Doping in XC skiing

Page 150 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 7, 2015
656
0
0
Two cases within just a few weeks with none at all in the years prior, when we know just how easily these things "happen" (especially among dominating groups/nations - i.e Jamaica) makes you wonder how many cases have been swept under the rug by FIS et. al.

Has Antidoping Norge been guilty of favouritism? I have seen first hand how clumsily rude they treat other athletes. Maybe they act differently when asked to 'eat at the kings table'? No matter what, I am sure this draws plenty of (hidden and not so hidden) smiles from other Norwegian athletes, even those in winter sports.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
...this is remarkable....

remarkable 1: both leaders of the last season, i mean the genders, caught doping. i doubt it is a coincidence b/c a very long experience in many endurance sports tells us the leaders dope the most

remarkable 2: i have long been pounding here the theme that of unprecedented secrecy still surrounding the sundby case. neither the fis acquittal not who acquitted him had been made public. if the suspicion of of a cover up proves correct, the fact that we have another norwegian busted may show a crack in the fis and nsf mafia-like deals. this is of course a speculation

remarkable 3: as a chemist i view the lip balm version with great suspicion. the amounts of the steroid are to small and the area of skin penetration is too tiny too. a trans-dermal transition into the circulation is complicated and some drug could metabolize. i recall some case when one of the masking techniques was undetectable metabolites of the banned substance . it may have misfired in the little therese case. thus the docs rush to protect her...
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
this is why the 'doctor mistake' - to a critical mind at least - looks like an utter bs. :rolleyes:

the always vigilant and very professional norwegian medics suddenly became incapable of reading a clearly marked label... besides we always knew that the team brings everything from norway when abroad - from food to cooks to any sanitary or therapeutic meds. i smell bs, a story prepaid in advance, to instantly defuse the strict wada rules on non intentional negligence. that is the only way she can reduce the vacation time, which should be 4 years in such cases....
 
Python -agree, totally. Also your point re application of lipcream not necessarily being enough to trigger an AAF is good, imo.

Will be interesting to see how this positive came about in the first place. Hubris leading to a genuine mistake? Testers being a step ahead? Something else? I would not rule out institutional arm twisting slash "kohandel", either.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Re:

meat puppet said:
Python -agree, totally. Also your point re application of lipcream not necessarily being enough to trigger an AAF is good, imo.

Will be interesting to see how this positive came about in the first place. Hubris leading to a genuine mistake? Testers being a step ahead? Something else? I would not rule out institutional arm twisting slash "kohandel", either.
this is truly scandalous ! turns out, there is a failed doping test .....but...... there is NO doping case open by fis. and t herese is NOT suspended :rolleyes: that's what i understood from the norwegian side. isn't this phenomenal given that hundreds of athletes get suspended automatically upon an A sample returning a positive.

neither was sundby suspended and the whole thing was handled in deep secrecy.

the fis needs a change of chief ?
 
Do we have any idea how much she had taken? Is it really plausible this was all because of a lipcream? The doctor falling on his sword, feel kind of bad for him, he's just a pawn in this game of chess anyway, I can't imagine something so simple would be the cause of all of this.

If they get their way Johaug will end up with a sentence like Simon Yates and might miss this season but there are no championships this year anyway so it doesn't really hurt too much.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
they might dismiss the case altogether...

that much became clear at the press conference, though the anti-doping norge said it was one of the possibilities.

a no consequence dismissal of an anabolic steroid positive without a hearing would be unprecedented, if memory serves. but everything is possible in norway, when a xc ski sect is mobilized to save one of their own.

the following questions are critical. and i will attempt to qualify what i can based on whatever little info known so far.

1. which testing authority ordered the test ?
this q is instrumental to evaluating the degree of objectivity as to how the consequences will be handled. only one of the following 4 could: the fis, the norwegian ski fed/ anti-doping norge, the italian coni, the wada. if it is the 1st two, i expect the case dismissal as it was with sundby, but a true shytstorm will follow. guaranteed. wada will appeal. i am 200% sure.

2. which lab detected the steroid ?
this is important b/c i know for a fact that not every wada lab has the equipment sensitive enough to detect a very low level. the steroid is a non-specif substance, meaning ANY level found is an automatic adrv.
my hunch it was a german lab - perhaps cologne - well known to lead in detecting steroids. bad news for therese.

3. what was the concentration in urine ?
this Q is crucial. the norges already told the world at the press conference, w/o revealing the concentration, it was consistent with applying a cream. to any specialist or a chemist this is a downright crap. 1st because one needs to know the time the cream was applied compared the drug half-life and related to the test day, and 2nd the athlete story can not be taken for granted w/o the verification. for instance, say she took a tablet but got tested when the drug almost washed out due to metabolic clearance. things like that, is what the anti-doping is about.

i smell fish...
 
Re:

python said:
3. what was the concentration in urine ?
this Q is crucial. the norges already told the world at the press conference, w/o revealing the concentration, it was consistent with applying a cream. to any specialist or a chemist this is a downright crap. 1st because one needs to know the time the cream was applied compared the drug half-life and related to the test day, and 2nd the athlete story can not be taken for granted w/o the verification. for instance, say she took a tablet but got tested when the drug almost washed out due to metabolic clearance. things like that, is what the anti-doping is about.

i smell fish...
Well it's complete bs. At the pressconference today: "Fredag 16. september, 12 dager etter at Johaug brukte kremen, ble det tatt en urinprøve av Johaug. Hun oppga ifølge Skiforbundet at hun hadde brukt kremen Trofodermin, og det forbudte stoffet ble oppdaget i prøven som ble tatt."

So the test was done 12 days after she used the medication. The half live of the drug is 8 hours. http://www.steroidconfirm.com/Steroid_Half-Lives.pdf How on earth is it possible to trace enough substance 12 days after?
 
Jan 3, 2016
300
0
0
Very good points Python, and Disc Gear. It's all quite staggering.

The Norwegian press is mostly still in Poor Therese mode, how can they have such clueless doctors and so forth.
There seems to be some confusion around if the doctor didn't know that the cream contained clostebol, or if he he saw that the cream contained clostebol but he didn't know it was on the doping list.

If I am skiing on snow in bright sunshine I use a sunblock. And if I don't, and I get a sun burnt lip, then I use a zinc salve, but then I am not a top level athlete. Ho hum.
 
Re:

python said:
this is why the 'doctor mistake' - to a critical mind at least - looks like an utter bs. :rolleyes:

the always vigilant and very professional norwegian medics suddenly became incapable of reading a clearly marked label... besides we always knew that the team brings everything from norway when abroad - from food to cooks to any sanitary or therapeutic meds. i smell bs, a story prepaid in advance, to instantly defuse the strict wada rules on non intentional negligence. that is the only way she can reduce the vacation time, which should be 4 years in such cases....
The "doping" is crossed out, so the medics probably thought it means "no doping" :rolleyes:

I'm not the biggest cross-country skiing fan. I watch a few races every year, but I'm not as interested in the sport as many here, but even I have the feeling that I read about doping in XC skiing way too often in the last months.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
@discgear
an excellent point and a detail. thanks. i had no opportunity to watch the pressconference. just read the highlight.
let me quickly qualify the new info. generally, in classic biochemistry a substance can be considered biologically washed out after about 5 half-lifes. no matter how one plays with the math 8x5 is not going to stretch to 12 days. one has to be careful though - and that why hearings with the expertise exist - a substance half life is NOT a fixed textbook number. rather it is a range. for a given athlete. or between athletes. a good guess is that a motoroller like therese with her fast metabolism of a top athlete is FASTER than one referenced. a bad news for the ' lip cream' theory. a lip service, pun intended :lol:

in some cases per wada an athlete can be exposed to a special pharmacokinetic study - to establish the very parameters of the drug clearance (half life etc) - in order to entertain the claim made by a cheat or determine the so called therapeutic use (like it was with sundby who undergone 2 of such studies in london and oslo).

the issue of the equipment sensitivity is a whole different subject. it is complicated and may surface during a hearing if ever conducted. that's why there MUST be a hearing. i'll go into that if and when applied.

@blaaswix
poor therese indeed :surprised:
 
Re: Re:

ClassicomanoLuigi said:
So the test was done 12 days after she used the medication.
Or so it is claimed, twelve days after they claim she used the drug in this manner.
The half live of the drug is 8 hours. http://www.steroidconfirm.com/Steroid_Half-Lives.pdf How on earth is it possible to trace enough substance 12 days after?
It seems that metabolites of a single oral dose of the drug already could be detected by liquid chromatography beyond 10 days

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0tiUCEz0lo
I don't speak Norwegian, but it's not necessary to know the language to see the severity of this emotion reaction. If it were merely a mistake, and not even her own mistake, then I would expect the press conference to be a somber occasion, at which she would grimly state those facts. But, she doesn't act like a person who has done nothing wrong
Well the study you refer to is an oral dose. This was cream on the lips - at least they claim.... :rolleyes: .

I do agree that something is way off when she talks. Eyes constantly looking upwards, looking into the manuscript getting the details right, and then the theatrical finishing punch in the table.

http://www.expressen.se/sport/langdskidor/ilskan-mot-johaug-det-ar-inte-trovardigt/
Saarinen doesn't buy the explanation. Today, she went to the same drug store as NSFs MD claim he went to, and bought the same medicine. It wasn't on the shelfs. She had to ask for it, and was warned by the dealer that it's a classified doping product. Also the package - as mentioned before - was clearly marked with doping.

By the way, where is ToreBear?
 
Went to check FIS, antidoping.no and Norges skiforbund sites. Now, I dont read norwegian fluently, so please correct me if Im wrong here. But after my perusal it seems to me that no case has been opened and no suspension has taken place, just as python said. This is quite remarkable. Weren't there a case against Contador, the precedent of similar status(?), like, almost immediately?

Also Olympiatoppen twitter has not commented this at all.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Re:

meat puppet said:
Went to check FIS, antidoping.no and Norges skiforbund sites. Now, I dont read norwegian fluently, so please correct me if Im wrong here. But after my perusal it seems to me that no case has been opened and no suspension has taken place, just as python said. This is quite remarkable. Weren't there a case against Contador, the precedent of similar status(?), like, almost immediately?

Also Olympiatoppen twitter has not commented this at all.
good call and a parallel re, the contador case.

i followed that clenbuterol case in the minute details. still remember a bit... then, the so called results management authority - the uci - applied the complicated wada rules to attempt to 'delay' the decision.

i am sure this is what is going now with threse. there are legal clause that a results management authority can use before passing a case down for further adjudication. which normally would be a national fed. likely the fis is being hounded by the norge fed to dismiss.
 
Nov 15, 2015
180
0
0
Re: Re:

Look, r-tards. She didn't stop using the cream 12 days before the positive test. That's when she started using it. At least get your facts straight before poking holes in her story.

In other news, Johan Olsson is convinced that Therese is innocent. Aint that a glowing endorsement?
 
Re: Re:

John de Savage said:
Look, r-tards. She didn't stop using the cream 12 days before the positive test. That's when she started using it. At least get your facts straight before poking holes in her story.

In other news, Johan Olsson is convinced that Therese is innocent. Aint that a glowing endorsement?
Don't know if you have other information, but this is from vg.no: Fredag 16. september, 12 dager etter at Johaug brukte kremen, ble det tatt en urinprøve av Johaug.
 
I love the moment about 10 seconds before the end of the press conference, when she clenches her fist and punches the table. You can almost hear a flack telling her to do that exactly in this moment because it will make her look more emotional and reliable :lol:

Anyway, I'm extremely annoyed how some media stations are reporting about this case. For example the Austrian TV station ORF reported about Johaug and they didn't even mention that her claims could potentially be wrong. They only said how embarrassing this case is for the Norwegian medics :eek:
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS