General Doping Thread.

[Jancouver]

Ex-pro and current Swiss national coach, Danilo Hondo confesses to blood doping during his career, worked with the Erfurt doctor "Mark S" who is under investigation https://www.rbb24.de/sport/beitrag/2019/05/ex-radprofi-danilo-hondo-gesteht-blutdoping.html

 

[Koronin]

Have you all seen that the UCI gave Sammy Sanchez a 2 year doping ban and at the same time said that they accept Sanchez's explanation that the samples were contaminated. Um if they were contaminated why is he getting a ban?
https://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/48259947

 

[Tim Booth]

After Denifl and Preidler, today's La Gazzetta Dello Sport says Kristijan Koren (Bahrain-Merida), currently riding the Giro, linked to Operation Aderlass, also Kristijan Đurasek (UAE Emirates) riding in California + Borut Božič, recently from Bahrain-Merida.
https://twitter.com/inrng/status/1128554095248400385?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Eembeddedtimeline%7Ctwterm%5Eprofile%3Ainrng%7Ctwcon%5Etimelinechrome&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Finrng.com%2F

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

Have you all seen that the UCI gave Sammy Sanchez a 2 year doping ban and at the same time said that they accept Sanchez's explanation that the samples were contaminated. Um if they were contaminated why is he getting a ban?
https://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/48259947

Contaminated supplement, not sample, that's very different. I'm guessing they have accepted that this was most likely which is why it's only 2 years.

 

[Ricco']

Re: Re:

Have you all seen that the UCI gave Sammy Sanchez a 2 year doping ban and at the same time said that they accept Sanchez's explanation that the samples were contaminated. Um if they were contaminated why is he getting a ban?
https://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/48259947

Contaminated supplement, not sample, that's very different. I'm guessing they have accepted that this was most likely which is why it's only 2 years.

I don't understand that, if the anti doping body accepts the contaminated supplement motive, they still give a 2 year suspension. The fault should be on the makers of the supplement, not on the rider. For sure they don't expect the riders to test each box of supplementation products that they take to see if it's contaminated with performance enhancing substances.

Losing all results would be the right measure to take. After all, he was racing with things that aren't allowed. But being suspended from racing because of something that isn't the riders fault, but the manufacturer's, is a bit too much for me.

This, I repeat, if it's found without doubt that the cause of the positive is a contaminated supplement.

 

[Mayomaniac]

Re: Re:

Have you all seen that the UCI gave Sammy Sanchez a 2 year doping ban and at the same time said that they accept Sanchez's explanation that the samples were contaminated. Um if they were contaminated why is he getting a ban?
https://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/48259947

Contaminated supplement, not sample, that's very different. I'm guessing they have accepted that this was most likely which is why it's only 2 years.

I don't understand that, if the anti doping body accepts the contaminated supplement motive, they still give a 2 year suspension. The fault should be on the makers of the supplement, not on the rider. For sure they don't expect the riders to test each box of supplementation products that they take to see if it's contaminated with performance enhancing substances.

Losing all results would be the right measure to take. After all, he was racing with things that aren't allowed. But being suspended from racing because of something that isn't the riders fault, but the manufacturer's, is a bit too much for me.

This, I repeat, if it's found without doubt that the cause of the positive is a contaminated supplement.

There a organizations, like the German NADA, who test supplements on a regular basis and have a list of those that you can use without any concerns. That said, 2 years is probably to harsh, but according to the WADA code that's the ban for an accidental anti doping violation, it is probably too harsh when it is actually a tainted supplement.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Have you all seen that the UCI gave Sammy Sanchez a 2 year doping ban and at the same time said that they accept Sanchez's explanation that the samples were contaminated. Um if they were contaminated why is he getting a ban?
https://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/48259947

Contaminated supplement, not sample, that's very different. I'm guessing they have accepted that this was most likely which is why it's only 2 years.

I don't understand that, if the anti doping body accepts the contaminated supplement motive, they still give a 2 year suspension. The fault should be on the makers of the supplement, not on the rider. For sure they don't expect the riders to test each box of supplementation products that they take to see if it's contaminated with performance enhancing substances.

Losing all results would be the right measure to take. After all, he was racing with things that aren't allowed. But being suspended from racing because of something that isn't the riders fault, but the manufacturer's, is a bit too much for me.

This, I repeat, if it's found without doubt that the cause of the positive is a contaminated supplement.

Based on the UCI statement and reading between the lines I think that they have accepted that this is the most likely cause, hence only 2 years and not 4 years, but Sanchez failed to prove it was definitely the cause, which could be argued as no ban.

The liability rests with the rider (for good reasons) but it does result in situations like this (if we believe the claim) and the Contador case. It's not an easy thing to prove. Even if you save an amount of each supplement you take, there is no chain of custody for everything you take/eat. Just because you have a contaminated supplement in your possession doesn't prove that 1) this was the cause of your failed test and 2) the supplement was contaminated before you got it.

Athletes aren't forced to take supplements, it's a known risk and you need to weigh it up. As Mayomaniac points out, there is some information available to athletes to help, but it isn't perfect.

 

[Koronin]

Re: Re:

Have you all seen that the UCI gave Sammy Sanchez a 2 year doping ban and at the same time said that they accept Sanchez's explanation that the samples were contaminated. Um if they were contaminated why is he getting a ban?
https://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/48259947

Contaminated supplement, not sample, that's very different. I'm guessing they have accepted that this was most likely which is why it's only 2 years.

I don't understand that, if the anti doping body accepts the contaminated supplement motive, they still give a 2 year suspension. The fault should be on the makers of the supplement, not on the rider. For sure they don't expect the riders to test each box of supplementation products that they take to see if it's contaminated with performance enhancing substances.

Losing all results would be the right measure to take. After all, he was racing with things that aren't allowed. But being suspended from racing because of something that isn't the riders fault, but the manufacturer's, is a bit too much for me.

This, I repeat, if it's found without doubt that the cause of the positive is a contaminated supplement.

Based on the UCI statement and reading between the lines I think that they have accepted that this is the most likely cause, hence only 2 years and not 4 years, but Sanchez failed to prove it was definitely the cause, which could be argued as no ban.

The liability rests with the rider (for good reasons) but it does result in situations like this (if we believe the claim) and the Contador case. It's not an easy thing to prove. Even if you save an amount of each supplement you take, there is no chain of custody for everything you take/eat. Just because you have a contaminated supplement in your possession doesn't prove that 1) this was the cause of your failed test and 2) the supplement was contaminated before you got it.

Athletes aren't forced to take supplements, it's a known risk and you need to weigh it up. As Mayomaniac points out, there is some information available to athletes to help, but it isn't perfect.

Basically what this is says is he doesn't have the money to buy his way out of this.

 

[veganrob]

Re: Re:

Have you all seen that the UCI gave Sammy Sanchez a 2 year doping ban and at the same time said that they accept Sanchez's explanation that the samples were contaminated. Um if they were contaminated why is he getting a ban?
https://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/48259947

Contaminated supplement, not sample, that's very different. I'm guessing they have accepted that this was most likely which is why it's only 2 years.

Only the likelihood that it was a contaminated supplement. So apparently it was never tested. 2 yrs because they know Sanchez is lying and is 43yrs old

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Have you all seen that the UCI gave Sammy Sanchez a 2 year doping ban and at the same time said that they accept Sanchez's explanation that the samples were contaminated. Um if they were contaminated why is he getting a ban?
https://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/48259947

Contaminated supplement, not sample, that's very different. I'm guessing they have accepted that this was most likely which is why it's only 2 years.

I don't understand that, if the anti doping body accepts the contaminated supplement motive, they still give a 2 year suspension. The fault should be on the makers of the supplement, not on the rider. For sure they don't expect the riders to test each box of supplementation products that they take to see if it's contaminated with performance enhancing substances.

Losing all results would be the right measure to take. After all, he was racing with things that aren't allowed. But being suspended from racing because of something that isn't the riders fault, but the manufacturer's, is a bit too much for me.

This, I repeat, if it's found without doubt that the cause of the positive is a contaminated supplement.

Based on the UCI statement and reading between the lines I think that they have accepted that this is the most likely cause, hence only 2 years and not 4 years, but Sanchez failed to prove it was definitely the cause, which could be argued as no ban.

The liability rests with the rider (for good reasons) but it does result in situations like this (if we believe the claim) and the Contador case. It's not an easy thing to prove. Even if you save an amount of each supplement you take, there is no chain of custody for everything you take/eat. Just because you have a contaminated supplement in your possession doesn't prove that 1) this was the cause of your failed test and 2) the supplement was contaminated before you got it.

Athletes aren't forced to take supplements, it's a known risk and you need to weigh it up. As Mayomaniac points out, there is some information available to athletes to help, but it isn't perfect.

Basically what this is says is he doesn't have the money to buy his way out of this.

No, that’s what you assume is the case. My post just points out why the rules are what they are.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Have you all seen that the UCI gave Sammy Sanchez a 2 year doping ban and at the same time said that they accept Sanchez's explanation that the samples were contaminated. Um if they were contaminated why is he getting a ban?
https://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/48259947

Contaminated supplement, not sample, that's very different. I'm guessing they have accepted that this was most likely which is why it's only 2 years.

Only the likelihood that it was a contaminated supplement. So apparently it was never tested. 2 yrs because they know Sanchez is lying and is 43yrs old

That is most likely. It’s also a nicer for the UCI and probably a slightly less actionable statement should Sanchez decide to get lawyers involved.

 

[Asero831]

In Basketball, Odom Used Fake Penis to Pass Olympic Drug Test
Is this the norm in cycling as well? For sure the authorities would not stare at the details of yours while you pee.

 

[TourOfSardinia]

Re:

In Basketball, Odom Used Fake Penis to Pass Olympic Drug Test
Is this the norm in cycling as well? For sure the authorities would not stare at the details of yours while you pee.

Photo?

 

[benzwire]

Re: Re:

In Basketball, Odom Used Fake Penis to Pass Olympic Drug Test
Is this the norm in cycling as well? For sure the authorities would not stare at the details of yours while you pee.

Photo?

Please NO! For cyclists, it's a bit more difficult to hide a fake schlong with lycra on

 

[Ricco']

Alarcon and Marque with anomalous values in their blood passport and are followed closely by spanish autorities, according to portuguese newspaper Record.

https://www.record.pt/modalidades/ciclismo/detalhe/alarcon-e-marque-com-valores-anomalos-no-passaporte-biologico?ref=Ciclismo_DestaquesPrincipais

 

[Squire]

Re:

Alarcon and Marque with anomalous values in their blood passport and are followed closely by spanish autorities, according to portuguese newspaper Record.

https://www.record.pt/modalidades/ciclismo/detalhe/alarcon-e-marque-com-valores-anomalos-no-passaporte-biologico?ref=Ciclismo_DestaquesPrincipais

Least surprising news of the century. Since W52 went Pro conti, it was only a matter of time, obviously.

 

[Robert5091]

So have the bookies started offering odds on Roglic and/or Nibali geting caught up in Operation Aderlass?

Big Raul doping?! Shocked that anyone would even think it.

 

[Serpentin]

So second rest day blood bag today, who will benefit the most ? Nibali ?

 

[Robert5091]

Are we in for the annual pre-TdF doping bust this year?

 

[Red Rick]

Nobody has seriously doped in the Tour since Sky started dominating it

 

[Robert5091]

Re:

Nobody has seriously doped in the Tour since Sky started dominating it

That's because for some weird reason they always catch someone just before the TdF.

 

[Robert5091]

Popeye was doping - shock! :surprised:
https://www.dw.com/en/german-scientists-say-spinach-chemical-should-be-banned-from-sports/a-49342711

Scientists at the Freie Universität Berlin have recommended that ecdysterone, a steroid-like chemical found in spinach, be added to the list of banned doping substances, German media reported Tuesday.

The university's Institute of Pharmacy led a 10-week strength training program with 46 athletes to test how the substance affected their physical performance.

Some of the participants were given placebos, others were given ecdysterone capsules containing the equivalent of up to 4 kilograms (or 8.8 pounds) of raw spinach a day.

During the study, which was supported by the World Anti-Doping Authority (WADA), those taking the supplement saw their physical strength increase three times as much as their placebo-taking counterparts.

"Our hypothesis was that we would see an increase in performance, but we didn't expect it to be that big," the Maria Parr at the Berlin university's Institute of Pharmacy said in an interview with broadcasters ARD and ARTE.

The results mean ecdysterone belongs on the list of banned substances for sports, the researcher added.

"We recommended to WADA in our report that the substance be added to the doping list. We think that if it increases performance, then that unfair advantage should be eliminated."

The decision would be left up to an expert body at the agency, but that will only likely happen after further investigation into how many athletes use the supplement.

According to this https://www.naturalnewsblogs.com/ecdysterone-used-performance-enhancing-supplement/ there's already many probably taking it.

 

[King Boonen]

That's an arthropod hormone. Many similar compounds are found in lots of other plants, they think as a defence mechanism against insects. Sticking that on the banned list could be a hole WADA don't want to fall down.


It's possibly already banned as it acts on a nuclear receptor in arthropods. This means, if it does have a biological action in humans, it's likely on something like the PPAR-gamma receptor, estrogen receptor, androgen receptor etc., many of which are already covered in the prohibited list.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re:

Popeye was doping - shock! :surprised:
https://www.dw.com/en/german-scientists-say-spinach-chemical-should-be-banned-from-sports/a-49342711

Clearly it is too much to expect these people to know how/why substances get added to the baned list. If it was just because they were performance enhancing the list would be without end.

Still, if all you're looking for is some silly season attention from the press, ignorance is best.

 

[Robert5091]

https://tass.com/sport/1067134

Russia’s two-time European champion in track cycling Yelena Brezhniva decided to return to sports after she had served a lengthy suspension for anti-doping violations, Valery Grinkovsky, the head of the Tula Region Cycling Federation, told TASS on Thursday.

The Russian Anti-Doping Agency (RUSADA) announced in February 2016 that Brezhniva was found guilty of violating anti-doping regulations after her doping sample tested positive for a banned performance enhancing drug. She was slapped with a four-year disqualification, effective from June 22, 2015.

After Brezhniva was informed about the lengthy suspension, she announced a decision to wrap up her sports career.

"Brezhniva was overemotional at the moment of making the decision," Grinkovsky told TASS. "Everything is different now, Brezhniva made a decision to return to sports and last year she resumed active trainings."

Grinkovsky added that the 29-year-old cyclist, whose disqualification term expired on June 21, was most likely to compete at the Russian Championships in St. Petersburg in August.