An-Li Kachelhoffer - Guilty of Anti-Doping Violation - Best kept secret. Why?

[Jase619]

One wonders if she had not have called them if she would have been tested at all....

 

My thoughts exactly, but there is at least people on this thread who know her personally, so they should be able to clarify this. . .

 

Also wonder how some claim that she gave up racing in Feb 2017, after the SA champs, but then won the Tour Durban 2 months later. . . 

[Skinnyone]

One wonders if she had not have called them if she would have been tested at all....

Well that too...maybe the only conspiracy is that SAIDS saw an opportunity to "bust" an athlete, the athlete is being forwardly open about medication and hey presto the next day there's a knock on her door...

[V12man]

That's how I read it - the report went something like: took the medication during the day, was tested after medication, read the label then called SAIDS/Doctor.

I did read it - but it was at 2am.... I will relook at it.

 

The fact of the matter is that the TUE request is supposed to be done at the same time as the script is written (or within about 2 minutes after) - and that clearly did not happen in this case.

 

What I found interesting is that they seem to imply that the doctor did insufficient testing to justify the drugs prescribed - I can imagine I might have something to say about that were I in that situation.

[Gen]

 

 

She pleaded guilty. She was found guilty by SAIDS. She was sentenced.

 

Nobody is claiming she is "totally innocent".

 

But there is a difference between a careless mistake and deliberately cheating.

 

But seems to some hubbers a positive test can only mean deliberate cheating and nothing else, no further evidence required.

What doesn't sit well is some are saying..oh well she wasn't planning on racing so that's okay and therefore the lack of transparency isn't an issue... I call BS on that. There are 3 categories when it comes to the banned list.. Banned in competition, Banned outside of competition and Banned always.

 

People are waving it away because she now longer races...I don't agree with that .. At the time if the offence in June 2017 she was still in the testing pool which means she was at some point going to race or at least could at any point race.. she was cosidering retiring because of what went down at SA champs..but had not (as per article of May 2017).. she wrote a website entry in Aug 2017 (a few days before she was notified of the AAF)with her plans for 2018..at no point did she mention she won't race again... she would race as what she saw a semi pro...which would still make her subject to out of competition testing...at that time she would've known that her retrospective TUE was denied and would've known that she would return a AAF ..which would mean she would probably be expecting a phone call or letter about that at some point.

 

 

The lack of transparency is an issue..if local teams and athletes don't want to conduct themselves professionally., they will never be taken seriously...

 

Anyhow..more interesting is that CSA first handed her a provisional suspension so UCI and UKanti-doping actually could've provisionally suspended whats-his-face but chose not to.

 

 

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[Edition 507]

But there is a difference between a careless mistake and deliberately cheating.

Totally agree with your statement Skubarra. Taking prescribed medicine at the recommended dosage is a careless mistake, being almost 6 times over the limit that is considered 'abuse' of the substance is deliberate cheating!

[Eldron]

I did read it - but it was at 2am.... I will relook at it.

 

The fact of the matter is that the TUE request is supposed to be done at the same time as the script is written (or within about 2 minutes after) - and that clearly did not happen in this case.

 

What I found interesting is that they seem to imply that the doctor did insufficient testing to justify the drugs prescribed - I can imagine I might have something to say about that were I in that situation.

 

She took a swig of the medicine from the bottle on the way home, got tested around 11pm, read the label and called SAIDS and Doctor in the morning.

 

Definitely only called AFTER she was tested.

 

This was no "tip off" test.

 

The other elephant in the room is the sudden disappearance of her case off the SAIDS list.

 

On the evidence provided it sounds she made an careless mistake but there is a hint of a nasty smell coming to the fore on this one... 

[Eldron]

What doesn't sit well is some are saying..oh well she wasn't planning on racing so that's okay and therefore the lack of transparency isn't an issue... I call BS on that. There are 3 categories when it comes to the banned list.. Banned in competition, Banned outside of competition and Banned always.

 

People are waving it away because she now longer races...I don't agree with that .. At the time if the offence in June 2017 she was still in the testing pool which means she was at some point going to race or at least could at any point race.. she was cosidering retiring because of what went down at SA champs..but had not (as per article of May 2017).. she wrote a website entry in Aug 2017 (a few days before she was notified of the AAF)with her plans for 2018..at no point did she mention she won't race again... she would race as what she saw a semi pro...which would still make her subject to out of competition testing...at that time she would've known that her retrospective TUE was denied and would've known that she would return a AAF ..which would mean she would probably be expecting a phone call or letter about that at some point.

 

 

The lack of transparency is an issue..if local teams and athletes don't want to conduct themselves professionally., they will never be taken seriously...

 

Anyhow..more interesting is that CSA first handed her a provisional suspension so UCI and UKanti-doping actually could've provisionally suspended whats-his-face but chose not to.

 

 

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

One bells for you maam - exactly my thoughts.

[V12man]

Totally agree with your statement Skubarra. Taking prescribed medicine at the recommended dosage is a careless mistake, being almost 6 times over the limit that is considered 'abuse' of the substance is deliberate cheating!

Inhaled salbutamol is allowed - oral salbutamol is not.

 

The somewhat indirect measurement of metabolite concentrations in urine is dubious to get to a starting dose of any medication and prone to error....

 

Oral salbutamol easily generates much higher concentrations of metabolites in urine than inhaled - so if you take oral salbutamol containing meds it is almost sure you will go over the limit in a flash.

 

Here is WADA's note - in toto.

 

All selective and non-selective beta-2 agonists, including all optical isomers, are prohibited;

Including, but not limited to:

Fenoterol

Formoterol

Higenamine

Indacaterol

Olodaterol

Procaterol

Reproterol

Salbutamol

Salmeterol

Terbutaline

Tulobuterol

Vilanterol

Except:

• Inhaled salbutamol: maximum 1600 micrograms over 24 hours;

  in divided doses not to exceed 800 micrograms over 12 hours starting from any dose;

• Inhaled formoterol: maximum delivered dose of 54 micrograms over 24 hours;
• Inhaled salmeterol: maximum 200 micrograms over 24 hours.

The presence in urine of salbutamol in excess of 1000 ng/mL or formoterol in excess of 40 ng/mL is not consistent with therapeutic use of the substance and will be considered as an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) unless the Athlete proves, through a controlled pharmacokinetic study, that the abnormal result was the consequence of a therapeutic dose (by inhalation) up to the maximum dose indicated above.

 

[Eldron]

 

Anyhow..more interesting is that CSA first handed her a provisional suspension so UCI and UKanti-doping actually could've provisionally suspended whats-his-face but chose not to.

 

 

Isn't this because she decided not to ask for B sample test and admitted guilt? I'm pretty sure she could have gone the Froome route and asked for B sample testing and confidentiality until finalization.

[Gen]

Isn't this because she decided not to ask for B sample test and admitted guilt? I'm pretty sure she could have gone the Froome route and asked for B sample testing and confidentiality until finalization.

Probably yes...didn't think of that...thx

 

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[V12man]

She took a swig of the medicine from the bottle on the way home, got tested around 11pm, read the label and called SAIDS and Doctor in the morning.

 

Definitely only called AFTER she was tested.

 

This was no "tip off" test.

 

The other elephant in the room is the sudden disappearance of her case off the SAIDS list.

 

On the evidence provided it sounds she made an careless mistake but there is a hint of a nasty smell coming to the fore on this one... 

She doesn't have a leg to stand on ito the process she followed....

 

I can't comment on the disappearance of her case from the SAIDS website - does seem odd indeed.

[V12man]

Isn't this because she decided not to ask for B sample test and admitted guilt? I'm pretty sure she could have gone the Froome route and asked for B sample testing and confidentiality until finalization.

Nope - she took ORAL salbutamol - that is always banned.... so that argument won't fly real well

[Gen]

Nope - she took ORAL salbutamol - that is always banned.... so that argument won't fly real well

Aaah understood.

 

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[Eldron]

Nope - she took ORAL salbutamol - that is always banned.... so that argument won't fly real well

Ah yes. Thanks for that.

[Odinson]

Nope - she took ORAL salbutamol - that is always banned.... so that argument won't fly real well

 

Is anal Salbutamol banned? 

 

Asking for a friend. 

[Patchelicious]

The fact that this has gone missing from the SAIDS website since this thread popped up, simply reaffirms the OPs questions.