Doping row continues

The amount of medical ignorance in the report is astounding. Here is an excerpt from that BBC article.

See page 29 of the report where we're told that Wiggins may have been treated with triamcinolone on up to nine occasions, during a four-year period, and that: "It would be hard to know what possible medical need could have required such a seemingly excessive use of this drug.

So he had, at most 2 jabs a year? And they call that 'seemingly excessive'. How ridiculous. If you wanted to use triamcinolone to 'improve power to weight ratio' you would need continued, systematic use over a period of time. Very occasional, sporadic use like this would only have any benefit to treat an acutely inflammatory episode like a soft tissue/joint injury or an allergy. So the 'possible medical need' accords with what the team sky is saying i.e. to treat asthma or hayfever. Taken just before competition, it would help keep breathing at an optimum. It would have damn all chance of 'improving power to weight ratio'.
I

I agree with Wheeze. The report is full of assumptions by the Committee. It is so ambiguous it is of no help at all. The conclusion leaves me no clearer than before.

To use phases such as "We believe or It is probable" is unacceptable. They could of saved a lot of tax payers money and just gone through this thread picking out bits from here.

Thanks for "injecting " a little clarity into the conversation. some people seem to assume that this medication is some kind of "magic bullet", the issue was discussed on Jeremy Vine yesterday and the amount of ill-informed anecdotal comment was immense. Be nice to have some measured authoritative comment for a chamge. Oh yes and MPs talking about crossing ethical lines is funny , anyone remember duckhousegate.

The whole thing stinks. There's an agenda here and I'm not quite sure what it is.
Me thinks that a similar shadow is in the background to that which haunts the US election.

Labour MP John Mann said the cyclist must “justify why he should keep his knighthood and sponsorship deals by now proving his innocence”.

how do you prove you didn't do something?? Typically British appproach, no hero left untarnished.

Didn't Wiggins claim in his autobiography that he'd never had an injection in his life for anything?

As I've said before on here. He probably doesn't think he's a cheat. He probably thinks using small amounts of performance enhancing drugs that are not illegal if you can get the team doctor to say you need them is fair game.

It's probably symptomatic of pro-cycling that he doesn't see how anyone else could think differently.

From The Telegraph September 2016:

"David Millar, who was banned for doping in 2004, told Telegraph Sport on Monday that the drug was the most potent thing he took in his career, and that included the banned blood booster EPO and testosterone. Millar said it helped him to lose weight and still feel stronger than he did before.

His testimony is backed up anecdotally by other riders as well as by some randomised controlled trials [RCTs] with amateur athletes."

Never mind Wiggins, what this has explained is why I never got to the top in any sport: I'm far too healthy! Without any allergies or other chronic problems, I never got to take any medication with performance-enhancing side-effects. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike T

From The Telegraph September 2016:

"David Millar, who was banned for doping in 2004, told Telegraph Sport on Monday that the drug was the most potent thing he took in his career, and that included the banned blood booster EPO and testosterone. Millar said it helped him to lose weight and still feel stronger than he did before.

His testimony is backed up anecdotally by other riders as well as by some randomised controlled trials [RCTs] with amateur athletes."

---

also from the Telegraph...today

Tom Cary, the Telegraph's cycling correspondent, found in the wake of the Fancy Bears leak that asthma experts were sceptical that triamcinolone would have improved Wiggins' performance. According to Dr Brian Lipworth, of the Scottish Centre for Respiratory Research, there is "no scientific reason" why a drug like triamcinolone would be performance-enhancing.

Lipworth, who sits on the WHO guidelines committee ARIA, explained that "an anabolic steroid like testosterone puts on muscle mass but this is a catabolic steroid which breaks down muscle," added that the benefits reported by David Millar probably came down to the fact that he was taking EPO and testosterone at the same time as he was using triamcinolone.

Lipworth, who sits on the WHO guidelines committee ARIA, explained that "an anabolic steroid like testosterone puts on muscle mass but this is a catabolic steroid which breaks down muscle," added that the benefits reported by David Millar probably came down to the fact that he was taking EPO and testosterone at the same time as he was using triamcinolone.

Anecdotal comments and unspecified random trials are not scientific eveidence unless cross checked.

However he did go on to say effectively that the drug was a sledghammer to crack a nut in treating asthma and the side effects could be serious, make of that what you will.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by creaky

make of that what you will.

---

I make of it that the intent was not to treat his alleged asthma.

And BTW, just because asthma experts can't see how drug X could enhance performance, doesn't mean the drug doesn't enhance performance. What you need is a cycling team doctor's opinion. And again, it shows what the sport is like that there are none able to speak freely on the topic.