Learning From Lance: WADA To Adopt New Code

86TDFWinner said:
Saw this on Yahoo a few moments ago, pardon me if it's already been discussed here:


http://sports.yahoo.com/news/learning-lance-wada-adopt-code-183110216--oly.html
Very intriguing:

"The World Anti-Doping Agency is also taking a new approach in its effort to catch drug cheats. It is pursuing investigations and gathering intelligence rather than relying on the blood and urine samples that proved unsuccessful with Armstrong, a serial doper who never failed a test."

Dave.
 
A report commissioned by WADA and delivered this year said drug-testing had been ''generally unsuccessful'' in catching dopers.

Statements like that frustrate me. They miss the entire second part of why testing fails. Because at least cycling promoters and the federation itself is ordering easily defeated tests. Or, they simply don't process the positive.

Terrible reporting.
 
Jul 7, 2012
509
0
0
jens_attacks said:
common sense will prevail

doping legalized all over the world. wada disappears

you choose to watch or not.end of story
What a dumb thing to say. Does the authenticity of a performance mean nothing to you?

Do you really want athletes to be forced into potentially harmful doping if they want to have any chance of winning?

Outside magazine, January 2004.

Drug Test

As for the larger issue of drugs in sports, eight months in the world of the artificially enhanced convinced me more than ever that it's critical for an organization like the World Anti-Doping Agency to succeed. This group, founded after the Salt Lake Olympics by Canadian anti-doping leader Dick Pound, represents the most serious international attempt to come to grips with sports doping. WADA is the logical response to an argument that gets aired from time to time: that since cheating is impossible to eliminate, the only recourse is to simply legalize everything—that way, no athlete has a hidden advantage over another, since everyone would be free to try anything that might increase endurance.

Like a lot of powerfully bad ideas, that one has a certain mad logic. But it would turn every sport into a test of how much damage an athlete was willing to risk to improve performance, and would basically force every serious athlete to cheat and risk his or her health. Athletic contests would have a strange life-or-death quality. If we don't keep drugs out of these events, they become freak shows, the athletes like gladiators—with us playing the role of decadent Romans, urging them on.

Besides, on a fundamental level, drugs ruin the simple joy of competition. With drugs in the mix, it's not about the athletes, it's about the chemistry.

http://outside.away.com/outside/bodywork/200311/200311_drug_test_1.html
 
jens_attacks said:
common sense will prevail

doping legalized all over the world. wada disappears

you choose to watch or not.end of story
Uh Huh. And when USAC is making the next Tammy Thomas, then what?
http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20130224/NEWS01/302240002/?nclick_check=1

Let's make it personal: Jens_attacks your child is identified as an athlete with Olympic-level capabilities at 11. Now the doping starts. What are you going to start your child on first, HGH, Testosterone, recovery injections? What's next?

When does your child do the injections without supervision? Blood transfusions?


C'mon now you are the tough one who is okay with the doping. Tell me how you would do it. Or, now that it's personal, "oh it's different. But, go ahead and let other children dope."
 
the sceptic said:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wada-approves-four-year-bans-for-doping

I guess this wont change much since no one that matters will test positive but its better than nothing.
This will be a complete mess. A large portion, maybe the majority, of positives are for minor substances that are often the result of not reading labels on supplements and over the counter medications. A lot of people will have their careers destroyed for innocent mistakes.

A more sensible approach would have been to divide substances and doping techniques into classes with different sanctions for each class. EPO, lifetime ban. DHEA, six months.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
BroDeal said:
This will be a complete mess. A large portion, maybe the majority, of positives are for minor substances that are often the result of not reading labels on supplements and over the counter medications. A lot of people will have their careers destroyed for innocent mistakes.

A more sensible approach would have been to divide substances and doping techniques into classes with different sanctions for each class. EPO, lifetime ban. DHEA, six months.
this, first of all.

secondly,
New Anti-Doping Code to start in 2015
shows at what pace anti-doping is evolving.
pace of a sloth.
 
Jan 29, 2010
502
0
0
BroDeal said:
This will be a complete mess. A large portion, maybe the majority, of positives are for minor substances that are often the result of not reading labels on supplements and over the counter medications. A lot of people will have their careers destroyed for innocent mistakes.

A more sensible approach would have been to divide substances and doping techniques into classes with different sanctions for each class. EPO, lifetime ban. DHEA, six months.
I read that they have also introduced increased flexibility for accidental ingestion cases, as well as for athletes who cooperate with investigations.

If someone is intentionally doping though, then I don't care what they got caught for, they should get the 4 years (barring turning in their buddies too). If they'll cheat with DHEA, they're probably cheating with EPO too, they just haven't tested positive for it yet.
 
WinterRider said:
I read that they have also introduced increased flexibility for accidental ingestion cases, as well as for athletes who cooperate with investigations.

If someone is intentionally doping though, then I don't care what they got caught for, they should get the 4 years (barring turning in their buddies too). If they'll cheat with DHEA, they're probably cheating with EPO too, they just haven't tested positive for it yet.
The criminal code can have subtlety with respect to misdemeanors and capital crimes, but doping is doping.

There are smart criminals and dumb ones. Simlarly, there are smart dopers and those who, in the words of Will Voet, would drink their own urine if you told them it would be beneficial.

The intent of doping is to cheat. Cheating, actual or intentional, should result in a ban from competition. Simple as that.

Of course, given how foolish dumb dopers can be, if there is to be any gradation in penalties, then perhaps the dumb dopers should always get the max. That way we can go beyond the mere wrist-slapping of competition bans, and protect those poor members of society who might be tempted to drink their own urine.

Dave.
 
as far as Professional Cycling goes, I ask how much improvement is to have in place a 4 year ban for dopers , when the very sources to detecting & catching them in the first place, AKA the Bio passport & the current tests are yet allowing riders & teams to get away with it?:confused:
 
Aug 10, 2010
6,286
0
0
Robert21 said:
What a dumb thing to say. Does the authenticity of a performance mean nothing to you?

Do you really want athletes to be forced into potentially harmful doping if they want to have any chance of winning?
While "authenticity" is a wonderful ideal, professional races have never been authentic. They have always been doped-up circuses. People can speculate whether this racer or that racer was clean (or cleaner), but they can't fairly speculate that the race itself was clean. Rather, we can be really sure that the race itself was drug-saturated.

On your second point, I totally agree. Bike racers have proven that they are willing to dope to the edge of death (and beyond) in order to compete. The sport must protect those crazy fools from themselves.
 
Jul 6, 2010
2,340
0
0
BroDeal said:
This will be a complete mess. A large portion, maybe the majority, of positives are for minor substances that are often the result of not reading labels on supplements and over the counter medications. A lot of people will have their careers destroyed for innocent mistakes.

A more sensible approach would have been to divide substances and doping techniques into classes with different sanctions for each class. EPO, lifetime ban. DHEA, six months.
I think a lot of that happened before ephedrine/pseudoepehdrine were taken off the list.

Apart from that, contaminated supplements may be a minor player, but that's up to the athlete to source from reputable manufacturers. And if they can't read a label, then they're too stupid to be paid.

Differing sanctions, say steroids vs blood vector, would result in an utter goat show and an Orwellian "my cheating is less than your cheating" mess.
 
JMBeaushrimp said:
I think a lot of that happened before ephedrine/pseudoepehdrine were taken off the list.

Apart from that, contaminated supplements may be a minor player, but that's up to the athlete to source from reputable manufacturers. And if they can't read a label, then they're too stupid to be paid.

Differing sanctions, say steroids vs blood vector, would result in an utter goat show and an Orwellian "my cheating is less than your cheating" mess.
And the USADA statistics are:

15 Ephedrine sanctions between 2001 and 2004, 8 of which were public warnings, out of a total of 121 sanctions
13 Pseudoephedrine sanctions between 2001 and 2004, 8 of which were public warnings, out of a total of 121 sanctions

Combined, ephedrine and pseudoephedrine accounted for 23% of the 'positives' between 2001 and 2004.

To suggest, however, that a majority of these positives could be accounted for by ignorance of the contents ignores how pervasive these drugs are in sport.

Please recall the high school football deaths, for example.

That there were no positives after 2004 is not a result of these drugs being removed from the WADA list. Rather, the sale of ephedra containing supplements were banned in the US in 2004.

Ephedrine, methylephedrine and pseudoephedrine all remain on the LIST as "Specified stimulants":

http://list.wada-ama.org/list/s6-stimulants/#ephedrine

"**** Each of ephedrine and methylephedrine is prohibited when its concentration in urine is greater than 10 micrograms per milliliter.
***** Pseudoephedrine is prohibited when its concentration in urine is greater than 150 micrograms per milliliter. "

An educated guess would be that ephedrine and pseudoephedrine are still in wide use, with concentrations managed below threshold.

Dave.
 
Robert21 said:
What a dumb thing to say. Does the authenticity of a performance mean nothing to you?

Do you really want athletes to be forced into potentially harmful doping if they want to have any chance of winning?
DirtyWorks said:
Uh Huh. And when USAC is making the next Tammy Thomas, then what?
http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20130224/NEWS01/302240002/?nclick_check=1

Let's make it personal: Jens_attacks your child is identified as an athlete with Olympic-level capabilities at 11. Now the doping starts. What are you going to start your child on first, HGH, Testosterone, recovery injections? What's next?

When does your child do the injections without supervision? Blood transfusions?


C'mon now you are the tough one who is okay with the doping. Tell me how you would do it. Or, now that it's personal, "oh it's different. But, go ahead and let other children dope."
Playing Devil's advocate here.

Why don't they institute speed limits on descents to protect the riders then?

Or how about full body suits, crash protection, like Keirin racing, yet with more padding?

Disc brakes...

There are risks of death with every day racing, and serious injury with the current equipment, routes and how races are managed. Or just riding down the road on a training ride.

The logic that allowing any and all doping is misguided, unsafe and against fair play, is completely arbitrary and baseless.
 
hfer07 said:
as far as Professional Cycling goes, I ask how much improvement is to have in place a 4 year ban for dopers , when the very sources to detecting & catching them in the first place, AKA the Bio passport & the current tests are yet allowing riders & teams to get away with it?:confused:
Think of how many riders have served out their bans and returned to the sport. Look at Contador's creative accounting allowing him to serve 2 years in 6 months. With 4 years it's a different story.

What do you do with such an extended vacation? 4 years is a long time to couch surf, I think it will force a lot of riders into retirement.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
masking_agent The Clinic 2

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts