Is a rider under Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) a clean rider?

[sponsor]

Originally Posted by sponsor View Post
If an athlete CREATES the condition that requires a TUE to overcome and that TUE happens to also help that athlete win then I see a real problem.

Do you have an example?

Got this REAL one today... Athlete hurts themselves in the gym and chooses to heal more quickly by taking a doctor approved steroid injection. They choose under Dr OK to take steroid until all signs of injury goes away.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Got this REAL one today... Athlete hurts themselves in the gym and chooses to heal more quickly by taking a doctor approved steroid injection. They choose under Dr OK to take steroid until all signs of injury goes away.

How about enriching blood to speed injury recovery? Already done and "out of competition."

Once you start down the path of choosing what is and isn't cheating, there are no right answers. Fundamentally, this is the problem that WADA/NADO's are tasked to solve.

This is an endless discussion with no right answers at this level.

It might be helpful to think like an elite athlete who attempts to exploit every rule under the IOC's system.

The objective is to win within the sport's rules and never test positive. ANYTHING that meets those two criteria is not cheating/doping.

 

[DirtyWorks]

I know of TUE is a huge problem in MMA. The Nevada Athletic Commission (NAC) just banned all TUE and the UFC is having major issues because many of its fighters are all of a sudden testing positive for PEDs.

And the NAC banned them because the abuse of PEDs was becoming a huge problem, an obvious problem: Pretty much all the fighters had some sort of TUE.

Testing is a joke in that federation anyway. I'm glad to see NAC came to the same conclusion. If only they had jurisdiction over Olympic sports. They would come to a similar conclusion. Eventually.

 

[Catwhoorg]

Originally Posted by sponsor View Post
If an athlete CREATES the condition that requires a TUE to overcome and that TUE happens to also help that athlete win then I see a real problem.



Got this REAL one today... Athlete hurts themselves in the gym and chooses to heal more quickly by taking a doctor approved steroid injection. They choose under Dr OK to take steroid until all signs of injury goes away.

Depending on the level the athlete is at (A Joe Schmoe like me can apply retroactively should they even be tested, not that I'll ever win even $50 at a local Half marathon. Its simply not worth the time and effort to do it any other way)

But a TUE is not granted by the prescribing doctor. TUE's under the WADA rules are granted by a committee of the relevant authority. For cycling the UCI Anti-doping wing has to grant a TUE.

(And should be before not after treatment*, unless an emergency arises, such as a blood transfusion to save someone during surgery)


*Lance being the obvious exception.

 

[sponsor]

How about enriching blood to speed injury recovery? Already done and "out of competition."

I would expect so the athlete (not a cyclist - so happens) can get the benefit of the drug without "cheating". Just got me thinking while it appears of low character to me - it would not be cheating if a cyclist did this with the proper paperwork.

Still - not cheating, but also not clean

Once you start down the path of choosing what is and isn't cheating, there are no right answers.

If there is a TUE there is no cheating.

The objective is to win within the sport's rules and never test positive. ANYTHING that meets those two criteria is not cheating/doping.

I'm saddened that I do not agree with you. I wish it were as you say.
At the big money levels the athletes objective is to win - without getting caught.
It should be the competition authorities responsibility to only make rules that can be enforced and enforce those they make.

 

[MatParker117]

Testing is a joke in that federation anyway. I'm glad to see NAC came to the same conclusion. If only they had jurisdiction over Olympic sports. They would come to a similar conclusion. Eventually.

The type of TUE he's talking about WADA only issued to a guy with no testicles.

 

[DirtyWorks]

The type of TUE he's talking about WADA only issued to a guy with no testicles.

Same thing. Testing is a joke.

Sponsor, winning without getting caught is what I was describing.

 

[sponsor]

Same thing. Testing is a joke.

Sponsor, winning without getting caught is what I was describing.

Oh - I read not breaking the rules. I understand. Winning athletes ALWAYS break the rules - as simple as going over the center line, or sticky bottle to worse.

My answer to all this is eliminate TUEs and take those things off the list that require TUEs.

If it is fair/safe enough for one rider to use it it is safe/fair enough for all - OR its not safe enough for any. Just like the eyeglass example - a rider with bad vision can use eye glasses - so can a rider with good vision.

The banned substance list is just too big. I don't associate sports rule/law breaking AS MUCH with the character of the athlete, rather the competition authority. They need to stop making rules they cannot enforce, or that create hole just to make everyone feel good.

OK - I feel better now.

 

[Will Carter]

The type of TUE he's talking about WADA only issued to a guy with no testicles.

So never actually issued then, since there hasn't (in my memory) been a 'guy' cyclist with no nads ...

 

[zigmeister]

I've never heard/read anywhere that WADA has ever issued a TUE for someone to use Testosterone.

They will of course claim patient confidentiality regarding HIPAA to avoid answering the question. But I recall it being asked by a cyclist/blogger, wish I could find that article, regarding the subject. He tried to submit a TUE for it, and it was summarily denied. Surprise. They gave some ignorant endocrinologist statement about not meeting the "mythical" standards they came up with and justified in their minds to approve the medicine.

Most male secondary hypogonadism is what is known as "idiopathic". Which means generally "unknown" as the cause. Since the rise of this condition amongst men, particularly in the industrialized world, many real experts and research is pointing towards the tendency of a large portion of men affected to chemical/industrialized exposure causing the condition. Now, these same idiots who make the denial, will tell you undoubtably that the rise in asthma in children/adults is the result of the same thing...so hey, why do you need a TUE even?!?!? Just take your inhaler and live your life, and legally compete under their rules without a TUE. The complete ignorance and denial of one medical condition, and the complete acceptance of another due to similar, yet really unproven clinically via studies/research, is mind boggling.

Do you see any ridiculous and stupid contradictions with this logic? I do...it is clear as day and the sky is blue to me personally.

What they have done is created a trap for you and want to encourage people who have applied so they can build a database and list of people to target in case you decide to show up and register for an event and target you for testing so they can get a bust and write on their sad web site how they busted some masters racer for "doping".