. But I don't think they have elite skiers.There is also the question of understanding altitude effects in winter on elite skiers. You can't for example translate directly what you know about cycling automatically transfers to XC.

I think a competent physiologist could gain an understanding of altitude and temperature effects very well, wherever they come from. This sounds like an excuse to keep the XC world in a cosy loop that has lead to a culture where asthma has become a competitive advantage, and any critical voices from outside are rejected. XC desperately needs more voices from outside the Nordic countries if it's going to recover any credibility.

My personal opinion now is for an outright ban on asthma medication.

Asthma has not become a competitive advantage. I don't think there is anything to recover. The credibility that was lost in 2001 has been recovered long ago.

As to your line of argument about banning asthma medication. I just don't see any logic to it. Norway would likely be hurt the least from a medal standpoint though. Since some of our best xc skiers don't have asthma. But the competition would be boring. No Cologna, no Legkov, probably most of the good Sweedes would go too.

 

[Blaaswix]

Re: Re:

"And with all due respect to Fitch, he is an Australian. I don't see how he could know so much about the issues facing an elite cross country skier."

Why? Is endurance sports physiology somehow different in the southern hemisphere? Do you not think that they ski Down Under? Really?

I know they ski. But I don't think they have elite skiers.There is also the question of understanding altitude effects in winter on elite skiers. You can't for example translate directly what you know about cycling automatically transfers to XC.

I think a competent physiologist could gain an understanding of altitude and temperature effects very well, wherever they come from. This sounds like an excuse to keep the XC world in a cosy loop that has lead to a culture where asthma has become a competitive advantage, and any critical voices from outside are rejected. XC desperately needs more voices from outside the Nordic countries if it's going to recover any credibility.

My personal opinion now is for an outright ban on asthma medication.

Asthma has not become a competitive advantage. I don't think there is anything to recover. The credibility that was lost in 2001 has been recovered long ago.

As to your line of argument about banning asthma medication. I just don't see any logic to it. Norway would likely be hurt the least from a medal standpoint though. Since some of our best xc skiers don't have asthma. But the competition would be boring. No Cologna, no Legkov, probably most of the good Sweedes would go too.

There is sufficient doubt, in my mind, and I think many others now, that asthma medication *is* performance enhancing. It matters not one jot to me which country would be 'hurt' the least or the most by a ban on competitors using asthma medication. It's about the sport, not Norway.

 

[BullsFan22]

Re: Re:

@ BullsFan22

It's about US anti-doping efforts before the 2000 olympics. Usada started operation in october after the olympics.

It's interesting historically and shows how far AD has come since then.

I know it, I just posted this because Ken Fitch was one of people interviewed. WADA was established in 1999. USADA not long after. It doesn't mean there weren't any 'anti-doping efforts,' it just means that these two institutions were established at the time.

I am not sure that AD has come that 'far,' to be honest. Hiding positives, collusion, manipulation, letting known dopers compete and winning medals.

This article, along with numerous others I have shared on various threads in the Clinic, show just how much corruption ruled in the USOC in the 80's up to the early 2000's. Perhaps it still does, but it's convenient to have the Russians with their own problems, it deflects from its own issues!

Staying on point with doping in xc skiing, Falla was interviewed about asthma use, and like Bjoergen and Sundby, says she wouldn't be where she was today without asthma medications.

But unlike the Russians, the FBI under government instructions didn't collude with USOC. Russian doping is on a whole nother level. Or at least it was after 2010. Before that I doubt the state was as involved.

I'm sure a lot of athletes if they were honest would say the same thing as Falla. I think a lot of asthmatics in general would say the same thing. In fact I think people who need glasses would say the same thing.

We certainly don't know whether or not the FBI or CIA or whoever didn't or did collude with USOC. And we certainly don't know whether or not the stories about the FSB collusion in Sochi or elsewhere is true and how true it is. What we do now is that the USOC and USATF helped athletes dope and if someone had tested positive, there was good chance they would be cleared of any wrongdoing, certainly the medal contenders were. It happened as early as Carl Lewis. Surely the USOC and USATF had to get some orders from somewhere? I very much doubt that, with all the resources and knowledge and spying, that the US authorities didn't know what was going on. In the end, doping is doping, whether you choose to do it yourself, or someone else encouraged you, or your national federation encouraged you and gave you the resources, or whatever. I didn't see the Americans being banned from Seoul, or Barcelona, or Atlanta, or Sydney, or Athens, when this was all going on, did you? And the Russians would all of a sudden involve themselves post 2010? Why so late? Olympics are a big deal in Russia, from what I understand.

So your point is a double standard compared to 30 years ago, even though what happened 30 years ago is not the same as happened now? ok

The FSBs involvement in Sochi is in the report, deemed to have been proven by the Lawyer dude writing the report.

Well, let's then assume that whatever that Canadian 'lawyer dude' says is true and assuming that the reports of USOC corruption is also true, then there is definitely a double standard. I know it's dangerous to 'assume' things, particularly in significant cases like widespread doping, tampering, collusion etc, but let's try.

The problem with the Canadian 'lawyer dude,' and the other Canadian 'dude' that was a part of this 'independent' investigation, D*ck Pound, is that they never talked to any of the athletes that they accuse of collusion and doping. Didn't you read any of the recent interviews with Legkov in the Norwegian media?

What sort of 'investigation' is it, when you don't even try to talk to athletes you are investigating? If I am investigating a murder (as terrible as an analogy that may be), and I and other detectives on the case have several 'suspects' in custody or will shortly visit them to talk to them, I am not going to immediately point fingers and say they are guilty or they were compliances without questioning them or others who I have leads on. But I guess that's a sign of a good, experienced lawyer. Make something out of very little.

 

[Hakkapelit]

Re: Re:

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.

Funny. I don't want to go into personalities and making things personal, but Heikkinen seems like an 'odd' fellow. Not even 'reserved odd.' Reminds me a little of Ivan Lendl. I watched the Lysebotn Opp a couple days ago, and they interviewed him before and after the race (which he won, of course), and he had an arrogance/weirdness about him. "Developed a thick skin after 2001?" He was 17 at the time of the scandal, and then made the Finnish National Junior Team. I'd like to know what developing a thick skin after 2001 means? Not caring about any suspicions relating to Finnish skiers post 2001? Or the actual scandal? Or just not caring at all what anyone says and just worrying about himself? He Said he's been training hard since he was 9...blah, blah...Last year he won the same race, in record time, beating Legkov after a 1 on 1 battle until the last few hundred meters. Then not long after, he had an injury and was sidelined the entire fall and also missed the entire season. We'll see what happens this year.

The question he was presented with was if he was dissapointed with the news, I don't really know how close they are but according to the article ateast phoned eachother since - but my understanding was that after pretty much the whole team getting cought in 2001, well thats disappointing - one norwegian maybe not so much even if he says its a special case "and all that".

I could subscribe to Heikkinen being odd, but as I see him as extremly dry and demure I cant really see in what context he would be arrogant. Maybe in some sort of dry-jokey way to taunt the locals as part of pre-race banter.

And about his back-problems, his first competition was on December 12 so hardly the entire season, but had a month off from training between September- October.

 

[Discgear]

ToreBear, your posting to me and other forum members the last days have been, let’s put it mild – borderline trolling. You’ve just been time after time repeating the official Norwegian version that was presented by NSF and Sundby on the press conference. And while not repeating NSF arguments, your posts have been filled with insults, ad hominem arguments, condescending comments and, with your own words, an arrogant attitude.

An attitude that is, I’m afraid, quite similar to Roste, Lofshus and other Norwegian ski officials. I will try to stay out of arguments with you for the time being, since it is frankly not very fruitful.

You’ve might had a point in that I and many others have chosen research and arguments contradicting the official version, and in that sense not being objective. However, I’ve been clear in my posts that I’ve been challenging the official version presented on the press conference. My aim has been to show that it is much more into it when reading the CAS verdict. Following bold statements were made by NSF and MJS during the press conference:

MJS: att dere setter dere inn i dommen, og forstår hvor urimelig den er
… that you look into the verdict and understand how unreasonable it is.

MJS: ikke har hatt noen konkurransefordel av inntaket
… had no competetive advantage by the medication

MJS: en totalt urimelig dom som faller på meg på grunn av en misfortåelse
… the verdict is totally unreasonable and hurts me due to a misunderstanding

NSF: gjorde advokaten det klart at han ikke har vært over den lovlige grensen for virkestoffet salbutamol
… the lawyer made it clear that he didn’t go beyond any allowed limits in his salbutamol usage

NSF: I en forstøver forbli om lag 90 % av medisinen igjen i apparatet, mens kun 10 % inhaleres og tas opp av utøveren
… In a Nebulizer 90% of the dose stays in the machine, and only 10% goes into the body

Team-doctor: I desember 2014 oppstod det en forverring i Martins astma, og jeg foreskrev en behandling som blant annet omfattet ventoline
… In December 2014 Martin had severe problems with his asthma, and I did a prescription that amongst other, included Ventoline

NSF: Han har ikke hatt for høye verdier, det er ikke saken
… He hasn’t had to high values in the tests, that is not the case

NSF: Hadde skiforbundet søkt om fritak, hadde det blitt invilget
… If the Ski federation had applied for a TUE, it would have been granted

NSF: Det skal ikke være noe tvil om at vi kjemper i kampen mot dopen, påpekte skipresidenten videre
… Don’t hesitate that we fight against doping

Now, when we had time to analyze the verdict there is so many questions to be asked and it seems that Norwegian media finally have started to push for real answers.

1. We do have prof. Fitch and his critical comments about how this was handled by the Norwegians and how MJS really pushed the limits.
2. We do have the head of Antidoping Finland and his very critical comments.
3. We have testimonies by norwegian athletes that have been pushed to test for asthma by NSF and Olympiatoppen, without any asthmatic problems.
4. We now know how extensive the medication was by MJS and that the extreme prescription was made by the team-doctor over the phone, without any foregoing examination.
5. We have access to clinical studies that shows performance-enhancing effects by inhalation of salbutamol in total contradiction with the claims at the press-conference.
6. We know that it is much more into it than that a Nebulizer only distributes 10% of the dosage
And so on…