Fancy Bears hack ADAMS system

[veji11]

Another element is how overdiagnosed ADHD is in the US compared to for example continental Europe...

 

[keeponrollin]

Re:

Another element is how overdiagnosed ADHD is in the US compared to for example continental Europe...

ADHD is more frequently diagnosed in the US, because having the diagnosis, has certain benefits, for the school, & the student; & the teachers prefer students that are medicated, as they're easier to work with.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

Another element is how overdiagnosed ADHD is in the US compared to for example continental Europe...

ADHD is more frequently diagnosed in the US, because having the diagnosis, has certain benefits, for the school, & the student; & the teachers prefer students that are medicated, as they're easier to work with.

Well not really, it's more of situation whereby children used to be displined for being disruptive. Nower days there is a greater understanding to why this is so. In most cases the child has trouble concentrating and is easily distracted. To help with this, adderall or similar drugs are prescribed to allow them to focus on what task at a time. Generally it's in 5-10mg doses once a day.

The drugs are abused at college level because you can achieve extreme hyperfocus. For sportspersons the drug is an aphetimine and can assist with masking tiredness and stress. It certainly is performance enhancing.

Those in the army are prescribed the same drugs so they can concentrate for longer periods.

 

[djpbaltimore]

Re:

Re Biles: I'm sure you'll find she's not the only gymnast with an ADHD diagnosis/exemption. ADD diagnosis is really squishy, and college and high school kids, late night lawyers etc. have been taking Ritalin for years to sharpen up and calm down.

Re the Williamses...et alors?

However, as the father of an asthmatic but athletic son, and an asthmatic wife, I can tell you it's more common than you think, and that if even 15-20 percent of the peloton has some form of asthma I wouldn't be shocked.

Yep, whether the diagnosis is masking doping in sports or not, allergy and asthma incidence are definitely on the rise in the world as a whole.

 

[D-Queued]

Re: Re:

Another element is how overdiagnosed ADHD is in the US compared to for example continental Europe...

ADHD is more frequently diagnosed in the US, because having the diagnosis, has certain benefits, for the school, & the student; & the teachers prefer students that are medicated, as they're easier to work with.

Yes and yes.

And, yes, grossly overdiagnosed.

And, arguably, very frequently diagnosed as a matter of 'convenience'. There is something wrong with Johnny's cognition... must be ADHD.

One extremely unfortunate result being that there are treatments and programs available for many who do have real issues, but the ADHD diagnosis can and does send them down the wrong path. And the drugs don't help.

Well, they don't help unless you need another gold medal for your collection.

Dave.

 

[BullsFan22]

Fancy Bears!! Fancy Bears everywhere!!!


http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/09/14/scientists-trapped-polar-bears-russia-weather-station-rescued/90349676/

 

[thehog]

Re:

could one get any?............less normal ..ok venus disagrees

but hearing suggestions that athletes have been 'smeared' by TUE details being

released..............'smearing' would only occur if TUEs were 'less honest'

Mark L

Weren't you hacked? By cuddly bears or fancy bears?

 

[thehog]

Apparently Fancy is warming up for another release. 3-2-1...

 

[RobbieCanuck]

Re:

I think TJ Quinn has made the best point of anybody. Criticizing an athlete for testing positive for something that they are allowed to take is not very logical.

T.J. Quinn ‏@TJQuinnESPN 3h3 hours ago
T.J. Quinn Retweeted Neal Rogers
Amen. If you don't like the rules, discuss the rules. This shows no violation of the rules.

Ross Tucker has suggested that all TUEs be eliminated. I think that is extreme, but there is probably too much abuse of the system.

Except the WADA TUE has pretty tough requirements - latest as follows:

STANDARDS AND PROCESS FOR GRANTING TUE
S 4.0 Obtaining a TUE
4.1 An Athlete may be granted a TUE if (and only if) he/she can show that each of the following conditions is met:

a. The Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method in question is needed to treat an acute or chronic medical condition, such that the Athlete would experience a significant impairment to health if the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method were to be withheld.

b. The Therapeutic Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is highly unlikely to produce any additional enhancement of performance beyond what might be anticipated by a return to the Athlete’s normal state of health following the treatment of the acute or chronic medical condition.

c. There is no reasonable Therapeutic alternative to the Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.

d. The necessity for the Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is not a consequence, wholly or in part, of the prior Use(without a TUE) of a substance or method which was prohibited at the time of such Use.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

I think TJ Quinn has made the best point of anybody. Criticizing an athlete for testing positive for something that they are allowed to take is not very logical.

T.J. Quinn ‏@TJQuinnESPN 3h3 hours ago
T.J. Quinn Retweeted Neal Rogers
Amen. If you don't like the rules, discuss the rules. This shows no violation of the rules.

Ross Tucker has suggested that all TUEs be eliminated. I think that is extreme, but there is probably too much abuse of the system.

Except the WADA TUE has pretty tough requirements - latest as follows:

STANDARDS AND PROCESS FOR GRANTING TUE
S 4.0 Obtaining a TUE
4.1 An Athlete may be granted a TUE if (and only if) he/she can show that each of the following conditions is met:

a. The Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method in question is needed to treat an acute or chronic medical condition, such that the Athlete would experience a significant impairment to health if the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method were to be withheld.

b. The Therapeutic Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is highly unlikely to produce any additional enhancement of performance beyond what might be anticipated by a return to the Athlete’s normal state of health following the treatment of the acute or chronic medical condition.

c. There is no reasonable Therapeutic alternative to the Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.

d. The necessity for the Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is not a consequence, wholly or in part, of the prior Use(without a TUE) of a substance or method which was prohibited at the time of such Use.

All the above requires is a doctors note. Are WADA going to over ride the medical profession? I dont think so.

Anyway WADA came about simply as PR for the IOC to say they are fighting doping, see they have WADA, but in fact they are just fluff.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

Re: Re:

[quote All the above requires is a doctors note. Are WADA going to over ride the medical profession? I dont think so.

Anyway WADA came about simply as PR for the IOC to say they are fighting doping, see they have WADA, but in fact they are just fluff.[/quote]

While I get your point I sincerely doubt a "doctor's note" is sufficient. It would require a full medical report for which the doctor is putting their reputation on the line. It has to be reviewed by the the TUE committee (TUEC) pursuant to the International Standards for Approval adopted by WADA and every anti doping agency in the world.

See S 5.2 of the WADA TUE process on the WADA website.

The review process requires the application to be reviewed inter alia by,

a. TUECs should include at least three physicians with experience in the care and treatment of Athletes and a sound knowledge of clinical, sports and exercise medicine.

I accept that the rule says "should" include and whether or not these TUECs do in fact only WADA, the ADAs, or International Federations or Major Event Organizers can tell us.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

[quote All the above requires is a doctors note. Are WADA going to over ride the medical profession? I dont think so.

Anyway WADA came about simply as PR for the IOC to say they are fighting doping, see they have WADA, but in fact they are just fluff.

While I get your point I sincerely doubt a "doctor's note" is sufficient. It would require a full medical report for which the doctor is putting their reputation on the line. It has to be reviewed by the the TUE committee (TUEC) pursuant to the International Standards for Approval adopted by WADA and every anti doping agency in the world.

See S 5.2 of the WADA TUE process on the WADA website.

The review process requires the application to be reviewed inter alia by,

a. TUECs should include at least three physicians with experience in the care and treatment of Athletes and a sound knowledge of clinical, sports and exercise medicine.

I accept that the rule says "should" include and whether or not these TUECs do in fact only WADA, the ADAs, or International Federations or Major Event Organizers can tell us.[/quote]

Did a phone call to UCI's Zorzoli not get Froome the TUE permission required for Romandie? I think so. No note required!

 

[arcus]

The crux here, for me, is the integrity and rigor of the TUE application process.

The reality is that some approved TUEs are completely legit (e.g. insulin in a diabetic athlete), but in other situations athletes are gaining access to performance enhancing pharmaceuticals for non-medical and disingenuous reasons.

Some of the journalists and doping-commentators are focusing on the "No-ADRV" angle, without acknowledging that the TUE process is being abused by some athletes, and this should be the real story.

A female tennis player secured a TUE for DHEA (an anabolic steroid), and competed for a year on the medication till WADA made a complaint (upheld on appeal by CAS) and the TUE was withdrawn. The TUE process is open to exploitation.

 

[proffate]

I don't understand how the athletes, USADA and the media are playing both angles here: TUEs are all above board, yet revealing all these shameless activities amounts to "smearing"?

USADA CEO Travis Tygart said the athletes are being wrongly smeared.
"In each of the situations, the athlete has done everything right in adhering to the global rules for obtaining permission to use a needed medication," he said.

This from an article titled "Hackers steal medical data of US Olympic stars". Is your typical journo on as many medications as Serena Williams? That might explain the outrage. I don't really believe that public figures whose entire professional success is tied to public performances, and particularly demonstrations of superior fitness (health), have the same right to medical privacy as the rest of us.

 

[arcus]

Re: Re:

@ Robbbiecanuck and Benotti69:

I read the guidelines, and they specifically state that TUE applications should be supported by objective evidence. Cited examples included radiologic imaging, pathology reports, copies of actual lab results, etc.

If an athlete applied for a TUE saying they need hGH because they had to have a benign pituitary neoplasm surgically resected (so no longer produce the peptide endogenously), a "doctors-note' would/should not be sufficient. They would need copies of MRI scans, operative-reports, pathology etc (you would hope!!)

The problem area is the cluster of conditions like asthma, ADHD, and tissue injury where the diagnoses are less clear-cut and susceptible to manipulation.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

Re: Re:

[quote All the above requires is a doctors note. Are WADA going to over ride the medical profession? I dont think so.

Anyway WADA came about simply as PR for the IOC to say they are fighting doping, see they have WADA, but in fact they are just fluff.

While I get your point I sincerely doubt a "doctor's note" is sufficient. It would require a full medical report for which the doctor is putting their reputation on the line. It has to be reviewed by the the TUE committee (TUEC) pursuant to the International Standards for Approval adopted by WADA and every anti doping agency in the world.

See S 5.2 of the WADA TUE process on the WADA website.

The review process requires the application to be reviewed inter alia by,

a. TUECs should include at least three physicians with experience in the care and treatment of Athletes and a sound knowledge of clinical, sports and exercise medicine.

I accept that the rule says "should" include and whether or not these TUECs do in fact only WADA, the ADAs, or International Federations or Major Event Organizers can tell us.

Did a phone call to UCI's Zorzoli not get Froome the TUE permission required for Romandie? I think so. No note required![/quote]

There is a specific rule for that. Rule 6.9 of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions (ISTUE) https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/therapeutic-use-exemption-tue/international-standard-for-therapeutic-use-exemptions-istue


Essentially the athlete has to make a fresh application. But I can see circumstances in which a phone call concurrent with a faxed or e-mailed application might do the trick if the Major Event Organizer supported the application, Froome's medical records for the need for the TUE were current and contemporaneous with the start of the Romandie. It would be superfluous to resubmit the same medical data the organization already had to grant the original TUE.

I don't know if that happened in this instance but I can see why it might legitimately occur!

 

[RobbieCanuck]

Re: Re:

@ Robbbiecanuck and Benotti69:

I read the guidelines, and they specifically state that TUE applications should be supported by objective evidence. Cited examples included radiologic imaging, pathology reports, copies of actual lab results, etc.

If an athlete applied for a TUE saying they need hGH because they had to have a benign pituitary neoplasm surgically resected (so no longer produce the peptide endogenously), a "doctors-note' would/should not be sufficient. They would need copies of MRI scans, operative-reports, pathology etc (you would hope!!)

The problem area is the cluster of conditions like asthma, ADHD, and tissue injury where the diagnoses are less clear-cut and susceptible to manipulation.

Thanks for that

 

[Brullnux]

Petra Kvitova and Jack Conger

 

[Rollthedice]

Re:

Petra Kvitova and Jack Conger

She's asthmatic and he probably has the newly discovered ilness of the champions, ADHD so let's give him a permanent TUE for speed.

 

[TeflonDub]

New drop from fancybear.net

Wiggins and Froome.

 

[doolols]

Fancy Bears have changed their website - the original data is now on "Page-1"
http://fancybear.net/page-1.html

This is page 2
http://fancybear.net/page-2.html

 

[buckle]

Re:

New drop from fancybear.net

Wiggins and Froome.

Prednisolone for Froome.

 

[doolols]

Froome TUE for prednisolone
21 May 2013 - 26 May 2013
27 Apr 2014 - 2 May 2014
29 Apr 2014 - 6 May 2015 !!! (mistake?)
29 Apr 2014 - 6 May 2014

The April 2014 dates coincide with the Telegraph article
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...-did-not-break-anti-doping-rules-say-UCI.html

Edit:

Froome was suffering from a chill and was granted permission to use prednisolone on his way to winning the Tour of Romandy in Switzerland in April.

 

[doolols]

It's interesting the amount of times Prednisolone comes up in these TUEs. I wish I had shares in the manufacturer of this.

 

[doolols]

Also interesting is that Prednisolone is not specifically mentioned on WADA's banned list. It's not even in the database, despite its widespread use with TUEs.

Is it in the 'catch-all' "anything like this" rules?