Doping in XC skiing

[ToreBear]

Re: Re:

]



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.

But still the FBI was not helping USOC cover up doping. The degree of government involvement is the big difference.

I think the reason the athletes were not interviewed was because they didn't have much time, and had to prioritize areas they thought might yield evidence. Remember so far, that report has not mentioned any athletes names. The reason he didn't interview the government officials is his previous experience of interviewing them yielding little information.

Yes. Legkov has a good point about him not being on the national team. IIRC Rodtchenkov described the process of changing dope tests at Sochi. But that doesn't mean he knew they were doping or what they are doping with.

I'm a bit torn about Legkov. On the one hand the Canadian coach said after the relay that he saw something in Legkov he didn't like. On the other hand, I didn't see anything about Legkov that made me think he was better than expected.

If you were to tell me that it's 100% true that Legkov doped, I would have to say it was with Stimulants. Those signs would be easier to see when looking at someones face. I doubt he would have taken anything like steroids and epo because he would need to have used them over time, and that would get him caught. Especially since he competed the next week in Finland and came third(automatic dope test). From his podiums, we can more or less guarantee he was tested on the 1st of February(won in Toblach) and 2nd March. Nah I don't see it. If he took anything it would be stimulants.

But that is very hypothetical, and is unprovable now since any samples he took during Sochi would have been exchanged.

I choose to view this situation as orders coming to switch the samples of Russian athletes. I don't think Rotchenkov knew who was doping or not. He didn't need to know. He just switched all of them.

So in my mind the evidence against individual athletes in Sochi is not enough to prove any violation. It would have to be more than that.

And here that comes in: The Russians had a system of avoiding positives before they reach the lab, and another after they reached the lab. I don't think there is any list of those potential positives who never reached the lab, or if there is, Wada doesn't have it. What they do have though is the list of those who tested positive at the lab. If a Positive was found it would be sent to the ministry for approval. Those who were protected had their positives changed at the lab.

So anybody that showed up on that list I would view as having doped. And I think being on the list is enough to suspend them.

So In Legkovs case, seeing as he rarely trained in Russia, and hence was not tested much in the Moscow lab, the likelihood of him being on that list is small even if he doped, which I personally don't think he did.

Now another interesting thing is that the head of FIS anti doping IIRC, said when this stuff about the Moscow lab came out, that he had blood samples analyzed in Moscow, while the Urine samples were analysed outside the country.

So that makes it even less likely that many of the top or suspicious Russians(who Fis would test), would be on the List of names who have positives changed to negative.

I think they are investigating the list of names now. But if they will just publish it, or send it to the antidoping process, I have no idea. If i'ts the latter, this could take quite some time.

 

[BullsFan22]

Re: Re:

]



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.

But still the FBI was not helping USOC cover up doping. The degree of government involvement is the big difference.

I think the reason the athletes were not interviewed was because they didn't have much time, and had to prioritize areas they thought might yield evidence. Remember so far, that report has not mentioned any athletes names. The reason he didn't interview the government officials is his previous experience of interviewing them yielding little information.

Yes. Legkov has a good point about him not being on the national team. IIRC Rodtchenkov described the process of changing dope tests at Sochi. But that doesn't mean he knew they were doping or what they are doping with.

I'm a bit torn about Legkov. On the one hand the Canadian coach said after the relay that he saw something in Legkov he didn't like. On the other hand, I didn't see anything about Legkov that made me think he was better than expected.

If you were to tell me that it's 100% true that Legkov doped, I would have to say it was with Stimulants. Those signs would be easier to see when looking at someones face. I doubt he would have taken anything like steroids and epo because he would need to have used them over time, and that would get him caught. Especially since he competed the next week in Finland and came third(automatic dope test). From his podiums, we can more or less guarantee he was tested on the 1st of February(won in Toblach) and 2nd March. Nah I don't see it. If he took anything it would be stimulants.

But that is very hypothetical, and is unprovable now since any samples he took during Sochi would have been exchanged.

I choose to view this situation as orders coming to switch the samples of Russian athletes. I don't think Rotchenkov knew who was doping or not. He didn't need to know. He just switched all of them.

So in my mind the evidence against individual athletes in Sochi is not enough to prove any violation. It would have to be more than that.

And here that comes in: The Russians had a system of avoiding positives before they reach the lab, and another after they reached the lab. I don't think there is any list of those potential positives who never reached the lab, or if there is, Wada doesn't have it. What they do have though is the list of those who tested positive at the lab. If a Positive was found it would be sent to the ministry for approval. Those who were protected had their positives changed at the lab.

So anybody that showed up on that list I would view as having doped. And I think being on the list is enough to suspend them.

So In Legkovs case, seeing as he rarely trained in Russia, and hence was not tested much in the Moscow lab, the likelihood of him being on that list is small even if he doped, which I personally don't think he did.

Now another interesting thing is that the head of FIS anti doping IIRC, said when this stuff about the Moscow lab came out, that he had blood samples analyzed in Moscow, while the Urine samples were analysed outside the country.

So that makes it even less likely that many of the top or suspicious Russians(who Fis would test), would be on the List of names who have positives changed to negative.

I think they are investigating the list of names now. But if they will just publish it, or send it to the antidoping process, I have no idea. If i'ts the latter, this could take quite some time.

I can't prove that the FBI or a secret service govt or govt hired entity did or didn't get involved in manipulating or changing tests. I don't know that, so while I can't say it happened, I can't say it didn't happen. I would say the same thing about the Russian case.

Rodchenkov has lived in the US since 2011. If Legkov has barely been to Russia, and not ever tested in Russia apart from Sochi or during the Rybinsk WC races, only being tested while in continental Europe, then I think he makes a valid point that he's never seen Rodchenkov in his life.

As far as Justin Wadsworth, the then Canadian national team head coach, is concerned, I will advise not to take everything he says serious or smart. Before he became the Canadian team coach, he was a head coach for the Americans. The Americans had some good results, but the women's team was largely terrible apart from Randall's sprinting and the occasional top 30, top 20 distance results from a couple skiers. One who essentially retired after Oslo 2011. The other is is still on the team, and skiing well, but is much better in skating than classic and is somewhat inconsistent, particularly when the conditions don't suit her. The men were good at the time, two world class sprinters and a distance guy, very good at classic, but again, too inconsistent to be a threat. He had breakthroughs in two World Championship races where he almost medaled. Apart from that, he was simply ok at the big races. Nothing to speak of during the Olympics in which he took part it. Wadsworth was a coach with the Americans for a few seasons, then moved to the Canadians after Vancouver and as you probably know, they won the team sprint in Oslo and in that same season Kershaw had a couple podiums at the TDS and the following season he finished 2nd overall in the WC. After that his form dropped, seemingly every week, ever so slightly. He hasn't had a podium since 2012. Harvey was the flag bearer since that season and I think his talent is really been shown to everyone else. He'll be a contender for another few seasons. After that, they don't have anyone who is close to Harvey's level. Wadsworth had been riding the coattails of Harvey and Kershaw for years. He's done nothing to expand the national team. The guy has never had a college education, from what I know, and prior to becoming a US head coach, he never had any experience coaching, at any level, let alone the head coaching position at a national team. Him becoming coach with Canada is mostly due to Beckie Scott, his wife. She too, 'wants to clean the sport,' but only if the Russians are there to be cleaned. That has been her and her husband's deal the whole time. They never talk anything else in doping but the Russians. Wadsworth was also critical of Legkov in the 50km, but when you look at that race, he skied tactically brilliant race. He didn't really lead, he had good skis, the conditions were fast, his shape was good and he saved his energy really well for that final lap. What's more, the gaps were small. Not just between the front 4, but to the top 25 or 30 guys. It was barely over a minute to the 25 or 26th skier. Yes, it was a mass start, conditions were fast, but the pace wasn't slow, it was brisk for much of the race.

And what happened to the Canadians in Sochi? I don't think they even had one top 15 result. Then the following season Harvey won two individual medals and if he had skied the 50km tactically better, he could have gotten a third medal. He also led the relay after the first leg. The only Russian to win an individual race in Falun that year was Vylegzhanin, he won the 30km skiathlon. Harvey was 3rd, just a second or two behind. No other Russian won an individual medal there. What happened? How was Harvey able to beat those state sponsored Russians? This after being blown away in every race in Sochi.

 

[BullsFan22]

Re: Re:

]



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.

But still the FBI was not helping USOC cover up doping. The degree of government involvement is the big difference.

I think the reason the athletes were not interviewed was because they didn't have much time, and had to prioritize areas they thought might yield evidence. Remember so far, that report has not mentioned any athletes names. The reason he didn't interview the government officials is his previous experience of interviewing them yielding little information.

Yes. Legkov has a good point about him not being on the national team. IIRC Rodtchenkov described the process of changing dope tests at Sochi. But that doesn't mean he knew they were doping or what they are doping with.

I'm a bit torn about Legkov. On the one hand the Canadian coach said after the relay that he saw something in Legkov he didn't like. On the other hand, I didn't see anything about Legkov that made me think he was better than expected.

If you were to tell me that it's 100% true that Legkov doped, I would have to say it was with Stimulants. Those signs would be easier to see when looking at someones face. I doubt he would have taken anything like steroids and epo because he would need to have used them over time, and that would get him caught. Especially since he competed the next week in Finland and came third(automatic dope test). From his podiums, we can more or less guarantee he was tested on the 1st of February(won in Toblach) and 2nd March. Nah I don't see it. If he took anything it would be stimulants.

But that is very hypothetical, and is unprovable now since any samples he took during Sochi would have been exchanged.

I choose to view this situation as orders coming to switch the samples of Russian athletes. I don't think Rotchenkov knew who was doping or not. He didn't need to know. He just switched all of them.

So in my mind the evidence against individual athletes in Sochi is not enough to prove any violation. It would have to be more than that.

And here that comes in: The Russians had a system of avoiding positives before they reach the lab, and another after they reached the lab. I don't think there is any list of those potential positives who never reached the lab, or if there is, Wada doesn't have it. What they do have though is the list of those who tested positive at the lab. If a Positive was found it would be sent to the ministry for approval. Those who were protected had their positives changed at the lab.

So anybody that showed up on that list I would view as having doped. And I think being on the list is enough to suspend them.

So In Legkovs case, seeing as he rarely trained in Russia, and hence was not tested much in the Moscow lab, the likelihood of him being on that list is small even if he doped, which I personally don't think he did.

Now another interesting thing is that the head of FIS anti doping IIRC, said when this stuff about the Moscow lab came out, that he had blood samples analyzed in Moscow, while the Urine samples were analysed outside the country.

So that makes it even less likely that many of the top or suspicious Russians(who Fis would test), would be on the List of names who have positives changed to negative.

I think they are investigating the list of names now. But if they will just publish it, or send it to the antidoping process, I have no idea. If i'ts the latter, this could take quite some time.

BTW, good points.

 

[ToreBear]

Re:

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…

I'm starting to wonder if you are the one trolling. We started off with me pointing out the flaws in your post, like false and/or misleading quoting. viewtopic.php?p=1986627#p1986627
I was willing to take it at face value that these were just unintentional mistakes by you. Something I was willing to accept despite the type and amount of mistakes telling me otherwise.

So you laid out the bait, and I as I have in the past naively took it. Then you made a long post that wasn't adressed to anyone, but plainly was looking for a response from someone who holds a different view so you could argue with them.

I didn't take the bait, ruining the purpose of your posting. So you replied to a post I made to someone else with:

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

Really you are in a way accusing me of trolling if I don't respond to your bait.

When the trolling word comes up, I get suspicious. More often than not I have seen that those who are first to accuse others of trolling, are in fact the real trolls themselves.

Here you want me to respond to the bait I didn't take the first time. I did so because I'm a nice guy. I also replied to the next bit of bait you laid in the same post.

So having spent the time to write a long careful reply. You respond with some arguments, monolog and a lot of bait hoping to make me respond in kind.

I again reply. But this time I don't carefully respond to your if-then-else-if-so arguments, that seem to be either a rehash, or something new meant to make me react. Or something you say you didn't say that I'm able to respond to with a quote of you saying it.

So now we have this post were you essentially accuse me of trolling again. That I am blindly following the NSF press conference arguments(cool since I haven't seen it). And when I'm not posting as an nsf pr man, I post insults, ad hominems, condescending comments. Oh and supposedly I have said I had an arrogant attitude.

From me saying "I know I can come across as a bit arrogant", You said I said I had an "arrogant attitude". That is a nice little stretch of the truth, as you seem to do quite regularly.

Now my supposedly arrogant attitude is the same one as people in the NSF who to you appear to be "the enemy". And you will now try to stay out of arguments with me for the time being. Oh ok.

I guess not, since the next paragraph is adressed to me, meaning something...


So I've been trolled again. Oh well I guess you've had your fun.

 

[ToreBear]

Re: Re:

]



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.

But still the FBI was not helping USOC cover up doping. The degree of government involvement is the big difference.

I think the reason the athletes were not interviewed was because they didn't have much time, and had to prioritize areas they thought might yield evidence. Remember so far, that report has not mentioned any athletes names. The reason he didn't interview the government officials is his previous experience of interviewing them yielding little information.

Yes. Legkov has a good point about him not being on the national team. IIRC Rodtchenkov described the process of changing dope tests at Sochi. But that doesn't mean he knew they were doping or what they are doping with.

I'm a bit torn about Legkov. On the one hand the Canadian coach said after the relay that he saw something in Legkov he didn't like. On the other hand, I didn't see anything about Legkov that made me think he was better than expected.

If you were to tell me that it's 100% true that Legkov doped, I would have to say it was with Stimulants. Those signs would be easier to see when looking at someones face. I doubt he would have taken anything like steroids and epo because he would need to have used them over time, and that would get him caught. Especially since he competed the next week in Finland and came third(automatic dope test). From his podiums, we can more or less guarantee he was tested on the 1st of February(won in Toblach) and 2nd March. Nah I don't see it. If he took anything it would be stimulants.

But that is very hypothetical, and is unprovable now since any samples he took during Sochi would have been exchanged.

I choose to view this situation as orders coming to switch the samples of Russian athletes. I don't think Rotchenkov knew who was doping or not. He didn't need to know. He just switched all of them.

So in my mind the evidence against individual athletes in Sochi is not enough to prove any violation. It would have to be more than that.

And here that comes in: The Russians had a system of avoiding positives before they reach the lab, and another after they reached the lab. I don't think there is any list of those potential positives who never reached the lab, or if there is, Wada doesn't have it. What they do have though is the list of those who tested positive at the lab. If a Positive was found it would be sent to the ministry for approval. Those who were protected had their positives changed at the lab.

So anybody that showed up on that list I would view as having doped. And I think being on the list is enough to suspend them.

So In Legkovs case, seeing as he rarely trained in Russia, and hence was not tested much in the Moscow lab, the likelihood of him being on that list is small even if he doped, which I personally don't think he did.

Now another interesting thing is that the head of FIS anti doping IIRC, said when this stuff about the Moscow lab came out, that he had blood samples analyzed in Moscow, while the Urine samples were analysed outside the country.

So that makes it even less likely that many of the top or suspicious Russians(who Fis would test), would be on the List of names who have positives changed to negative.

I think they are investigating the list of names now. But if they will just publish it, or send it to the antidoping process, I have no idea. If i'ts the latter, this could take quite some time.

I can't prove that the FBI or a secret service govt or govt hired entity did or didn't get involved in manipulating or changing tests. I don't know that, so while I can't say it happened, I can't say it didn't happen. I would say the same thing about the Russian case.

Rodchenkov has lived in the US since 2011. If Legkov has barely been to Russia, and not ever tested in Russia apart from Sochi or during the Rybinsk WC races, only being tested while in continental Europe, then I think he makes a valid point that he's never seen Rodchenkov in his life.

As far as Justin Wadsworth, the then Canadian national team head coach, is concerned, I will advise not to take everything he says serious or smart. Before he became the Canadian team coach, he was a head coach for the Americans. The Americans had some good results, but the women's team was largely terrible apart from Randall's sprinting and the occasional top 30, top 20 distance results from a couple skiers. One who essentially retired after Oslo 2011. The other is is still on the team, and skiing well, but is much better in skating than classic and is somewhat inconsistent, particularly when the conditions don't suit her. The men were good at the time, two world class sprinters and a distance guy, very good at classic, but again, too inconsistent to be a threat. He had breakthroughs in two World Championship races where he almost medaled. Apart from that, he was simply ok at the big races. Nothing to speak of during the Olympics in which he took part it. Wadsworth was a coach with the Americans for a few seasons, then moved to the Canadians after Vancouver and as you probably know, they won the team sprint in Oslo and in that same season Kershaw had a couple podiums at the TDS and the following season he finished 2nd overall in the WC. After that his form dropped, seemingly every week, ever so slightly. He hasn't had a podium since 2012. Harvey was the flag bearer since that season and I think his talent is really been shown to everyone else. He'll be a contender for another few seasons. After that, they don't have anyone who is close to Harvey's level. Wadsworth had been riding the coattails of Harvey and Kershaw for years. He's done nothing to expand the national team. The guy has never had a college education, from what I know, and prior to becoming a US head coach, he never had any experience coaching, at any level, let alone the head coaching position at a national team. Him becoming coach with Canada is mostly due to Beckie Scott, his wife. She too, 'wants to clean the sport,' but only if the Russians are there to be cleaned. That has been her and her husband's deal the whole time. They never talk anything else in doping but the Russians. Wadsworth was also critical of Legkov in the 50km, but when you look at that race, he skied tactically brilliant race. He didn't really lead, he had good skis, the conditions were fast, his shape was good and he saved his energy really well for that final lap. What's more, the gaps were small. Not just between the front 4, but to the top 25 or 30 guys. It was barely over a minute to the 25 or 26th skier. Yes, it was a mass start, conditions were fast, but the pace wasn't slow, it was brisk for much of the race.

And what happened to the Canadians in Sochi? I don't think they even had one top 15 result. Then the following season Harvey won two individual medals and if he had skied the 50km tactically better, he could have gotten a third medal. He also led the relay after the first leg. The only Russian to win an individual race in Falun that year was Vylegzhanin, he won the 30km skiathlon. Harvey was 3rd, just a second or two behind. No other Russian won an individual medal there. What happened? How was Harvey able to beat those state sponsored Russians? This after being blown away in every race in Sochi.

Rodchenkov is living in the US while running the Moscow anti-doping lab? This does not compute.

As for Wadsworth. I register his opinion. He could be right or he could be wrong.

The Russians have had a bad history of doping, but I think after the rash of positives before 2010 they were threatened with expulsion by FIS if they didn't get serious about stopping the doping.

I think they have more or less followed that up. The girls look to all be racing clean. The results might not have come yet, but I think it will take time to get trainers who don't see doping as a tool. The training system has been set up with doping as a method for decades, and that takes time to change. I also think the men have been more or less clean. At least I think there has been a no doping policy from the federation.

Anyway, I think there are a lot of coaches who are alert to signs the Russians have reverted to old ways. It takes time to earn trust.

Of course the Sochi games might have created more pressure to get results. But the results they got seemed to be within normal range anyway.

There were a lot of teams that had trouble with their skies at Sochi. The Norwegians were just the most obvious and loudest ones that couldn't get it right. So It would not surprise me if they also had that issue.

 

[kosmonaut]

This is getting ridiculous. MJS appealing CAS verdict.

http://www.tv2.no/sport/8536007/

 

[Blaaswix]

Re:

This is getting ridiculous. MJS appealing CAS verdict.

http://www.tv2.no/sport/8536007/

NRK seem to be saying that he is evaluating whether to put in an appeal, but the chances of succeeding are low.

 

[BullsFan22]

Re:

This is getting ridiculous. MJS appealing CAS verdict.

http://www.tv2.no/sport/8536007/

Not a surprise, really. He wants to keep the titles and money.

 

[TMobile41]

I was happy to see MJS get busted, but to be honest until I see Marit Bjoergen caught, I will still feel that this sport is a joke

 

[John de Savage]

Healthy norwegian skiers were told to use asthma medicine.
http://www.tv2.no/sport/8541900

 

[Blaaswix]

Re:

Healthy norwegian skiers were told to use asthma medicine.
http://www.tv2.no/sport/8541900

Do read this, fire up Google Translate if you need to, but read it. It's quite staggering.

 

[Robert5091]

So it's given as a "preventitive medicine" so skiers can breath when they retire from competitions ... yeah. Look forward to the seminar later this year.

 

[kosmonaut]

The plot thickens. Be interesting to see how this unfolds.

http://www.vg.no/sport/langrenn/langrenn/fis-lege-om-astmamedisin-til-friske-norske-langrennsloepere-meget-uheldig/a/23775404/

Inggard Lereim: – This is new to FIS and if correct I will ask FIS to investigate.

Anti Doping Norway: – This is completely new information, and we react strongly on what we've learned through media.

Seppälä: – This is doping.

 

[Lyon]

Re: Re:

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.

Skiing has not recovered it's credibility. Even in Norway many have long since been waiting/hoping for a big scandal. Deep down people know that modern sport is built like a house of cards and that the winter sports are no different.

Back in the early to mid nineties it was at least alluded to that operating in the gray area was a neccecity for the Norwegian skiers to compete against the Russians and Italians. If this misuse of asthma medication is along the same path (and I do believe it is), simply come out and say it. At this point nobody really cares about such a traffic violation anyway, since they already suspect murder.

The Norwegian Skiing federation operates in much the same way as SKY/British Cycling - even when they have nothing to hide they still hide it.

 

[python]

...1st the good news - both critical articles linked above are the main stream norwegian media. that's good to see an attempt at self reflection. i am also encouraged by the critical comments of some norwegian medical professionals and - if the reaction is genuine - anti-doping norway.

now we have to wait and see if wada had sufficiently recovered from its pre-olympic political crusades against one country and ready to take on another. the difference in scale and therefore in significance of course may hamper wada's zeal.

 

[Blaaswix]

Re:

...1st the good news - both critical articles linked above are the main stream norwegian media. that's good to see an attempt at self reflection. i am also encouraged by the critical comments of some norwegian medical professionals and - if the reaction is genuine - anti-doping norway.

now we have to wait and see if wada had sufficiently recovered from its pre-olympic political crusades against one country and ready to take on another. the difference in scale and therefore in significance of course may hamper wada's zeal.

When the Sundby story broke in Norway there was a majority of negative comments under media articles, but still a few in his defence. I haven't seen a single comment so far that is anything other than people being appalled, but not that surprised, this time. I think Norwegian XC fans really have had enough this time. Very interesting ski season on the way.

 

[Discgear]

Re: Re:

...1st the good news - both critical articles linked above are the main stream norwegian media. that's good to see an attempt at self reflection. i am also encouraged by the critical comments of some norwegian medical professionals and - if the reaction is genuine - anti-doping norway.

now we have to wait and see if wada had sufficiently recovered from its pre-olympic political crusades against one country and ready to take on another. the difference in scale and therefore in significance of course may hamper wada's zeal.

When the Sundby story broke in Norway there was a majority of negative comments under media articles, but still a few in his defence. I haven't seen a single comment so far that is anything other than people being appalled, but not that surprised, this time. I think Norwegian XC fans really have had enough this time. Very interesting ski season on the way.

Yes, it's a game changer. I read today on vgd.no, quite a difference though still a few sounds quite like ToBe on this forum. I never before seen the norwegian media so skeptical towards the Norwegian Ski Federation.

 

[Blaaswix]

Re: Re:

...1st the good news - both critical articles linked above are the main stream norwegian media. that's good to see an attempt at self reflection. i am also encouraged by the critical comments of some norwegian medical professionals and - if the reaction is genuine - anti-doping norway.

now we have to wait and see if wada had sufficiently recovered from its pre-olympic political crusades against one country and ready to take on another. the difference in scale and therefore in significance of course may hamper wada's zeal.

When the Sundby story broke in Norway there was a majority of negative comments under media articles, but still a few in his defence. I haven't seen a single comment so far that is anything other than people being appalled, but not that surprised, this time. I think Norwegian XC fans really have had enough this time. Very interesting ski season on the way.

Yes, it's a game changer. I read today on vgd.no, quite a difference though still a few sounds quite like ToBe on this forum. I never before seen the norwegian media so skeptical towards the Norwegian Ski Federation.

The mantra that asthma meds don't enhance performance in athletes that don't have asthma keeps getting repeated. And then there's this article (abstract only) https://www.thieme-connect.com/products/ejournals/abstract/10.1055/s-2004-815716 which found that "Inhalation of a supratherapeutic dose of 800 µg salbutamol improved endurance cycling performance by 1.9 ± 1.8 % in non-asthmatic athletes", which is rather different to what we keep being told.

 

[meat puppet]

Doesnt salbutamol also have an anabolic effect, if a mild one?

Anyhow, Seppälä is right. This is about taking drugs without a medical reason, to wit in order to enhance performance. So doping.

 

[Lyon]

As said before: If it doesn't work, athletes stop using it. Every day is a trial and results are easy to gauge. Without a doubt the general feeling within the Norwegian skiing community is that asthma medication have a performance enhancing effect.

 

[Cloxxki]

Re:

Doesnt salbutamol also have an anabolic effect, if a mild one?

Seems the effect is mild, if you use normal dose
I use 200-400mcg and never noticed a thing, obviously. Dispicable the amounts Sundy takes, structurally, not to save his life or anything.

 

[Discgear]

A short update, norwegian media is really spinning this forward now.

1. Norwegian Ski Federation has spent millions on hiring a PR-firm to handle the mess after the CAS-verdict. Seems that it won't be sufficient now, after the latest scandal

2. Yesterday, Erik Røste ski president of the Norwegian Ski Federation, called out for an investigation about the treatment of healthy skiers with asthma medication through Nebulizer. He said that the XC-team would do the investigation internally. After some hours and great pressure from the media, he said that he will invite Antidoping Norge to participate. (remember, the same Anti-doping Norge that first cleared MJS). Seems that the head of Finland Antidoping agency, Seppälä, was right all along when he in July called out for an international investigation of elite XC-skiing in Norway.

3. On the 22th August, just before the latest scandal exploded, MJS in an interview told the media that he has hired top lawyers in Switzerland to investigate the possibilities for an appeal against the CAS-verdict. In the same interview he said that last season - due to the investigation - he wasn't able to use the Nebulizer anymore, hence needed to step up to much higher doses of asthma medication The highlighted part is quite sensational. If so, not using nebulizer due to the investigation, howcome rest of the team was using it, even non-asthmatics? It doesn't really make sense either when you read the claims in the verdict, when it looked as if the nebulizer and the doses was an exception, due to an acute worsening of MJS asthma. Also, what does higher doses mean, considering the extreme doses that was put into the Nebulizer?

I guess the possibility for MJS top lawyers to succed with an appeal has drastically worsened the last days.

 

[Blaaswix]

Re: Re:

On the 22th August, just before the latest scandal exploded, MJS in an interview told the media that he has hired top lawyers in Switzerland to investigate the possibilities for an appeal against the CAS-verdict. In the same interview he said that last season - due to the investigation - he wasn't able to use the Nebulizer anymore, hence needed to step up to much higher doses of asthma medication The highlighted part is quite sensational. If so, not using nebulizer due to the investigation, howcome rest of the team was using it, even non-asthmatics? It doesn't really make sense either when you read the claims in the verdict, when it looked as if the nebulizer and the doses was an exception, due to an acute worsening of MJS asthma. Also, what does higher doses mean, considering the extreme doses that was put into the Nebulizer?

It was already found by the WADA that Martin Johnsrud Sundby was abusing the nebulizers, and that his condition was not "acute severe asthma". The way in which he used the large doses of salbutamol was excessive, prolonged, and medically unnecessary.

I guess the possibility for MJS top lawyers to succeed with an appeal has drastically worsened the last days.

Their tactic is foolish, and makes one wonder whether they have understood the content of the ruling. Sundby should have just accepted his suspension, rather than to attempt to 'clear his name' by claiming innocence.

On the 22th August, just before the latest scandal exploded, MJS in an interview told the media that he has hired top lawyers in Switzerland to investigate the possibilities for an appeal against the CAS-verdict. In the same interview he said that last season - due to the investigation - he wasn't able to use the Nebulizer anymore, hence needed to step up to much higher doses of asthma medication The highlighted part is quite sensational. If so, not using nebulizer due to the investigation, howcome rest of the team was using it, even non-asthmatics? It doesn't really make sense either when you read the claims in the verdict, when it looked as if the nebulizer and the doses was an exception, due to an acute worsening of MJS asthma. Also, what does higher doses mean, considering the extreme doses that was put into the Nebulizer?

It was already found by the WADA that Martin Johnsrud Sundby was abusing the nebulizers, and that his condition was not "acute severe asthma". The way in which he used the large doses of salbutamol was excessive, prolonged, and medically unnecessary.

I guess the possibility for MJS top lawyers to succeed with an appeal has drastically worsened the last days.

Their tactic is foolish, and makes one wonder whether they have understood the content of the ruling. Sundby should have just accepted his suspension, rather than to attempt to 'clear his name' by claiming innocence.

So an ordinary inhaler would give the sort of dose prescribed to treat chronic asthma. A nebulizer would be the sort of treatment given in an emergency situation for an acute, serious asthma attack. Is this right so far? How would you get an even higher dose if not by a nebulizer?

 

[Discgear]

Re: Re:

So an ordinary inhaler would give the sort of dose prescribed to treat chronic asthma. A nebulizer would be the sort of treatment given in an emergency situation for an acute, serious asthma attack. Is this right so far? How would you get an even higher dose if not by a nebulizer?

It's all very confusing. There's two possible explanations; either the Norwegians are blowing a lot of smoke out of their a...s or they don't really have a clue. The latter is less probible due to project 88 http://www.greatestsportingnation.com/content/why-do-norway-continue-top-capita-rankings

Just going through the mathematics: The CAS-verdict states that the limit of a 1600 microgram daily dose is with an inhaler, a MDI – metered dose inhaler. An often cited study claims that the efficiency of such a devise is about 10-20% of the dose reaching the lungs. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1884297/
In reality the WADA limit hence is 160-320 microgram of beta-2 agonists reaching the lungs.

The logic of MJS and the NSF was that a Nebulizer only delivers 10% to the lungs, hence it was relevant with a dose of 15000 micrograms daily. According to one of the WADA experts (CAS-verdict) a Nebulizer distributes about 40% of the inserted dose to the lungs (however without citation). That would mean that Johnsrud Sundby (at least, or every Norwegian skier?) over expanded period of times are deposing a dose of 6000 micrograms daily to the lungs (40% of 15000). That in other words is 20-40 times the allowed dose according to WADA rules. Just think of Salazar for a minute!

After the developments the last week, we know that the use of Nebulizer is common within the elite XC-skiing community in Norway even among healthy athletes. You might wonder in what doses. Remember the following: steroids, narcotics and EPO are all medicines, as is Salbutamol and other Beta2-agonists. It’s the use of it by healthy athletes that makes it doping, so be it in Russia or Norway.

__________________

 

[meat puppet]

Thanks discgear, excellent summaries along the way.