• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Ozzie Dopers. Surprise surpise

Jun 16, 2009
19,654
2
0
Visit site
the main drugs they tested + for all likely came from supplements. There were only a few for more well known or serious PED's. Anyway, the fact that there have been 42 suggest that the level of the athletes for at least some of these offences is rather low. Also, please don't give me the crap that ASADA are trying to cover up for their own as they openly came out with this information anyway. If any pro cyclist tested positive I am pretty sure that the authorities would be right onto it and so would the media.

If you mean to say Aussie dopers, please spell it the correct way, Blackcat. Anyway, we know that your narrowmindedness often hampers your attempts at trying to be rational
 
May 6, 2009
8,522
1
0
Visit site
I could see why there might be a coverup if it was a topline AFL or NRL (rugby league) player that tested positive, but I doubt it would be the case if it were a pro cyclist, or from any other sport.
 
one of the "AFL" posatives was from a WA player who played in the WAFL (state league). I remember there being some coverage of it at the time ... he was banned for using steroids to recover from injury.

Wasnt covered up, and got front page coverage here
 
AussieGoddess said:
one of the "AFL" posatives was from a WA player who played in the WAFL (state league). I remember there being some coverage of it at the time ... he was banned for using steroids to recover from injury.

Wasnt covered up, and got front page coverage here

And the guy done for Ephedrine in the GF.

hrotha said:
Are those 42 positives news? Because from the article I gather it's a statistical recap of past positive cases, not an announcement of new ones.

That's indeed what it is, you should be able to find a list of sanctions on the ASADA site.
 
Jul 27, 2009
496
0
0
Visit site
ASADA list of currently sanctioned athletes

Here's the list of currently sanctioned athletes. There's 3 cyclists on it, none of whom I've heard of.

There's another cyclist who would be on that list if he hadn't been killed on a training ride - John Cornish. Cornish intended to appeal his suspension (read the link for the scientific basis of this); in any case, my understanding was that he was a good local rider, but no more. Like all Australian-based riders, he wasn't making a living out of it.

I don't think you can take this as evidence as widespread doping in Australian domestic cycling.
 
craig1985 said:
I could see why there might be a coverup if it was a topline AFL or NRL (rugby league) player that tested positive, but I doubt it would be the case if it were a pro cyclist, or from any other sport.
If the majority of these athletes are involved with the AIS it will get covered up ASAP :rolleyes:

Us aussies don't dope....
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
42x16ss said:
Us aussies don't dope....
you actually could be right or........the oz is best at covering up :):p


it all depends on whether you're an optimist or a pessimist and not at all on the actual statistics.

for ex, france for a marginally higher number of total tests (about 25%) catches more than 5 times as many dopers as oz, or the overall rate of positives in oz (about .5%) is actually one of the lowest in the word for any country and is 4 times lower than the overall wada stats historically (about 2%)

go figure, you're either:

(i) the cleanest
(ii) best at covering up,
(iii) most incompetent at testing

:):)

yep, the stats are as always in the eyes of the beholder
 
I suppose the lesson to be learned in all of these anti-doping craze is: raise and slaughter your own meat if you want to be safe from clenbuterol positives. And don't take any OTC supplement whatsoever in your life.

USAC and others have made it public that a big increase of positives have been due to Methylhexaneamine. This is hidden/obscured within other products and ingredients as part of OTC supplements, yet you don't know it is there unless what other ingredients may contain it.

Bodybuilding, rugby and some other sports we can safely assume steroids were the positive tests.

Of course, they didn't reveal who, or at least what, the positive tests were for. That would be nice instead of taking their word for it in some secretive manner only revealing bits/pieces of information for their PR initiative to continue getting their funding.

This statement was a good one, now you know how they are catching many of these people. Trying to import illegal stuff using their actual names and shipped to their home address.

"ASADA also reported that it had analysed 297 reports from various intelligence sources, and 2968 referrals of performance and image enhancing drugs from the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service."
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,854
1
0
Visit site
auscyclefan94 said:
the main drugs they tested + for all likely came from supplements. There were only a few for more well known or serious PED's. Anyway, the fact that there have been 42 suggest that the level of the athletes for at least some of these offences is rather low. Also, please don't give me the crap that ASADA are trying to cover up for their own as they openly came out with this information anyway. If any pro cyclist tested positive I am pretty sure that the authorities would be right onto it and so would the media.

If you mean to say Aussie dopers, please spell it the correct way, Blackcat. Anyway, we know that your narrowmindedness often hampers your attempts at trying to be rational



hahahaha, very funny
 
Data from ASADA annual reports, as best as I was able to determine when I looked at it earlier this year:

ASADATestingbyyear.jpg


In Australia it is normal for annual reports to use a July-June financial year reporting period rather than calendar years.

ASADASanctionsbySport.jpg


Note that this was as of March 2011 when I went through the reports. I haven't checked to see the current numbers for 2011.

If the latest report (2010/11) shows 42 doping violations in a 12 month period, then that is a significant increase (up 54%) on the historical average of 27 doping violations per year for last six years.

It would interesting to see if that is as a result of an increased in the number of tests, or better targeted testing. I doubt that, on average, athlete behaviour wrt doping has worsened to that extent compared to previous years.

edit - I just noted 7040 tests according to the article, so that means the 2010/11 doping violation rate went up to 0.6% of all tests.