Impey cleared of doping - free to race

[Parker]

And like a number of other things you have claimed over the past 12 months or so, you are wrong.

That's detailed intelligent analysis that everyone can get behind

 

[Parker]

In Menchov's case, it was a BP violation, right?

You miss the point. None of what you say re. Menchov was made publicly available. But the verdict is not doubted. But other, less palatable verdicts are.

The Menchov verdict, with no evidence, is never doubted, because it fits with internet opinion (always guilty). The Impey verdict is challenged because it does not.


I'm banging my head against a wall here because none of you want to listen. I have no opinions, just guesses. I defer to the experts. Others reject the experts and fight for their opinion, solely because it fits their agenda.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

You miss the point. None of what you say re. Menchov was made publicly available. But the verdict is not doubted. But other, less palatable verdicts are.

(And I don't doubt it either)

No, I don't miss the point. You are ironically refusing to read the logical explanation for asking for evidence, and keeping your "the clinic is so wrong" blinkers firmly closed on your crusade to discredit.

Let me bitesize it for you: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

It's coincidence that in this instance the request for said evidence supports a tone of belief that riders dope.

 

[Parker]

Let me bitesize it for you: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

There's nothing extraordinary about any of it though. Someone screwed up at work is not extraordinary.

(On the other hand a rider taking a lousy masking agent just before a race he was almost certain to be tested at makes complete sense. Particularly if we introduce a complicated plot involving a pharmacist but where he can't remember to lay off the drugs for a minor race.)

All you are protecting is you your opinion.


My point, which people are missing, is this: Why are verdicts that do not match your initial opinion not valid until you see the evidence, but those that do are valid with the same lack of evidence?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

There's nothing extraordinary about any of it though. Someone screwed up at work is not extraordinary.

If you knew anything about drug interactions you'd not be so glib about a chemist cross-contaminating orders for customers.

If there was enough dust to trigger a positive then that same chemist is potentially at risk of killing people using a similar scenario.

 

[Tonton]

You miss the point. None of what you say re. Menchov was made publicly available. But the verdict is not doubted. But other, less palatable verdicts are.

The Menchov verdict, with no evidence, is never doubted, because it fits with internet opinion (always guilty). The Impey verdict is challenged because it does not.


I'm banging my head against a wall here because none of you want to listen. I have no opinions, just guesses. I defer to the experts. Others reject the experts and fight for their opinion, solely because it fits their agenda.

Don't hurt yourself, please. Go ride a bike and see how relaxed you'll be afterwards, when legs hurt good . Seems to me that the key words are transparency. And precedent. I find dangerous to open a door that would enable X to find a pharmacy catering to old folks, sclerosis patients, and later blame their positive test for HGH on the pharmacist. Maybe Impey is innocent (I sincerely hope he is, but where is he...hiding?), but there'd better be a solid investigation behind the reinstatement. Right now all we know is the same "trust me" rhetoric: details please! I don't want a precedent to be set and in the future a cheater's lawyer can use the same defense as jurisprudence and the doper gets away with it. Actually, I don't care about Impey: but that defense may apply for a GT "winner" stripped of the title. Your trolling rants remind me of the stuff I was reading a few years back, when LA was the most tested athlete in the world and never tested positive. Innocent until proven what? Half innocent? Not caught? Oh no. It's just the French being jealous . The Clinic guys being mean. See my signature quote PS: Benotti69 is mean . I hope that this post is not too long to read...

 

[TailWindHome]

In Menchov's case, it was a BP violation, right?

So the panel look at his values and say - looks like doping to me.
* Menchov takes some EPO or similar
* Menchov removes some blood
* Menchov adds some blood

Impossible to prove these, but the evidence is simple - the BP. Asking for one of those as evidence is never going to happen. Even JV is scared to release a clean domestique rider's Giro based BP as evidence to support his alleged clean rider's GT win.

However, I would love this evidence - be great to have. Even asked for it. But there's an element of personal privacy too yeah?

In this case, with Impey, they have accepted that
* the chemist had a customer's order before doing Daryl's
* the chemist wore no gloves or if he did, he did not change them
* the chemist's order creation protocol does not include washing his hands between orders, or even rinsing them or wiping them on his jeans or a towel
* the order of the preceding customer was probenecid
* the chemist had to physically construct the order, rather than grabbing a bottle of pills off the shelf
* the chemist then had to physically construct Impey's order, stick a few capsules into a bottle or something
* that there was sufficient dust on his hands, that made it into these capsules, Impey used the capsules and did not think it strange there was already dust on them

Now, as well as all this, they are asking us to either
1. accept the chemist's version of events - like his memory is photographic and flawless OR
2. they have some sort of paper trail proving at least the timeline as a possibility

There are also privacy issues - noone wants to broadcast to the world that they have gout or similar, perhaps.

But the evidence that proves the points above is going to be receipts, and they are easily photographable and postable on the web.

Right?

I mean there's nothing simpler. Happens all the time (taking photos of things and posting them to the web) and there is no interpretation required - unlike BP readings.

Here's the thing:
Menchov doping seems really believable.
The chemist story, with the capsules and the dust and what not? Good grief.

If you can't see one looks fanciful and one looks believable, particularly given the results Menchov had, and the era he raced, then there is no point in furthering the discussion.

Still with the 'hands'?
It's like you haven't read any of the thread.

 

[TailWindHome]

Seems to me that the key words are transparency..

What you guys mean by transparency and how it would differ from 'retrial' by journalist and forum would make an interesting thread.

I fear your calls for transparency veer into the latter.

'We got it right with Lance - we'll decide who dopes'

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Still with the 'hands'?
It's like you haven't read any of the thread.

Been away for a couple of days, didn't feel like reading 22 pages of Parker putting the cinic down in some kind of discredit crusade, the last few pages were bad enough.

I did, however, read the article describing what happened.

Later, the pharmacist found some capsules and called Impey, who went in the afternoon to buy them.

Shortly before the pharmacist served Impey, he had dispensed Probenecid to another customer. His hands had contaminated Impey’s capsules. At the hearing, till slips showing time and purchase from the pharmacy convinced the hearing Impey had not ingested the substance on purpose.

Did you or someone else know more than the Cape Times?

 

[TailWindHome]

Did you or someone else know more than the Cape Times?

SAIDS statement

http://www.drugfreesport.org.za/201...endent-tribunal-on-daryl-impey-doping-charge/

Impey’s defense team stated that the pharmacy in question confirmed in evidence that they had sold Probenecid to a customer two hours prior to selling empty gelatin capsules to Daryl Impey and that on both occasions the products were dispensed using the same pill-counter.

 

[King Boonen]

Still sounds like rubbish. Gelatine capsules cost pennies. If Impey were using them for bicarb he'd be doing it at pretty much every race, so he'd just buy a bag.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

SAIDS statement

http://www.drugfreesport.org.za/201...endent-tribunal-on-daryl-impey-doping-charge/

Impey’s defense team stated that the pharmacy in question confirmed in evidence that they had sold Probenecid to a customer two hours prior to selling empty gelatin capsules to Daryl Impey and that on both occasions the products were dispensed using the same pill-counter.

I did a search in the thread and just saw this report link - but it doesn't really change the story in terms of believability.

Have you ever prepared food at home? I do, all the time. Never met a person who cuts meat and veges on the same board - always separate boards.

Never met a person who cuts anything on a board for a meal and then leaves it unwiped for the next 24 hours or so before using the same board again for the next evening meal. Sure they might exist, but mostly the protocol is once a meal is finished, you clean up after you.

Now go up a level. Or 10. To a pharmacist who prepares drug remedies for customers. Those drugs can kill people who are allergic to them. He's preparing remedies on or over the bench, then just throwing capsules down on same bench to count them. Then putting them into a container. Who even does that? So you have a container containing capsules and another container to put them in, but instead of counting them into the empty container, you drop them on a dirty counter and then what, scrape them into the empty container, or pick them all up again, one by one, to put them in the empty container.

And this is believable?

Having dispensed chocolates and trailmix and the like, I always get both containers and dispense directly into the empty container.

No wonder I never became a chemist.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

This is not even going into discussing using bicarb soda for the sprint at the end of a race. pffffffftttt ever read the experiences from people who are doing that for world champion level track races?

And he's going to pop a few before the sprint?

Are the gel caps in a bottle in his back pocket?

Do they have anything else in them?

Would the probenecid help mask whatever else was in them? Or help increase that other substance's effectiveness during a hot race by preventing it from being leached out through the liver - less drug required and less likelihood of being pinged for it?

And here's Parker banging on about "oh why don't you believe this story?"

 

[TailWindHome]

He's preparing remedies on or over the bench, then just throwing capsules down on same bench to count them. Then putting them into a container. Who even does that? So you have a container containing capsules and another container to put them in, but instead of counting them into the empty container, you drop them on a dirty counter and then what, scrape them into the empty container, or pick them all up again, one by one, to put them in the empty container.

And this is believable?

You're making stuff up now.

Stuff you make up to embellish the story makes it less believable yes.

Maybe he picks his nose while he's doing it too?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

You're making stuff up now.

Stuff you make up to embellish the story makes it less believable yes.

Maybe he picks his nose while he's doing it too?

Um. Ok this is the second time you have answered my post with unhelpful words.

In the first instance, you could have simply said - hey man the report came out it was a pill-counter.

In the second instance, you could say - hey man a pill-counter is not a counter (bench) where people prepare pills, it's a machine that counts pills.

What's funny, is that in either instance, the chemist is putting things down on a surface that has another drug being put on it, with no between episode cleaning protocol.

My bad for not understanding what a pill-counter is, but it still doesn't change the unbelievability. As for your personal attack. Well. Leopards and spots and all that.

 

[King Boonen]

The pill-counter should be cleaned after each use. In reality they probably just get a visual inspection and that's it. Most tablets are pretty solid and you hardly get any dust whatsoever. The pharmacist is also ultimately responsible, so he should be in pretty serious trouble.

It still doesn't account for the fact that it seems ridiculous to buy gelatine capsules individually rather than just as a bag.

We need to know what level was detected. Without that it's worse than guessing really.

 

[King Boonen]

In the second instance, you could say - hey man a pill-counter is not a counter (bench) where people prepare pills, it's a machine that counts pills.

They're not always a machine. In fact I'd guess that a lot of pharmacies do it by hand on a tray. The machines tend to be for counting out large numbers of pills.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

The pill-counter should be cleaned after each use. In reality they probably just get a visual inspection and that's it. Most tablets are pretty solid and you hardly get any dust whatsoever. The pharmacist is also ultimately responsible, so he should be in pretty serious trouble.

It still doesn't account for the fact that it seems ridiculous to buy gelatine capsules individually rather than just as a bag.

We need to know what level was detected. Without that it's worse than guessing really.

So tablet hitting plastic and dislodging probenecid particles - that's one aspect.
Chemist not knowing he has gel caps and then all of a sudden finding some.
Gel caps hitting plastic and soaking up said probenecid particles - another.
Probenecid particles remaining on caps as Impey prepares them - another.
Probenecid particles remaining on caps as Impey races and they bang around in his pocket or in a container in his pocket - another.
Probenecid particles remaining on caps as Impey consumes them - another.

All that handling and what not leaves sufficient probenecid on the gel caps so that when consumed he tests positive.

Amazing.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

They're not always a machine. In fact I'd guess that a lot of pharmacies do it by hand on a tray. The machines tend to be for counting out large numbers of pills.

Which makes it even more like a bench in respect to the way I described the situation to which Tailwind mocked me for making stuff up.

 

[TailWindHome]

As for your personal attack.

At no point have I attacked you personally

You asked "Did you or someone else know more than the Cape Times?"

I provided a link to the original statement and the quote from it.

You then decided to embellish the story using phrases highlighted in bold. I pointed this out.

If you feel I've attacked you personally that's your issue.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

At no point have I attacked you personally

You asked "Did you or someone else know more than the Cape Times?"

I provided a link to the original statement and the quote from it.

You then decided to embellish the story using phrases highlighted in bold. I pointed this out.

If you feel I've attacked you personally that's your issue.

You're making stuff up now.

Stuff you make up to embellish the story makes it less believable yes.

Maybe he picks his nose while he's doing it too?

You are persisting with the "made stuff up" vs what I have very clearly shown was an error on my part in thinking a "pill counter" was a counter - ie a bench?

Really?

Someone admits a mistake and you continue on as if they are still making the same mistake.

Gotcha.

If we were in a restaurant or at a party and you overheard me making a mistake and proceeded to talk like that to me (was he picking his nose as well?) your girlfriend would be kicking you under the table. If I then admitted my mistake but you continued to talk to me like I was continuing in my error, despite acknowledging it, she'd be walking away.

 

[TailWindHome]

You are persisting with the "made stuff up" vs what I have very clearly shown was an error on my part in thinking a "pill counter" was a counter - ie a bench?

Really?

Someone admits a mistake and you continue on as if they are still making the same mistake.

Gotcha.

If we were in a restaurant or at a party and you overheard me making a mistake and proceeded to talk like that to me (was he picking his nose as well?) your girlfriend would be kicking you under the table. If I then admitted my mistake but you continued to talk to me like I was continuing in my error, despite acknowledging it, she'd be walking away.

This is just silly.

You accused me of making a personal attack - I didn't

We'll move on.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

This is just silly.

You accused me of making a personal attack - I didn't

We'll move on.

Well I agree your nose picking response was silly, as does your girlfriend.

Is there any difference between a bench, a pill counter or a tray, when it comes to cleaning them between orders?

Because that was my point. Not that he put it on a bench, but that there was no cleaning between them.

 

[Benotti69]

What you guys mean by transparency and how it would differ from 'retrial' by journalist and forum would make an interesting thread.

I fear your calls for transparency veer into the latter.

'We got it right with Lance - we'll decide who dopes'

And there you have it, the myth that only Lance doped and the rest are all cleans.

 

[TailWindHome]

And there you have it, the myth that only Lance doped and the rest are all cleans.

You took that from my post?
How?