wada and big pharma to sign an agreement

[python]

thought this deserves it's own thread.

it’s not the bio passport nor the retro testing that’ll save the sport (though i’m positive on both) but this piece of news.

very surprised this was not reported widely and completely missed by cn

http://translate.google.com/translat...hl=en&ie=UTF-8

On July 6, 2010 will be an important day in the fight against Doping in Lausanne, in fact, Wada and FIIM (Federation Internationale Medicines Industry) will sign an important agreement with big pharma: The purpose of is to allow anti-doping organizations to more easily expose the cheaters. . The pharmaceutical companies are also committed to alerting the Wada potential of a medicinal product since its first development phase. And the engineers of the fight against doping will have access to these molecules from the outset to develop a detection system well before the product is sold.

 

[Roland Rat]

It's good news and it might help, as long as Wada don't relax. Would you trust a pharma company not to withhold one or two drugs to cream another premium from the athletes and thus playing both sides? I wouldn't.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

Link doesn't work.

Susan

 

[bobbins]

I was told once that EPO sales for non-medical uses were more than for medical uses, not sure how true that is but it is certainly food for thought.

 

[python]

source: tuttobici, 15 june, 2010.

I was told once that EPO sales for non-medical uses were more than for medical uses, not sure how true that is but it is certainly food

i dont think it is true.

 

[Roland Rat]

source: tuttobici, 15 june, 2010.


i dont think it is true.

I don't think sales is true, but income could well be.

But then when you consider all those internet EPO dealers and all those gym jockeys and amateur athletes in the world who may use it, sales may be true. Who do we know with experience of EPO internet selling who could comment....?

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

i dont think it is true.

Think that idea came from Donati actually. I can't find the original, but I did find this sketchy little report

 

[Mambo95]

I don't think sales is true, but income could well be.

But then when you consider all those internet EPO dealers and all those gym jockeys and amateur athletes in the world who may use it, sales may be true. Who do we know with experience of EPO internet selling who could comment....?

It's very, very unlikely. The worldwide sales of EPO in 2005 was around $11 billion, and it's only grown since then. There's no way there's that many dopers.

(And the companies involved in the agreement won't be selling to athletes).

Source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:EPO_sales.png

 

[Roland Rat]

It's very, very unlikely. The worldwide sales of EPO in 2005 was around $11 billion, and it's only grown since then. There's no way there's that many dopers.

(And the companies involved in the agreement won't be selling to athletes).

Source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:EPO_sales.png

$11 billion

Ok then, yeah, no chance.

 

[Oldman]

I don't think sales is true, but income could well be.

But then when you consider all those internet EPO dealers and all those gym jockeys and amateur athletes in the world who may use it, sales may be true. Who do we know with experience of EPO internet selling who could comment....?

This helps WADA. Now the folks at UCI will need to issue a press release saying they will "appreciate" recieving the information as well. They could pass that on to the appropriate teams to allow their preparation for testing.

C'mon. Most of the PEDs have been a known commodity and it waits for local cops to bust a blatant drug distribution ring before UCI does a thing. It's not like a breakthrough molecular advantage becomes rumored and RS launches into a drug development program to synthesize their own version. Getting big pharma to put reliable markers into their products would really help to make testing easier/cheaper. The black market products would then be the problem...

 

[DirtyWorks]

C'mon. Most of the PEDs have been a known commodity and it waits for local cops to bust a blatant drug distribution ring before UCI does a thing.

It's not like a breakthrough molecular advantage becomes rumored and RS launches into a drug development program to synthesize their own version. Getting big pharma to put reliable markers into their products would really help to make testing easier/cheaper. The black market products would then be the problem...

If the agreement worked such that any sport federations were not a part of the communications between WADA and Big Pharma, it would be a big win. I could see Big Pharma liking that deal a whole lot more than having to share its strategic knowledge with sporting federations too. Let's hope the sporting federations like the UCI are not included.

 

[Oldman]

If the agreement worked such that any sport federations were not a part of the communications between WADA and Big Pharma, it would be a big win. I could see Big Pharma liking that deal a whole lot more than having to share its strategic knowledge with sporting federations too. Let's hope the sporting federations like the UCI are not included.

So WADA then knows what's coming. Who tests? Getting the UCI to give up that control is the entrenched issue and unless the IOC require it; we'll have more years of the current routine.
A very big if...the rider's union insisted on separate, independent and retroactive testing they could make a statement on their sport's future. It would need to be in tandem with WADA or anyone that had emergent technological knowledge. If there's a role for a Greg Lemond or other elder statesman; that could be it.

 

[131313]

Think that idea came from Donati actually. I can't find the original, but I did find this sketchy little report

Here's the full Donati report: http://www.wada-ama.org/rtecontent/document/Donati_Report_Trafficking_2007-03_06.pdf

Long story short, no one knows the exact amount of illegal performance-enhancing drugs being sold, but while it's not=to the legitimate therapeutic use, it's definitely significant. Very significant.

Legitimate use of first-generation EPO shouldn't be increasing. With the second-generation darbepoetin-type products, the amount sold should, in theory, be much less since it has to be used much less often. I image that as a % of first-generation sales, blackmarket EPO has actually increased, significantly, since this report.

 

[Polish]

Long story short, no one knows the exact amount of illegal performance-enhancing drugs being sold, but while it's not=to the legitimate therapeutic use, it's definitely significant. Very significant.
.

Thousands of cyclists micro-dosing EPO compared to the
millions upon millions upon millions of Patients macro-dosing EPO.

If Worldwide usage of EPO is truly $10,000,000,000+, the percentage of usage by cyclists is significantly INSIGNIFICANT. A drop in the bucket. WAY Less than 1%

The fact that WADA has pestered Big Pharma into wasting resources and increasing the cost to patients is a big sham. WADA should be ashamed.
WADA joke, but it is NOT funny.

And now young riders will seek out EPO from lower quality labs and backroom clinics. Great for their health? Good job WADA. The young riders who have been brainwashed by the hater myth that "EPO will transform you into a 7 time TdF winner". Yes, some people believe that myth.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Thousands of cyclists micro-dosing EPO compared to the
millions upon millions upon millions of Patients macro-dosing EPO.

If Worldwide usage of EPO is truly $10,000,000,000+, the percentage of usage by cyclists is significantly INSIGNIFICANT. A drop in the bucket. WAY Less than 1%

The fact that WADA has pestered Big Pharma into wasting resources and increasing the cost to patients is a big sham. WADA should be ashamed.
WADA joke, but it is NOT funny.

And now young riders will seek out EPO from lower quality labs and backroom clinics. Great for their health? Good job WADA. The young riders who have been brainwashed by the hater myth that "EPO will transform you into a 7 time TdF winner". Yes, some people believe that myth.

And some believe the myth of evolution.

 

[131313]

Thousands of cyclists micro-dosing EPO compared to the
millions upon millions upon millions of Patients macro-dosing EPO.

If Worldwide usage of EPO is truly $10,000,000,000+, the percentage of usage by cyclists is significantly INSIGNIFICANT. A drop in the bucket. WAY Less than 1%

The fact that WADA has pestered Big Pharma into wasting resources and increasing the cost to patients is a big sham. WADA should be ashamed.
WADA joke, but it is NOT funny.

Pretty much nothing you said is actually true. You should spend some time reading the Donati report.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

It was actually Dick Pound who made the assertion in one of his books maybe further back than the 2003 Donati link there, that something astounding like only 17% of PED's were used in medically controlled environment. At the time I found that figure absurd, delivered by Nazi Frogmen, but it's indeed an interesting thought.

Didn't read the entire thread here, but isn't this was Roche and WADA did with CERA?

 

[poupou]

Thousands of cyclists micro-dosing EPO compared to the
millions upon millions upon millions of Patients macro-dosing EPO.
...

Do you believe that only cyclists are using EPO? What about other sports like football, basket, tennis, ...?

 

[Benotti69]

And now young riders will seek out EPO from lower quality labs and backroom clinics. Great for their health? Good job WADA. The young riders who have been brainwashed by the hater myth that "EPO will transform you into a 7 time TdF winner". Yes, some people believe that myth.

if someone is going to go down a back alley to buy drugs for sports/getting high, its called 'Darwinism' by some and you gotta ask what kind of mentality would put themselves at that kind of risk.

It is risky enough taking PEDs from team doctors who are more concerned with results than riders health or potential long term health risks...

Katusha rider Kirchen suffered a heart attack....?????

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kirchen-suffers-suspected-heart-attack

it's all gone to héll...burn it down

 

[gree0232]

Thousands of cyclists micro-dosing EPO compared to the
millions upon millions upon millions of Patients macro-dosing EPO.

If Worldwide usage of EPO is truly $10,000,000,000+, the percentage of usage by cyclists is significantly INSIGNIFICANT. A drop in the bucket. WAY Less than 1%

The fact that WADA has pestered Big Pharma into wasting resources and increasing the cost to patients is a big sham. WADA should be ashamed.
WADA joke, but it is NOT funny.

And now young riders will seek out EPO from lower quality labs and backroom clinics. Great for their health? Good job WADA. The young riders who have been brainwashed by the hater myth that "EPO will transform you into a 7 time TdF winner". Yes, some people believe that myth.

I'll have to disagree with this one Pole.

WADA is not concerned with just cycling. It is concerned with all sports. EPO has benefits outside of cycling, and would be a boost in any endurance event - long distance track and field, marathon, triathletes, swimming, etc.

The other side of the money coin is that the sports generate huge sums of money in and of themselves and without an effective testing regimine in place, the credibility of performances are undermined ala Mark McGwire's home run derby.

The simple fact of the matter is that the claim, "I am the most tested athlete in the world," is only credible so long as there is an effective testing system in place that IS catching the cheats.

This is a positive step for WADA and our sport.

 

[Polish]

Do you believe that only cyclists are using EPO? What about other sports like football, basket, tennis, ...?

and

I'll have to disagree with this one Pole.

WADA is not concerned with just cycling. It is concerned with all sports. EPO has benefits outside of cycling, and would be a boost in any endurance event - long distance track and field, marathon, triathletes, swimming, etc.
.

poupou ang gree0232,

I was specifically discussing only cyclists and their EPO usage.

This is a Cycling/Lance forum, and the WADA/BigPharma agreement is
going to be announced at the Tour de France Cycling/Lance event.

I realize other sports use EPO too. Maybe more than cycling.

But do either of you think the PED use of EPO by cyclists is more than 1% of the TOTAL worldwide usage of EPO estimated at $10+ billion USD? No way.

But OK, I will admit IF cycling WAS using 1% of the total EPO - that WOULD be a significant amount.

This is a positive step for WADA and our sport.

While this announcement by WADA is meant to give athletes a "heads-up" warning to stay away from BigPharma EPO or risk getting caught - it may shift usage to the lower quality black market EPO.

And why did WADA choose the TdF instead of the World Cup Futball venue to make such an important announcement?

 

[Oldman]

and

poupou ang gree0232,

I was specifically discussing only cyclists and their EPO usage.

This is a Cycling/Lance forum, and the WADA/BigPharma agreement is
going to be announced at the Tour de France Cycling/Lance event.

I realize other sports use EPO too. Maybe more than cycling.

But do either of you think the PED use of EPO by cyclists is more than 1% of the TOTAL worldwide usage of EPO estimated at $10+ billion USD? No way.

But OK, I will admit IF cycling WAS using 1% of the total EPO - that WOULD be a significant amount.

While this announcement by WADA is meant to give athletes a "heads-up" warning to stay away from BigPharma EPO or risk getting caught - it may shift usage to the lower quality black market EPO.

And why did WADA choose the TdF instead of the World Cup Futball venue to make such an important announcement?

The question of which sport WADA chose to highlight is a good question. It's possible that there is some new PED that has a marker agent or known test that hasn't been disclosed. Taking down a big fish like LA would enhance the reputation of the agency in charge but, sadly; the UCI is in charge. Something has to happen to alter that single authority prior to the Tour if anyone thinks that is the landmark event for PED exposure.

 

[gree0232]

and



poupou ang gree0232,

I was specifically discussing only cyclists and their EPO usage.

This is a Cycling/Lance forum, and the WADA/BigPharma agreement is
going to be announced at the Tour de France Cycling/Lance event.

I realize other sports use EPO too. Maybe more than cycling.

But do either of you think the PED use of EPO by cyclists is more than 1% of the TOTAL worldwide usage of EPO estimated at $10+ billion USD? No way.

But OK, I will admit IF cycling WAS using 1% of the total EPO - that WOULD be a significant amount.



While this announcement by WADA is meant to give athletes a "heads-up" warning to stay away from BigPharma EPO or risk getting caught - it may shift usage to the lower quality black market EPO.

And why did WADA choose the TdF instead of the World Cup Futball venue to make such an important announcement?[/QUOTE]

The question of which sport WADA chose to highlight is a good question. It's possible that there is some new PED that has a marker agent or known test that hasn't been disclosed. Taking down a big fish like LA would enhance the reputation of the agency in charge but, sadly; the UCI is in charge. Something has to happen to alter that single authority prior to the Tour if anyone thinks that is the landmark event for PED exposure.

Why the TdF? Because ASO, UCI, WADA, etc. have been making steady and public proclamations about anti-dooping for years now. Highlighting a deal that will allow for greater testing and deterrence is about restoring credibility to cycling.

As for the UCI, just a reminder that the UCI tests are sent to WADA accredited labs and results are reported to the UCI, WADA, and IOC. There is nothing wrong with having a single agency in control of testing collection as it standardizes collection methods and sheer volume of collections (5000+) not only lend credence to the agency in court (where it matters) but also allow the agency in question to build analysis like the biological passport.

It should also be noted that most National Agencies also conduct their own testing in collaboration with the UCI - the notable exception is France (for obvious reasons).

And finally, as for EPO itself, as the drug evolves, it not only becomes more effective for the patients it is meant to treat, it becomes more difficult to detect. A partnership between the testing agent and the producer will allow the tests to keep up with the development. An example of this success would be EPO CERA. It was used by riders because it was believed to be undetectable.

So long as there is a belief that 'new' brands of EPO are unprotected, cyclists (and others) will be tempted to use them. So long as new tests are developed in concert, there will be tests that are ready to expose those who choose to cheat.

Whether cyclist turn to the 'black market' EPO is irrelevant, as successful testing will find that in the system too.

There will always be a game between would be cheaters looking for an edge and those seeking to expose them. This is just proof that the agencies responsible for that exposure are taking action to naroow the gap and make cheating more difficult.

 

[Oldman]

Why the TdF? Because ASO, UCI, WADA, etc. have been making steady and public proclamations about anti-dooping for years now. Highlighting a deal that will allow for greater testing and deterrence is about restoring credibility to cycling.

As for the UCI, just a reminder that the UCI tests are sent to WADA accredited labs and results are reported to the UCI, WADA, and IOC. There is nothing wrong with having a single agency in control of testing collection as it standardizes collection methods and sheer volume of collections (5000+) not only lend credence to the agency in court (where it matters) but also allow the agency in question to build analysis like the biological passport.

Better confirm your chain of custody. If it's a UCI race and they contract with an (accredited) lab; the result would go to them first. The lab doesn't know which test goes with a rider as it's a numbered index. That's the obvious problem. The IOC would not want to know anything if there was an issue anyway.

 

[gree0232]

Why the TdF? Because ASO, UCI, WADA, etc. have been making steady and public proclamations about anti-dooping for years now. Highlighting a deal that will allow for greater testing and deterrence is about restoring credibility to cycling.

As for the UCI, just a reminder that the UCI tests are sent to WADA accredited labs and results are reported to the UCI, WADA, and IOC. There is nothing wrong with having a single agency in control of testing collection as it standardizes collection methods and sheer volume of collections (5000+) not only lend credence to the agency in court (where it matters) but also allow the agency in question to build analysis like the biological passport.

Better confirm your chain of custody. If it's a UCI race and they contract with an (accredited) lab; the result would go to them first. The lab doesn't know which test goes with a rider as it's a numbered index. That's the obvious problem. The IOC would not want to know anything if there was an issue anyway.

I think you need to check your terms. Chain of custody refers to evidence and is required to maintain the integrity of the evidence and avoid contamination (be it accidental or deliberate), it is also needed to find and verify the process so that contamination issues can be tracked through the process to identify and eliminate the issue. It has nothing to do with reporting requirements.

As this modern world uses email quite extensively, there is something called a courtesy copy that makes notification simultaneous to the required agencies. If they use a phone to report, one agency is going to get the phone call first. I do not think it would be reasonable to think getting a call first rather than second is proof of conspiracy to make positives go away. Additionally, a WADA accredited lab selected by the UCI is done specifically to avoid one agency having too much influence with the lab and I do not think we can predict which agency a lab will call first.

Simply put, there is no evidence of doping positives going away, and there have been plenty of positives in the last few years.

Step like this one to maximize the ability of testing to find (and prove) cheats is a good thing.