Rui & Mario Costa will be acquitted

[centri]

Professional athletes need to take care when ingesting supplements. It would help if there was something out there that could provide them with some guidance.

BUT...

Many people here go on about the names of the products without realizing that many of these riders don't speak English and do not have access to a GNC or the like. It is also possible that they were out of school a few years earlier then you would suspect. Where I live in Spain its not easy to find great stuff and if you were to ask at the Farmacia they, I would think, would probably not be very helpful (in fact, they could be the opposite). In addition, many many kids will start work at 14 or 15, ending their education at that point.

People need to understand some context before they start calling other people names.

 

[Chuffy]

Hey, you need "supplements?" Fine, do some research. I realize that "Nutrilite Health" doesn't sound as sexy as "ANDRO PUMP 5000" or "MONSTER MASS" or "Anabolic Innovations Healthy Cheat Foods Pancake Mix" or whatever, but when IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to ensure you don't test positive, a little research goes a long way.

Your 'research' would appear to be the equivalent of checking the label.

 

[Anonymous]

Your 'research' would appear to be the equivalent of checking the label.

Uh, no. Read the link I provided. They have tested their product to make sure it contains no substances on the WADA list. If you don't see the difference, then get back to me and I will explain.

 

[Anonymous]

Professional athletes need to take care when ingesting supplements. It would help if there was something out there that could provide them with some guidance.

BUT...

Many people here go on about the names of the products without realizing that many of these riders don't speak English and do not have access to a GNC or the like. It is also possible that they were out of school a few years earlier then you would suspect. Where I live in Spain its not easy to find great stuff and if you were to ask at the Farmacia they, I would think, would probably not be very helpful (in fact, they could be the opposite). In addition, many many kids will start work at 14 or 15, ending their education at that point.

People need to understand some context before they start calling other people names.

I would assume they know someone who can read? If so, maybe they could ask them to help...

Yea, lets make the threshold "people who can't read" and see how that works out for the situation. I'd be willing to bet, as is with asthmatics in the pro peloton, we would have a rash of illiterate people riding bikes...

 

[joe_papp]

There are plenty of protein powders that are not risky if this is your purpose. I couldn't determine if your previous post was sarcastic, and I now see that it was. Fine, they need to do some research if they are trying to merely use the "supplement" for recovery and replacement. A simple Google search for "Protein powder no WADA banned substances" that took .15 seconds produced this product:http://www.nutrilitehealth.com/products/product.aspx?itemno=106411

Hey, you need "supplements?" Fine, do some research. I realize that "Nutrilite Health" doesn't sound as sexy as "ANDRO PUMP 5000" or "MONSTER MASS" or "Anabolic Innovations Healthy Cheat Foods Pancake Mix" or whatever, but when IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to ensure you don't test positive, a little research goes a long way.

If you want the WADA to make up a safe list, fine, that will help. However, right now, those guys took a banned substance in a protein "supplement" and should pay the price. Is it as bad as HGH? No. Are they freaking stupid? Yes. Should the defense "I took a supplement and didn't know the substance was in there so don't punish me" be allowed under WADA...well, I guess if you trust riders to do the right thing in that world, then you trust them much more than I.

I'm not being sarcastic. Contamination can occur across the range of supplements, whether it's a product made by a seemingly reputable company, or one that is marketed for all intents and purposes as if it was liquid testosterone.

In fact, for some time the USCF (pre USA Cycling) was sponsored by a supplement company whose products included an unlisted ingredient that metabolized such that it mimicked or approximated a banned stimulant! But that wasn't discernible based on reading the ingredient list, and this w/ a product given to national team riders.

I'm not defending the use of some particular product marketed under the name of "This-is-almost-as-good-as-HGH-but-costs-half-as-much." I'm rejecting the notion that it's acceptable to make a blanket statement that anyone taking a supplement is stupid and that they must be doing so for nefarious purposes with hopes of obtaining some advantage that mimics doping.

By your rationale, it seems that all a supplement company would have to do is change the name of their product from "This-is-almost-as-good-as-HGH-but-costs-half-as-much" to "High Quality All-Natural Whey Protein" and that would prove that the athlete using the product had no doping intent and so wasn't stupid (because if they were stupid, they'd be taking "This-is-almost-as-good-as-HGH-but-costs-half-as-much" and not "High Quality All-Natural Whey Protein," which isn't about doping, but rather, supplementing protein intake). That is, the name of the product reflects whether the person using it is doing so en lieu of doping or to simply augment their diet.

 

[joe_papp]

This includes vetting supplements if you insist on taking them.

And therein lies the problem. It's hardly a reasonable burden to expect an athlete who needs to drink a protein shake in order to meet his or her dietary requirements to be able afford to have their protein powder pre-tested at a laboratory to determine whether or not the manufacturer may have cross-contaminated the product with something else. The onus should be on the manufacturer to deliver a clean product, and not on the resource-poor athlete who probably wouldn't even know how to go about getting product analyzed in the first place.

 

[Anonymous]

I'm not being sarcastic. Contamination can occur across the range of supplements, whether it's a product made by a seemingly reputable company, or one that is marketed for all intents and purposes as if it was liquid testosterone.

In fact, for some time the USCF (pre USA Cycling) was sponsored by a supplement company whose products included an unlisted ingredient that metabolized such that it mimicked or approximated a banned stimulant! But that wasn't discernible based on reading the ingredient list, and this w/ a product given to national team riders.

I'm not defending the use of some particular product marketed under the name of "This-is-almost-as-good-as-HGH-but-costs-half-as-much." I'm rejecting the notion that it's acceptable to make a blanket statement that anyone taking a supplement is stupid and that they must be doing so for nefarious purposes with hopes of obtaining some advantage that mimics doping.

By your rationale, it seems that all a supplement company would have to do is change the name of their product from "This-is-almost-as-good-as-HGH-but-costs-half-as-much" to "High Quality All-Natural Whey Protein" and that would prove that the athlete using the product had no doping intent and so wasn't stupid (because if they were stupid, they'd be taking "This-is-almost-as-good-as-HGH-but-costs-half-as-much" and not "High Quality All-Natural Whey Protein," which isn't about doping, but rather, supplementing protein intake). That is, the name of the product reflects whether the person using it is doing so en lieu of doping or to simply augment their diet.

I was being sarcastic with the name thing. My real point was in the specific reference I posted. If you read it, that company markets that there are no WADA banned substances in their products. The company producing "AndroPump Extreme" or whatever isn't putting itself out there as being safe in any way. They are producing bodybuilding "supplements" and I believe cyclists are using that to get an edge, not just to replenish. That being the case, they deserve to be suspended for 6 months or a year for taking a "supplement" that contains a banned substance. The "supplement" company has no need to change the name of their product because Portuguese cyclists are not their targeted consumer. The guy in the Rock & Republic jeans and the Prada sunglasses walking into your local gym is their mark.

As for them being stupid, that was just trolling.

Now, if the WADA wants to help out by listing approved supplements or replenishment powders or liquids, I have no problem with that. I still do have a problem with some guy taking some "supplement" that you find advertised on bodybuilding forums and websites who is SHOCKED that it contains a banned substance. Either he is naive, or he just didn't really think about it enough. Either way, he deserves his punishment in my opinion because of the reality of what would happen in the "You didn't know the supplement contained a banned substance so you get off free" world existed.

Now, if the cyclist wants to take legal action against the company who made the "supplement," they can try, but I would suggest that case would be harder to win than you would expect.

 

[centri]

I would assume they know someone who can read? If so, maybe they could ask them to help...

Yea, lets make the threshold "people who can't read" and see how that works out for the situation. I'd be willing to bet, as is with asthmatics in the pro peloton, we would have a rash of illiterate people riding bikes...

Okay, I get it. Some people cheat. That's a given and an easy one.

Maybe the cultural thing is too hard to explain. You would have to live here to understand what I'm getting at rather then taking my word for it. But hey, I'll try again:

I live in a block of apartments, in Spain, and besides my wife and one other person that I know of there is not a single other English speaker in the 600 or so apartments in the area that I live in. Dude goes to the local gym to buy protein powder, because the bike shop doesn't deal in that. Maybe he goes to Decathon. At the latter he can get WEIDER products. In the gym, who knows what. But that is where you get that stuff here. There is no fancy pants vitamin shop in town... Does that make sense?

Yes its a bad choice, and not so bright IYO. If someone could provide the goods with some sort of guarantee that WADA is happy with, then nobody would have an excuse, even if the WADA approved goods were found to be contaminated.

I still do have a problem with some guy taking some "supplement" that you find advertised on bodybuilding forums and websites who is SHOCKED that it contains a banned substance.

A great example of something that would be more likely to happen in NA then southern Europe. No rider is going to go browsing and ordering on the internet. Geez man, most people I know here in there later 20's are just learning how to turn on a computer, and very few have credit cards, let alone use them. (Never mind using them on the internet.)

 

[RussellRides]

Costa Bros

The article today mentioned the supplement by name, and I went to the manufacturer's website.

Now I know these companies can be shady, and the labels on the product (and especially the websites) can change without warning. However, currently there are two very big red flags on the product description:

WARNING: IF YOU ARE GOVERNED BY ANY ATHLETIC OR GOVERING BODY, MAKE SURE TO CONTACT THAT BODY TO ENSURE THE USE OF THIS PRODUCT IS NOT IN VIOLATION OF THEIR RULES AND REGULATIONS.

Also, the ingredients clearly list 'geranium oil', which according to wikipedia is about 1% methylhexanamine.

If this was the case when the guys bought and used this stuff, I would give them a suspension easily. Even a cursory bit of research would have shown them the product contained banned substances.

I agree completely with Joe Papp as far as 'protein shakes' go, but using this type of product (which itself is sold as a 'stimulant' type supplement) should be obviously a risky type of supplement.

-Russell

 

[centri]

If you read the article and this thread, the original label has been changed, as has the website.

but using this type of product (which itself is sold as a 'stimulant' type supplement) should be obviously a risky type of supplement.

In the article they talk about taking an Arginine based product (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arginine). Its useful as an anti-catabolic and for recovery. I've used it, one of the few things I found that worked when I supplemented with it. If they were advised by a nutritionist to use it, as they say, well, nothing fishy there.

Then again maybe they knew it was contaminated or whatnot despite nothing appearing on the labeling.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Hey Joe

The article today mentioned the supplement by name, and I went to the manufacturer's website.

Now I know these companies can be shady, and the labels on the product (and especially the websites) can change without warning. However, currently there are two very big red flags on the product description:


Also, the ingredients clearly list 'geranium oil', which according to wikipedia is about 1% methylhexanamine.

If this was the case when the guys bought and used this stuff, I would give them a suspension easily. Even a cursory bit of research would have shown them the product contained banned substances.

I agree completely with Joe Papp as far as 'protein shakes' go, but using this type of product (which itself is sold as a 'stimulant' type supplement) should be obviously a risky type of supplement.

-Russell

Joe,

Look at how quickly Russell determined the viability of the product that is blamed for the Adverse Analytical Finding. Reducing my argument to 'protein powder' is a fail. This case is not about protein shakes. As someone that worked in natural foods wholesale, believe me when I say the only thing you will get in off-the-shelf protein powder is some kind of protein and some fillers.

When athletes go for the esoteric stuff like the supplement in question and then do not bother to research the consequences, an Adverse Analytical Finding is justified. Knowing what's going into your body is required at that athletic level.

 

[joe_papp]

Joe,

Look at how quickly Russell determined the viability of the product that is blamed for the Adverse Analytical Finding. Reducing my argument to 'protein powder' is a fail. This case is not about protein shakes. As someone that worked in natural foods wholesale, believe me when I say the only thing you will get in off-the-shelf protein powder is some kind of protein and some fillers.

When athletes go for the esoteric stuff like the supplement in question and then do not bother to research the consequences, an Adverse Analytical Finding is justified. Knowing what's going into your body is required at that athletic level.

One can argue either about the Costa case specifically, or about supplement use generally.

My contention is that there are more than a few examples of situations where it's completely plausible for an athlete to use supplements that have nothing to do with doping, and that it's an unreasonable expectation to expect the athlete to be able to fund and manage the pre-testing of the supplement they'd like to take - in the example I gave, it was protein powder.

 

[Oldman]

One can argue either about the Costa case specifically, or about supplement use generally.

My contention is that there are more than a few examples of situations where it's completely plausible for an athlete to use supplements that have nothing to do with doping, and that it's an unreasonable expectation to expect the athlete to be able to fund and manage the pre-testing of the supplement they'd like to take - in the example I gave, it was protein powder.

While I'm not trying to be an absolute hard-liner I think we're at the threshold where a rider needs to make the decision how deep is his need for supplements or "condensed" foods. Maybe the pro should always plan to clear his products, record the purchases and maybe even keep containers/samples if it is that important. It would make a defense case much easier.
As for amateurs they need to get real...the next step to the pros is not in a can. If they can't pick training programs and events that cannot be served by a good diet they might seek help. At that point, if they have the physical talent then they start acting like a pro and pay attention. Most of the amateur guys I see that want supplements are also recording power data and every other detail of their cycling life anyway.

 

[BroDeal]

Supplements are a fact of life. They are convenient. Everyone uses them. While I find it hilarious when someone pulls a positive from taking something named "Crack," it does not bother me much if someone gets out off the hook because the ingredient list of his supplements was wrong or there was true contamination.

I think one of the problems is that there are too many low grade substances of dubious effectiveness on the banned list. I would rather have the authorities use their limited resources on detecting higher grade dope.

The cynic in me suspects that sports authorities include low grade stuff because it is easier to catch athletes for low level ghetto doping than it is to tackle the stuff that really works. They get to point to the positives and say that they caught someone. The athlete gets to claim it was all a mistake. Sport takes a lesser hit than catching someone for something more serious.

 

[Oldman]

Supplements are a fact of life. They are convenient. Everyone uses them. While I find it hilarious when someone pulls a positive from taking something named "Crack," it does not bother me much if someone gets out off the hook because the ingredient list of his supplements was wrong or there was true contamination.

I think one of the problems is that there are too many low grade substances of dubious effectiveness on the banned list. I would rather have the authorities use their limited resources on detecting higher grade dope.

The cynic in me suspects that sports authorities include low grade stuff because it is easier to catch athletes for low level ghetto doping than it is to tackle the stuff that really works. They get to point to the positives and say that they caught someone. The athlete gets to claim it was all a mistake. Sport takes a lesser hit than catching someone for something more serious.

While it doesn't bother me that someone took something we know the sports authorities aren't targeting anything. As you point out they don't have the time or the money but they may emphasize low level busts to show diligence. It only adds emphasis to several points: 1. They can't or won't out the "protected" stars unless overwhelming evidence is presented. The system is too easily manipulated by advance notice, sketchy testing protocols, etc. 2. Don't take any supplement that hasn't been in the market for a long time and you're certain it is pure-what every PRO should do.

 

[joe_papp]

I was just reviewing the USADA learning module I had to complete for this coming season and there's an entire section that deals with the topic of manufacturer's intentionally hiding the presence of banned stimulants in their supplements by listing "geranium oil" on the ingredients list. Interesting.

Also, "Strict Liability" is even more aggressively propagandized, which means I should probably reposition myself on the Costa matter and support the party line, namely, that Rui Costa knew about the strict liability policy when he decided to use supplements, and he assumed 100% of the risk therein. It's a shame that he tested positive, but now he needs to pay the price, and if that's a 1 or 2 year ban, then that's a fair and just punishment. Supplements are evil.