Sky - gaming the system?

[Cudzoziemiec]

And still the Russians whine that people are picking on them!

[citoyen]

Just think how fast he could go if he wasn't ill enough to need treatment.

I was thinking much the same thing while listening to the report on the radio this morning. They were saying he had a severe asthma attack so was taking the medication on doctor's advice... was it doctor's advice to take enough medicine to make sure he could win the race? Some serious cognitive dissonance going on at Team Sky.

[Hot Flatus]

Veloman has been a bit quiet recently. Can't imagine why. There has been plenty to talk about.   

I see Brailsford is already spinning away.  Not sure he's going to get away with it this time.

[DuncanM]

All the top riders seem to be asthmatic. I read a study somewhere that the quantity of training required to be a top cyclist created the conditions that cause asthma, but I'm not in a position to be able to verify that. I know that Indurain was one who used it.

How much salbutamol do you need to take to get above 1000 ng/ml? Is it a case that you are allowed 4 puffs a day, but if you take 6 then you go over the limit?

[IJL]

From WADA

The presence in urine of salbutamol in excess of 1000 ng/mL or formoterol in excess of 40 ng/mL is presumed not to be an intended 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 the use of the therapeutic dose (by inhalation) up to the maximum dose indicated above.

Not sure if the rules have changed since Petachi's ban but it leave's a fair bit of wiggle room, on the other hand if its still rumbling on does it mean that the pharmacokinetic tests didn't support Froome's case ?

[citoyen]

How much salbutamol do you need to take to get above 1000 ng/ml? Is it a case that you are allowed 4 puffs a day, but if you take 6 then you go over the limit?

I heard on the radio this morning that it's around 16 puffs on an inhaler per day. I don't know how accurate that is but it's a lot of puffs. Even when she's having a bad attack, my wife never takes that much. If it got so bad as to need that many puffs in one day, she'd be in hospital, not racing her bike up Spanish mountains.

Clearly it is going to vary between individuals, but when you've got double the legal limit in your blood, it's hard to explain that away as being a quirk of your metabolism.

[Si S]

How much salbutamol do you need to take to get above 1000 ng/ml? Is it a case that you are allowed 4 puffs a day, but if you take 6 then you go over the limit?

It depends on the inhaler dose and your metabolism but I've seen numbers bandied about of 16 puffs will keep you under, excretion is a non-linear response but to double the permissible amount it's not an extra puff or two.

x-post with citoyen

[ijsbrand]

Nibali, who has asthma too, states: it was raining those days. There were no pollen in the air bothering me. I did not need any Ventolin.

[Hot Flatus]

How much salbutamol do you need to take to get above 1000 ng/ml? Is it a case that you are allowed 4 puffs a day, but if you take 6 then you go over the limit?

I heard on the radio this morning that it's around 16 puffs on an inhaler per day. I don't know how accurate that is but it's a lot of puffs. Even when she's having a bad attack, my wife never takes that much. If it got so bad as to need that many puffs in one day, she'd be in hospital, not racing her bike up Spanish mountains.

Clearly it is going to vary between individuals, but when you've got double the legal limit in your blood, it's hard to explain that away as being a quirk of your metabolism.

Oh I dont know. People bought the Bilharzia bullshit, didn't they 

Besides, its all going to be ok. Brailsford has said that the metabolism thing is far too complicated for us to understand, and Team Sky will look into it all and explain it to us later.

[citoyen]

Not sure if the rules have changed since Petachi's ban but it leave's a fair bit of wiggle room, on the other hand if its still rumbling on does it mean that the pharmacokinetic tests didn't support Froome's case ?

It's unclear from the wording of WADA's statement whether any such tests have been conducted yet. Is it not merely a statement of the results of the initial urine test, as confirmed by the B sample?

[Si S]

Not sure if the rules have changed since Petachi's ban but it leave's a fair bit of wiggle room, on the other hand if its still rumbling on does it mean that the pharmacokinetic tests didn't support Froome's case ?

It's unclear from the wording of WADA's statement whether any such tests have been conducted yet. Is it not merely a statement of the results of the initial urine test, as confirmed by the B sample?

That's my understanding, it took a long time for Ulissi's pharmokinetic study to be performed at Luasanne, 8 months between finding and back dated ban. It could make next season very interesting for him, and if Sky drag it out long enough he could well have an asterisk against every GT 

[citoyen]

Besides, its all going to be ok. Brailsford has said that the metabolism thing is far too complicated for us to understand, and Team Sky will look into it all and explain it to us later.

Maybe whatever he was taking it in conjunction with affected the way his body absorbed the salbutamol?

[hillbilly]

Pity.  I quite like the role he carved out as the sport's ambassador.  A nice chap, articulate and fair minded.  But now tainted, regardless of the eventual outcome based on technical and process arguments from his legal team and expert. 

[DuncanM]

Nibali, who has asthma too, states: it was raining those days. There were no pollen in the air bothering me. I did not need any Ventolin.

There was a certain amount of "I've been misquoted" coming from Nibali now.
Plus temperature change (from say a hot day to a cold one) is something that triggers asthma in some people (not just pollen).

However it ends up, this is going to go on for ages, and it's not good for the sport.

[Samuel D]

Which is why these leaks and for that matter total transparency by the various governing bodies are harmful. Trial by media or mob is the new normal. No one cares about facts or process or wrongdoing or experts, just gut instinct and clickbait and what celebrities think (Nibali in this case, Millar in the last) and cutting tall poppies.

The public has proven itself unable to distinguish between allowed use of a specified substance and doping, and even between an adverse analytical finding and doping. Leaks wreck reputations in this environment.

INRNG has a summarising piece up, by the way.

I suppose this must have been an error by Sky or Froome, unless the high urine concentration was caused by his metabolism and circumstances despite a dose below the allowed threshold – in which case he’s flatly innocent of all wrong technical and otherwise, not that the baying crowd will ever accept that. But since Froome has known about this for nearly three months, you’d expect him and Sky to already have proven to their satisfaction how he responds to salbutamol. Then again, maybe they have done that and we’re yet to know – the leak has forced a premature statement but there’s surely more to come.

2000 ng/ml is a nice round number, isn’t it? Not Petacchi’s 1320 ng/ml. Easy to remember.

I question what the Petacchi case can tell us, because salbutamol has since been downgraded from needing a TUE to being a specified substance despite doping regs generally getting tougher. This tells you something else about salbutamol if you think hard.

[Hot Flatus]

Which is why these leaks and for that matter total transparency by the various governing bodies are harmful.

Remember Contador's ban for Clenbutarol?

How did that come about?  Oh yes. The UCI tried to bury it, and it only came to light after a leak.  You don't seem to understand the corrupt nature of sports governing bodies, do you.

Trial by media or mob is the new normal. No one cares about facts or process or wrongdoing or experts, just gut instinct

You can include yourself in this because the very next thing you say is...

I suppose this must have been an error by Sky or Froome, unless the high urine concentration was caused by his metabolism and circumstances despite a dose below the allowed threshold – in which case he’s flatly innocent of all wrong technical and otherwise, not that the baying crowd will ever accept that. But since Froome has known about this for nearly three months, you’d expect him and Sky to already have proven to their satisfaction how he responds to salbutamol. Then again, maybe they have done that and we’re yet to know – the leak has forced a premature statement but there’s surely more to come.

2000 ng/ml is a nice round number, isn’t it? Not Petacchi’s 1320 ng/ml. Easy to remember.

So the general public aren't allowed by you to make suppositions, but you give yourself permission.   

Best follow your own advice. Be quiet, and wait until more details emerge.

[trekker12]

Pity.  I quite like the role he carved out as the sport's ambassador.  A nice chap, articulate and fair minded.  But now tainted, regardless of the eventual outcome based on technical and process arguments from his legal team and expert.

Although, when Contador rode his final Vuelta last year he was regarded as a hero in his own country and the tainted meat thing and subsequent ban hardly got mentioned.

The British press aren't quite so kind on our sporting heroes though especially those who aren't exactly seen as particularly British. Not that he will be particularly bothered and he wasn't going to anyway but his chances of winning SPOTY have just disappeared.

I suspect he will get a slap on the wrist and the headlines are louder than the reality but it will now always get mentioned every time he wins something and the Triple Crown to include the Giro next year will now be regarded with suspicion.

[Samuel D]

I cannot see a possibility for a slap on the wrist. Either he shows he took salbutamol below the allowed dose or he gets his Vuelta stripped and a ban of months to years (although presumably toward the low end of that: the Norwegian skier Johnsrud Sundby recently got a two-month ban for unjustified salbutamol above 1000 ng/ml in his urine in a case where the CAS criticised this salbutamol rule).

Although 2000 ng/ml sounds greatly higher than the presumably already high allowable urine concentration, there’s still a possibility for Froome to show that his urine legitimately had that concentration of salbutamol, which is why this AAF should not be in the public domain. If he can’t, people won’t make much of a distinction between salbutamol, even a mistakenly high dose of salbutamol, and EPO. We’re at that level of inanity, unfortunately.

It’s interesting to consider whether the new media-induced terror of applying for a TUE provoked this AAF, since he’d have been allowed any sane dose of salbutamol with a TUE.

Cycling is being ruined by this combination of overzealous rules, leaks of confidential process, and trial by media. It’s become nigh on impossible to navigate these booby traps while competing at the top. Essentially the rules are constantly changing. Perhaps salvation lies in amateur sport, but if so, what a shame that we cannot have nice things.

[Hot Flatus]

Bollocks

[Samuel D]

Bollocks

All of it?

I’d forgotten this thread was you doing this. I can’t be bothered with that attitude or style of discourse, so learn some manners or you’ll be talking to yourself some more.

[Sergeant Pluck]

Pity.  I quite like the role he carved out as the sport's ambassador.  A nice chap, articulate and fair minded.  But now tainted, regardless of the eventual outcome based on technical and process arguments from his legal team and expert. 

Agreed, very sad whatever the outcome. And surely, doctor's advice or not, Froome must have known when he was pushing the limits. More so as I suspect that it is hard to achieve such salbutamol levels in the urine by inhaling it.

[toontra]

Cycling is being ruined by this combination of overzealous rules, leaks of confidential process, and trial by media. It’s become nigh on impossible to navigate these booby traps while competing at the top.

I thought it was drug cheating that was ruining the sport, not leaks to the press.

[Hot Flatus]

Bollocks

All of it?

I’d forgotten this thread was you doing this. I can’t be bothered with that attitude or style of discourse, so learn some manners or you’ll be talking to yourself some more.

Well I won't really be talking to myself, will I.  Just not you.  How will I ever cope.

But yes, to answer your question, apart from your first sentence, pretty much all bollocks as usual.

Although 2000 ng/ml sounds greatly higher than the presumably already high allowable urine concentration, there’s still a possibility for Froome to show that his urine legitimately had that concentration of salbutamol, which is why this AAF should not be in the public domain. If he can’t, people won’t make much of a distinction between salbutamol, even a mistakenly high dose of salbutamol, and EPO. We’re at that level of inanity, unfortunately.

It doesn't sound greatly higher, it is greatly higher. Its twice as high.  Given that the threshold is set above a therapeutic dose, getting to double the limit takes some explaining away.

It’s interesting to consider whether the new media-induced terror of applying for a TUE provoked this AAF, since he’d have been allowed any sane dose of salbutamol with a TUE.

There is no media-induced terror of applying for a TUE. There is a media-induced terror of trying to abuse the TUE system.

Cycling is being ruined by this combination of overzealous rules, leaks of confidential process, and trial by media. It’s become nigh on impossible to navigate these booby traps while competing at the top. Essentially the rules are constantly changing. Perhaps salvation lies in amateur sport, but if so, what a shame that we cannot have nice things.

Which rules are constantly changing?

[DuncanM]

This is interesting:
https://sportsscientists.com/2017/12/brief-thoughts-froomes-salbutamol-result/

Somewhere, someone has fscked up. The most charitable answer, that it's just too many inhaler puffs, means Froome + the doctor screwed up horribly. Unless they can demonstrate in a lab setting that a permitted dose causes this urine concentration, he should be banned. The innr ring article shows a graph which demonstrates this as a possibility. The worst possible screw up is that it was as a result of some other doping (see the jorg jacshe tweet about the blood bag residue). If that's the case, I doubt we'll ever find out.
Old school cycling has numbers stories of being caught because the cheating was messed up. Who was it who produced a urine sample that proved he was pregnant? Or got one from the mechanic, who was doped up to the eyeballs to drive across europe all night? That was back when it was assumed everyone was doped though, and being caught didn't have such consequences...

[Hot Flatus]

This is interesting:
https://sportsscientists.com/2017/12/brief-thoughts-froomes-salbutamol-result/

Somewhere, someone has fscked up. The most charitable answer, that it's just too many inhaler puffs, means Froome + the doctor screwed up horribly. Unless they can demonstrate in a lab setting that a permitted dose causes this urine concentration, he should be banned. The innr ring article shows a graph which demonstrates this as a possibility. The worst possible screw up is that it was as a result of some other doping (see the jorg jacshe tweet about the blood bag residue). If that's the case, I doubt we'll ever find out.
Old school cycling has numbers stories of being caught because the cheating was messed up. Who was it who produced a urine sample that proved he was pregnant? Or got one from the mechanic, who was doped up to the eyeballs to drive across europe all night? That was back when it was assumed everyone was doped though, and being caught didn't have such consequences...

Excellent article, thank you. 

Some great quotes:

Michel Rieu, scientist at the French Anti-Doping Agency, salbutamol should remain banned in any concentration. Rieu said to L’Equipe that in order to reach the 1000 ng/ml threshold, “you really have to mess things up and not follow classic doping protocol. Those who cheat use salbutamol as a cure, out of competition, and are careful not to reach these kind of concentrations during competition.”

...but best of all, Jorg Jaksche's pithy tweet:

#neverforgetinyourcalculationthebloodbagleftovers

My personal guess?  Froome has done a blood bag the evening after a really difficult day and a big time loss. The salbutamol is in there. It has been used as a masking agent for something else.  Bit like Contador's Clen pozzy...from a blood sample that also contained blood bag plasticisers