There's a certain amount of reputation protection going on from Swart so that he doesn't look bad having said one thing and now finding he needs to alter his position slightly and deflect criticism from himself. It's a kind of moral cowardice he's displaying.
Froome and Wiggins TUEs
- Thread starter Joffey
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
There's a certain amount of reputation protection going on from Swart so that he doesn't look bad having said one thing and now finding he needs to alter his position slightly and deflect criticism from himself. It's a kind of moral cowardice he's displaying.
Dogtrousers
Kilometre nibbler
How so?
Not disagreeing, or picking a fight. I'm just a bit dim and I don't understand.
To get things in some kind of proportion...
...Wiggins took a hayfever treatment that is approved by WADA and everybody else, once a year, as a preventative precaution before cycling around the fields of France for 3 weeks.
The mistake was not being as transparent as they should. At least they applied for a tue which can't be said of Orica wrt Yates. They seem to have received little criticism for that gaffe
...Wiggins took a hayfever treatment that is approved by WADA and everybody else, once a year, as a preventative precaution before cycling around the fields of France for 3 weeks.
The mistake was not being as transparent as they should. At least they applied for a tue which can't be said of Orica wrt Yates. They seem to have received little criticism for that gaffe
Relative obscurity of course helps in the case of Yates.
It's a very awkward one for Wiggins though, even if he believes no foul play... Given all that Sky have said about being whiter than white. Still nothing from Brailsford ?
Pro Tour Punditry
Guru
I mean he's joining in with the overriding tide of criticism when he could perhaps be more circumspect and point out that these are TUE's, approved and signed off by the UCI and hold fire until both sides have had their say, especially given his previous approval of Sky, instead I feel he's distancing himself purely for his own reputational reasons.
That does not mean I entirely disagree with him but I'm waiting until I've weighed up everything first. Then again I'm not a Sports Scientist tying my reputation to a particular bandwagon.
According to Millar the treatment in question is also great for losing weight! And no one should be applying for a TUE as a preventative measure. That is entirely against the regulations.
It sounds to me like it should be on the banned and not eligible for a TUE list.
Let me fix that for you
Smoker Wiggins was given a shot of what most doctors do not ever give hayfever sufferers, but some doctors use as a last resort in the most serious cases. It has massive performance enhancing side effects and its use and abuse via TUEs has a fearsome reputation within and outside the pro peloton. The timing was critical, each time just before Wiggins main goal for the season and at exactly the right time to achieve the side effects its reputation demand it is used. Its use by Wiggins matched that time in his career when he achieved his best power to weight ratios.
Let me quote a bit of CIRC "One doctor stated that it was impossible to lose the weight that some riders achieve without assistance, and that the TUE is taken advantage of to enable this practice. He stated that riders use corticoids to “lean out” i.e. to lose weight quickly, and keep it off, without losing power. By way of example he explained that to lose 4kg in 4 weeks by using corticoids would provide a 7% power/weight improvement. He added that when used in large quantities and in conjunction with other substances, they supported performance gains. "
Let's put that CIRC quote in perspective. Say I was working with an elite athlete that had been in the pro peloton for 7 or 8 years and was a high achiever - ie already maxed out. Even if I set about a regime of a new diet and targeted exercise, a realistic target would be to achieve a 2- 3 % power weight improvement in six months. I could never consider achieving 7% by fair means. 7% in four weeks ! It is why it is so hard to beat dopers.
A TUE is a tool to write off any positive from a test result. If you are going to lie about the TUE you are not going to worry about a trivial thing like it says the athlete will have a single injection. You would just get on and inject. Why bother drawing attention to what you are up to; the AAF is covered.
It's a tough revelation which is why Mr weathervane Millar is now pointing in the other direction. (Mr Millar is always committed to his own survival and profitability - doping pays well, it pays seriously well.) There is no hiding from it and all it means. It is not just Wiggins; it is those who were around him as well.
Flying_Monkey
Recyclist
- Location
- Odawa
I think this is entirely true. We've got to get real about TUEs. There should really be a no-needles policy for a start. Just like Wiggins claimed he was adhering to. We now know he is a liar. It is unfortunately that simple. Whatever his acheivements, he was dishonest. He might not have been as bad as someone like Armstrong, but he is not the new face of clean cycling. As for Sky, we've known for a long time that they do anything they can get away with, so long as it complies with the letter of the law. Any dubious drug that has not actually been banned. Any medicine for one condition which just happens to have desirable side-effects. And so on. They are certainly not any different from the other top teams in this regard. But that's the point that the hackers are trying to make. Sky is at it. British athletes are at it. They are not better, superior, more ethical. They are just professionals. And professional sport is, surprise, surprise, professional - and winning matters more than the myths of Corinthian, incorruptible, clean athletes.
Last edited:
Strathlubnaig
Guru
- Location
- Alberta
jut a ban
blimey!
You're way ahead on the conclusion and interpretation stakes. That 7% loss is using Corticoids over 4 weeks not a single TUE. That said I don't believe that such medicines should be available through a TUE. Nicole Cooke said the same thing as Millar a while ago when Froome's Tour of Romandie TUE came out. If you're that ill, you won't be near the front of the race anyhow and using something like that prophylactically seems overkill and an abuse of the TUE system. Nevertherless it's on the WADA list and was UCI approved, the question is, should it be.
Dogtrousers
Kilometre nibbler
Am I wrong in thinking that Corticosteroids are only banned in competition? The TUE is only necessary while racing. Out of competition (when you will be doing your weight losing and stuff) no one needs a TUE as they are not banned out of competition.
Most steroids are banned in and out of competition but you'll find them on both lists, presumably because they can be used legitimately under a TUE system. I believe the one in question is a glucocorticoid and is banned in and out of competition but trying to make sense of the WADA list for a layman is pretty difficult. I did find a reference that said the amount for detection needs to be over 30ng/ml but I don't know how that converts to the dosage he received, possibly because it's held in suspension.
Edit: yes you appear to be correct that Corticosteroids don't require a TUE outside of competition, whatever that means, presumably between races. This what Wiki says...
Glucocorticoids are a class of corticosteroids that affect the metabolism of carbohydrates, fat, and proteins, and regulate glycogen and blood pressure levels.They possess pronounced anti-inflammatory activity and cause alteration of connective tissue in response to injuries. The anti-inflammatory and connective tissue effects of glucocorticoids might mask injuries, leading to more serious injuries to athletes. Because of this and metabolic regulation effects, the administration of any glucorticoid orally, rectally, intraveniously, or intramuscularly is prohibited and requires a therapeutic use exemption. Topical uses of glucocorticoids does not require an exemption.
Last edited:
