Doping in XC skiing

Page 196 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re:

ToreBear said:
Saw Bendiksen not being prosecuted. Read the rage and indignation here. :lol: How this illustrates that something is rotten in Norway etc.

Bendiksen was freed because WADAs rules don't allow for punishing doctors unless they do something intentional. The rules are stupid, but they are the rules.
So now you're upset that WADA doesn't allow ADN to punish the doctor. But so far, you've joined the Norse chorus with upset voices over WADA punishing someone using lip balm.

But that put aside, please provide a direct link to the paragraph in the WADA code that prohibits NIF, NSF or ADN to punish the team doctor for assuring an athlete it's okay to use medication with anabolic steroids.
 
Re: Re:

Discgear said:
ToreBear said:
Saw Bendiksen not being prosecuted. Read the rage and indignation here. :lol: How this illustrates that something is rotten in Norway etc.

Bendiksen was freed because WADAs rules don't allow for punishing doctors unless they do something intentional. The rules are stupid, but they are the rules.
So now you're upset that WADA doesn't allow ADN to punish the doctor. But so far, you've joined the Norse chorus with upset voices over WADA punishing someone using lip balm.

But that put aside, please provide a direct link to the paragraph in the WADA code that prohibits NIF, NSF or ADN to punish the team doctor for assuring an athlete it's okay to use medication with anabolic steroids.
Sorry don't have time for strawman arguments. I think the rules are stupid, but it does not upset me. I can not see any chorus, and AFAIK Trifoderm is not a lip balm.

I'm no lawyer or wada expert. However ADN had a dialogue with wada about this case, and the lack of intent is enough for him to be let off.

If I'm wrong, and WADA disagrees and ADN lied about their agreement, they should be expected to appeal.
 
Most people are happy to discuss and considered the high expectation of Russian track&field athletes and skiers to make to the national team, in order to make a living.
How's that in Norway then? Is the sport SO BIG that like amateur soccer in The Netherlands (3rd league or lower), you can actually make a living doing just the sport, no teaching or waxing etc?
Surely a Norwegian looking to make it to the national team is going to get a lot of pressure. One does not just ski into the national team on pure talent. Especially not of the ones present are high on anti-asthma inhalers overdosed dozens of times, and having years of world cup level experience and training volume.

What is the difference between Russia ("can't make the team without doping, obviously") concerning multiple sports, and skiing/biathlon in Norway presenting a much larger share of sporting culture there, lacking internationally renowned soccer/swimming/cycling/track/etc?
 
Jul 28, 2011
135
0
8,830
Re: Re:

ToreBear said:
Discgear said:
ToreBear said:
Saw Bendiksen not being prosecuted. Read the rage and indignation here. :lol: How this illustrates that something is rotten in Norway etc.

Bendiksen was freed because WADAs rules don't allow for punishing doctors unless they do something intentional. The rules are stupid, but they are the rules.
So now you're upset that WADA doesn't allow ADN to punish the doctor. But so far, you've joined the Norse chorus with upset voices over WADA punishing someone using lip balm.

But that put aside, please provide a direct link to the paragraph in the WADA code that prohibits NIF, NSF or ADN to punish the team doctor for assuring an athlete it's okay to use medication with anabolic steroids.
Sorry don't have time for strawman arguments. I think the rules are stupid, but it does not upset me. I can not see any chorus, and AFAIK Trifoderm is not a lip balm.

I'm no lawyer or wada expert. However ADN had a dialogue with wada about this case, and the lack of intent is enough for him to be let off.

If I'm wrong, and WADA disagrees and ADN lied about their agreement, they should be expected to appeal.
Translation: "I am going to completely ignore you ('don't have time' despite ~1500 posts) and I think the rules are stupid and wrong. Yet despite this, if something truly nefarious happened it would have been called out."

I think you just stated your MO in your most articulate form yet!
 
Re: Re:

ToreBear said:
Discgear said:
ToreBear said:
Saw Bendiksen not being prosecuted. Read the rage and indignation here. :lol: How this illustrates that something is rotten in Norway etc.

Bendiksen was freed because WADAs rules don't allow for punishing doctors unless they do something intentional. The rules are stupid, but they are the rules.
So now you're upset that WADA doesn't allow ADN to punish the doctor. But so far, you've joined the Norse chorus with upset voices over WADA punishing someone using lip balm.

But that put aside, please provide a direct link to the paragraph in the WADA code that prohibits NIF, NSF or ADN to punish the team doctor for assuring an athlete it's okay to use medication with anabolic steroids.
Sorry don't have time for strawman arguments. I think the rules are stupid, but it does not upset me. I can not see any chorus, and AFAIK Trifoderm is not a lip balm.

I'm no lawyer or wada expert. However ADN had a dialogue with wada about this case, and the lack of intent is enough for him to be let off.

If I'm wrong, and WADA disagrees and ADN lied about their agreement, they should be expected to appeal.
You said: Bendiksen was freed because WADAs rules don't allow for punishing doctors unless they do something intentional. The rules are stupid, but they are the rules.

I do ask you once more: please provide a direct link to the paragraph in the WADA code that prohibits NIF, NSF or ADN to punish the team doctor for assuring an athlete it's okay to use medication with anabolic steroids.
BTW, what is Trifoderm?
V3R1T4S said:
Translation: "I am going to completely ignore you ('don't have time' despite ~1500 posts) and I think the rules are stupid and wrong. Yet despite this, if something truly nefarious happened it would have been called out."
I think you just stated your MO in your most articulate form yet!
:lol:
 
Re: Re:

Discgear said:
ToreBear said:
Discgear said:
ToreBear said:
Saw Bendiksen not being prosecuted. Read the rage and indignation here. :lol: How this illustrates that something is rotten in Norway etc.

Bendiksen was freed because WADAs rules don't allow for punishing doctors unless they do something intentional. The rules are stupid, but they are the rules.
So now you're upset that WADA doesn't allow ADN to punish the doctor. But so far, you've joined the Norse chorus with upset voices over WADA punishing someone using lip balm.

But that put aside, please provide a direct link to the paragraph in the WADA code that prohibits NIF, NSF or ADN to punish the team doctor for assuring an athlete it's okay to use medication with anabolic steroids.
Sorry don't have time for strawman arguments. I think the rules are stupid, but it does not upset me. I can not see any chorus, and AFAIK Trifoderm is not a lip balm.

I'm no lawyer or wada expert. However ADN had a dialogue with wada about this case, and the lack of intent is enough for him to be let off.

If I'm wrong, and WADA disagrees and ADN lied about their agreement, they should be expected to appeal.
You said: Bendiksen was freed because WADAs rules don't allow for punishing doctors unless they do something intentional. The rules are stupid, but they are the rules.

I do ask you once more: please provide a direct link to the paragraph in the WADA code that prohibits NIF, NSF or ADN to punish the team doctor for assuring an athlete it's okay to use medication with anabolic steroids.
BTW, what is Trifoderm?
V3R1T4S said:
Translation: "I am going to completely ignore you ('don't have time' despite ~1500 posts) and I think the rules are stupid and wrong. Yet despite this, if something truly nefarious happened it would have been called out."
I think you just stated your MO in your most articulate form yet!
:lol:
If the rules were that detailed, I would think ADN could see for themselves instead of talking to WADA. Laws are made so you don't have to spell out a million possible events. It's the job of Lawyers and Judges to interpret if X law fit's Y situation.

I imagine there is something with article 2.8 giving them problems since that is relevant to support personell.

I meant trofodermin. My mistake.
 
Re: Re:

V3R1T4S said:
ToreBear said:
Discgear said:
ToreBear said:
Saw Bendiksen not being prosecuted. Read the rage and indignation here. :lol: How this illustrates that something is rotten in Norway etc.

Bendiksen was freed because WADAs rules don't allow for punishing doctors unless they do something intentional. The rules are stupid, but they are the rules.
So now you're upset that WADA doesn't allow ADN to punish the doctor. But so far, you've joined the Norse chorus with upset voices over WADA punishing someone using lip balm.

But that put aside, please provide a direct link to the paragraph in the WADA code that prohibits NIF, NSF or ADN to punish the team doctor for assuring an athlete it's okay to use medication with anabolic steroids.
Sorry don't have time for strawman arguments. I think the rules are stupid, but it does not upset me. I can not see any chorus, and AFAIK Trifoderm is not a lip balm.

I'm no lawyer or wada expert. However ADN had a dialogue with wada about this case, and the lack of intent is enough for him to be let off.

If I'm wrong, and WADA disagrees and ADN lied about their agreement, they should be expected to appeal.
Translation: "I am going to completely ignore you ('don't have time' despite ~1500 posts) and I think the rules are stupid and wrong. Yet despite this, if something truly nefarious happened it would have been called out."

I think you just stated your MO in your most articulate form yet!
:confused: How do you think I got to 1500ish posts? By not wasting time on silliness.
 
Re: Re:

ToreBear said:
Discgear said:
ToreBear said:
Discgear said:
ToreBear said:
Saw Bendiksen not being prosecuted. Read the rage and indignation here. :lol: How this illustrates that something is rotten in Norway etc.

Bendiksen was freed because WADAs rules don't allow for punishing doctors unless they do something intentional. The rules are stupid, but they are the rules.
So now you're upset that WADA doesn't allow ADN to punish the doctor. But so far, you've joined the Norse chorus with upset voices over WADA punishing someone using lip balm.

But that put aside, please provide a direct link to the paragraph in the WADA code that prohibits NIF, NSF or ADN to punish the team doctor for assuring an athlete it's okay to use medication with anabolic steroids.
Sorry don't have time for strawman arguments. I think the rules are stupid, but it does not upset me. I can not see any chorus, and AFAIK Trifoderm is not a lip balm.

I'm no lawyer or wada expert. However ADN had a dialogue with wada about this case, and the lack of intent is enough for him to be let off.

If I'm wrong, and WADA disagrees and ADN lied about their agreement, they should be expected to appeal.
You said: Bendiksen was freed because WADAs rules don't allow for punishing doctors unless they do something intentional. The rules are stupid, but they are the rules.

I do ask you once more: please provide a direct link to the paragraph in the WADA code that prohibits NIF, NSF or ADN to punish the team doctor for assuring an athlete it's okay to use medication with anabolic steroids.
BTW, what is Trifoderm?
V3R1T4S said:
Translation: "I am going to completely ignore you ('don't have time' despite ~1500 posts) and I think the rules are stupid and wrong. Yet despite this, if something truly nefarious happened it would have been called out."
I think you just stated your MO in your most articulate form yet!
:lol:
If the rules were that detailed, I would think ADN could see for themselves instead of talking to WADA. Laws are made so you don't have to spell out a million possible events. It's the job of Lawyers and Judges to interpret if X law fit's Y situation.

I imagine there is something with article 2.8 giving them problems since that is relevant to support personell.

I meant trofodermin. My mistake.
The following constitute anti-doping rule violations:
Article 2.8:
Administration or Attempted Administration to any Athlete In-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method, or Administration or Attempted Administration to any Athlete Out-of-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited

Why would that part of the WADA in any way be an obstacle for ADN or the NSF to punish the team doctor? :confused:
 
NADO's are very inconsistent when it comes to charging athlete support staff for providing/administering prohibited substances to athletes - Sometimes they use the provision of trafficking prohibited substances to non-athletes - Have always felt that support staff aren't punished enough by Anti-Doping Authorities.
 
Re: Re:

Discgear said:
Why would that part of the WADA in any way be an obstacle for ADN or the NSF to punish the team doctor? :confused:
Seems ADN have explained it in their press release much better than I ever could:
http://www.antidoping.no/om-antidoping-norge/nyheter/patalenemnden-henlegger-sak-mot-fredrik-bendiksen/
Påtalenemnden i Antidoping Norge har besluttet å henlegge saken mot tidligere landslagslege i langrenn, Fredrik Bendiksen.

- Saken knyttet til Fredrik Bendiksens mulige overtredelse av dopingreglene er henlagt. Årsaken til henleggelsen er at han etter påtalenemndens vurdering ikke har utvist forsett, og at skyldkravet derfor ikke er oppfylt, sier prosessfullmektig Niels R. Kiær.

I henhold til NIFs lov og World Anti-Doping Code er det å forskrive eller gi et forbudt stoff eller metode et regelbrudd. Hvilket krav som stilles til skyldgrad, fremkommer imidlertid ikke av regelverket.

Etter en grundig gjennomgang av saken og tilbakemeldinger fra WADA har påtalenemnden besluttet at saken mot Bendiksen henlegges.

- Bendiksen mente å behandle sårskaden som Therese Johaug pådro seg på høydesamling i Italia. Påtalenemnden har ikke funnet det bevist at Bendiksen forskrev klostebol i den hensikt å tilføre Johaug et dopingmiddel, eller at han så det som en mulighet, sier Kiær.

I påtalenemndens arbeid med saken har det vært vesentlig å klargjøre hvilken skyldgrad som kreves for å kunne hevde at det er et regelbrudd når det er snakk om å forskrive eller gi et forbudt stoff eller metode.

- Fredrik Bendiksen har gjort en feil, men dopingbestemmelsene og World Anti-Doping Code rammer ikke uaktsom overtredelse av reglene når det gjelder støttepersonell. Dette er presisert av WADA overfor Antidoping Norge, sier Niels R. Kiær.
The first part that is blacked referes to 2.8 that you quoted above. Their problem is that there is there is no description of degrees of guilt needed to cross the threshold to rule violation in the rules.

Hence the underlined bit were WADA was involved in whether there were grounds for prosecution.

The last black bit points out that the prosecution board has not found it proven that the doc prescribed klostebol with the intent of giving Johaug a doping substance, or that he saw that as a possibility.

PS. For anyone not familiar with Norwegian/Swedish/Danish the link is available to your favorite translator. If there are problems I will assist as far as I'm able. (Legalese is not easy to translate between languages).
 
Has anyone noticed how much more masculine Johaug's facial features have become?

Back when in her early 20s with her plump cheeks and round features:


During her CAS hearing sporting a bad case of Dolph Lundgren Jaw:


Every time I see her in the Norwegian news lately I'm blown away by how much she looks like a dude, and she used to be really pretty. Even when she was getting her ass handed to her by Bjørgen and Kowalczyk in pretty much every race she was by far the most popular skier in Norway just because of her looks. Am I completely out in the woods on this or am I actually on to something?
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Am I completely out in the woods on this or am I actually on to something?
if you are looking for a dude-like dudette in the norwegian team look no furthe than the post above by pazuzu :)

the pictures may indeed meet the forum standard, but there are plenty of very strange never explained facts that apparently now will never be heard by any doping panel...such as, how an experienced sports doctor committed a blunder he did which just happened to be an anabolic steroid, or whether he coordinated his story with the one proposed by johaug and her lawyers, or what were her steroid profiles some weeks prior to her positive...

when you have the rarely observed state support for the convicted violators of the anti-doping rules, your chance of unearthing those critical details is rather slim ;)
 
Re:

Saint Unix said:
Has anyone noticed how much more masculine Johaug's facial features have become?

Back when in her early 20s with her plump cheeks and round features:


During her CAS hearing sporting a bad case of Dolph Lundgren Jaw:


Every time I see her in the Norwegian news lately I'm blown away by how much she looks like a dude, and she used to be really pretty. Even when she was getting her *** handed to her by Bjørgen and Kowalczyk in pretty much every race she was by far the most popular skier in Norway just because of her looks. Am I completely out in the woods on this or am I actually on to something?

I have largely stayed away from making any sort of comments on changing physiques (including the face, cheeks, drying up, etc), but you are right, you are on to something. Johaug may not have gained weight, but we can see the muscle mass gain. It's fairly clear with her arms and legs, particularly her arms. Definitely not Bjoergen levels, but increase in hormones is likely.
 
Feb 4, 2012
435
0
0
Re:

python said:
if you are looking for a dude-like dudette in the norwegian team look no furthe than the post above by pazuzu :)
Bjoergen's neck is as thick as her head. Rather like American football players in the 70s and 80s unregulated steroid era. :confused:



contrast that with US XC standout Jessica Diggins:

 
Re: Re:

Aragon said:
meat puppet said:
Niskanen hiring vähäsöyrinki is ridiculous, but it is even more ridiculous that no journalist asks her about it...
Kerttu Niskanen has now commented on her decision to cooperate with Pekka Vähäsöyrinki:

http://www.is.fi/maastohiihto/art-2000005150164.html?ref=rss

Finnish is barely readable through Google Translator, so I'll provide here the highlights from the interview:

- "The discussion is totally ridiculous. If we keep coming to this subject time and time again, it is better not to do interviews at all. I am familiar with his history: what took place over twenty years ago should not influence anything. I am living now and so is Pekka and we are looking into the future."
- "There was discussion about making some changes throughout the season. I made the first move towards Pekka, he didn't contact me."
-"Through these years Pekka has asked about my exercises and about the races I participated. He is very sharp-eyed and systematical and still to wants learn new things."
- "Everyone who knows about modern cross country skiing understands that it is possible to triumph clean. If someone doesn't get it, there is nothing I can do about it."
This is pure vanilla from the reporter and pure cleans era PR talking points from the athlete, as it should be as per the script. But it is funny how overtly annoyed Niskanen gets anyhow (though this is more apparent in the Finnish original).
 
Re: Re:

I too found that discussion a little generic, it sounded like the elephant in the room just had to be discussed at some point. In the end, I do fully agree with the comments that 1990s was a different time period with different incentives and the discipline was different from the viewpoint of the decision making process.

Interestingly Immo Kuutsa - the head coach of the Finnish XC team between 1972 and 1985 - mentions in his 2016 biography that Vähäsöyrinki gave greenish light towards the direction of blood doping in 1988 after the Calgary fiasco:
Italy was the leading European country in many disciplines, and there were many supportive measures utilised, of which Immo had been tipped of by Carmelo Bosco, a researcher who had moved to Finland. Bosco was wondering in many occasions why similar measures hadn't been used in Finland as had been used in Italy. Bosco was the brother-in-law of Finnish skier Harri Kirvesniemi. After the 1988 Calgary winter olympics, the head coach Pekka Vähäsöyrinki told that he wouldn't participate in any major competition before the bloods had been "taken care of".
The story goes on that this didn't have to take place as the blood doping test was introduced and high altitude training was enough etc. etc. It is a well-known tradition that these semi-autobiographies edited with the help of sports journalists are notoriously whitewashing in their approach. While there are some interesting bits and pieces in the book and I am not taking the position that the book is totally honest in all instances.
 
BullsFan22 said:
If I've read the comments (the most recent ones and the ones pages back-some waaay back) and done the right search (albeit no in great detail) there is a strong connection between the Italians and Finns in xc since the 1970's?
As far as I know, the old threads must have the "latest" knowledge, at least I am not aware of any significant new information revealed on the subject for years if not for decades.

It is a well known fact that Francesco Conconi started to utilise his blood doping program in early 1980s and the Italian cross country team had two Finnish head coaches during that decade, Viljo Sadeharju (1980 or 1981 - 1984) and Jarmo Punkkinen (1984-1990).

Coach Alessandro Donati - the whistleblower of the Ferrara doping program - has claimed that Francesco Conconi told him that the method he used was the Finnish blood doping technique but that he had made a few improvements into it. Donati has claimed also that the Italians specifically hired a Finnish coach "to get access to the secrets of blood doping".

Sadeharju's theory is that the original source of Conconi's method was the Italian's research with blood diseases and the Ferrara blood doping program with runners started actually as early as 1979 if not slightly earlier, so at least it wasn't that coach who brought the method to Italy. Maybe it was Carmelo Bosco who tipped off Conconi about the method, at least he had many Finnish exercise physiologist colleagues. Conconi only knows for sure.

Italy wasn't actually the only country where Finnish exported their coaching know-how. Switzerland had also a Finnish athlete-turned-coach for a few years in early 1980s, who collaborated with skiers such Franz Renggli and Konrad Hallenbarter and also predicted correctly that Evi Kratzer would succeed even internationally (5k bronze, 1987 WC Oberstdorf).

This coach is actually possibly connected to blood doping even when I wouldn't think that he was hired for his knowledge on the subject. In 1983-1985 Finnish authorities investigated the fate of a handful of blood bags that were suspected having vanished for blood doping purposes during 1970s. It isn't established why, but the only commercial broadcasting company claimed in 1985 that the coach was one of the three cross-country skiers who transfused with the vanished blood bags in 1974 and 1975. Many parts of the official inquiry have been classified and it has been never been established where the information about him came from.

Google Translate has updated its Finnish-language algorithm, so the a Finnish television interview with Donati from 2000 should be almost readable, except that some Scandinavian letter of that transcript are Hebrew letters. Strange.
https://web.archive.org/web/20090810092711/http://yle.fi:80/mot/110900/liite1.htm
 
A slot in the Norwegian national team is kept open for Johaug. Also Lofshus informs that Johaug, despite the suspension, is still on the pay-roll. He claims that it's within the framework of the current WADA regulations.
 
Re:

Discgear said:
A slot in the Norwegian national team is kept open for Johaug. Also Lofshus informs that Johaug, despite the suspension, is still on the pay-roll. He claims that it's within the framework of the current WADA regulations.
Spot on with your post - Athletes can still be paid during a suspension but are not allowed to train with the team.
 
Re: Re:

yaco said:
Discgear said:
A slot in the Norwegian national team is kept open for Johaug. Also Lofshus informs that Johaug, despite the suspension, is still on the pay-roll. He claims that it's within the framework of the current WADA regulations.
Spot on with your post - Athletes can still be paid during a suspension but are not allowed to train with the team.
Curious how that's allowed.
Try anything like that in government or business.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY