Doping in XC skiing

[Discgear]

http://www.dagbladet.no/sport/tv-2-ledelsen-ba-lersveen-om-a-dempe-seg-i-johaug-saken/64045179
The Norwegian television channel TV2, have silenced journalist Ernst Lersveen. He's been by far the most critical and outspoken against NSF in both Johaug and Johnsrud Sundby cases and is maybe the journalist who has revealed most of the oddities. It turns out that NSF the last weeks has filmed Lersveen whenever he has been doing interviews with skiers. Lersveen (63) has been a journalist within XC-skiing since 1982.

 

[olhell]

Re:

The Norwegian state television

Not that it makes a big difference, but I think you're mixing TV2 and NRK. TV2 is not "state television". TV2 is a private company 100% owned by Egmont..

 

[Discgear]

Re: Re:

The Norwegian state television

Not that it makes a big difference, but I think you're mixing TV2 and NRK. TV2 is not "state television". TV2 is a private company 100% owned by Egmont..

Sorry, my bad. I'll correct the post.

 

[LeakyBoat]

Re: Re:

Simplest scenario for the whole adventure for me is that Johaug was on the steroid, went to Italy for the altitude camp, then the good doctor was tipped off to the anti-doping test upon therese's return to Norway. So knowing she would test positive, he flew down to find the most plausible deniability possible. This happened to be the (non) lip cream.

Bad theory. All she had to do was not hear the door bell that day, or stay at a friends/parents house without updating her whereabouts.
-----------

John de Savage - as Tubeless notes, do you have a more compelling hypothesis? Simply saying bad theory would seem to be trying to create doubt on what was written without addressing the actual content. Sure, intentionally messing up the whereabouts could be plausible, though for reasons Tubeless wrote, it might not be as plausible as normal.

How do we know evasion wasn't the preferred option and it didn't work? Those who've failed OOC could have been trying to avoid the test.

 

[John de Savage]

Re: Re:

You're assuming that Johaug knew when and where she was going to be tested. The press reports indicated that ADNO has a habit of showing up at team gatherings where it's easy to find everyone - and it would not be possible to avoid being tested.

So avoid team gatherings for a couple of weeks. Not a big deal if your career depends on it.

Do you have a better theory that would explain the known facts?

No, I don't. But your theory assumes that Johaug and the team doc acted foolishly, imo.

 

[Discgear]

Re: Re:

No, I don't. But your theory assumes that Johaug and the team doc acted foolishly, imo.

Well so they did even in the official NSF theory.

 

[python]

https://www.nrk.no/sport/norske-juniorer-hadde-ikke-astma-_-fikk-astmamedisin-i-vm-1.13211144
not only the norge seniors not having asthma were treated with the asthma meds, but now we find out the juniors too. and of course, with nabulizers. in the same article, the swedish team doc rejects the practice on the swedish team as ethically questionable. considers the nebulizers belong in the emergency care and hospitals

but we know the story already, don't we, its about the holy of human holies... the youngsters health - not about pushing the gray line or god save...doping

 

[Blaaswix]

Re:

https://www.nrk.no/sport/norske-juniorer-hadde-ikke-astma-_-fikk-astmamedisin-i-vm-1.13211144
not only the norge seniors not having asthma were treated with the asthma meds, but now we find out the juniors too. and of course, with nabulizers. in the same article, the swedish team doc rejects the practice on the swedish team as ethically questionable. considers the nebulizers belong in the emergency care and hospitals

but we know the story already, don't we, its about the holy of human holies... the youngsters health - not about pushing the gray line or god save...doping

The worst part is what seems to run through the whole Norwegian asthma meds issue: the redefinition of the need to medicate. Asthma is, apparently, far from the only reason to use asthma meds. Any entirely NORMAL reaction to exercise in cold air, i.e. a tightening of the airways, is a reason to medicate. Awful medical ethics, WADA need to get on this now. Nebulizers for junior athletes without asthma? And during a race? Words fail me.

I cough when I open the freezer and get a lung of cold air - do I need a nebulizer?

 

[sida_mot]

"It's not wrong. They may not have had asthma but they did seem short on breath, the nebulizer treated that symptom"

This just keeps getting worse. Any other country and there would have been a team ban issued already.

 

[python]

Re: Re:

https://www.nrk.no/sport/norske-juniorer-hadde-ikke-astma-_-fikk-astmamedisin-i-vm-1.13211144
not only the norge seniors not having asthma were treated with the asthma meds, but now we find out the juniors too. and of course, with nabulizers. in the same article, the swedish team doc rejects the practice on the swedish team as ethically questionable. considers the nebulizers belong in the emergency care and hospitals

but we know the story already, don't we, its about the holy of human holies... the youngsters health - not about pushing the gray line or god save...doping

The worst part is what seems to run through the whole Norwegian asthma meds issue: the redefinition of the need to medicate. Asthma is, apparently, far from the only reason to use asthma meds. Any entirely NORMAL reaction to exercise in cold air, i.e. a tightening of the airways, is a reason to medicate. Awful medical ethics, WADA need to get on this now. Nebulizers for junior athletes without asthma? And during a race? Words fail me.

I cough when I open the freezer and get a lung of cold air - do I need a nebulizer?

here's where i get genuinely puzzled :Question: the new information on the juniors , if i understood the norwegian text right, was related by the NEW chief medic. NEW b/c of the fiasco with sundby. is the guy arrogant or stupid or simply very honest to talk of a such a sensitive issue, mind you on the teens, so nonchalantly ?

sounds like any sober professional would refer to a nordic-composed investigative panel when faced with such questions. but i thank him for yet another peek into the norge 'grey area'

 

[Random Direction]

Re:

"It's not wrong. They may not have had asthma but they did seem short on breath, the nebulizer treated that symptom"

This just keeps getting worse. Any other country and there would have been a team ban issued already.

Well, I got short on breath and coughed a lot when I rode up a 600 m 25% grade hill - can I have a nebulizer?

Or, when I skied in the dry air at Canmore after living at sea level I coughed a lot - can I have a nebulizer?

Or, I just did a full out sprint in the Gatineau Hills and I wasn't really in shape, but now am coughing up a lung, guess I need the magic potion. And it isn't doping because I'm coughing a lot and is vaguely similar to asthmatic symptoms

Idiots.

 

[BullsFan22]

Re: Re:

"It's not wrong. They may not have had asthma but they did seem short on breath, the nebulizer treated that symptom"

This just keeps getting worse. Any other country and there would have been a team ban issued already.

Well, I got short on breath and coughed a lot when I rode up a 600 m 25% grade hill - can I have a nebulizer?

Or, when I skied in the dry air at Canmore after living at sea level I coughed a lot - can I have a nebulizer?

Or, I just did a full out sprint in the Gatineau Hills and I wasn't really in shape, but now am coughing up a lung, guess I need the magic potion. And it isn't doping because I'm coughing a lot and is vaguely similar to asthmatic symptoms

Idiots.

It's just typical Norwegian arrogance. Like the poster said, any other country, the Norwegians would be yelling and screaming, as it is, it's no biggie!

 

[abcdaniel]

Re: Re:

...within the article i incorrectly linked to, was this,
http://www.vg.no/sport/langrenn/therese-johaug/skyldte-paa-bikini-linjen-utestengt-to-aar-for-johaug-dopet/a/23822306/

Read the article, and in the bottom there is a video clip of an ADNO press conference, I guess the same day/in conjunction with Therese's non existing tears. ADNO is really spinning the positive doping test to make it fit the cream story. No anti-doping agency should present speculation on how the substance has entered tha athlete's body, before an investigation, and certainly not spinning the positive to fit the athlete´s story. This is minblowing. They are some dirty gnomes in the Norwegian ski complex. No mention of real, hard substance level in the sample, but spin galore. Highlights:

Clostebol is a weak anabolic steroid.

In a cream, the substance goes straight through intact skin, and of course a sore, into the body, and is expelled through the urine.

Because it is a substance alien to the body, as long as such a substance is found, it constitutes a doping case.

The level of the substance in the sample is low, consistent with the usage of a cream, and there is no indication that this in any way would have performance-enhancing effects.

 

[Discgear]

Re: Re:

ADNO is really spinning the positive doping test to make it fit the cream story. No anti-doping agency should present speculation on how the substance has entered tha athlete's body, before an investigation, and certainly not spinning the positive to fit the athlete´s story. This is mindblowing. They are some dirty gnomes in the Norwegian ski complex. No mention of real, hard substance level in the sample, but spin galore. Highlights:

Clostebol is a weak anabolic steroid.

In a cream, the substance goes straight through intact skin, and of course a sore, into the body, and is expelled through the urine.

The level of the substance in the sample is low, consistent with the usage of a cream, and there is no indication that this in any way would have performance-enhancing effects.

Gosh, they are really corrupt. ADNO has totally embarresed themselves the last months. Remember they did free Johnsrud Sundby first but got overrun by CAS and WADA. Despite two positives by Sundby almost two years back they didn't step ut the testing regime. Worlds number one Johaug was not tested throughout training season, neither Bjorgen preparing her come back. Despite knowing that Johnsrud Sundby got caught positive when using Nebulizer in 2014, they haven't done anything in examining the methods throughout last season - it was business as usual.
When Johaug got caught they didn't confront her or the team doctor in 8 days, hence giving them oppurtunities to put there story together. At the first press-conference Johaug also said things that hinted she was aware of the upcoming test well in advance. Talked about the meeting with ADNO. The comments above just confirm the picture of an organization that is fundamentally corrupt.

 

[V3R1T4S]

When operating at the extreme limit of the rules (such that sometimes going over them, e.g. the Sundby case) just how big of a step is it to go from a whole organization keeping a giant nebulizer ‘factory' on the upper floor of the team bus a secret to as little as just one individual tipping off another about a possible upcoming test. It doesn't even have to be explicitly that there will be a test. Say someone from ADNO or NSF mentions to one of the coaches that, say, his good friend (who is a tester) is going to be there one day. "Ah, great, I haven’t seen him in forever!" says the coach. “It will be good to catch up." That doesn’t seem so wrong, does it? Well, that’s completely illegal and immoral.

If you’ve learned an iota of social psychology you learn it is very easy for groups that operate at the limits for individuals to go over that limit in a seemingly “innocent” way, which is why teams should not operate AT the limit of the grey zone but at the limit between the white and grey zone.

At the end of the day, an actual positive is registered and so regardless of excuse - or lack thereof - it is imperative for there to a be a full ban for there to be any credibility left in Norway. Else this extreme arrogance and rule-bending (and thus inevitably breaking in some cases) will continue.

 

[BullsFan22]

Re:

When operating at the extreme limit of the rules (such that sometimes going over them, e.g. the Sundby case) just how big of a step is it to go from a whole organization keeping a giant nebulizer ‘factory' on the upper floor of the team bus a secret to as little as just one individual tipping off another about a possible upcoming test. It doesn't even have to be explicitly that there will be a test. Say someone from ADNO or NSF mentions to one of the coaches that, say, his good friend (who is a tester) is going to be there one day. "Ah, great, I haven’t seen him in forever!" says the coach. “It will be good to catch up." That doesn’t seem so wrong, does it? Well, that’s completely illegal and immoral.

If you’ve learned an iota of social psychology you learn it is very easy for groups that operate at the limits for individuals to go over that limit in a seemingly “innocent” way, which is why teams should not operate AT the limit of the grey zone but at the limit between the white and grey zone.

At the end of the day, an actual positive is registered and so regardless of excuse - or lack thereof - it is imperative for there to a be a full ban for there to be any credibility left in Norway. Else this extreme arrogance and rule-bending (and thus inevitably breaking in some cases) will continue.

This. And I think the idea of 'grey area' is a nice way of saying 'legal doping.' It's pathetic. The Norwegians have used this term since Sundby's news actually went public in July. There is nothing 'grey' about it. It's most definitely black or if you really want to be serious, RED. Twice he failed tests in span of three weeks and he was allowed to race. It's blatant is what it is. Anyone else would have been suspended for two years after the first failed doping test.

 

[Blaaswix]

Re: Re:

This. And I think the idea of 'grey area' is a nice way of saying 'legal doping.' It's pathetic. The Norwegians have used this term since Sundby's news actually went public in July. There is nothing 'grey' about it. It's most definitely black or if you really want to be serious, RED. Twice he failed tests in span of three weeks and he was allowed to race. It's blatant is what it is. Anyone else would have been suspended for two years after the first failed doping test.

[/quote]


Ah yes, but National team coach Vidar Løfshus says that Sundby 'hasn't been caught for doping' we've all got it wrong http://www.aftenposten.no/100Sport/...ige-ikke-bruker-forstoverapparat-853196_1.snd it was for not having a TUE. Not doping. Do you see?


It's all part of the wonderful new world of sporting ethics where giving junior athletes, without asthma diagnoses, asthma medicine, via nebulizers at world championships is all part of the fun.

 

[python]

Re: Re:

...within the article i incorrectly linked to, was this,
http://www.vg.no/sport/langrenn/therese-johaug/skyldte-paa-bikini-linjen-utestengt-to-aar-for-johaug-dopet/a/23822306/

Read the article, and in the bottom there is a video clip of an ADNO press conference, I guess the same day/in conjunction with Therese's non existing tears. ADNO is really spinning the positive doping test to make it fit the cream story. No anti-doping agency should present speculation on how the substance has entered tha athlete's body, before an investigation, and certainly not spinning the positive to fit the athlete´s story. This is minblowing. They are some dirty gnomes in the Norwegian ski complex. No mention of real, hard substance level in the sample, but spin galore. Highlights:

Clostebol is a weak anabolic steroid.

In a cream, the substance goes straight through intact skin, and of course a sore, into the body, and is expelled through the urine.

Because it is a substance alien to the body, as long as such a substance is found, it constitutes a doping case.

The level of the substance in the sample is low, consistent with the usage of a cream, and there is no indication that this in any way would have performance-enhancing effects.

i almost want the adno give her a light punishment..then i am sure of a wada appeal which should be a lot of fun.

i don't see another way for the sport and the fans to learn more about the norwegian 'grey areas'. the cas hearing would almost certainly be followed by more documented (and public !) exposures. something that almost did NOT happen in the sundby case.

where can i buy a 'freedom to therese' t-shirts :razz:

 

[Kajsen]

Re: Re:

"It's not wrong. They may not have had asthma but they did seem short on breath, the nebulizer treated that symptom"

This just keeps getting worse. Any other country and there would have been a team ban issued already.

Well, I got short on breath and coughed a lot when I rode up a 600 m 25% grade hill - can I have a nebulizer?

Or, when I skied in the dry air at Canmore after living at sea level I coughed a lot - can I have a nebulizer?

Or, I just did a full out sprint in the Gatineau Hills and I wasn't really in shape, but now am coughing up a lung, guess I need the magic potion. And it isn't doping because I'm coughing a lot and is vaguely similar to asthmatic symptoms

Idiots.

It's just typical Norwegian arrogance. Like the poster said, any other country, the Norwegians would be yelling and screaming, as it is, it's no biggie!

My friend and fellow researcher works with the lady who performed the exercise-induced asthma study which the Norwegian Ski Federation (NSF) holds as "scientific evidence" of asthma medicine not having any performance-enhancing effect on healthy athletes. Today, during lunch, they talked, and she pointed out that her study measured athletes using "normal" doses of medicine and not the high doses that Sundby (and, one would assume, others) gets. So she cannot say that asthma medicine does not improve the capacity of helathy ahtletes, as it might well depend on the amount of medicine taken - which is why the doping rules contain a limit.

In any case, the other point by her is that here (and forgive me for being imprecise in terminology here), ordinary people are deemed to have clinical asthma if their respitory capacity (or something) drops by 10%. For athletes, however, medical staff (here, that means the NSF doctors) define athletes as asthma patients if their capacity drops by only 2-3 %, considering that this, in elite sports, leads to marked effects on race time. So no, most of the "asthmatic" XC skiers in Norway do not qualify as "true" asthmatic patients.

A note from the doctor is always deemed authoritative.

I should also mention that the lady in question believes that all nations do the same (I don't think she is right on that, though.)

 

[Cloxxki]

In the case of Norway, how would it be really to send the athletes a referral to another WADA accredited sports fysician to addert their athma "suffering"?
The athlete would be conditioned for 24 hours in a decent hotel, not able to take any substances to trigger an astmatic response. Then a quick maximum effort test, lactate levels monitored, of course. And then with a NORMAL dose of salbutamol. 200mgr. Not the legal limit, that's for patients and junkies.

It's insane really that in this day and age, the early 90's so far in the past, that we can still use our own preferred doc to sign our TUE's. It basically guarantees corruption, medical malpractice, sporting fraud.

 

[Kajsen]

In the case of Norway, how would it be really to send the athletes a referral to another WADA accredited sports fysician to addert their athma "suffering"?
The athlete would be conditioned for 24 hours in a decent hotel, not able to take any substances to trigger an astmatic response. Then a quick maximum effort test, lactate levels monitored, of course. And then with a NORMAL dose of salbutamol. 200mgr. Not the legal limit, that's for patients and junkies.

It's insane really that in this day and age, the early 90's so far in the past, that we can still use our own preferred doc to sign our TUE's. It basically guarantees corruption, medical malpractice, sporting fraud.

I truly believe this is one (there are a couple more) of areas where the system collapses. The doctor is the authoritative man (woman). We perceive of the doctor as an honest professional (often rightly, sometimes wrongly). Team doctors are included in that category. As are FIS's own medical or anti-doping staff, for that matter. The system is not well (it is rotten, to be more direct); in Norway's case, that was indicated a few years' back with Mads Drange's book on "the Big Doping Bluff" (freely translated from Norwegian). I must admit I haven't read it, though I will; but I know the main contents of it. The Norwegian anti-doping institution(s) is simply dysfunctional. You really refer to one of the main reasons why: the institution is national. (Drange was a scientist employed by the anti-doping agency, but he eventually quit given the deficiencis of the system (they were basically unable to catch any of what he could clearly see were dopers); the book's and Drange's newsworthiness lasted for only a few days, the process was subdued by the same mechanism by which other such criticisms - as 3-4 Nordic documentaries - have been, that is, through massive Ski-Federation reactions and athletes' outrage).

The system is non-functioning. Those with a minimum of analytical capabilities see that, although there aren't that many in my country. The elephant in the room, though, is proof. Or a lack of it. Because - virtually by definition - you cannot prove anything when it comes to our skiers and doping. But that was before Sundby and Therese, because there you might, but just might... (We're extremely hung-up here on due processes and judicial proofs, and all that, which obviously work to the benefit of the dopers, but that is the way it is.)

 

[BullsFan22]

In the case of Norway, how would it be really to send the athletes a referral to another WADA accredited sports fysician to addert their athma "suffering"?
The athlete would be conditioned for 24 hours in a decent hotel, not able to take any substances to trigger an astmatic response. Then a quick maximum effort test, lactate levels monitored, of course. And then with a NORMAL dose of salbutamol. 200mgr. Not the legal limit, that's for patients and junkies.

It's insane really that in this day and age, the early 90's so far in the past, that we can still use our own preferred doc to sign our TUE's. It basically guarantees corruption, medical malpractice, sporting fraud.

I truly believe this is one (there are a couple more) of areas where the system collapses. The doctor is the authoritative man (woman). We perceive of the doctor as an honest professional (often rightly, sometimes wrongly). Team doctors are included in that category. As are FIS's own medical or anti-doping staff, for that matter. The system is not well (it is rotten, to be more direct); in Norway's case, that was indicated a few years' back with Mads Drange's book on "the Big Doping Bluff" (freely translated from Norwegian). I must admit I haven't read it, though I will; but I know the main contents of it. The Norwegian anti-doping institution(s) is simply dysfunctional. You really refer to one of the main reasons why: the institution is national. (Drange was a scientist employed by the anti-doping agency, but he eventually quit given the deficiencis of the system (they were basically unable to catch any of what he could clearly see were dopers); the book's and Drange's newsworthiness lasted for only a few days, the process was subdued by the same mechanism by which other such criticisms - as 3-4 Nordic documentaries - have been, that is, through massive Ski-Federation reactions and athletes' outrage).

The system is non-functioning. Those with a minimum of analytical capabilities see that, although there aren't that many in my country. The elephant in the room, though, is proof. Or a lack of it. Because - virtually by definition - you cannot prove anything when it comes to our skiers and doping. But that was before Sundby and Therese, because there you might, but just might... (We're extremely hung-up here on due processes and judicial proofs, and all that, which obviously work to the benefit of the dopers, but that is the way it is.)

Mads Drange was lambasted by the press and the NSF. He was accused, not surprisingly, of 'being disgruntled,' and 'wanting to sell a book for money.' It's pretty much identical style criticism to the ones we saw anytime anyone criticized Armstrong.

 

[Kajsen]

Yes, the reactions to Drange were indeed quite similar to the Armstrong case. That was actually pointed out by TV2's commentator, to his credit: http://www.tv2.no/2014/01/16/sport/sotsji/ol/vintersport/5231214#.VE4Ob_l5Nlw (in Norwegian).

Some of Drange's points included that athletes are hardly tested at all by Antidoping Norge (ADN), contrary to what we commonly believe (this is especially the case with EPO testing). Therese Johaug is a case in point (four months without any tests). Drange also wrote about the "adjustments" many Norwegian athletes (as judged by their blood profiles) did every time regulations changed - for instance when threshold values were altered or blood profiling became part of hard evidence.

One point that wasn't (to my knowledge) raised by Drange is the scope for corruption in such a system. Some posters here have earlier - in the spirit of conspiracy theories vis-a-vis Therese's case - indicated that ADN, or some in ADN, probably warns star athletes about the timing of tests. to include myself in the spirit of conspiracy theories: It is surely a huge potential problem that some people consistently occupy places at both sides of the table. Nobody does that more consistently than Inggard Lereim. He was the doc responsible for Lillehammer 1994 (he claimed no abnormality with any blood values for medalists in XC). He also had responsibility for Albertville 1992 - as well as most other things run by FIS and the like in the 1990s. He has also had a relatively consistent role as a medical adviser (both formally and informally) for the Norwegian Skiing Federation (NSF). Between 2007 and February 2015, moreover, he was a board member at ADN, before he got a position for some ethics & anti-doping advisary institution. He currently leads the NSF's investigation into the Therese Johaug case.

The point is simply that such has the system been for at least two-and-a-half decades. Expert on doping become (naturally) anti-doping experts and (equally naturally) advisors to athletes and Federations, and the like. Jim Stray-Gundersen is another such name (from the late 1990s and early 2000s in Norway. And Ola Rønsen (for 2-3 decades and still going strong). Everything might be fine, but the system is set up in a way - at all levels - that doping is incredibly easy to get away with.

 

[kosmonaut]

@kajsen: I really think you should read the book before summing up Drange's views in a few sentences. Other than that, good points.

 

[Kajsen]

Re:

@kajsen: I really think you should read the book before summing up Drange's views in a few sentences. Other than that, good points.

I concur. However, I do not think my summary amounts to a breach of code of conduct; I say it like Sundby and NSF did: It was a mere issue of uncertainty regarding the administration (of my summary/asthma medicine).