Chris Froome now been caught?

guitarfishbay

axisus said:

Heartfeltdawn said:

The notion of an online database that anyone can access: how exactly does that work with an individual's right to medical privacy? 

Indeed. It is an outrageous suggestion on one hand, but then it seems like a necessity to keep sport cleaner on the other. An acceptable cost for top level sport? 

No and absolutely never.

Privacy on health matters should not be eroded because viewers of sport don’t believe the professional testers can’t do their jobs. What good is a list of medication to the public? 

TheBigDipper

I'm a big fan of Froome, and I'll be gutted if he turns out to be a cheat. I won't be surprised to find out that he has been as close to the limit of legality as possible, though. 

My understanding is he increased his dose as advised by the doctors, but it was still within the regs. After all, as race leader he is certain to be tested every day. Sky seem to be saying that the technique of measuring how much is in the body of a post-race athlete is flawed and that they can prove it. I hope so. 

Legionreturns

I think we're at the stage now that nobody really trusts the results of a race until a year later when all the drug cheats have been caught. I can't see the point in the tdf, giro etc now. If 50% of them were completely clean I'd be surprised. 

Also, Froome is and always has been, a knob head. Can't stand him.

Saddlepunk

Funkfingers said:

Salbutamol is a relieving agent. It is supposed to be taken when the patient's airways are already causing a restriction.

Salbutamol is not supposed to be taken as a preventative medicine.

Often the drug they get caught with is a red herring. Back in 1988 I remember Greg LeMond being the leader of the TDF and being found with a legal kidney treatment drug in his system.

My thinking was - "if there's something wrong with his kidneys, how come he's winning the TDF?", "if there's nothing wrong with his kidneys why is he taking a kidney drug?".

The answer, of course, was that he was taking the legal kidney drug because it masked the other illegal substances he was taking. He cheated, but didn't fail a drug test so was not caught nor disqualified.

I think it may be the same with asthma drugs - maybe they hide blood doping. Wasn't it, 'coincidentally' an asthma inhaler that Bradley Wiggins had flown over from the UK at great expense instead of popping to the local chemist?

marantz1300

No surprise.

It's not just Froome,I'm suspicious of ALL top sports people .

There's so much money in being the best and I don't think you can be the best if your natty.

Tone71

PC_Dave said:

Holy fuck, I have asthma and I take Salbutamol. I need to take more then I’ll be a cycling hero!

But seriously, I cannot see how it can be “performance enhancing.” If I exceed the stated dose, it just gives me the shakes. Nothing more. 

Same here, just the shakes and a clearer chest.

Telejester

Teetonetal said:

Jalapeno said:

Sky statement seems to be pretty robust - doctor supervision etc.

Yes, because we all know the doctors in sport are 100% trustworthy.

Teetonetal said:

Jalapeno said:

Sky statement seems to be pretty robust - doctor supervision etc.

Yes, because we all know the doctors in sport are 100% trustworthy.

We all have absolute faith in Dr Michele Ferrari, i went to see him about a cold.

strtdv

I'm withholding judgement until I read into it a bit more. 
The legal restriction is on the dose of salbutamol taken, the amount in the urine is simply a marker they can look for to raise suspicion, but isn't breaking the rules in itself.

You're allowed up to 800 mcg in 12 hours. One puff is 100 mcg. It's feasible that if you took all 8 puffs at once you could produce a urine sample with above 1000ng/ml transiently, and if you did a 24 hour urine collection you would find that overall average level over the time was well within the allowed limits.
I'm no expert in the metabolism of salbutamol, but I think that's a plausible answer.

All Froome needs to do is get himself dehydrated (as you would be during a race), take 8 puffs of salbutamol, produce the urine sample, and if it measures at a similar level then you have a very plausible defence.

NeilMcG

Bit feeble though isn't it? Compared to the good old days of epo abuse...

cj73

World (European) cycling hates British cycling's success, end of story.

Just look at how they changed the rules at the Olympics 

Neill

A few pro cyclists have been caught this year for "abuse" of Salbutamol, prior to 2017 it fell under the Theraputic Use Exemption" rules ie if you had a TUE you could inhale as much as you wanted. 

The suspicion that it does enhance performance is the reason the TUE's don't apply anymore, so anyone can use salbutamol now but there's a limit - apparently a very reasonable one - that reflects the normal use of an inhaler by a person suffering from asthma.  WADA's change of policy was designed to catch those abusing the drug who previously wangled a TUE so they could use it to aid performance.  That's the feeling in the cycling world anyway. 

I think Froome is in trouble.  Most of the other cases where those found with an abnormal test result have been unable to explain it away and have received bans.  And none of them were anywhere near the concentration that was found in Froome's sample.  Having said that, they didn't have Dave Brailsford on their side...

crunchman

NeilMcG said:

Bit feeble though isn't it? Compared to the good old days of epo abuse...

The click bait chasing press are making this out like Armstrong et al.  It's nowhere near that.

I do think that the idea of sport has gone out of the window at the professional level.  Everyone is taking the rules to the absolute limit, and beyond.  The spirit of it is wrong.  Footballers claim a throw when the ball has come off of them, cricketers don't walk.  They are all pumping their bodies full of creatine etc even if they aren't taking anything illegal.

Placidcasual79

Teetonetal said:

I really hope this is cleared up and explainable. 
Can't help but feel that all sport is in a mess. Look at the Fury incident too.

Indeed @Teetonetal the Fury thing is a farce isn't it? I'd be worried about the effect such an incident could have on the reputation of the sport I love expect that the sport is boxing and its probably beyond redemption!

I dont understand the intricacies of cycling - but the guy seemed pretty up front and open about things? Or is that me being naive?

Telejester

The way things are going you wont be able to take anything medicinal  you could have an arse that is killing you and anusol will be out of the question

Philly_Q

I heard Froome being interviewed today and he sounded quite confident that he'd done nothing wrong.  I hope he's telling the truth, I like they guy precisely because he's portrayed as a bit dull and unglamorous compared with all the supposedly cool people.  He gets the job done.

But as several people have said already, I can't help feeling that even the "clean" (and often quite smug about it) athletes in all sports push the rules to the absolute limit.  They get every ounce of "performance enhancement" out of their TUEs and all those legal drugs and supplements.  They follow the letter of the law but not the spirit.

Telejester

froomes threshold power is a sustainable 500w plus, sorry but i dont think that is possible without alien genes or a little help, greg lemond with unheard of 92.5 vo2 max couldnt sustain 500 plus watts. me smells a rat but it will be interesting to see how it pans out.

paddyb

I can be in a situation where it is very hard for me to breathe and two puffs will sort me out.
There are two questions for me both how is the amount  so high and what doctor is sanctioning this kind of dose and then allows a person that needed that much to race their bike

duotone

TheBigDipper said:

I'm a big fan of Froome, and I'll be gutted if he turns out to be a cheat. I won't be surprised to find out that he has been as close to the limit of legality as possible, though. 

My understanding is he increased his dose as advised by the doctors, but it was still within the regs. After all, as race leader he is certain to be tested every day. Sky seem to be saying that the technique of measuring how much is in the body of a post-race athlete is flawed and that they can prove it. I hope so. 

That’s the thing that really pisses me off about them, they think they are bigger than the cycling machine.  After the "decongestant" incident, I could never trust Team Sky or anything that Dave Brailsford says in interviews.

stickyfiddle

If there are multiple ways of measuring something in your system then as long as the measuring method is made clear you have no excuse. 

I can't help feeling that basically everyone at the top end of cycling is on something - it's impossible to win without being. 

menamestom

roundthebend said:

I don't understand how an asthma sufferer can win an event like TdF or Vuelta. I don't know enough about the condition, but I cycle myself and breathing can be hard even though I don't suffer.

Asthma is a narrowing of the airways.  If you take medication and it is well managed the airways are open as much as they would be in a non sufferer.  The problem is with chronic severe asthma where the airways can remain only partially restricted, or is somebody like me who neglects to take their inhaler, once it worsens it takes quite a while to get back to normal again.  Airways are measured by a peak flow meter, and based on a few factors you can tell what you should be blowing out.  If your reading is what it should be, asthma should not be affecting performance, none withstanding that exercise can be a trigger in some people, which leads me to my next point.....

Funkfingers said:

Salbutamol is a relieving agent. It is supposed to be taken when the patient's airways are already causing a restriction.

Salbutamol is not supposed to be taken as a preventative medicine.

I don't completely agree with this in practise.  Yes it is to relieve symptoms, but by the time you have symptoms to relieve you are already at risk. 

I take a daily preventer, but still use salbutamol, as further prevention prior to coming into contact with any triggers.  So before I play football or come into contact with dogs I take it.  This is because If I don't, after 30 mins of being in contact with a trigger, I know I would need it, so rather than waiting for my airways to restrict my breathing I take it as another level of prevention.  Generally the advice I have been given is take every step necessary to prevent an attack.