DieselnDust Posted March 6 Posted March 6 16 hours ago, Frosty said: Second time it’s happened. If it was the corporate world, where failure to address findings in an integrated management system audit, or food safety audit, after a previous audit, it could result in suspension of the certificate/standard. It’s quite possible they have previous finding that are unresolved. Who knows, with the facts. Highly likely this is case. This could be numerous things though from failure to update to latest method revisions to precision data falling outside the requirements, to breaches in operating procedures.
Frosty Posted March 6 Posted March 6 (edited) From the Science of Sport discourse group: “related specifically to the Gas Chromatography / Combustion / Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometry (GC/C/IRMS) analytical method” “During the period of suspension, samples that have not yet been analyzed by the Laboratory, samples currently undergoing a confirmation procedure, and any samples for which an Adverse Analytical Finding has been reported, must be securely transported to another WADA-accredited laboratory” Edited March 6 by Frosty Danger Dassie 1
DieselnDust Posted March 6 Posted March 6 Sounds like there is a problem with method precision which is quite alarming if true. I’m more familiar with methods for organic chemistry but with any GSMS precision is down to continually running control reference material to normalise the machine , operator deviating from standard operating procedures or the machine is the problem Danger Dassie, Frosty and ChrisF 3
madmarc Posted March 8 Posted March 8 6 minutes ago, David Marshall said: https://flip.it/W5naHJ 🙄 Haha - Set up a doping check gate at CTCT after the medal collection - I wonder how many riders will be bailing over the fences 😁 DieselnDust and Mook 2
jcza Posted March 8 Posted March 8 Lab no longer required because cycling is so much cleaner now. peetwindhoek, DieselnDust, mecheng89 and 6 others 1 8
HdB Posted March 9 Posted March 9 19 hours ago, David Marshall said: https://flip.it/W5naHJ 🙄 The event organisers would surely have the names of all the riders who entered, so "random tests" could be organised for the riders who dropped out? DieselnDust 1
mecheng89 Posted March 9 Posted March 9 22 hours ago, jcza said: Lab no longer required because cycling is so much cleaner now. You forgot your comic sans. DieselnDust 1
mecheng89 Posted March 28 Posted March 28 Another one bites the dust. https://www.globalcyclingnetwork.com/racing/news/decathlon-ag2r-la-mondiale-terminate-franck-bonnamours-contract
Shebeen Posted March 28 Posted March 28 4 hours ago, mecheng89 said: Another one bites the dust. https://www.globalcyclingnetwork.com/racing/news/decathlon-ag2r-la-mondiale-terminate-franck-bonnamours-contract blood passport case, so complicated. Might look to use the arguments that were successful in this defense: https://www.sportingnews.com/in/tennis/news/why-simona-halep-cleared-explaining-doping-controversy/4146a11c993536328bbb64b4
Jewbacca Posted April 10 Posted April 10 So I see Amy Wakefield has received a 4 year ban for taking the illegal and off market phentermine.... mecheng89 and bolt67 2
MarcoDeS Posted April 10 Posted April 10 17 minutes ago, Jewbacca said: So I see Amy Wakefield has received a 4 year ban for taking the illegal and off market phentermine.... 👀 hectic
Danger Dassie Posted April 10 Posted April 10 26 minutes ago, Jewbacca said: So I see Amy Wakefield has received a 4 year ban for taking the illegal and off market phentermine.... Off market is not entirely correct, it’s found within a number of prescribed medications. The actual hearing doc can be found here, unfortunately doubt most will bother to read it; https://drugfreesport.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Award-SAIDS-v-Amy-Wakefield_.pdf DieselnDust and NickGM 2
binxc Posted April 10 Posted April 10 The whole story is a bit odd. Phentermine is banned in competition but she states she was taking it out of competition due to weight gain as a result of a sterilisation. A normal sterilisation would not necessarily result in intractable weight gain unless they removed one's ovaries as well, which would not be standard at her age - but depending on the cause of her issues, they may very well have had to do that. She also had her urologist at her hearing to suggest that she had altered kidney function which may have contributed to her high urine levels and he then says that they need to ask a nephrologist about that, which is fair from his side but indicates poor preparation from her representation, as surely they should have anticipated that the urologist would give this answer, being a surgeon and not a physician. A more cohesive medicolegal team might have gotten her off but ultimately, she knew the risks of taking it. Danger Dassie and Rowl 2
Jbr Posted April 10 Posted April 10 I don't understand how this works, if your medical condition requires you to take banned substances, and you know that they are banned, can't you file a case beforehand stating that you will be taking said substance for medical reasons and get a free pass ? Seems that would make sense rather than having to hide it and hope not to get caught and only then having to justify yourself ChrisF, bespokes, pietas and 2 others 5
.thumb.png.75d6381975d6e967f7f244707be5c209.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now