Impey cleared of doping - free to race

[Catwhoorg]

Forgot to say the actual counter was always well cleaned after any batch in my father's pharmacy.

I would expect no less anywhere else, but sadly this is unlikely to be the standard. Maybe a wipe with a wet cloth.

 

[bewildered]

I don't buy that excuse for a second.

Why are people talking about 'reasonable doubt'? Reasonable doubt has nothing to do with this case. It is more like the balance of probabilities, ie Impey has to show his story is more likely to have happened than not once a positive is found, surely? The positive test shifts the onus of proof onto the rider.

Did the doping authority seek their own expert evidence to check on Impey's experts' claims of plausibility? Or did they just swallow it whole? He can hire all the experts he wants to show that contamination is possible, but even still that doesn't make his story more probable than not imo.

What are the chances for a normal person with no incentive to dope to have this happen to them innocently in this manner(hypothetically)? The chances for a pro-cyclist should be lower imo.

Impey's evidence was obviously enough in the doping authority's eyes to make an easy decision that caused no grief but on the balance of probabilities that decision is perverse imo.

Not to mention the dangerous precedent this sets. It could make anti-doping even more ineffective.
Edit: I see they apparently 'vigorously' investigated the experts' claims. No further detail given tho

 

[Tonton]

I don't buy that excuse for a second.

Why are people talking about 'reasonable doubt'? Reasonable doubt has nothing to do with this case. It is more like the balance of probabilities, ie Impey has to show his story is more likely to have happened than not once a positive is found, surely? The positive test shifts the onus of proof onto the rider.

Did the doping authority seek their own expert evidence to check on Impey's experts' claims of plausibility? Or did they just swallow it whole? He can hire all the experts he wants to show that contamination is possible, but even still that doesn't make his story more probable than not imo.

What are the chances for a normal person with no incentive to dope to have this happen to them innocently in this manner(hypothetically)? The chances for a pro-cyclist should be lower imo.

Impey's evidence was obviously enough in the doping authority's eyes to make an easy decision that caused no grief but on the balance of probabilities that decision is perverse imo.

Not to mention the dangerous precedent this sets. It could make anti-doping even more ineffective.
Edit: I see they apparently 'vigorously' investigated the experts' claims. No further detail given tho

Just imagine getting random drug tested at work and come back positive for marijuana. Your defense? I roll my cigarettes, someone in the tobacco factory must have had weed on his hands while packing the tobacco. And sure, the odds are that you can find one pot-head working in the factory. It makes the excuse plausible. Not sure that you'd be off the hook tho...

Your point about setting a precedent is huge IMO: from now on, all it takes is send an accomplice to fill a prescription just before yours to establish a paper trail and if caught claim cross-contamination.

 

[rsergio007]

So, Impey testified that he prepares his own drug cocktails at home and got away with it… omg.

"I picked up home chemistry as a hobby after binge watching Braking Bad"

 

[vavafroome]

maybe he just has a taste for the white stuff

 

[mrhender]

I don't buy that excuse for a second.

Why are people talking about 'reasonable doubt'? Reasonable doubt has nothing to do with this case. It is more like the balance of probabilities, ie Impey has to show his story is more likely to have happened than not once a positive is found, surely? The positive test shifts the onus of proof onto the rider.

There is nothing about reasonable doubt in the decision..
http://www.drugfreesport.org.za/2014/08/saids-accepts-decision-made-by-independent-tribunal-on-daryl-impey-doping-charge/

“We would like to take this opportunity to remind all athletes that, due to the principle of strict liability, athletes must exercise extreme caution at all times with regards to any food and/or medical products they may come into contact with.” concludes Galant.

So clearly they are aware of this and has decided he does not fall unto that rule... Above standing implies that this cuould be a borderline case where thay councluded that getting empty capsules from a pharmacy should be done without worries of contamination..

Did the doping authority seek their own expert evidence to check on Impey's experts' claims of plausibility? Or did they just swallow it whole? He can hire all the experts he wants to show that contamination is possible, but even still that doesn't make his story more probable than not imo.

They did:
“Under the Anti-Doping Rules, SAIDS is required to vigorously pursue all anti-doping rule violations within our jurisdiction. We did so and checked the veracity of Impey’s account to the fullest extent possible. We sought opinions from our own experts, which confirmed that cross-contamination was indeed possible in the manner proposed by Impey’s experts.

What are the chances for a normal person with no incentive to dope to have this happen to them innocently in this manner(hypothetically)? The chances for a pro-cyclist should be lower imo.

Very slim.. Agreed..

Impey's evidence was obviously enough in the doping authority's eyes to make an easy decision that caused no grief but on the balance of probabilities that decision is perverse imo.

Not to mention the dangerous precedent this sets. It could make anti-doping even more ineffective.
Edit: I see they apparently 'vigorously' investigated the experts' claims. No further detail given tho

It is pretty clear that SAIDS are not very experienced in these matters.
They are however the national organ in power of making a decision..
I do agree that if you compare to the UCI... The rule of strict liability may not be concistent with the outcome of this case... It will be interesting to see if any appeals are to come..

 

[mrhender]

Just imagine getting random drug tested at work and come back positive for marijuana. Your defense? I roll my cigarettes, someone in the tobacco factory must have had weed on his hands while packing the tobacco. And sure, the odds are that you can find one pot-head working in the factory. It makes the excuse plausible. Not sure that you'd be off the hook tho...

Your point about setting a precedent is huge IMO: from now on, all it takes is send an accomplice to fill a prescription just before yours to establish a paper trail and if caught claim cross-contamination.

We still don't know if higher authorities will agree on this...
I doubt they will allow this to become a precedent...

 

[Catwhoorg]

And it also requires there only to be a trace (ill defined at this time) amount when tested.

That could be due to popping something (legal) during a ride that had been contaminated.
Or could be right at the end of the glow time for a deliberately taken substance.

This wouldn't fly for a large therapeutic level detected.

 

[westerner]

excuse me SA ADA, but what about the concept of strict liability. should an athletes not be required to take better care, making sure to buy uncontaminated caps in a sealed plastic bag, for making race concoctions?

 

[TailWindHome]

So did Impey hire an independent scientist to confirm this story would indeed result in the said contamination and then the said positive?

Or are they just taking his world alongside the report that indeed the customer before him bought probenecid?

“Impey presented expert evidence from pharmacy professionals, pharmacologists and pharmacokinetic experts confirming that cross-contamination caused by the use of the pill-counter in such manner was plausible,” Galant explained.

“Under the Anti-Doping Rules, SAIDS is required to vigorously pursue all anti-doping rule violations within our jurisdiction. We did so and checked the veracity of Impey’s account to the fullest extent possible. We sought opinions from our own experts, which confirmed that cross-contamination was indeed possible in the manner proposed by Impey’s experts.

 

[TailWindHome]

Questions: who is that pharmacist? Who are his other customers? Any name that we know? Who is the client who ordered the previous order, the one who contaminated Impey's capsules? Any possibility that he was a decoy, hired to serve as the alibi in case things go wrong? Any links, money trail? It will take a lot to convince me. I hope that all the details come out.

Those details won't and shouldn't come out.

 

[TailWindHome]

So, Impey testified that he prepares his own drug cocktails at home and got away with it… omg.

Bicarbonate of Soda isn't Crystal Meth.
I've a packet in the cupboard.
I better call Saul.

 

[Benotti69]

In the Clinic, all that's needed is to say he's a cyclist.

The sport created the mess it finds itself in and there seems little motivation to change the perception.

Impey and SAID may have done enough to fool the simple minded but this contamination from the pharmacists hands is as ridiculous as any excuses we have heard.

 

[fmk_RoI]

It is pretty clear that SAIDS are not very experienced in these matters.

How is it clear that SAIDS are not very experienced?

 

[DirtyWorks]

Why would the pharmacist get his hands on the substance in the first place? I don't think I can buy anything in a pharmacy that is not packed in capsules and boxes. For obvious reasons. I guess in South Africa pharmacies are maybe like frontier grocery stores where they keep stuff in barrels and sacks.

Descriptions of the drug describe it in the form of crystalline powder. And it's possible for a pharmacist to do this kind of packaging. What's the pharmacist doing handling gelatin caps I can't quite figure. It seems sketchy, but maybe things are a little more primitive in Impey's corner of the world.

The missing bit for me is what's WADA's threshold for the substance? Zero?

Probenicid apparently has been used as a PED for a very, very long time so it seems likely they've got a fantastic test for it.

Unless the UCI decides to take this one to CAS, it's over. Will they? No idea.

 

[fmk_RoI]

this contamination from the pharmacists hands is as ridiculous as any excuses we have heard.

You see, this is what is really frustrating. The contaminated hands story is simply believed, accepted as being true, because it was reported as being true. Even when evidence is introduced showing that the contaminated hands thing did not happen, some still cling to it, repeat it. The gullibility of some people, even when faced with the existence of the SAIDS statement, is astonishing. It's almost like they want to believe and have to run and hide when confronted with facts.

 

[Tonton]

Those details won't and shouldn't come out.

Yes they should come out. It is called transparency. And it is lack of transparency that makes the sport a joke in the eyes of many. Until there's transparency, the cloud of suspicion will never go away. And if Impey is innocent, I bet that he wants transparency and clear his name. But I agree with you: the details won't come out.

 

[Rollthedice]

"Fatima Yvelain is a regional-level distance runner in France. I suspect you had not heard of her until now but she enters history with one of the best ever excuses for a positive doping test.

Following a positive test for EPO after a half-marathon, she claimed heavy rainfall on the day of race had caused water to stream over hidden medical waste somewhere near the course. As she ran, the EPO-laced rainwater splashed onto her shorts, thus contaminating her urine when she later provided a sample at the doping control.

Needless athletics website VO2.fr reports the French Athletics Federation didn’t believe a word. She is banned for two years."

- See more at: http://inrng.tumblr.com/post/29472905178/itsrainingepo#sthash.20UtvrFN.dpuf

This must be one of the best explanations of doping. Impey's is definitely in all time top 5.

 

[BroDeal]

The idea that he was using sodium bicarbonate as an ergogenic is bogus. A few capsules would have no effect. A 75kg rider would have to consume 25g. Picture that as the number of capsules to hold an extra large scoop of sports drink powder. One of the side effects of using an efficacious amount is what research on the subject often describes as "explosive diarrhea." The only sprint Impey would be winning is a sprint to the nearest bush by the side of the road.

 

[Energy Starr]

"Fatima Yvelain is a regional-level distance runner in France. I suspect you had not heard of her until now but she enters history with one of the best ever excuses for a positive doping test.

Following a positive test for EPO after a half-marathon, she claimed heavy rainfall on the day of race had caused water to stream over hidden medical waste somewhere near the course. As she ran, the EPO-laced rainwater splashed onto her shorts, thus contaminating her urine when she later provided a sample at the doping control.

Needless athletics website VO2.fr reports the French Athletics Federation didn’t believe a word. She is banned for two years."

- See more at: http://inrng.tumblr.com/post/29472905178/itsrainingepo#sthash.20UtvrFN.dpuf

This must be one of the best explanations of doping. Impey's is definitely in all time top 5.

Agreed but hers failed. Apparently FAF isn't clueless, unlike SAIDS.

 

[TailWindHome]

Yes they should come out. It is called transparency. And it is lack of transparency that makes the sport a joke in the eyes of many. Until there's transparency, the cloud of suspicion will never go away. And if Impey is innocent, I bet that he wants transparency and clear his name. But I agree with you: the details won't come out.

So you believe that the name/ medical details of the person to whom the Probenecid was prescribed should be made public?

The name of the pharmacists other customers should be made public?

The name of the pharmacist should be made public?

That you're entitled to see the pharmacy records?


For reals?

 

[DirtyWorks]

So, Impey testified that he prepares his own drug cocktails at home and got away with it… omg.

You aren't thinking like an athlete in the system.

There is nothing forbidding Impey from consuming baking powder as a PED under WADA regs. It's not a banned substance, therefore he's not doping. This is quite common. Lim's beet root juice being another example. Do they work? No idea.

Pre-EPO test, some athletes that got results on EPO still stand by the "it was not doping" story.

 

[Energy Starr]

So you believe that the name/ medical details of the person to whom the Probenecid was prescribed should be made public?

The name of the pharmacists other customers should be made public?

The name of the pharmacist should be made public?

That you're entitled to see the pharmacy records?


For reals?

Hopefully they could just report that they confirmed that it was prescribed to someone other than Impey. They could report more details without naming names. They chose the "nothing to see here" method.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Hopefully they could just report that they confirmed that it was prescribed to someone other than Impey.

Is this really your theory, that Impey went to the chemists for some Probenecid and then two hours later went back for some gelatine capsules? Really?

 

[Tonton]

So you believe that the name/ medical details of the person to whom the Probenecid was prescribed should be made public?

The name of the pharmacists other customers should be made public?

The name of the pharmacist should be made public?

That you're entitled to see the pharmacy records?


For reals?

Energy Starr answered for me.