General Doping Thread.

Page 33 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
To beat a dead horse, exercising muscles to exhaustion requires recovery. EPO aids muscle recovery. Show me a study that says otherwise.
I think we all understand and point well taken. I think folks are just saying that there are dozens of other ways to accomplish the same, and typically other substances have been used in sports like baseball. EPO isn't the first thing one would think of. May have to do with the particulars of the testing regime in baseball, maybe something else. It's interesting is all.
 

GVFTA

BANNED
Jul 5, 2018
223
134
1,230
I think we all understand and point well taken. I think folks are just saying that there are dozens of other ways to accomplish the same, and typically other substances have been used in sports like baseball. EPO isn't the first thing one would think of. May have to do with the particulars of the testing regime in baseball, maybe something else. It's interesting is all.
I guess we would all be naive to put anything past any professional athlete in any sport. The last thing I thought a cyclist would test positive for is strychnine, but a former teammate of mine did just that while he was racing for Jelly Belly!
 
Reactions: fmk_RoI

Apparently the case of Sofie De Vuyst is very complex, says Hans Vandewehge, who is somewhat of an authority on the subject. Things that have been released in the press, are not correct. But proving her innocence will cost a lot of money and given her age (32), he wonders if she won't just retire.

Too bad he doesn't specify what is so complex about here case, just that he has never seen a case like this.
 
Back to supplements: UKAD, boxing and the Dillian Whyte case:
UK Anti-Doping and the professional boxer, Dillian Whyte, can today jointly confirm that Mr Whyte was charged with an anti-doping rule violation (ADRV) earlier this year, but that this charge has now been withdrawn.
More questions than answers here so let's go from the top:
The British Boxing Board of Control, having delegated responsibility for anti-doping matters to UKAD, has been informed of the resolution of these proceedings against Mr Whyte.
Is UKAD's role in boxing like USADA's role in MMA? Boxing isn't part of WADA, has it's own rules, and the management is outsourced to UKAD?

The facts of the case:
  • There is nothing in Mr Whyte's longitudinal urinary profile to suggest that he has used steroids.
  • The levels of the metabolites found in Mr Whyte's 20 June 2019 sample were extremely low.
  • Mr Whyte had provided a urine sample to VADA on 17 June 2019, i.e. 3 days before his 20 June 2019 sample, which was tested by a WADA-accredited laboratory and which returned a negative result, including for the metabolites in question.
  • Mr Whyte provided several other doping control samples to UKAD and VADA between 20 June and 20 July 2019 (i.e. the date of his fight with Oscar Rivas) – all of which also tested negative.
  • In light of the above points, the trace amounts of metabolites found in the 20 June 2019 sample are consistent with an isolated contamination event, and they are not suggestive of doping.
At the heart of it, then, UKAD are saying the Dianabol entered Whyte's system between the 17th and the 20th and by the 20th was in such low amounts they concluded it wasn't performance enhancing. Can we confidently assume this is a tainted supplement?

Has anyone looked at the actual rules here (soz, I'm being lazy today and not looking for them myself) and do they allow for thresholds, like the amended MMA rules do? Or is there a get out of gaol free card in the strict liability clause that allows UKAD to say "We ain't never caught this guy doping before and we really need to catch em twice in order to punish em once?"
 
At the heart of it, then, UKAD are saying the Dianabol entered Whyte's system between the 17th and the 20th and by the 20th was in such low amounts they concluded it wasn't performance enhancing. Can we confidently assume this is a tainted supplement?
Not necessarily. If dianabol was the drug in question (I'm going on your post, am not familiar with the case), that has a half-life of 3-6 hours. So if he had taken a large dose right after the test, it probably would have been detectable onlyin trace amounts 2-3 days later. If he was tested several times following that date, and was negative, that one hypothetical dose on the 17th or 18th would be all he took, which would seem unlikely. However, if he hadn't expected to be tested on the 20th, and as a result of that test he was told (or expected) he would be tested again soon, he might have stopped taking it altogether.
 
Reactions: fmk_RoI
Here's one I didn't know: Asafa Powell and Sherone Simpson sued supplement manufacturer Dynamic Life Nutrition for $8m after both popped positives which they blamed on supplements. The case was settled out of court.
And another one of these: UFC fighter Yoel Romero popped a positive for Ibutamoren in 2016 and served six months on the naughty step after convincing USADA that it was a tainted supplement that caused his positive. In May he won a lawsuit against Gold Star Performance Products, the makers of the supplement. He was award $27.45 million: $3m for lost income; $3m for reputation damage; $3m for emotional harm; all three trebled under New Jersey's Consumer Fraud Act because Gold Star was found to have committed consumer fraud.

From the report linked above:
Given the relatively small scope of Gold Star Performance Products compared to supplement industry leaders, it remains to be seen what percentage of the $27.45 million Romero will receive before the company is devoid of cashflow and assets and forced to file for bankruptcy.
 
Last edited:
Shayna Jack drops tainted supplement defence in favour of "cocaine kiss":
"There's the chance of it being in a contaminated supplement.

"The only unfortunate thing is I actually hadn't taken supplements in two months prior to that test."

Jack then outlined the "kiss cocaine case" defence.

"There was a case in the past called the 'kiss cocaine case' where someone had taken cocaine and then the partner, who was an athlete, kissed that person and they were contaminated because they had contact with something someone else had taken.

"I was told that anything I had come in contact with during that period could have been a risk of the contamination."
Deets
 
Reactions: 42x16ss
Yesterday, WADA published a report on anti-doping violations from 2017.


Italy at #1, with 171, France at #2 with 128, US at #3 with 103. Russia at #5 with 82.
So why aren't those three countries (plus Brazil at #4) aren't banned as well? I'd be interesting to see the 2018 and 2019 lists. Hope they'll be available soon, rather than having to wait two years...
 
Reactions: fmk_RoI

GVFTA

BANNED
Jul 5, 2018
223
134
1,230
Yesterday, WADA published a report on anti-doping violations from 2017.


Italy at #1, with 171, France at #2 with 128, US at #3 with 103. Russia at #5 with 82.
So why aren't those three countries (plus Brazil at #4) aren't banned as well? I'd be interesting to see the 2018 and 2019 lists. Hope they'll be available soon, rather than having to wait two years...

Plenty info in this thread
 
Reading an ESPN article about a Green Bay Packers (American football) running back, I noticed this:
" His goal entering 2019 was to trim body fat, so he eliminated candy from his diet. He maintained his weight of 205 but slashed his body fat percentage from 11% to 5.3%. "

Of course it's no surprise whatsoever, but it does shout 'NFL in the Aicar club'
 
Reactions: fmk_RoI
Farah pops a positive for boldenone, the same drug that has seen Fernando Gaviria's brother-in-law Fabián Puerta sat on the naughty step since August 2018.
Let's run this one past the Clinic hivemind and see what comes out. As well as Farah popping a positive, a second tennis player went to the naughty step this week, Nicolas Jarry. A German media outlet spoke to someone at the Institute for Biomedical and Pharmaceutical Research in Nuremberg, Fritz Sörgel ("a recognized doping expert", it says, although I doubt many here would be able to pick him out of a line-up) and he came up with this ...uh ... ingenious bit of ... well that's for you to decide, I hesitate to call this logic:
"Suppose a substance can only be determined at a value of 1. Then the athlete simply takes five different substances with a value of 0.2. These then add up to 1, with the same effect, but cannot be tested positive. But you have to master that, but Jarry's adviser doesn't seem to. He mixed at least two preparations that he thought were undetectable. With the Ligandrol I am not surprised that it went wrong. The substance is chemically very different from the well-known steroid anabolic steroids and has not been scientifically investigated compared to the latter. ”
(Translation from German by Google's babelfish.) To me, this looks a bit like Enron accounting, where you turn one power station into a thousand power stations by mathemagics. Or like that hotel porter puzzle with the ten dollars that only adds up to nine. Any of the more sensible folk around here got a take on it? Jarry got caught for ligandrol and stanozolol. If that's two of his 0.2s, what options are there for the other three to be?
 
Let's run this one past the Clinic hivemind and see what comes out. As well as Farah popping a positive, a second tennis player went to the naughty step this week, Nicolas Jarry. A German media outlet spoke to someone at the Institute for Biomedical and Pharmaceutical Research in Nuremberg, Fritz Sörgel ("a recognized doping expert", it says, although I doubt many here would be able to pick him out of a line-up) and he came up with this ...uh ... ingenious bit of ... well that's for you to decide, I hesitate to call this logic: (Translation from German by Google's babelfish.) To me, this looks a bit like Enron accounting, where you turn one power station into a thousand power stations by mathemagics. Or like that hotel porter puzzle with the ten dollars that only adds up to nine. Any of the more sensible folk around here got a take on it? Jarry got caught for ligandrol and stanozolol. If that's two of his 0.2s, what options are there for the other three to be?

Just saw you posted about the two positives. Here's the news from tennis magazine.

 
Let's run this one past the Clinic hivemind and see what comes out. As well as Farah popping a positive, a second tennis player went to the naughty step this week, Nicolas Jarry. A German media outlet spoke to someone at the Institute for Biomedical and Pharmaceutical Research in Nuremberg, Fritz Sörgel ("a recognized doping expert", it says, although I doubt many here would be able to pick him out of a line-up) and he came up with this ...uh ... ingenious bit of ... well that's for you to decide, I hesitate to call this logic: (Translation from German by Google's babelfish.) To me, this looks a bit like Enron accounting, where you turn one power station into a thousand power stations by mathemagics. Or like that hotel porter puzzle with the ten dollars that only adds up to nine. Any of the more sensible folk around here got a take on it? Jarry got caught for ligandrol and stanozolol. If that's two of his 0.2s, what options are there for the other three to be?
I'm guessing the translation might be poor, because I think what he really is trying to say is that you can replace 1 effective, but easily detected, substance with several other substances at levels below the limit of detection/specification, whose effects adds up to the same as that one substance (which you probably worked out). His example is silly, because if the substance can only be determined at 1, you'd take it at a level of 0.9, along with the 5 other things, also at a level just below detection, and get 1+ benefit (5.4 to take his dodgy maths to completion).


As for how to do this, I'd suppose you'd look at the specified substance list and work out how much of these you can take without tripping the wire. Non-specified substances are harder, because their detection can be lab dependent (paging Berto...) so if you were planning this you'd need to have a good idea of where your samples are going to end up.

If I'm honest, I think that's probably a lot more work than most dopers go to. I would think most rely on wide windows in testing outside competition and some basic clearance times found on the internet (how long does such and such a product make you "glow" for). Because of variation in metabolism and efficacy of drugs from person to person, you'd need to do a fair bit of testing to work out what particular cocktail falls into Sörgel's suggestion and while you're doing that you run the risk of falling foul of anti-doping.
 
Reactions: Fus087 and fmk_RoI

Although the minimum sanction for a positive steroid test would typically be four years, the UCI anti-doping rules provide for reduced bans for unintentional anti-doping rule violations (10.2.1.1).
Great that microdosing can now be seen as unintentional.
 
Reactions: fmk_RoI
Denise Betsema's provisioneel suspension has been ended by UCI.

 
If I'm honest, I think that's probably a lot more work than most dopers go to.
This is probably where I found Sörgel's "logic" most annoying: he presents it as a simple math problem. Product X has a testing threshold of Y, therefore you simply substitute it for a cocktail of five products with the same combined testing threshold.

First, there's the assumption that performance gain is somehow linked to testing thresholds. And that vice versa all products have comparable thresholds. Then there's the question of how do you know the testing threshold. And glow time for each of the substituted products.

Yes, I do get that people have been use cocktails of drugs for performance gain. But - as with claimed performance gains for kit - it is rather simplistic to think the numbers add up and substitution is so simple that you can do the math on the back of a dearest comrade packet.

Sörgel may be right in saying that Jarry testing positive for two substances suggests substitution and not contamination, but elsewhere in that interview he suggests as proof of Nadal's doping that he is Spanish.
 
Reactions: Fus087
do the math on the back of a dearest comrade packet.
A dearest comrade packet? Sounds like Soviet condoms ("I am sorry Vladimir, you cannot explore my vast steppe without your dearest comrades. I cannot afford the morning after pill and you cannot afford the antibiotics."). Not what I wrote though. I used a slang word for cigarette. Three letters, begins in F, ends in G, in between is the indefinite article. Feck off if that's censorable.

If the forum software is going to edit us I do think it should indicate it has done so.
 
Last edited:
Farah pops a positive for boldenone, the same drug that has seen Fernando Gaviria's brother-in-law Fabián Puerta sat on the naughty step since August 2018.
An interesting and relevant fact about Boldenone....in addition to promoting steady increases in strength and muscle mass, its also well known for rapidly increasing red blood cell production.......a bit like EPO on steroids if you like ;)
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
B The Clinic 2
D The Clinic 9
Invicituz The Clinic 0

ASK THE COMMUNITY