Chris Froome returns adverse analytical finding for Salbutamol

[Phatman]

Say I was a Dr and was asked to report on the testing of the inner workings of Sagan's body...would anyone take my findings serious...[emoji6][emoji6][emoji6]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Yes, because you would be incredibly thorough with your investigation and assessment. Edited December 14, 2017 by Phatman

[Gen]

Yes, because you would be incredibly thorough with your investigation and assessment.

[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23] thorough indeed but it would have little to do with how performance relates to bike riding..[emoji6]

 

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[eddy]

Say I was a Dr and was asked to report on the testing of the inner workings of Sagan's body...would anyone take my findings serious...[emoji6][emoji6][emoji6]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

Solank jy 'n deeglike steekproef gedoen het sal ons jou woord aanvaar......  

[Patchelicious]

Certainly the implication I took from your post was that he isn’t independent when it comes to CF. I would be fairly pissed if someone implied that I was unprofessional because I liked someone. Anyway, have a good holiday

That’s exactly what that post implied....

[Patchelicious]

Say I was a Dr and was asked to report on the testing of the inner workings of Sagan's body...would anyone take my findings serious...[emoji6][emoji6][emoji6]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Comparing your unconditional support of an athlete to that of a scientific Dr Jereon report, is a bit ridiculous to be honest.

[intern]

I think we're talking cross purposes here.

 

If you're asking if I think he cheated the answer is - I don't really care. I'm kinda ambivalent about CF.

 

Do I think he'll get away with it? Yes. For two reasons:

 

1) Salbutamol is a "soft drug" - you don't even need a TUE for the first 1000ng/ml and you could legally have 2000ng/ml if you had a TUE (this is opinion - I'm not sure on that fact).

2) SKY have a lot of doctors. I reckon they can get CF through the pharma test. Is this ethical? No. Is it legal? Yes.

 

Salbutamol has had mixed results when tested - personally I don't think it makes much (if any) difference to performance. I really don't think CF smashed Stage 18 because he had 2,000ng/ml of salbutamol in him.

You missed 'Sky have a lot of lawyers' and 'Sky have a lot of PR people'. Essential for any big sports star these days.

[Patchelicious]

You missed 'Sky have a lot of lawyers' and 'Sky have a lot of PR people'. Essential for any big sports star these days.

For that matter any big company..... Facebook and Googles tax practices. Ethical? Nah.... illegal? Nah

[intern]

For that matter any big company..... Facebook and Googles tax practices. Ethical? Nah.... illegal? Nah

Fair enough, though I'd also content potentially a false equivalence mate.

Ethics is a poor yardstick, because your ethics and my ethics are different.

Legality is a better yardstick, because either something is legal or it is not.

And tax practices which avoid paying tax legally? Fantastic. Tax is plunder, as per Frederic Bastiat. And while I abhor Facebook, Google gives us all an enormous amount of value for free, so I'm quite OK for Alphabet to structure its tax affairs optimally.

Of course, if one were to be consistent, one would not use the services of companies which weren't aligned with one's ethics...

[intern]

Content/contend. Almost but not quite the same thing

[Fat Boab]

Say I was a Dr and was asked to report on the testing of the inner workings of Sagan's body...would anyone take my findings serious...[emoji6][emoji6][emoji6]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

In this case, if no one took your findings seriously, they wouldn't be much use at an inquiry, for either side, would they?

[Eugene]

I haven't read this thread from front to back so forgive me if someone else has mentioned this.

 

Wasn't it previously leaked that both him and Wiggins had received a therapeutic exemption for asthma.

 

Wiggins took the brunt of the negativity and Froome sailed through the experience pretty much unharmed.

 

Now, he has tested for double the amount allowed. Isn't this similar to Wiggins? The big story of Wiggins was how much he used. Didn't they say that the dosages were so high, that he wouldn't have been able to cycle with asthma that bad?

 

Two TDF winners in the same team with the same findings.

 

Coincidence?

 

One would be very nieve to think that he is completely innocent.

Edited December 15, 2017 by Eugene

[Thor Buttox]

Fair enough, though I'd also content potentially a false equivalence mate.

Ethics is a poor yardstick, because your ethics and my ethics are different.

Legality is a better yardstick, because either something is legal or it is not.

And tax practices which avoid paying tax legally? Fantastic. Tax is plunder, as per Frederic Bastiat. And while I abhor Facebook, Google gives us all an enormous amount of value for free, so I'm quite OK for Alphabet to structure its tax affairs optimally.

Of course, if one were to be consistent, one would not use the services of companies which weren't aligned with one's ethics...

Like the casino, the bottle store or the chemist. Not really unethical, not illegal but they sell products that are addictive and can cause great harm to people and their loved ones.

 

Or Bora Argon in Gen's case...

 

As a big supporter of Mr Froome, I am forced to consider that my Lance moment is nigh. But I hope not, especially in the masking agent territory. Because before I was a Froome-fan I am a skeptic.

 

Hope I am wrong.

[Gen]

Comparing your unconditional support of an athlete to that of a scientific Dr Jereon report, is a bit ridiculous to be honest.

Fair enough ..

 

I won't imply I will just wonder.[emoji6]

 

My apologies

 

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Edited December 15, 2017 by Gen

[Fat Boab]

Moving away from potentially libellous claims......has it been 'concluded' on what terms the PK test would be conducted? eg a standard protocol UCI assessment, a Sky test with UCI oversight etc etc?

[Gen]

Moving away from potentially libellous claims......has it been 'concluded' on what terms the PK test would be conducted? eg a standard protocol UCI assessment, a Sky test with UCI oversight etc etc?

I posted an article where they interviewed someone from WADA there is some info in there.. you just need to translate it.

 

 

http://mobile.lemonde.fr/cyclisme/article/2017/12/14/affaire-froome-la-charge-de-la-preuve-revient-a-l-athlete_5229768_1616656.html?xtref=https://t.co/D0LV6MwjU0

 

The bit about the PK tests..translated of course.

 

How are these pharmacokinetic studies going?

 

It must be done under controlled conditions: in the presence of witnesses who make sure that the athlete takes the required amount of salbutamol, that he has no opportunity to add a catch, and especially of us ensure that the samples are collected in indisputable conditions and then sent to an anti-doping laboratory. Our procedures are strict.

 

The athlete tells us: "The day I was tested positive, that's how I took the offending substance, that's how much I took and when. " A urine sample is taken without taking the substance, to have the basic level of the athlete, especially when they are athletes who have chronic treatments. Then, the athlete takes salbutamol under the same conditions that he has described. Then we take at relatively precise hours.

 

The laboratory returns, in a report, on these analyzes which allow us to see exactly, for the dose which has been taken, at which urinary level of salbutamol we arrive. It is relatively difficult to distort this kind of analysis.

 

"WE DO NOT RELY ON ASSUMPTIONS. WE WANT FACTS "

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Edited December 15, 2017 by Gen

[shaper]

I wonder how CONTROLLED conditions for the PK test will relate to actual RACE conditions and trying to replicate them?

 

Will CF have to replicate as best the race for that day, inhale as he remembers or as is shown on video?  How do they factor in weather conditions/temp, race stress levels, inherent fatigue from weeks of racing etc... all factors that might affect a persons metabolism?

 

Or are there a few ASSUMPTIONS thrown in with WE WANT FACTS