Women and doping

Page 4 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
It's pretty concidence that she and Toon Aerts have tested positive for the same substance after racing in the same part of France, and that they also both represented by the same management agency. If the Aerts case is anything to go by, she'll face a two year suspension. Sporza reports that the trace amount is even smaller than Aerts' was, so we'll see if that will have an impact on the final verdict.

presumably however small the trace amount is, its still a positive for a banned substance, to coin the old saying you cant be half pregnant, so its got to be the same length ban right ? its a 4 year ban offence after all iirc.

regardless Im guessing her CanyonSram contract will be terminated however long the ban is and theyre just waiting for the confirmation to comply with employment law around it so as to avoid getting hit with a claim for 2 years worth of wages.

the press conference should be interesting, no doubt the usual it was inadverdent, contamination of a supplement, wonder if theyll go for the hair defence as Toon Aerts did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Samu Cuenca
presumably however small the trace amount is, its still a positive for a banned substance, to coin the old saying you cant be half pregnant, so its got to be the same length ban right ? its a 4 year ban offence after all iirc.

regardless Im guessing her CanyonSram contract will be terminated however long the ban is and theyre just waiting for the confirmation to comply with employment law around it so as to avoid getting hit with a claim for 2 years worth of wages.

the press conference should be interesting, no doubt the usual it was inadverdent, contamination of a supplement, wonder if theyll go for the hair defence as Toon Aerts did.
Yeah, unless they can come up with some clear evidence of how it ended up in her body, which could possibly lead to a reduced sentence, it looks like an open and shut case.

It's of course worrying that if they have used it intentionally, that the anti-doping authorities then haven't been able to bust them for the other stuff they have presumably used it with.
 
As expected theyre claiming contamination , she'd never heard of this drug before, will fight to prove her innocence, they're even claiming it could be the dairy cow industry in Normandys fault for using this drug in their cows, cites Toon Aerts and even Contador.

Weirdly (but maybe its the translation) she says she chose to stop racing as her head isn't in the right place at the moment. whilst I thought it was pretty clear from CanyonSrams statement, they'd made her non active, due to her being in contravention of their own anti doping and zero tolerance drug policies.



 
Jun 24, 2021
36
58
1,680
I am very much a sceptic when it comes to "clean cycling" at the highest level. That said, I lean towards contamination with this case and Toon Aerts. Not to say neither rider is clean, but I don't think they knowingly took this substance. It would be a very foolish thing to willingly take. It is very much detectable for quite some time. It can boost testosterone, but so can many other drugs that are much harder to detect.
 
I would think if your intention is to cheat and get away with it, EPO would be a much better choice. When micro-dosed it has a very short half life.
The risk-reward ratio for drugs with longer glow times is not as simple as you think. You have to be tested, and your sample has to be tested for that drug. The risk of the first might be moderate, but the second is lower that most credit.

All drugs carry risk and you can say of anyone and any drug "Why would they want to risk it, it doesn't make sense."
 
I am very much a sceptic when it comes to "clean cycling" at the highest level. That said, I lean towards contamination with this case and Toon Aerts. Not to say neither rider is clean, but I don't think they knowingly took this substance. It would be a very foolish thing to willingly take. It is very much detectable for quite some time. It can boost testosterone, but so can many other drugs that are much harder to detect.

but its no doubt due to cost, availability of the drug & the whoever is behind telling athletes to use this stuff in the first place.

Letrozole comes up in anti-doping cases quite alot for something thats not that effective and easy to detect, and its certainly been used in body building to mask anabolic steroid use, so its not necessarily something thats used just on its own.

as for the risk vs rewards, well its the same deal as always, getting good results leads to bigger and better things and security. when you are always only one step away from suddenly finding yourself dumped down a level, or out of the sport completely.

Id have more faith in the contamination reasoning, if there were more cases showing up more frequently, abit like how covid spreads in the races you dont just get a random one off event, and it didnt feel like just the goto excuse all the time, because its next to unprovable.