Yolande de Villiers sanctioned for anti-doping rule violation

So just something I have been pondering .... what is everyone's feeling about the moral/ethical issues around using something that is currently not on the banned list but gives a performance enhancement and no test exists yet? I mean there have been rumors going around of some new 'cancer drug' or HGH or something?

 

And then when eventually it is found and starts being tested for in 5 years or whatever must bans/restitution then be applied retroactively?

It's not in theory doping if it's not on the banned list... but doing some nasty on the side with some doctors with a drug in it's test phase (or these days quite possibly just developed for the sake of doping) is still doping in my view. Why do I say this, well, because riders and teams will know it's "wrong" and for that reason not be open about it.

I'm pretty sure it's happening already, and when it comes to the fore, the riders/teams will just claim it wasn't doping, it was just the competitive edge 

Sky have long been rumoured to have some edge along these lines - Froome and Wiggins, Anaemic rakes, but having not lost any power.

Time will tell and the popcorn will always flow 

So now you going to use that against me? That's just not cricket my friend

One of my pet hates   'common' DOES NOT MEAN THE SAME AS 'come on' FFS!

Box

Box

I take it on the chin no worries 

According to that link from rpedro Venteze is fully allowed......but not the syrup...

Venteze/Salbutabol has a maximum dosage that you can exceed and be guilty of an offense

(I have not looked at the syrup contents at all)

It's not in theory doping if it's not on the banned list... but doing some nasty on the side with some doctors with a drug in it's test phase (or these days quite possibly just developed for the sake of doping) is still doping in my view. Why do I say this, well, because riders and teams will know it's "wrong" and for that reason not be open about it.

 

I'm pretty sure it's happening already, and when it comes to the fore, the riders/teams will just claim it wasn't doping, it was just the competitive edge 

Sky have long been rumoured to have some edge along these lines - Froome and Wiggins, Anaemic rakes, but having not lost any power.

 

Time will tell and the popcorn will always flow 

Not sure why Sky is getting fingered here. The British Cyclng Federation definitely found something whether it be training methodology, nutrition or other enhancements since the 2008 Olympics and 2012 London Olympics where the Brits featured very well.

Even back in Boardman's day they were already experimenting

Venteze/Salbutabol has a maximum dosage that you can exceed and be guilty of an offense

 

(I have not looked at the syrup contents at all)

So then it's not as simple as just tapping your drug of choice in to the box and doing a search....which was my point earlier....is all this in your book doc ? (the book of course just yanking your chain)

Not sure why Sky is getting fingered here. The British Cyclng Federation definitely found something whether it be training methodology, nutrition or other enhancements since the 2008 Olympics and 2012 London Olympics where the Brits featured very well.

Even back in Boardman's day they were already experimenting

Brailsford pretty much was British Cycling back then... but yeah, semantics. Definitely a lot of "marginal gains" somewhere, somehow 

Venteze/Salbutabol has a maximum dosage that you can exceed and be guilty of an offense

 

(I have not looked at the syrup contents at all)

Bru if you feel the need to exceed the daily dosage then you got a seriaaaas problem and maybe need to consult a mortician.

One puff of Venteze generally does the trick of loosening up a tight chest. Maybe another puff a cople of hours later.

Anyone that needs16puffs......eish

They can just draw the line, we have a zillion rules for some of the most arb rubbish it is unbelievable... A Batch sounds good, would cover all the prize money chasers   

Good.  Now we need to draw a line for the Epic, and 100 other races.

So then it's not as simple as just tapping your drug of choice in to the box and doing a search....which was my point earlier....is all this in your book doc ? (the book of course just yanking your chain)

Not quite so simple - but it is one of the few I have seen that has allowable levels (which are insanely high for clinical use, and far above the reccomended daily dosages)

One has to be somewhat careful to make sure you use all possible names of all constituents of the medication being checked - sometimes trade names work, sometimes they don't - so it's a case of being VERY careful about what you take - and there is also the complication that some homeopathic/unscheduled "meds" are not very well documented in their actual constituents, so very hard to be 100% sure on what is actually in them - supplements especially have this issue - only the manufacturer (maybe) knows EXACTLY what went into it - the labelling is often very marginal.

She has been using a masking agent for THREE months.....unintentional

Ja nee, must agree. 3 months unintentional? No way.

Not quite so simple - but it is one of the few I have seen that has allowable levels (which are insanely high for clinical use, and far above the reccomended daily dosages)

 

One has to be somewhat careful to make sure you use all possible names of all constituents of the medication being checked - sometimes trade names work, sometimes they don't - so it's a case of being VERY careful about what you take - and there is also the complication that some homeopathic/unscheduled "meds" are not very well documented in their actual constituents, so very hard to be 100% sure on what is actually in them - supplements especially have this issue - only the manufacturer (maybe) knows EXACTLY what went into it - the labelling is often very marginal.

and this is my major beef with the whole drug testing process. The manufacturers  are never guilty of withholding information but a hobbycyclist can get sanctioned for taking something that's constituents have not completely been disclosed

Brailsford pretty much was British Cycling back then... but yeah, semantics. Definitely a lot of "marginal gains" somewhere, somehow 

I file "marginal gains" alongside  "the cynics and the skeptics: 'I'm sorry for you. I'm sorry you can't dream big and I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles'"

Brailsford pretty much was British Cycling back then... but yeah, semantics. Definitely a lot of "marginal gains" somewhere, somehow 

A strong athlete at 82 kg's trimming down to 75 kg's already equates to marginal  gains....but's lets speculate on.....

Not quite so simple - but it is one of the few I have seen that has allowable levels (which are insanely high for clinical use, and far above the reccomended daily dosages)

 

One has to be somewhat careful to make sure you use all possible names of all constituents of the medication being checked - sometimes trade names work, sometimes they don't - so it's a case of being VERY careful about what you take - and there is also the complication that some homeopathic/unscheduled "meds" are not very well documented in their actual constituents, so very hard to be 100% sure on what is actually in them - supplements especially have this issue - only the manufacturer (maybe) knows EXACTLY what went into it - the labelling is often very marginal.

Exactly that doc....that was what I was alluding to way back....

I file "marginal gains" alongside  "the cynics and the skeptics: 'I'm sorry for you. I'm sorry you can't dream big and I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles'"

then pleae don't improve your cycling to achieve a sub3 argust. Rather stay on the couch neh

I file "marginal gains" alongside  "the cynics and the skeptics: 'I'm sorry for you. I'm sorry you can't dream big and I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles'"

Doesn't sound very hot chocolate to me......

and this is my major beef with the whole drug testing process. The manufacturers  are never guilty of withholding information but a hobbycyclist can get sanctioned for taking something that's constituents have not completely been disclosed

Well - plenty of athletes have tried the defence "it was inintentional, it was in my supplements..."  only rugby players get away with that.....

I am still waiting for Daryl's pharmacist to have a professional review done....

then pleae don't improve your cycling to achieve a sub3 argust. Rather stay on the couch neh

Ah yes, didn't another one of his quotes go something like "you ask me what I am on, I tell you that I am on my bike whilst you are on your couch" or words to that effect.....  

ps. Who says that I have NOT already achieved a sub3 Argust ?

PS. OK, my only sub3 was admittedly last year but I did do a 3:03 over Ou-Kaapse some years ago  

Bru if you feel the need to exceed the daily dosage then you got a seriaaaas problem and maybe need to consult a mortician.

One puff of Venteze generally does the trick of loosening up a tight chest. Maybe another puff a cople of hours later.

Anyone that needs16puffs......eish

I have seen reports of urinary levels that would indicate 50 or more puffs over a 6 hour stage.... that's just stupid....

Ah yes, didn't another one of his quotes go something like "you ask me what I am on, I tell you that I am on my bike whilst you are on your couch" or words to that effect.....  

 

ps. Who says that I have NOT already achieved a sub3 Argust ?

 

 

PS. OK, my only sub3 was admittedly last year but I did do a 3:03 over Ou-Kaapse some years ago  

What are you on? I'm on my bike 6 hours a day. 

Credit: Armstrong, Lance

Absa Cape Epic should test the entire field this year. Kudos to their Zero Tolerance Policy!

What are you on? I'm on my bike 6 hours a day. 

 

Credit: Armstrong, Lance

That is the one....

Does the Epic only have a lifetime ban for taking prohibited substances or does it cover any Epic/UCI/CSA rules broken?