Goodbye then .. Chris Froome

Now we have something / quite-a-lot to discuss and celebrate.
Flinders
Posts: 2875
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: Goodbye then .. Chris Froome

Postby Flinders » 11 Jan 2018, 7:25pm

Vorpal wrote: His asthma is between him and his medical specialist.


So is my illness between me and mine. But the only drug I can take for it - an HRT which is merely replacing what I no longer have thanks to surgery - is banned so I have to go without the treatment or not compete. Why are some illnesses okay and others not?

Flinders
Posts: 2875
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: Goodbye then .. Chris Froome

Postby Flinders » 11 Jan 2018, 7:29pm

Vorpal wrote:
Flinders wrote:I am deeply suspicious of the sudden increase in athletes with asthma- not only those who cycle in car fumes. It sometimes seems like every other one of them now has it. I wonder how many would have it if the drugs for it did not also enhance performance?

1) the drugs for asthma do not enhance performance
2) the prevalence of exercise induced asthma is increasing in the general population, probably due to a combination of better diagnosis, and increased rates from sedentary lifestyles, more awareness, and environmental factors, such as pollution

It is likely that diagnosis rate is higher amongst athletes than other groups because they push the envelope in terms of physical capability.

Some experiments have been done where groups of school children were taken and tested for exercise induced asthma, and prevalence rates were quite high. In this example, the rate was 23% http://indexmedicus.afro.who.int/iah/fu ... nduced.pdf

I would expect that rate to be somewhat lower among athletes, if only because the worst affected are unlikely to enter sport.


They do 'enhance performance' for that individual, otherwise he wouldn't need them. My drugs 'enhance performance' in that if I was left unnaturally depleted of the hormones I need I would not be strong enough to do a lot of things. But my type of HRT - the sole one I can use- cannot be used under any exemptions. So why the difference?

Flinders
Posts: 2875
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: Goodbye then .. Chris Froome

Postby Flinders » 11 Jan 2018, 7:33pm

Paulatic wrote:
Tangled Metal wrote:
Paulatic wrote:Alive & well and now on Strava!
1000K in week one.

That'll be the salbutamol working then! :wink:

Interesting interview here http://road.cc/content/news/235285-lott ... e-cheating
Saying
Wellens, who received widespread praise after abandoning last year’s Tour de France rather than take otherwise banned medicine under a TUE, revealed that doctors had told him he could increase his lung capacity by 7 or 8 per cent if he used an inhaler.

And I think this important and the reason there are limits
He revealed that his brother had to abandon dreams of becoming a professional cyclist after he was diagnosed with exercise-induced asthma and turned down the drugs that would have let him continue racing because of the potential effect on his long-term health.


Admirable honesty and integrity, and as rare as rocking horse excrement these days.

Tangled Metal
Posts: 3787
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Goodbye then .. Chris Froome

Postby Tangled Metal » 11 Jan 2018, 9:48pm

The comments section had a good point. It is quite possible that this guy was struggling not just down to asthma, that he might have been about to drop out. Either way there was a comment about virtue signalling.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling

Not saying he is but behind the scenes what pro cyclists say in interviews might not be the reality. Just like it is with Froome and team sky. Wellens might be spinning his own story.

Don't I sound very distrusting? It's possibly what happens when you get sick of it all.

User avatar
Paulatic
Posts: 3098
Joined: 2 Feb 2014, 1:03pm
Location: 55°14′26.07″N 03°23′43.93″W

Re: Goodbye then .. Chris Froome

Postby Paulatic » 16 Jan 2018, 1:29pm

Apparently it’s a kidney malfunction he has now :D
The French sports daily reports that Froome’s salbutamol readings on the days either side of the abnormal test were very low. Having discounted the dehydration hypothesis initially suggested as a possible cause for a spike in the salbutamol concentration and decided against a pharmacokinetic option that might have shown that external factors were the cause because of the difficulty of recreating the same conditions of that day, Froome’s team of experts are said to be focusing on this new hypothesis.
Read more at http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/racin ... ToJgxZT.99
Whatever I am, wherever I am, this is me. This is my life RIP Hannah Hauxwell

https://stcleve.wordpress.com/category/lejog/

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 9867
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Goodbye then .. Chris Froome

Postby mjr » 16 Jan 2018, 3:01pm

Bilharzia is known to affect kidney function in some cases, isn't it? So it's not beyond possible.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

User avatar
RickH
Posts: 3549
Joined: 5 Mar 2012, 6:39pm
Location: Horwich, Lancs.

Re: Goodbye then .. Chris Froome

Postby RickH » 16 Jan 2018, 3:03pm

Flinders wrote:They do 'enhance performance' for that individual, otherwise he wouldn't need them. My drugs 'enhance performance' in that if I was left unnaturally depleted of the hormones I need I would not be strong enough to do a lot of things. But my type of HRT - the sole one I can use- cannot be used under any exemptions. So why the difference?

Rather than enhance performance I would be inclined to describe it as normalising performance - bringing it back to what it would be when not suffering from an asthma attack.

I think the deciding factor on what can be taken long term is probably based on what effect it would have on a "normal" person. Your HRT treatment may give a noticeable performance enhancing effect if taken by someone without your condition.

There are pro cyclists who regularly "take drugs" over extended periods & it is allowed -
  • Alex Dowsett (used to ride for Movistar, now switched to Katusha-Alpecin for 2018). He is a haemophiliac & has to inject Factor VIII (every other day according to his Wikipedia entry) so he doesn't bleed to death.
  • Team Novo Nordisk (a pro team riding at Pro Continental level) where all the riders are Type 1 diabetic & so will have to inject insulin multiple times a day.
A healthy person trying either of those will not enhance their performance, in fact they are more likely to suffer harm.

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 42124
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Goodbye then .. Chris Froome

Postby Mick F » 16 Jan 2018, 3:37pm

Does this really matter at all?
Why not legalise all performance-enhancing drugs?
If they all use them, it's a level playing field without the need to hide, and we wouldn't need all the endless testing.
Just let them do it.
It's not as if they are normal people anyway. Just let them get on with it.








..................... sorry, just putting forward an alternative argument! :D
Mick F. Cornwall

PH
Posts: 5665
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: Goodbye then .. Chris Froome

Postby PH » 16 Jan 2018, 3:45pm

Mick F wrote:..................... sorry, just putting forward an alternative argument! :D


Many of these drugs have proved to be harmful in other ways and with the restrictions off who knows what people might take. Your idea would make it impossible for people to be competitive and not take potentially harmful drugs.
Plus - if we want a competition about who has the best drugs, why bother with the bike race at all?

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 42124
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Goodbye then .. Chris Froome

Postby Mick F » 16 Jan 2018, 4:00pm

PH wrote:Plus - if we want a competition about who has the best drugs, why bother with the bike race at all?
Ok.
I'm up for that.
Why bother at all?

Is it not all too much trouble?
Boring as well?
There seems to be a whole industry around drug detection, and the impression - to an outsider - is that it's all too much trouble.





............. alternative argument of course! :D
Mick F. Cornwall

User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 3078
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Goodbye then .. Chris Froome

Postby pjclinch » 18 Jan 2018, 4:32pm

Mick F wrote:
PH wrote:Plus - if we want a competition about who has the best drugs, why bother with the bike race at all?
Ok.
I'm up for that.
Why bother at all?

Is it not all too much trouble?
Boring as well?
There seems to be a whole industry around drug detection, and the impression - to an outsider - is that it's all too much trouble.


Because at the end of the day bike racing (as with other sports, any of which individually will have people mystified as to why they're interesting) is worth the trouble to a lot of people.

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...

ianrobo
Posts: 403
Joined: 12 Jan 2017, 9:52pm

Re: Goodbye then .. Chris Froome

Postby ianrobo » 24 Jan 2018, 2:12pm

weeks on and still Sky/Froome have not come up with a credible 'reason' and still we do not why the UCI sat on it and sky did nothing until it was leaked. When asked a few days ago Wout Poels refused to back Froome, Brailsfraud has disappeared, Froome is of course training on his own in SA whilst all other team mates in Europe.

And still not one single Sky rider or staff has come out and backed him, meanwhile sky fanboys think it is all unfair and think somehow all a mistake ...

Tangled Metal
Posts: 3787
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Goodbye then .. Chris Froome

Postby Tangled Metal » 24 Jan 2018, 2:57pm

It's not unfair. It's also not UCI sitting on it until leaked, it's the standard protocol as followed by all sports governing bodies who work to WADA rules to not make public this type of test result. AAF happen a lot in many sports and get dealt with. Actions are simple and defined under the rules and protocols.

Results come in today meet the requirements for an AAF, individual is notified (and their team) and then time is given for the individual / team to present evidence of why such names finding could happen when they've been following the rules.

Athlete presents sufficiently strong scientific evidence, UCI / WADA reviews and makes a decision. Decision being evidence is accepted = rules on taking legal medication hasn't been broken = no press release = athlete's restoration is not tarnished.

Decision being evidence isn't strong enough = AAF is made public and the athlete serves a short ban for using too much of a legal medication that has no benefit other than to someone with a genuine, documented medical condition.

What happened here is completely against WADA / UCI rules. Someone took the opportunity to make public information about an athlete that has been subjected to above the normal level of scrutiny that his peers have. Not one other top GT cyclist had had the level of scrutiny Froome has. The person who leaked the matter probably got a payout or he / she was doing it for mischief. It's not being a fanbois to try and state the known and verifiable facts of this case.

BTW it's been quiet because the process is still happening. BTW, one last point is that it is quite possible many athletes across many sporting disciplines have had AAF against them not have been able to provide strong evidence to support their theories as to how the rules were followed but the test result was not valid. That's what Froome and sky are likely putting together. Evidence that the test was invalid. A reasonable theory because it's not a banned or performance enhancing n drug for endurance athletes and the test does not give any accurate information on the amount of the drug the athlete has taken. It's indicative of taking too much salbutamol only.

Personally I wish he'd get cleared out take the 6 month ban (backdated to September 2017 that most AAF cases get. He'll get that ban plus a statement from UCI/WADA saying he took too much salbutamol by mistake. Another words there was no cheating because it's not performance enhancing at those still low levels and only slightly enhancing for strength sports like body building. Endurance sports it reduces performance.

ianrobo
Posts: 403
Joined: 12 Jan 2017, 9:52pm

Re: Goodbye then .. Chris Froome

Postby ianrobo » 24 Jan 2018, 4:42pm

Tangled Metal wrote:It's not unfair. It's also not UCI sitting on it until leaked, it's the standard protocol as followed by all sports governing bodies who work to WADA rules to not make public this type of test result.


SO Sky and Froome knew in September he was guilty of a AAF, so can you explain why they did NOTHING until it was leaked and until now we have had as reasons

- dehydrated though the temperature was a relatively cool 20C and a short stage
- took some puffs before a press conference in case he coughed
- some weird liver problem where they claimed Salbultamol was stored all at once then released

Everything but saying why Sky sat on it for 3 months because lets be clear it is up to Sky and Froome to prove this finding wrong, it is not innocent before guilt, in effect he is guilty and this is the appeal.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 9867
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Goodbye then .. Chris Froome

Postby mjr » 24 Jan 2018, 4:53pm

ianrobo wrote:Everything but saying why Sky sat on it for 3 months because lets be clear it is up to Sky and Froome to prove this finding wrong, it is not innocent before guilt, in effect he is guilty and this is the appeal.

I'd say it's more like we know the evidence against him, but he gets reasonable time to prepare his defence. In effect, he's not been found guilty yet because the hearing hasn't taken place AFAIK.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.