swansonj
Guru
not strictly true. I, for one, have to decide whether or not to tear up the ticket I bought for the Wiggo Farewell Tour at the London Six Day.
Froome and Wiggins TUEs
- Thread starter Joffey
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
oldroadman
Veteran
- Location
- Ubique
And miss the racing on account of one person who has broken no regulation, but suddenly is a pariah? Oh how the Brits love their heroes to have feet of clay.
Nose, face, spite, cut off to. No one will notice one less in the seats anyway. Just go and enjoy the bike racing!
Stonechat
Guru
- Location
- Staines, Middlesex
We mustn't forget that these Russian leaks are part of a campaign to shift the debate away from the systematic flouting of the rules byy the Russian machine.
It goes to show how far we have come from the Armstrong era (apart from the Russians that is)
It goes to show how far we have come from the Armstrong era (apart from the Russians that is)
swansonj
Guru
Hmmm. "No one will notice one less in the seats" has an unfortunate echo of "everyone is doing it"...
I heard the first half of the Brailsford interview. He seemed to be resting on the distinction between 'use' and 'abuse' (in the manner of Wiggins when questioned by Marr) and yet there wasn't any explanation or follow-up on what that distinction was. Did things improve in the second half?
Hacienda71
Mancunian in self imposed exile in leafy Cheshire
- Location
- Wilmslow, Cheshire
My view is if you had exercise induced asthma and you were about to enter one of the toughest sporting events in the world and your team doctor said ok you can use an inhaler but the strongest medication for this is a steroid injection, but you will need a tue then that is what you go for. It was declared to the UCI as they require, if it seems suspicious then the UCI should be the ones saying as much.
HF2300
Insanity Prawn Boy
Loads o' quotes!
Well, I'm not thinking it'll be easy, but if there is a benefit to this debate, it might be that the regulation and operation of the TUE system is looked at to see if there are issues that need to be addressed.
But without knowing Wiggins' medical history, condition at the time and the circumstances surrounding the decision you can't possibly know this.
I thought that was the measure (4.1a "The prohibited substance is needed to treat ... a medical condition such that the rider would experience a significant impairment to health if the prohibited substance were to be withdrawn). It is the rider who's responsible for applying via ADAMS, although they do have to submit full medical history and records and a statement by a qualified doctor to say that the substance is needed. The one thing I can't find is any regulation about the make-up of the TUE committee or whether they have to have a medical background.
TUEs are for chronic as well as acute conditions. If a rider had a chronic condition with acute episodes caused by intense exercise, surely a need for medication for those acute phases, and those acute phases being triggered by the most arduous exercise, is exactly what you'd expect?
It seems to me Millar etc., however genuine, can only talk from their own experience as they are not medical people; it's been suggested, for example, that the effect Millar reports might have been a result of a combination of substances.
I'm not sure you can say. Having looked at research as well as comment around this current debate, there is a lot of contradiction as I mentioned in an earlier post. Given that, the key point must be that it's a banned substance, so at some point the authorities have decided that it has the potential to have a performance enhancing effect whether it did or did not in Wiggins' case
TMN to me, I think, or was that raised further upthread?
Exactly.
Well, I'm not thinking it'll be easy, but if there is a benefit to this debate, it might be that the regulation and operation of the TUE system is looked at to see if there are issues that need to be addressed.
But without knowing Wiggins' medical history, condition at the time and the circumstances surrounding the decision you can't possibly know this.
I thought that was the measure (4.1a "The prohibited substance is needed to treat ... a medical condition such that the rider would experience a significant impairment to health if the prohibited substance were to be withdrawn). It is the rider who's responsible for applying via ADAMS, although they do have to submit full medical history and records and a statement by a qualified doctor to say that the substance is needed. The one thing I can't find is any regulation about the make-up of the TUE committee or whether they have to have a medical background.
TUEs are for chronic as well as acute conditions. If a rider had a chronic condition with acute episodes caused by intense exercise, surely a need for medication for those acute phases, and those acute phases being triggered by the most arduous exercise, is exactly what you'd expect?
It seems to me Millar etc., however genuine, can only talk from their own experience as they are not medical people; it's been suggested, for example, that the effect Millar reports might have been a result of a combination of substances.
I'm not sure you can say. Having looked at research as well as comment around this current debate, there is a lot of contradiction as I mentioned in an earlier post. Given that, the key point must be that it's a banned substance, so at some point the authorities have decided that it has the potential to have a performance enhancing effect whether it did or did not in Wiggins' case
TMN to me, I think, or was that raised further upthread?
Exactly.
Here's the podcast of his interview http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0494ksx
Brailsford casts doubt on the performance enhancing properties from about 09:30. On 'transparency' he is embarrassing. At 14:00 he is all over the shop. His slapdown of McQuaid is brilliant, and he does make a decent case for Sky's processes, but it's all a bit abstract. Interesting that Sky have, apparently, had only 13 TUEs ever - of which 3 were for Wiggins and 2 were for Froome.
I think the problem for me is this.....if Brailsford, who was the big cheese in BC at the time, was relying on a distinction between use and abuse without making clear what that distinction is...............then what does that say about BC?
Taken overall, BC's success on the track since 2007 has been quite bonkerstastically extraordinary. I can only imagine that Fancy Bears are hacking their way in to the BC computer.
Callum Skinner; from The Scotsman..
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/cycli...o-prove-to-people-my-asthma-is-real-1-4241059
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/cycli...o-prove-to-people-my-asthma-is-real-1-4241059
Excellent article and a reminder that people's needs are real. I know someone with a Cortisol deficiency who need to take Cortisone when he's ill. It's real, diagnosed and tested by a consultant endocronologist and yet he competes at a high level as well. I would like to see Wiggins release a story like that though.
Dogtrousers
Kilometre nibbler
David Walsh, I was duped by Sky.
http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-...ky-now-brailsford-will-regret-inviting-me-in/
I'm kind of losing interest in this. @Crackle I read an article on exercise induced asthma yesterday, explaining how the prevalence goes up in endurance sports with a particular stress on breathing, so lots of (say) swimmers get it but fewer (say) boxers. But I am wearying of this and can't be arsed to find the link.
http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-...ky-now-brailsford-will-regret-inviting-me-in/
I'm kind of losing interest in this. @Crackle I read an article on exercise induced asthma yesterday, explaining how the prevalence goes up in endurance sports with a particular stress on breathing, so lots of (say) swimmers get it but fewer (say) boxers. But I am wearying of this and can't be arsed to find the link.
EnPassant
Remember Remember some date in November Member
- Location
- Gloucester
I don't think I fully understand TUE's really*. If you aren't fit without using drugs, you don't compete?
This appears too simplistic so there must be an error in my thinking somewhere or else they wouldn't have TUE's.
Also a lot of what makes elite athletes elite in the first place is an accident of birth isn't it? High VO2 max, higher proportion of fast twitch muscles and so on? So how come if you are lucky enough to have those (as examples) but unfortunately Asthma (again example) you aren't just "one of the rest of us who isn't elite?".
I assume this must be because asthma is considered a disease whilst not having a high VO2max isn't. But it's a line I'm finding difficult to figure out precisely in my head. And asthma/vo2max are only examples of course, there are others.
*I'm fairly new to this august forum and the type of information it delivers. It's made me consider things I never had before in several areas (and no, I'm not taking the piddle, I've learned more here about a lot of things than from the media in years).
This appears too simplistic so there must be an error in my thinking somewhere or else they wouldn't have TUE's.
Also a lot of what makes elite athletes elite in the first place is an accident of birth isn't it? High VO2 max, higher proportion of fast twitch muscles and so on? So how come if you are lucky enough to have those (as examples) but unfortunately Asthma (again example) you aren't just "one of the rest of us who isn't elite?".
I assume this must be because asthma is considered a disease whilst not having a high VO2max isn't. But it's a line I'm finding difficult to figure out precisely in my head. And asthma/vo2max are only examples of course, there are others.
*I'm fairly new to this august forum and the type of information it delivers. It's made me consider things I never had before in several areas (and no, I'm not taking the piddle, I've learned more here about a lot of things than from the media in years).
Froome to Dimension Data?
