Frank schleck

[Franklin]

Again: does anyone know what it can mask?

 

[blackcat]

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.

Cyril Guimards VC Roubaix with Andy, well... Andy had a rep

 

[Panda Claws]

If the ball keeps rolling there is a chance that Menchov gets the 2010 TDF

 

[blackcat]

interesting following this story as it develops on twitter, numerous people are expressing surprise that the UCI broke news of the test before testing the B sample, and michael creed says that use of a diuretic doesn't seem plausible or beneficial, and thinks that in all likelihood it's from a fat-burning supplement.

i'd be interested to hear about the concentration numbers they found in the urine sample, assuming it shows up in the b sample as well. something about this doesn't smell right (not that anything related to doping scandals ever does).

and Creed was also a big defender of Tyler H.

 

[Arnout]

Again: does anyone know what it can mask?

Steroids, apparently. Things to increase muscle mass (hehe, muscle mass on Frankie, where ). Don't know about the effectiveness.

 

[LaFlorecita]

interesting following this story as it develops on twitter, numerous people are expressing surprise that the UCI broke news of the test before testing the B sample, and michael creed says that use of a diuretic doesn't seem plausible or beneficial, and thinks that in all likelihood it's from a fat-burning supplement.

i'd be interested to hear about the concentration numbers they found in the urine sample, assuming it shows up in the b sample as well. something about this doesn't smell right (not that anything related to doping scandals ever does).

Fränk Schleck and fat-burning supplements?

 

[Lexman]

http://www.standaard.be/artikel/detail.aspx?artikelid=DMF20120717_167

Spokesman Maertens of RSNT says the teamdoctor knows this product isn't used in the team, F.S. doesn't know how the product got in his body.


what to think of this one :
http://www.sporza.be/cm/sporza/wielrennen/Tour/120717_frank_schleck_doping
Als Schleck kan aantonen hoe het middel in z'n lichaam kwam en zijn prestaties niet bevorderde, kan Schleck wegkomen met een waarschuwing. Is dat niet het geval, dan riskeert hij een schorsing van twee jaar.
If F.S. can prove and show how the substance / product came in his body and did not influence his results (prestations), he might get away with a warning, if not he could have a suspension of two years.

A warning ?????

If the rule "every rider is responsable for what's in his body" is applied for Contador and he gets a suspension, why should F.S. only get a warning?

 

[mwbyrd]

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

How in the holy heck is anyone other than a chemist supposed to understand this? Let alone some cyclist who only really wants to pedal his bicycle. Talk about leaving the barn door open with the statement in bold. It's like saying, just in case we aren't good enough to tell you exactly what's illegal, we will decide what is an what isn't legal/illegal when we find it.

Oh...and by the way, we are testing for things that aren't on the list, BUT YOU AS THE ATHLETE ARE RESPOSIBLE FOR WHAT'S IN YOUR BODY...

How would you like to be held to these standards at your job?

 

[Catwhoorg]

Again: does anyone know what it can mask?

Through dilution, just about anything that is tested for in urine.

Through reducing the plasma volume, certain evidences of blood doping.

 

[Arnout]

How in the holy heck is anyone other than a chemist supposed to understand this? Let alone some cyclist who only really wants to pedal his bicycle. Talk about leaving the barn door open with the statement in bold. It's like saying, just in case we aren't good enough to tell you exactly what's illegal, we will decide what is an what isn't legal/illegal when we find it.

Oh...and by the way, we are testing for things that aren't on the list, BUT YOU AS THE ATHLETE ARE RESPOSIBLE FOR WHAT'S IN YOUR BODY...

How would you like to be held to these standards at your job?

Doesn't matter, he is guilty. I don't care about how's and why's, it's his responsibility.

 

[LaFlorecita]

If the rule "every rider is responsable for what's in his body" is applied for Contador and he gets a suspension, why should F.S. only get a warning?

My point exactly. Rules are rules.

 

[Thee_chisa]

Can someone say if Xipamide is something you can take 'accidently' (in other products/food etc) or is it something you must know you have taken if its in your system ? Thanks.

no, won't be in food. this has to be purposely taken. certain diuretics are pretty dangerous drugs (including this one) as you can lose a lot of potassium that can cause a lot of problems for the body. the only way he can explain it is if he was taking it for high blood pressure. however, an athlete a) probably won't have hypertension and b) certainly wouldn't use a diuretic to rectify it.

 

[Franklin]

If the rule "every rider is responsable for what's in his body" is applied for Contador and he gets a suspension, why should F.S. only get a warning?

This is why the Contador judgement is a travesty of justice.

 

[mwbyrd]

Under diuretics:

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).


Xipamide is a thiazide type diuretic. So yes its on the list, under the bold section.

Duh...that's just SO OBVIOUS...

 

[red_death]

interesting following this story as it develops on twitter, numerous people are expressing surprise that the UCI broke news of the test before testing the B sample

IIRC you can waive a B test if you admit you took something.

 

[Arnout]

http://www.standaard.be/artikel/detail.aspx?artikelid=DMF20120717_167

Spokesman Maertens of RSNT says the teamdoctor knows this product isn't used in the team, F.S. doesn't know how the product got in his body.


what to think of this one :
http://www.sporza.be/cm/sporza/wielrennen/Tour/120717_frank_schleck_doping
Als Schleck kan aantonen hoe het middel in z'n lichaam kwam en zijn prestaties niet bevorderde, kan Schleck wegkomen met een waarschuwing. Is dat niet het geval, dan riskeert hij een schorsing van twee jaar.
If F.S. can prove and show how the substance / product came in his body and did not influence his results (prestations), he might get away with a warning, if not he could have a suspension of two years.

A warning ?????

If the rule "every rider is responsable for what's in his body" is applied for Contador and he gets a suspension, why should F.S. only get a warning?

Am I right in saying that if Contador had succeeded in proving that the clenbuterol in his body was coming from contaminated beef, he wouldn't have been banned? Apparently he didn't succeed, but that's exactly what was decided in these trials.

 

[noddy69]

How in the holy heck is anyone other than a chemist supposed to understand this? Let alone some cyclist who only really wants to pedal his bicycle. Talk about leaving the barn door open with the statement in bold. It's like saying, just in case we aren't good enough to tell you exactly what's illegal, we will decide what is an what isn't legal/illegal when we find it.

Oh...and by the way, we are testing for things that aren't on the list, BUT YOU AS THE ATHLETE ARE RESPOSIBLE FOR WHAT'S IN YOUR BODY...

How would you like to be held to these standards at your job?

Right so you just go taking random drugs without checking what they do or are they ok. The rule covers any drug that isnt on the list that is new to the market or otherwise. Any cyclist taking a drug into his system has to check what it does and if it is allowed. Its simple and easy to follow and there for a reason.

 

[LaFlorecita]

How in the holy heck is anyone other than a chemist supposed to understand this? Let alone some cyclist who only really wants to pedal his bicycle. Talk about leaving the barn door open with the statement in bold. It's like saying, just in case we aren't good enough to tell you exactly what's illegal, we will decide what is an what isn't legal/illegal when we find it.

Oh...and by the way, we are testing for things that aren't on the list, BUT YOU AS THE ATHLETE ARE RESPOSIBLE FOR WHAT'S IN YOUR BODY...

How would you like to be held to these standards at your job?

Those things don't get into your body in a natural way I think. If a cyclist is planning on taking something (medicin, supplements etc.) I am sure they let an expert check whether there is some banned substance in it.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Duh...that's just SO OBVIOUS...

I can sense the presence of a Schleck fanboy.

 

[Franklin]

Through dilution, just about anything that is tested for in urine.

Through reducing the plasma volume, certain evidences of blood doping.

With current spectometry, anyone's guess how effective it is?

I have two scenario's (skipping the conspiracy as that is hard to prove)

a. He messed up something else and rolled the dice.
b. It's an innocent misstake.

Considering the ease of detection the only reason to knowingly take it is hoping you will not be tested and if tested that you can bluff your way out.

All in all very interesting how this will play out.

 

[argyllflyer]

If the rule "every rider is responsable for what's in his body" is applied for Contador and he gets a suspension, why should F.S. only get a warning?

It's to do with the type of substance it is. 1st offence carries range of sanctions, from warning through to ONE year ban.

Specified Substances
Schleck has a chance of proving his innocence because Xipamide falls into a special category of substances under the World-Anti Doping Code called “Specified Substances.”

The Code states that when an “athlete can establish that the use of such a specified substance was not intended to enhance sport performance, the period of ineligibility… shall be replaced with the following.”

For a first violation athletes face anything from “a reprimand” or, at most, a “one year’s ineligiblity.”

A second violation would incur “two years ineligibility”, in other words a two-year ban, while a third violation would incur a “lifetime ban.”

http://velonews.competitor.com/2012...sitive-doping-test-for-frank-schleck-2_230302

 

[Catwhoorg]

How would you like to be held to these standards at your job?

Technically I am. I am subject to random drug screenings, mainly focused on 'recreational drugs' but there is a whole long list of other stuff they can look for.

Many of which include a variant of the phrase 'or similar substances'

If caught with a diuretic like this, I'd be expected to provide a valid prescription from a doctor (basically a TUE)

 

[Franklin]

Right so you just go taking random drugs without checking what they do or are they ok. The rule covers any drug that isnt on the list that is new to the market or otherwise. Any cyclist taking a drug into his system has to check what it does and if it is allowed. Its simple and easy to follow and there for a reason.

That's actually completely nonsense. I have no idea of knowing what is in my sportdrink/proteine shake or my vitamins.

Heck, you can't even be sure what is in your aspirin. All you can do is trust the label.

 

[Thee_chisa]

Through dilution, just about anything that is tested for in urine.

Through reducing the plasma volume, certain evidences of blood doping.

for blood doping they would use something like gelofusine to boost plasma volume and "normalise" levels, not a diuretic to display irregularities. probably not blood doping, more like a steroid, HGH.

 

[Dr.Sahl]

If the ball keeps rolling there is a chance that Menchov gets the 2010 TDF

That would be good, I welcome more tour cakes