Michael Rogers positive for clenbuterol

[SundayRider]

Why would he take frigging clen for the frigging Japan Cup.

Perhaps he had a bonus in his contract (worth a substantial amount?) if he won a race during the season? This just happened to be his first race win.

 

[frenchfry]

Why would he take frigging clen for the frigging Japan Cup.

To give himself a chance to win the frigging race against a peloton of frigging dopers?

And it worked!

 

[frenchfry]

My guess is as follows: small (micro) amounts of clen contamination are likely more common that we appreciate. I think when the some folks are being popped it is because something else is turning up that is too contentious to base the case on, so the clen becomes something to base a ban on. Take conti ... lots of rumours that there was evidence of blood bag use, but the tests for that would not have made the case. So testers could see there was an issue, but needed something to make a charge stick, and lo and behold they get traces of clen and now they can make a case.

In other words, if everything was A-OK, I doubt a micro finding of clen would be something WADA would necessarily launch after.

JMO

Often doping positives are for low levels of forbidden substances. One reason could be contamination, another could be that the rider was expecting the substance to have cleared his system to be undetectable, and only minute levels remain at the time of doping control. This is why it seems unreasonable to me to assume that Roger's positive is from contamination.

 

[thehog]

Often doping positives are for low levels of forbidden substances. One reason could be contamination, another could be that the rider was expecting the substance to have cleared his system to be undetectable, and only minute levels remain at the time of doping control. This is why it seems unreasonable to me to assume that Roger's positive is from contamination.

Actually. Yes. My thought process was if there was a low amount of C then it might point towards contamination. But if he was using his "windowing" correctly knowing he couldn't be tested at the airport and inflight then he might have done the deed deliberately.

A plausible conclusion.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Often doping positives are for low levels of forbidden substances. One reason could be contamination, another could be that the rider was expecting the substance to have cleared his system to be undetectable, and only minute levels remain at the time of doping control. This is why it seems unreasonable to me to assume that Roger's positive is from contamination.

The crude summary: he failed the ant-doping IQ test. Roger's cautionary tale to fellow dopers, timing matters!

 

[thehog]

The crude summary: he failed the ant-doping IQ test. Roger's cautionary tale to fellow dopers, timing matters!

It appears he did.

UCI checked all samples for C.

“All samples are analyzed for clenbuterol, in any WADA lab. It’s a routine analysis,” a UCI official said via email. “That means all samples from the Tour of Beijing were analyzed for clenbuterol. Same for Japan.”

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013/12/news/uci-says-all-samples-checked-for-clenbuterol_311700

 

[darwin553]

Let me just bite at the clinic's take-down of Rogers for a second and say assuming he had been doping for at least the time he was trained by Ferrari, is it still fair that he should be sanctioned for a positive for clenbuterol assuming that in fact he simply ate contaminated food and is unable to prove so?

 

[BradCantona]

It's fair regardless of any previous doping links. Without strict liability, you have a free for all. An athlete has to know what they're putting in their body, full stop. Most manage it

 

[veganrob]

My question is, how much contaminated meat would he have to eat to get a positive and what would the concentration of clen have to be in the meat. 48oz of steak? 16oz? One cheese Whopper? How about the fries?
The whole bad meat theory is simply not valid for Rogers in my opinion. Why wonder what he was thinking at the time. He is a doper, he has been his whole career. That is what they do, they dope.

And then some are just dopes.

 

[BroDeal]

My question is, how much contaminated meat would he have to eat to get a positive and what would the concentration of clen have to be in the meat. 48oz of steak? 16oz? One cheese Whopper? How about the fries?
The whole bad meat theory is simply not valid for Rogers in my opinion.

Your opinion is based on what? Do you think the German study that found 22 out of 28 travelers returning to Germany from China tested positive for low levels of Clenbuterol is invalid? Did the Germans just make up their data?

 

[Merckx index]

Often doping positives are for low levels of forbidden substances. One reason could be contamination, another could be that the rider was expecting the substance to have cleared his system to be undetectable, and only minute levels remain at the time of doping control. This is why it seems unreasonable to me to assume that Roger's positive is from contamination.

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that a low level of CB (though we still don't know what his level was) indicates doping, because a doper would time his ingestion so that only a low level would exist when he got tested. But contamination generally also results in a low level, so that doesn't mean much. Even in China, most meat is probably not contaminated, and most that is is probably contaminated at a relatively low level. The fact that the government doesn't do enough to ensure cleanliness doesn't mean that anything goes, that producers can sell meat without any effort at all to reduce its contamination.

Someone was asking why, if meat is so contaminated in China, more athletes there don't test positive. I'd guess one reason is because the tests often use the maximum criterion of 2 ng/ml. One might frequently get a level not exceeding that by eating typically contaminated meat, particularly since an athlete will often be tested some time after eating meat.

My question is, how much contaminated meat would he have to eat to get a positive and what would the concentration of clen have to be in the meat. 48oz of steak? 16oz? One cheese Whopper? How about the fries?

It depends on what level he tested at, and the level of contamination of meat. We were able to estimate that Contador probably would have had to eat several kgs of beef, because we knew his level, and because Spain does not allow the importation or sale of meat with a level above a certain standard. We may eventually learn what Rogers' level was, but we have no way of knowing how contaminated the meat he ate might have been (assuming that is the explanation). It's possible it could have contained far more CB than the Spanish standard.

So the short answer is, Rogers' level, for all we know now, might have resulted from eating a fairly small portion of meat.

 

[veganrob]

Your opinion is based on what? Do you think the German study that found 22 out of 28 travelers returning to Germany from China tested positive for low levels of Clenbuterol is invalid? Did the Germans just make up their data?

Do you have a link to that study? Also my other questions were not answered. How much meat is needed to be consumed and what is the concentration of clen needed in the meat to produce those positive results?


MI, Thanks for your reply.

 

[blackcat]

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that a low level of CB (though we still don't know what his level was) indicates doping, because a doper would time his ingestion so that only a low level would exist when he got tested. But contamination generally also results in a low level, so that doesn't mean much. Even in China, most meat is probably not contaminated, and most that is is probably contaminated at a relatively low level. The fact that the government doesn't do enough to ensure cleanliness doesn't mean that anything goes, that producers can sell meat without any effort at all to reduce its contamination.

what frenchfry was saying, one cannot discern the difference in potential contamination from doping by the minscule reading. Because of the half life and the concentration deteriorating

 

[blackcat]

Let me just bite at the clinic's take-down of Rogers for a second and say assuming he had been doping for at least the time he was trained by Ferrari, is it still fair that he should be sanctioned for a positive for clenbuterol assuming that in fact he simply ate contaminated food and is unable to prove so?

yep, i raise this dilemma about 10 pages in.

 

[blackcat]

My guess is as follows: small (micro) amounts of clen contamination are likely more common that we appreciate. I think when the some folks are being popped it is because something else is turning up that is too contentious to base the case on, so the clen becomes something to base a ban on. Take conti ... lots of rumours that there was evidence of blood bag use, but the tests for that would not have made the case. So testers could see there was an issue, but needed something to make a charge stick, and lo and behold they get traces of clen and now they can make a case.

In other words, if everything was A-OK, I doubt a micro finding of clen would be something WADA would necessarily launch after.

JMO

I like this. And i will wear the conspiracy theory burden on behalf of Ripper.

I think this is the most applicable of the unlikely scenarions. Hume's lesser miracle.

 

[DirtyWorks]

...is it still fair that he should be sanctioned for a positive for clenbuterol assuming that in fact he simply ate contaminated food and is unable to prove so?

If someone won't accept the fact the whole team would likely test positive if it was chicken or beef, then there's no discussion anyway.

Clenbuterol is a great endurance sport drug. It aids Recovery, leans, improves oxygen transfer. What a great drug! Pretty safe too. Can't screw up the timing though!

On the anti-doping side, Clen is a positive/negative test. The drug does not appear naturally in the human body. Apparently not too complicated to run, so a solid case.

 

[blackcat]

If someone won't accept the fact the whole team would likely test positive if it was chicken or beef, then there's no discussion anyway.

Clenbuterol is a great endurance sport drug. It aids Recovery, leans, improves oxygen transfer. What a great drug! Pretty safe too. Can't screw up the timing though!

On the anti-doping side, Clen is a positive/negative test. The drug does not appear naturally in the human body. Apparently not too complicated to run, so a solid case.

the fact the whole team would likely test positive if it was chicken or beef only if the team
(i) was all tested at the same time (and assuming their unique biochemistry worked exactly the same as a filter for the metabolites)
(ii) assuming they ate the same cut and piece of chicken or beef, that the others had, the same amount, and with the same legacy of clen in it.

 

[barn yard]

can we just forget all this meat stuff

we all know what has really happened here

 

[Big Doopie]

can we just forget all this meat stuff

we all know what has really happened here

Bingo. End of thread. Thank you.

 

[nevada]

Why would he take it if he was going for a win knowing he would be tested ?

 

[frenchfry]

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that a low level of CB (though we still don't know what his level was) indicates doping, because a doper would time his ingestion so that only a low level would exist when he got tested. But contamination generally also results in a low level, so that doesn't mean much.....

what frenchfry was saying, one cannot discern the difference in potential contamination from doping by the minscule reading. Because of the half life and the concentration deteriorating

Thanks blackcat, this is exactly what I meant.

Chances are we will never know if Rogers was doping with clen or not.

 

[frenchfry]

Why would he take it if he was going for a win knowing he would be tested ?

You can ask this question to the winners of the last 100 years of cycling races (and most other sports as well).

 

[timmers]

You can ask this question to the winners of the last 100 years of cycling races (and most other sports as well).

So you don't have an answer!

I can accept that Rodgers has doped in the past but why would he stuff up in the last few years of his career?

It's not as if he's riding for a GT contender is it?

But hey he's Australian and some of them aren't very bright so maybe that's the answer.

But then he did ride for Sky and they are the devil so this is payback.

 

[blackcat]

I dont think Rogers is stupid enough to risk transporting PEDs across borders and thru customs.

I think if he did do anything, would it not be find a sports chemist in Beijing and get a treatment before you are on the plane to Tokyo.

Seems an added risk to be transporting the ampoules across borders and thru customs, when you could be carrying them in your bloodstream instead.

This is in Rogers' favour, the assumption that he considered it a risk to be travelling with clen, or the team's mule carrying/not carrying clen across checkpoints

 

[blackcat]

Why would he take it if he was going for a win knowing he would be tested ?

because he assumed it would not be showing up in the test.

because as you alude to, the doping fallacy, no one will dope if they know 100% of the time they are tested, and 100% of time that the test shows 12 months worth of your previous injestion.

And do not even need the first factor, just 100% of time you win you will be tested, which is 100% accurate for the previous 12 months.