- May 26, 2010
- 74
- 0
- 0
offbyone said:Well that explains why the Schlecks seem to annually go from having horrible no form to perfect form with very little time in between.
But really, why bother if he, according to himself, wasn't even planning on contesting the tour? What a dumbass. Both Schlecks should get lost.
Machu Picchu said:First time for a long while since I've heard anything 'positive' about Frank....
sniper said:
totally my thoughts.
that's why all teams need well organized doping structures.
once the structure falters, accidents happen.
21switchbacks said:Oh, so THAT'S what Tommy V. has been doing all this time!
BroDeal said:It is interesting that RSNT immediately denied that any of their medications contained the substance. They could have kept their mouths shut and later discovered a medication that inadvertently contained it. They are hanging him out to dry.
ElChingon said:"Amigo de Brillo", its the 2006 backdated payday for you.![]()
patrick767 said:I have to agree that this is very odd. Why take a diuretic now to gain some advantage, via masking or dropping weight before more tough mountain stages, during a sub-par Tour performance? There's the risk of getting caught and little upside to it. What would FS be trying to do, dope his way to a top ten finish after being 3rd last year? Why bother?
Also, why isn't immediately testing the B sample automatic? Do it before they go public with the test results. If the A sample is positive, you test the B just to make sure. Then announce it. It seems like that should be standard operating procedure.
Waiting to hear more about what this will mean...
avanti said:Why would any cyclist purposly take this drug with a >10% chance of muscle weakness?
Forunculo said:Despite I'm no fan of Schleck and waiting more info, I think he is innocent. At least I hope.
patrick767 said:I have to agree that this is very odd. Why take a diuretic now to gain some advantage, via masking or dropping weight before more tough mountain stages, during a sub-par Tour performance? There's the risk of getting caught and little upside to it. What would FS be trying to do, dope his way to a top ten finish after being 3rd last year? Why bother?
Also, why isn't immediately testing the B sample automatic? Do it before they go public with the test results. If the A sample is positive, you test the B just to make sure. Then announce it. It seems like that should be standard operating procedure.
Waiting to hear more about what this will mean...
thehog said:Yes he must be innocent.![]()
LaFlorecita said:I don't really care about doping
LaFlorecita said:I don't really care about doping, normally I would've hoped he'd be let off, but Alberto a ban = Everyone a ban. No exceptions.
roundabout said:Eh, no. The Schleck caught actually has a pretty broad set of results and is competitive for more than 4 weeks a year.
But lumping them together works better, I guess.![]()
thehog said:Yes he must be innocent.![]()
mwbyrd said:=
Xipamide, the substance found in Schleck's urine, is not specifically mentioned on WADA's prohibited substance list."
If what's in bold is true, why do we even know about this?
Epicycle said:Diuretics include:
Acetazolamide, amiloride, bumetanide, canrenone, chlorthalidone,
etacrynic acid, furosemide, indapamide, metolazone, spironolactone,
thiazides (e.g. bendroflumethiazide, chlorothiazide, hydrochlorothiazide),
triamterene; and other substances with a similar chemical structure or similar
biological effect(s) (except drospirenone, pamabrom and topical dorzolamide and
brinzolamide, which are not prohibited).
http://www.wada-ama.org/Documents/World_Anti-Doping_Program/WADP-Prohibited-list/2012/WADA_Prohibited_List_2012_EN.pdf
kareeem said:Well that's all we need to know about you, fangirl.
Arnout said:Thanks for your extremely valuable contributions![]()
rhubroma said:According to cyclingnews.com the drug is not banned on WADA's list, though the Italian dailes say it is a "sostanza proibita" (prohibited substance). Where? On the UCI's list, Mars? Venus?
Anyone know?