Doping in XC skiing

[dukoff]

Re: Re:

sundby got in trouble with the wada appeal exactly b/c he did not have a tue during neither/both tests he failed. he did have one previously. this is one of the most curious moments, WHY he did not have one when it would be a mere formality....

It's clearly unbelievable to most here. But what is indeed the truth, is evidenced in details like this one.

There are certainly ethical questions to be raised on the use of asthma-meds vs variable medical diagnosis. And there are questions to be raised on the true secondary effects of these meds in general. But if NSF administered this for the purpose of secondary effects, not primary asthma/lung constrictions, they would have done it much more professionally, as eliminating the risk is all offered on a silver platter.

 

[BullsFan22]

Re: Re:

A few Qs about the Johaug case: Given that the story privided so far is true, would she have had any lasting advantages of a that low dose of clostebol for 10 days? To me this is one of the most important questions

If the story told by the doctor is true, the math might be something like this:

* 3.5 grams Trofodermin used
* The cream is 0.5% concentration of clostebol
* The absorption rate for transdermal testosterone analog like this, across the thin skin of the lips... maybe something like 20% of the amount applied is absorbed into the bloodstream

3.5 g / 200 / 5 = 3.5 milligrams total entered the blood

* The cream was used over a period of 10 days

0.35 milligrams per day

* The anabolic effect of clostebol vs. testosterone is about 45%

0.35 mg * 0.45 = 0.1575 milligrams testosterone equivalent potency per day

That is a guess based on the above assumptions. The number would come out to be far less than the amount required for effective anabolic muscle mass gain.

but everyone seems focused on if it was intentional or not.

That question is relevant to the moral character of the athlete, but the doping investigation will apply a principle of "strict liability": that the intent of the athlete and her doctor are not an excuse. Also, that the penalty may be worse because they "ought to have known" this product is banned, since the Trofodermin cream has the label "DOPING" on the package.

Since there have been so many doping cases involving this drug, it means either: a shocking mistake, or familiarity from a habit of using clostebol

Which means that she will be exonerated and the current two month ban is the only punishment she'll receive OR 2-4 years. There will be no 'in between' in this case. My guess is that she'll be exonerated and once her two month ban is completed on december 18, she'll be back on the team and racing, of course.

 

[Blaaswix]

Re:

Again, in the perspective of dose, you must be on top of these details in order not to step wrong. That is, if you were allowed to put this high dose in the nebulizer in the first place. Which we now know, that is not allowed.

The rest of the XC teams seemed to know that this wasn't allowed because as far as we know they haven't done it.

 

[python]

Re: Re:

The number would come out to be far less than the amount required for effective anabolic muscle mass gain.

this may not be the case at all, even if the amount was as small as you estimate (which may be an order of magnitude higher b/c we simply don't know how many tubes, packages or the frequency of application - and i drew a sharp attention to this fact earlier - hence it was conveniently not released).

besides, as we know from other endurance sports, particularly from cycling, the anabolic steroids are not used for muscle gain, but muscle maintenance. and faster recovery. hence the doses are very small. iirc, hamilton used just several mg at a time and knew he'll stop glowing in the morning. nothing we know about therese NOW prevents from assuming she was using the hamilton strategy...true, the sport of xc skiing places a higher premium on the upper body strength, even some bulk, but the principle of minimizing the catobolic wastage due to repeated overloads is the same...

and here's even more important factor about women and steroids. a well known one for decades. the testosterone effect on the ladies is dramatic compared to men. b/c they produce, on the average, 1/10 the testo amount in man. and therese does not really need much to get the effects. she's miniature even by the average female skier size - 45 kg.

the assumption that it was a deliberate doping strategy is very much potent until proven otherwise. if you followed our sport closer (not a dig) you'd remember her solo finishes 5-6% faster that any other girls including most norge girls. she was simply annihilating everyone last year.

i actually can see wada taking this road (as they did with contador) if therese's experts mount a defense along these lines.

 

[dukoff]

Re: Re:

Which means that she will be exonerated and the current two month ban is the only punishment she'll receive OR 2-4 years. There will be no 'in between' in this case. My guess is that she'll be exonerated and once her two month ban is completed on december 18, she'll be back on the team and racing, of course.

The standard non-intentional period of ineligibility should be 2y after §10.2.2 of the wada code. She will not be considered to have "No fault or negligance" after §10.4, but very likely "No significant fault or negligance" after §10.5. If it was a 'Specified Substance', that would open for "minimum, a reprimand" after §10.5.1, but since it's not shell fall under §10.5.2, "not be less than one-half of the period of ineligibility otherwise applicable". Which means half of 2 years, hence, she'll get 1 year.

There really isn't any apparent opening for further reduction since it's a non-'Specified Substance'.

 

[BullsFan22]

Re: Re:

Which means that she will be exonerated and the current two month ban is the only punishment she'll receive OR 2-4 years. There will be no 'in between' in this case. My guess is that she'll be exonerated and once her two month ban is completed on december 18, she'll be back on the team and racing, of course.

The standard non-intentional period of ineligibility should be 2y after §10.2.2 of the wada code. She will not be considered to have "No fault or negligance" after §10.4, but very likely "No significant fault or negligance" after §10.5. If it was a 'Specified Substance', that would open for "minimum, a reprimand" after §10.5.1, but since it's not shell fall under §10.5.2, "not be less than one-half of the period of ineligibility otherwise applicable". Which means half of 2 years, hence, she'll get 1 year.

There really isn't any apparent opening for further reduction since it's a non-'Specified Substance'.

That's what this next two months will bring, to see if they can prove that it was either negligent or not, a calculating routine that was actually caught, or a huge mistake by a doctor with 38 years of experience and the best athlete in her sport that talked of 'double and triple checking' anything she takes.

My opinion will be the two months and that's it.

 

[Wigry3]

If I were Therese and wanted to dope, I would just eat the cream, not rub it on the skin. Spread some Trofodermin on the toasted bread at breakfast.

That's not a good idea. Absorption from digestive system is much lower compared to transdermal administration. For example. One Undestor pill contains 40mg of testosterone and this drug is absorbed from lymphatic system - bypassing a liver that neutralizes most of the active substance. If i remember correctly you take 2 pills a day. So how much do we have to eat this ointment to get doped ?
I've been on HRT for almost 23 years and I know how steroids work. There are a lot of myths about them. Of course doping is doping and it's not important what was the purpose in using this ointment. However, in my opinion we can't say anything without actual result of the test. So let's wait, but it is a bit strange that she used this ointment for so many days. Steroid ointment should never be applied on face and particulary on lips. She used it for 10 days and she never spotted the red mark with the word 'doping' . If the doctor had told her to give herself an EPO shot would she have done it without hesitation only because the doctor made her do that?

 

[Tubeless]

Re: Re:

Which means that she will be exonerated and the current two month ban is the only punishment she'll receive OR 2-4 years. There will be no 'in between' in this case. My guess is that she'll be exonerated and once her two month ban is completed on december 18, she'll be back on the team and racing, of course.

The standard non-intentional period of ineligibility should be 2y after §10.2.2 of the wada code. She will not be considered to have "No fault or negligance" after §10.4, but very likely "No significant fault or negligance" after §10.5. If it was a 'Specified Substance', that would open for "minimum, a reprimand" after §10.5.1, but since it's not shell fall under §10.5.2, "not be less than one-half of the period of ineligibility otherwise applicable". Which means half of 2 years, hence, she'll get 1 year.

There really isn't any apparent opening for further reduction since it's a non-'Specified Substance'.

Applying the more lenient penalty under section 10.5.2. assumes Johaug's lip cream explanation is accepted. It smells like a cover story, made up in a hurry and without checking basic facts such as whether the medication is intended for sunburn lips at all. Neither the Dr nor Johaug able to see the text "Doping" on the tube? Even if the source of clestobol in the sample was from the lip cream, it'd be a stretch to claim "no significant fault or negligence".

If Johaug is given just a 1 year suspension, WADA is likely to take this to CAS to argue for 2 years.

 

[Cloxxki]

Re: Re:

the fis president talks tough on the johaug case...doubts the cream story, unhappy about how he was informed, thinks it is 4 years based on what he knows now and ready to appeal if the ban too mild...

http://www.dagbladet.no/sport/vi-kommer-til-a-anke-en-mild-straff/63980751

recalling how fis exonerated sundby, i am quite frankly surprised at the tone. but then again, even some norwegians are getting tired of the arrogance of their xc ski fed.

What is particularly galling is remembering how the Norwegians criticized the Finns for using oxygen masks in training whilst they had the nebulizers installed on the top floor of their waxing truck! The hypocrisy of it is just awful.

Those who did speak out fully deserve to be asked about this. On camera.

 

[BullsFan22]

Re: Re:

the fis president talks tough on the johaug case...doubts the cream story, unhappy about how he was informed, thinks it is 4 years based on what he knows now and ready to appeal if the ban too mild...

http://www.dagbladet.no/sport/vi-kommer-til-a-anke-en-mild-straff/63980751

recalling how fis exonerated sundby, i am quite frankly surprised at the tone. but then again, even some norwegians are getting tired of the arrogance of their xc ski fed.

What is particularly galling is remembering how the Norwegians criticized the Finns for using oxygen masks in training whilst they had the nebulizers installed on the top floor of their waxing truck! The hypocrisy of it is just awful.

Those who did speak out fully deserve to be asked about this. On camera.

I very much doubt that will happen. The only way, it seems, that the Norwegians will question their own national team skiers is if they are out in the open, blood doping or getting injections, or nebulizers or whatever else, in broad daylight. Though at that point the media will probably label it as some sort of sarcastic joke.

In all seriousness, they won't question those that mocked the Finns. If a Finn comes out and criticizes the Norwegians regarding Johaug, Sundby and the widespread asthma meds use, they'll be accused of being hypocrites...something along this line "you shouldn't be the one to talk, the Finns have had systematic doping...." Saarinen is really the only athlete thus far that has talked about these recent two cases on more than one occasion. Kowalczyk has always criticized the Norwegians and Bjoergen, specifically, using the asthma meds and being surprised how so many of the Norwegians 'suffer' from asthma. She was mocked, continuously by the Norwegians because of this. She's been proven right, and that's great.

No matter the outcome of Johaug's positive test(s), this season and even 2018 figure to be very interesting indeed. Will the Norwegians again occupy the top 10 spots as they did the last couple seasons? If they do, is that just business as usual and nobody really cares anymore? If they don't, will that mean that they toned their meds, and/or simply had psychological pressure knowing what happened during the Summer/Fall months with the two doping cases and that people will look at them more differently?

I think there is much more to this than simply that, to me, fake story of lip balm and simple 'overdose' of asthma meds. I think there is much more flagrant doping involved there and while I know that Sundby obviously has asthma, in my opinion, that isn't the only thing he's been using for the past few seasons. I think in both cases there as masking agents in play, especially in Johaug's case. Taking a banned steroid for ten straight days for lip balm is suspicious, to say the least.

 

[dukoff]

Re: Re:

Applying the more lenient penalty under section 10.5.2. assumes Johaug's lip cream explanation is accepted. It smells like a cover story, made up in a hurry and without checking basic facts such as whether the medication is intended for sunburn lips at all. Neither the Dr nor Johaug able to see the text "Doping" on the tube? Even if the source of clestobol in the sample was from the lip cream, it'd be a stretch to claim "no significant fault or negligence".

If Johaug is given just a 1 year suspension, WADA is likely to take this to CAS to argue for 2 years.

The standard of proof is only "balance of probability" (51%).

- her symptoms at the time in question are well documented
- she listed the medication on the form prior to being tested
- the doctor claimed he bought two creams, both showing up on recovered receipts
- the levels were compatible with use of the cream

These are strong supporting evidence for establishing the turn of events, compared to many other cases.

A 1 year ban will likely be reasoned by:

- she used the cream on advice from and supplied by an experienced team doctor
- the levels were low, and had no performance enhancing effect

As for the doping warning, it is certainly possible to miss with bad luck. It was on the back of the package, and not on the tube. Further, the leaflet, where she may be expected to seek information (not on the packaging), was in a language she may not understand. Hence, I don't think that detail will be a determining factor for anything.

Finally, Johaug shall not be held for her doctor's fault or negligence, but for her own fault or negligence.

Quite relevant case, given a 1y ban with seemingly weaker proof than Johaug's case:
CAS Squizzato v. FINA

 

[sida_mot]

I don't see it. Won't it be problematic to link that cream to treating her sunburn as it's not intended for that at all? And still it is not like she had a TUE and was allowed to do it anyways...

The crappy doctor defence is outdated. Athletes can't and shouldn't be able to avoid bans by having a team doctor fall on their swords. Would be madness if the system was like that.

The fact remains that she is caught with steroids in her blood. I'd guess at least 18 months. I can see it go much closer to the max as well though. The lack of transparency and general arrogant attitude of NSF in this matter and the recent Sundby-case might provoke the wrong people.

Would have been so much easier to take Johaug's side if she indeed had "done everything to prove her innocence" * bangs table*. Keeping quiet is just gonna make me wonder what they are afraid of telling.

Isn't Squizzato case kinda old?

 

[sida_mot]

I don't see it. Won't it be problematic to link that cream to treating her sunburn as it's not intended for that at all? And still it is not like she had a TUE and was allowed to do it anyways...

The crappy doctor defence is outdated. Athletes can't and shouldn't be able to avoid bans by having a team doctor fall on their swords. Would be madness if the system was like that.

The fact remains that she is caught with steroids in her blood. I'd guess at least 18 months. I can see it go much closer to the max as well though. The lack of transparency and general arrogant attitude of NSF in this matter and the recent Sundby-case might provoke the wrong people.

Would have been so much easier to take Johaug's side if she indeed had "done everything to prove her innocence" * bangs table*. Keeping quiet is just gonna make me wonder what they are afraid of telling.

Isn't Squizzato case kinda old?

 

[Tubeless]

Re: Re:

Applying the more lenient penalty under section 10.5.2. assumes Johaug's lip cream explanation is accepted. It smells like a cover story, made up in a hurry and without checking basic facts such as whether the medication is intended for sunburn lips at all. Neither the Dr nor Johaug able to see the text "Doping" on the tube? Even if the source of clestobol in the sample was from the lip cream, it'd be a stretch to claim "no significant fault or negligence".

If Johaug is given just a 1 year suspension, WADA is likely to take this to CAS to argue for 2 years.

The standard of proof is only "balance of probability" (51%).

- her symptoms at the time in question are well documented
- she listed the medication on the form prior to being tested
- the doctor claimed he bought two creams, both showing up on recovered receipts
- the levels were compatible with use of the cream

These are strong supporting evidence for establishing the turn of events, compared to many other cases.

A 1 year ban will likely be reasoned by:

- she used the cream on advice from and supplied by an experienced team doctor
- the levels were low, and had no performance enhancing effect

As for the doping warning, it is certainly possible to miss with bad luck. It was on the back of the package, and not on the tube. Further, the leaflet, where she may be expected to seek information (not on the packaging), was in a language she may not understand. Hence, I don't think that detail will be a determining factor for anything.

Finally, Johaug shall not be held for her doctor's fault or negligence, but for her own fault or negligence.

Quite relevant case, given a 1y ban with seemingly weaker proof than Johaug's case:
CAS Squizzato v. FINA

The tube at least in this picture does have the doping warning:

The fact that both the experienced Dr and Johaug herself failed to see the doping warning, or google the main ingredient clestobol can at best be categorized as "significant negligence". At worst, it is a cover story made up to cover intravenous use of the steroid and to argue for a lesser penalty.

The low level in the sample may simply mean that clestobol use stopped some time earlier. Referencing a similar case from the past, Alberto Contador argued unsuccessfully that the trace amounts of Clenbuterol found in his sample meant no performance-enhancing effect.

 

[Blaaswix]

As for the doping warning, it is certainly possible to miss with bad luck. It was on the back of the package, and not on the tube. Further, the leaflet, where she may be expected to seek information (not on the packaging), was in a language she may not understand.

It should be noted here that the Norwegian for doping is "doping". When presented with a novel medicine in a foreign country, whether you are an elite athlete, sports doctor or hapless tourist, you'd read the packaging.

 

[Discgear]

Re: Re:

Applying the more lenient penalty under section 10.5.2. assumes Johaug's lip cream explanation is accepted. It smells like a cover story, made up in a hurry and without checking basic facts such as whether the medication is intended for sunburn lips at all. Neither the Dr nor Johaug able to see the text "Doping" on the tube? Even if the source of clestobol in the sample was from the lip cream, it'd be a stretch to claim "no significant fault or negligence".

If Johaug is given just a 1 year suspension, WADA is likely to take this to CAS to argue for 2 years.

The standard of proof is only "balance of probability" (51%).

- her symptoms at the time in question are well documented
- she listed the medication on the form prior to being tested
- the doctor claimed he bought two creams, both showing up on recovered receipts
- the levels were compatible with use of the cream

These are strong supporting evidence for establishing the turn of events, compared to many other cases.

A 1 year ban will likely be reasoned by:

- she used the cream on advice from and supplied by an experienced team doctor
- the levels were low, and had no performance enhancing effect

As for the doping warning, it is certainly possible to miss with bad luck. It was on the back of the package, and not on the tube. Further, the leaflet, where she may be expected to seek information (not on the packaging), was in a language she may not understand. Hence, I don't think that detail will be a determining factor for anything.

Finally, Johaug shall not be held for her doctor's fault or negligence, but for her own fault or negligence.

Quite relevant case, given a 1y ban with seemingly weaker proof than Johaug's case:
CAS Squizzato v. FINA

Dukoff, if you accept the official version:
both Johaug and the experienced team doctor missed the clear doping warning
both failed to check/google Trofodermin and Clostebol
the the levels were compatible with use of the cream (They haven't made the levels public, despite several journalists questioning)

then what's your take on the following:
Johaug phones the team medic from Italy and tells about her problems. Why didn't the medic tell anyone from the staff to go and get Johaug the usual lip balsam that he thought were with package in Italy?

The medic travels down to Italy four days after the phone call and meets Johaug at the breakfast next morning. According to Lofshus, she has great pain, problems to eat and sleep. The medic finds out that she needs treatment. Here it is confusing, because he says the usual lip balsam is not in the package and also that he forgot to bring anything from Norway.

Despite Johaugs big problems, he didn't go shopping lip balsam until the next day! Go figure.

So, whats your take on this?

 

[dukoff]

The athlete is presumed to tell the truth. For the probabilities to fall against her, there must be contrary evidence overbalancing supporting evidence, not baseless subjective speculation and theories.

Trofodermin is indeed indicated against hsv, which is her symptom, and is typically triggered by sunburn. She calls it sunburn just as it's a bit more comfortable wording.

The actual tubes Therese used, have been shown, front and back, and does not have the warning on the tube itself.
http://imgur.com/a/NXppt

"I didn't see it", "you must have seen it", can neither be satisfactorily determined. If you get instructions for use by a familiar doctor with 30y+ experience, it's not that unlikely you skip to search for other instructions.

Her case could have been much worse. She may had bought it her self. She may had used it on a rash with no proof of the symptom's existence. She may had no receipt for the date of purchase. She may have not filed the medication on the report, but made the excuse after the fact. Even in such case, she should get non-intentional 1-2y based on the low levels detected. So it seems very unlikely to me she'll get more than 1y.

There are also some non-material indications that the story is not fabricated. Why they claimed she actually received the packaging, after the fact of the doping warning had been brought forward? It's indisputable he actually bought the creams. If it's all a lie, he should have known about the symbol too. Why the doctor use the words "she asked if the medication was ok, implied 'is it on the doping list' ", instead of saying she explicitly asked if it was on the doping list?. These details don't support her, yet are given for no apparent reason.

 

[dukoff]

Re: Re:

Dukoff, if you accept the official version:
both Johaug and the experienced team doctor missed the clear doping warning
both failed to check/google Trofodermin and Clostebol
the the levels were compatible with use of the cream (They haven't made the levels public, despite several journalists questioning)

then what's your take on the following:
Johaug phones the team medic from Italy and tells about her problems. Why didn't the medic tell anyone from the staff to go and get Johaug the usual lip balsam that he thought were with package in Italy?

The medic travels down to Italy four days after the phone call and meets Johaug at the breakfast next morning. According to Lofshus, she has great pain, problems to eat and sleep. The medic finds out that she needs treatment. Here it is confusing, because he says the usual lip balsam is not in the package and also that he forgot to bring anything from Norway.

Despite Johaugs big problems, he didn't go shopping lip balsam until the next day! Go figure.

So, whats your take on this?

Well, it's difficult to dissect without reading actual transcripts of the explanations given by both of them. But some facts which makes me not see this with suspicion are:

There are many products used against hsv outbreaks. Some which Therese obviously are in constant possession of, given this is a regular recurrence. Such outbreaks can manifest all from a small localized blister, to a larger area covering most of a lip surface, or even both upper/lower lips at the same time. Further, the extent of any single outbreak is not constant, it starts with a small indication, and grows to a maximum extent over a number of days, with a total time to full healing of about 2 weeks. These are facts known to anyone with a basic medical knowledge. In this light, a story of concern, application of primary selected medication, further aggravation of symptoms, with increasing discomfort and possible indication for need of alternative choice of medicine, all progressing over a number of days, is exactly how these conditions progress, when the outbreak is of a larger type. As we see in this incident from the interviews at the time, this was indeed such a large outbreak, and a progressing turn of events as I described is very much in line with the factual explanations given, even if we only have an outline of them. The need for medication alternative to her personal primary would not be indicated until several days had passed, which may well coincide with the timeline given.

 

[Blaaswix]

Re:

Trofodermin is indeed indicated against hsv...

Not in Norway it isn't.

 

[python]

johaug and johaug only is responsible for the doping product found in her body. time and again the court for arbitration in sport supported the position (i am not going to bother repeating the cas statement i quote above).
in it, the cas specifically rejected any referrals to a doctor advice. now, 'what she gets' has 2 flavours. a norwegian one which now changed from 'totally innocent' to 1year and the everyone else.

here's what's important. if, as was absolutely evident during the sundby case, the norwegians will try again to stonewall or manipulate the wada code to favour a domestic doper, they may again end up losing big time. a guaranteed appeal from fis (as the fis pres already said) or what's even worse a a joint fis/wada appeal. it would be a principal matter for them to protect - a corner stone principle of strict liability

the fis resources and the wada expertise offer nothing pretty for little threrese or her big bosses. i seems a wise approach for her to receive at least 2 years from adno, or face a sure appeal and another wave of distrust of the norwegian reputation which is already at all time low. wonder why a charm offensive was order yesterday ?
http://www.vg.no/sport/langrenn/petter-northug/langrennsledelsen-northug-amp-co-maa-vise-stoerre-ydmykhet-overfor-konkurreneter/a/23827494/

i trust the adno is not made of fanboys and fangirls.

 

[Discgear]

Re: Re:

Dukoff, if you accept the official version:
both Johaug and the experienced team doctor missed the clear doping warning
both failed to check/google Trofodermin and Clostebol
the the levels were compatible with use of the cream (They haven't made the levels public, despite several journalists questioning)

then what's your take on the following:
Johaug phones the team medic from Italy and tells about her problems. Why didn't the medic tell anyone from the staff to go and get Johaug the usual lip balsam that he thought were with package in Italy?

The e medic travels down to Italy four days after the phone call and meets Johaug at the breakfast next morning. According to Lofshus, she has great pain, problems to eat and sleep. The medic finds out that she needs treatment. Here it is confusing, because he says the usual lip balsam is not in the package and also that he forgot to bring anything from Norway.

Despite Johaugs big problems, he didn't go shopping lip balsam until the next day! Go figure.

So, whats your take on this?

Well, it's difficult to dissect without reading actual transcripts of the explanations given by both of them. But some facts which makes me not see this with suspicion are:

There are many products used against hsv outbreaks. Some which Therese obviously are in constant possession of, given this is a regular recurrence. Such outbreaks can manifest all from a small localized blister, to a larger area covering most of a lip surface, or even both upper/lower lips at the same time. Further, the extent of any single outbreak is not constant, it starts with a small indication, and grows to a maximum extent over a number of days, with a total time to full healing of about 2 weeks. These are facts known to anyone with a basic medical knowledge. In this light, a story of concern, application of primary selected medication, further aggravation of symptoms, with increasing discomfort and possible indication for need of alternative choice of medicine, all progressing over a number of days, is exactly how these conditions progress, when the outbreak is of a larger type. As we see in this incident from the interviews at the time, this was indeed such a large outbreak, and a progressing turn of events as I described is very much in line with the factual explanations given, even if we only have an outline of them. The need for medication alternative to her personal primary would not be indicated until several days had passed, which may well coincide with the timeline given.

If it indeed was HSV - oral herpes Johaug did suffer from (source?), early treatment is paramount. It further highlights the questions I raised before:

Johaug phones the team medic from Italy and tells about her problems. Why didn't the medic tell anyone from the staff to go and get Johaug the usual lip balsam that he thought were with package in Italy?

The medic travels down to Italy four days after the phone call and meets Johaug at the breakfast next morning. According to Lofshus, she has great pain, problems to eat and sleep. The medic finds out that she needs treatment. Here it is confusing, because he says the usual lip balsam is not in the package and also that he forgot to bring anything from Norway.

Despite Johaugs big problems, he didn't go shopping lip balsam until the next day! Go figure.

So once again, whats your take on this?

 

[Cloxxki]

Well I think the press has a job to do. Wo were the Norwegians ridiculing Kowalczyk over her asthma complaints? Ask them for a follow-up. Offer them the opportunity to admit their mistake.
It was a Norwegian elite skier mentioning the vapor-cabin. Let's see how key players that before spoke about the cleaner than clean team will be prepared to atttack the words of their own guy?
We should not let people get away with hypocritism without it being addressed. They deserve to have it be addressed, on an international podium.

"Dear top Norwegian skier, we see you just signed the anti-doping board before the race. In the eyes of your competitors, that includes not taking medicine you don't need. What is your own interpretation of the vow you signed there?

 

[dukoff]

Re: Re:

Johaug phones the team medic from Italy and tells about her problems. Why didn't the medic tell anyone from the staff to go and get Johaug the usual lip balsam that he thought were with package in Italy?

Because it's not primary indicated medicine. The primary she would be in possession of and using. He stated on the press conference that it was upon inspection he determined the need for Terra Cortril, which he found not to have, hence he went out to get it. The discussion they had over phone prior to this he describes to be whether she should remain at the camp or return to Norway. It's not explicitly stated what they discussed about medication at that time, but you would presume she was not untreated.

Why he didn't get the meds on the 2nd, but on the morning of the 3rd, he does not explain. He simply says "and I did that on the 3rd". As there was no questions raised on this, we don't have his reasoning. Though at this point he's likely not longer treating to contain an outbreak, but to speed up healing and avoid infection. In case the time wouldn't longer be that critical. Still, the reason is not apparent, and it's a fair question why he waited this day.

 

[Discgear]

Re: Re:

Johaug phones the team medic from Italy and tells about her problems. Why didn't the medic tell anyone from the staff to go and get Johaug the usual lip balsam that he thought were with package in Italy?

Because it's not primary indicated medicine. The primary she would be in possession of and using. He stated on the press conference that it was upon inspection he determined the need for Terra Cortril, which he found not to have, hence he went out to get it. The discussion they had over phone prior to this he describes to be whether she should remain at the camp or return to Norway. It's not explicitly stated what they discussed about medication at that time, but you would presume she was not untreated.

On the press-conference they only talked about sunburnt lips. TerraCortril would be maybe a proper medication for HSV. Do you have a link to where either the doctor or Johaug said that indeed HSV was the problem?
I agree that you would presume that she was not untreated, but indeed (you said it yourself) if Herpes is a common problem for Therese, you would also assume that she doesn't travel without proper medication for this. But as I recall, the only problem mentioned in the press-conference was the sunburned lips.

Why he didn't get the meds on the 2nd, but on the morning of the 3rd, he does not explain. He simply says "and I did that on the 3rd". As there was no questions raised on this, we don't have his reasoning. Though at this point he's likely not longer treating to contain an outbreak, but to speed up healing and avoid infection. In case the time wouldn't longer be that critical. Still, the reason is not apparent, and it's a fair question why he waited this day.

I'm glad you recognize the missing day as a fair question.
However, there is a few more problems. The medic didn't go to the nearby pharmacy where they indeed are selling TerraCortil, he went to the next one, which is more of a health store. Secondly, one of the side-effects with Trofodermin is blisters around the mouth. Boggles me why the medic would give such a medication - not mentioning the doping warning and the text Clostebol - for HSV stroken lips.
Thirdly, Trofodermin according to several Italian medics and pharmacists, shouldn't be lubed on the lips.

 

[BullsFan22]

Re: Re:

Johaug phones the team medic from Italy and tells about her problems. Why didn't the medic tell anyone from the staff to go and get Johaug the usual lip balsam that he thought were with package in Italy?

Because it's not primary indicated medicine. The primary she would be in possession of and using. He stated on the press conference that it was upon inspection he determined the need for Terra Cortril, which he found not to have, hence he went out to get it. The discussion they had over phone prior to this he describes to be whether she should remain at the camp or return to Norway. It's not explicitly stated what they discussed about medication at that time, but you would presume she was not untreated.

On the press-conference they only talked about sunburnt lips. TerraCortril would be maybe a proper medication for HSV. Do you have a link to where either the doctor or Johaug said that indeed HSV was the problem?
I agree that you would presume that she was not untreated, but indeed (you said it yourself) if Herpes is a common problem for Therese, you would also assume that she doesn't travel without proper medication for this. But as I recall, the only problem mentioned in the press-conference was the sunburned lips.

Why he didn't get the meds on the 2nd, but on the morning of the 3rd, he does not explain. He simply says "and I did that on the 3rd". As there was no questions raised on this, we don't have his reasoning. Though at this point he's likely not longer treating to contain an outbreak, but to speed up healing and avoid infection. In case the time wouldn't longer be that critical. Still, the reason is not apparent, and it's a fair question why he waited this day.

I'm glad you recognize the missing day as a fair question.
However, there is a few more problems. The medic didn't go to the nearby pharmacy where they indeed are selling TerraCortil, he went to the next one, which is more of a health store. Secondly, one of the side-effects with Trofodermin is blisters around the mouth. Boggles me why the medic would give such a medication - not mentioning the doping warning and the text Clostebol - for HSV stroken lips.
Thirdly, Trofodermin according to several Italian medics and pharmacists, shouldn't be lubed on the lips.

Excellent post. This just makes both the doctor AND Johaug look like amateurs, in fact like beginners, someone who doesn't have any experience and just went in to the store to by whatever they felt like was necessary. So many red lights in this Johaug story. How can a doctor with 38 years of experience, working with top athletes mess up this bad (if it was indeed an error rather than blatant doping)? They waited that long, and in the time before he came to Italy, he didn't prescribe anything or didn't tell anyone there to get something for her before he arrived, then once he arrived, he didn't bring anything from Norway? Once there, he went to a health store/pharmacy/whatever it was and got a steroid which was clearly marked as doping, and gave it to her, and she didn't double or triple or quadruple check like she always says she does, and used it for 10 days? Then a lip balm (albeit a steroid, which also boggles my mind that an anabolic steroid would be used for sunburned lips) is shown in her urine sample?

Under normal circumstances, this wouldn't hold up in the court of sport law and medicine. Just my hunch. So the next thing will be, are WADA, CAS, ADNO and whoever else is involved in the case now, how generous are they feeling? Will they give the best skier in the world (from last year anyway) and someone who's been a star of her sport for a number of years and one that is extremely popular in her country and makes a ton of money through her sport AND outside of it with her modeling, clothing and ski brands (including the "Johaug" gloves that a number of WC skiers use) a suspension? As it's been mentioned on more than one occasion, the shortest ban given for this type of drug was 15 months, the longest 4 years.

As I've said, I think they'll somehow weasel their way through this and the current provisional ban is the only one she'll get. I am hoping that if WADA, ADNO and CAS are really what they say they are, they'll give her 1-2 years and it will set a precedent (hopefully) that even if you are the top skier, even if you are from Norway, you'll be punished if caught doping or using banned substances. If not, it will be business as usual. If she is banned for at least a year, then there might be a chance that more is looked into the ongoing asthma medication on non-asthmatic skiers, including those not from Norway.