Gigs_98 said:
I'm actually starting to wonder whether Froome might maybe really be "innocent". Maybe he just tried to push the boundries and take as much Salbutamol as allowed but because of some unknown reasons it backfired and his body didn't process the substance fast enough. I've now already read a few articles claiming the too high portion of Salbutamol in his urine might be due to dehydration which sounds logical to someone like me who isn't exactly knowledgeable in this topic. I just don't get why you would purposely take too much of a substance like Salbutamol when you know you'll get tested the following day. Wouldn't that be unbelievably stupid? This just doesn't make sense to me.
Well-
1. There is no chance that he was dehydrated enough to cause a 100% increase in levels, beyond the allowable limit...while still being able to drop Nibali. Un-possible. Further, the literature Ive read suggests that dehydration can in fact increase the concentration- by 5-10%. So, even if we allow for this, what accounts for the other 90% over the limit?
Cheating, thats what.
2. It turns out the most of these guys in fact are...stupid. With Sky, we can go back as far as you like, and find absolutely absurd and ridiculous explanations for everything that seemed off. The Clinic has mocked these clowns for years. Turns out, however, that a fawning and sycophantic media (Kimmage aside) simply refused to ask tough questions, gave the benefit of the doubt, and on and on.
People often avoid asking tough questions of people perceived to be in positions of power or prestige, and that is clearly the case here.
I mean, a literate 12 year old with access to Google could have disproved the majority of Brailsfords crap in 30 seconds, had anyone WANTED to get to the truth. Because really, these guys arent very bright- but they are wealthy and powerful.
Look- with the odd prevalence of asthma in the peleton, surely some other athletes have run afoul of the rules like this, right? (If you believe the Sky explanations, that is.)