Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Daryl Impey tests positive for Probenecid

Options
«13

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    godtabh
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 23,204 Mod ✭✭✭✭godtabh


    Just posted on the tour thread (thought he was in the squad but I dont think he was)

    How is this only coming out now?


  • Options
    #3
    Borderfox
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 10,257 Mod ✭✭✭✭Borderfox


    http://www.sports-drugs.com/probenecid.htm


    He wouldn't have a touch of gout?


  • Options
    #4
    Doc07
    Registered Users Posts: 973 ✭✭✭Doc07


    So eh...what's Probenecid? Wikipedia says it's a masking agent, but I know literally nothing else about it.[/QUOTE]

    Ask Pedro Delgado circa 1988.


  • Options
    #5
    eeeee
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 6,820 Mod ✭✭✭✭eeeee


    Ah so disappointing. Can it be accidently ingested? In his statement he says he was clear shortly before, although that doesn't mean anything. WTF was he thinking?


  • Options
    #6
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,267 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    Garzelli tested positive for it on the 2002 Giro d'Italia too and was removed from the race.

    That positive is widely regarded as being the straw that broke the camel's back in terms of Mapei's sponsorship. They pulled out of cycling at the end of that year.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    dastardly00
    Registered Users Posts: 13,305 ✭✭✭✭dastardly00


    The most surprising thing is that the use of Probenecid isn't exactly 'new'.
    As others have stated, Delgado tested positive for it way back in '88, and Garzelli in '02.

    Impey you are some dope.
    (pun intended)


  • Options
    #8
    simonrooneyzaga
    Registered Users Posts: 1,001 ✭✭✭simonrooneyzaga


    anyone actually surprised? what a shame.


  • Options
    #9
    GlennaMaddy
    Registered Users Posts: 851 ✭✭✭GlennaMaddy


    "I had no knowledge of Probenecid nor have I ever taken the substance knowingly in any manner. I am committed to drug-free sport and fully intend to take all steps necessary to clear myself of any suspicion."

    Soon to be followed by the usual process of taking the drug lab to court, dropping that case, accepting a ban, pointing fingers at others, writing a book about doping, making a clean comeback :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #10
    simonrooneyzaga
    Registered Users Posts: 1,001 ✭✭✭simonrooneyzaga


    GlennaMaddy wrote: »
    Soon to be followed by the usual process of taking the drug lab to court, dropping that case, accepting a ban, pointing fingers at others, writing a book about doping, making a clean comeback :rolleyes:

    It was the meat!!! The meat goddammit


  • Options
    #11
    Junior
    Registered Users Posts: 3,179 ✭✭✭Junior


    Both A and B samples are positive so he really has no come back on this one. Also the delay with processing I believe is because someone died at the Lab in South Africa.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    dastardly00
    Registered Users Posts: 13,305 ✭✭✭✭dastardly00


    simonrooneyzaga wrote: »
    It was the meat!!! The meat goddammit

    Well with this particular case, it definitely wasn't the meat. Unless he ate meat from an animal that was being treated for gout.


  • Options
    #13
    Darkglasses
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 14,526 Mod ✭✭✭✭Darkglasses


    simonrooneyzaga wrote: »
    anyone actually surprised? what a shame.

    I am actually surprised to be honest. Of all teams/riders, Orica didn't strike me as ones most likely to have someone on banned substances.


  • Options
    #14
    godtabh
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 23,204 Mod ✭✭✭✭godtabh


    Darkglasses wrote: »
    I am actually surprised to be honest. Of all teams/riders, Orica didn't strike me as ones most likely to have someone on banned substances.

    I follow Dan Jones on twitter. Wouldnt be surprised if he had a few banned substances in his system!


  • Options
    #15
    eeeee
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 6,820 Mod ✭✭✭✭eeeee


    Darkglasses wrote: »
    I am actually surprised to be honest. Of all teams/riders, Orica didn't strike me as ones most likely to have someone on banned substances.

    This. I am really disappointed. They seem such an open team, with the videos/backstage passes and everything they were at the bottom of my list of suspicious teams.
    Although he tested clear shortly before so i am hoping it was a stupid personal thing he did for the nationals, not something condoned by Orica. Either way he's a flute.


  • Options
    #16
    Zyzz
    Registered Users Posts: 2,874 ✭✭✭Zyzz


    What shame he has brought to the Green Edge team.. :/

    How on earth these riders live their lives fearing everyday that they may get caught :|


  • Options
    #17
    death1234567
    Registered Users Posts: 3,327 ✭✭✭death1234567


    What would be nice is if he just admitted it and spared us the "I ate meat from a cow that was training to compete in the cow Olympics but I didn't know that the cow was taking a substance banned by WADA but not by the International Cow Olympic Committee".

    Life Ban. Move on.

    Oh it would also be nice if his team mates came out against him and said that he has devastated the team and put their livelihood at risk rather than saying nothing.


  • Options
    #18
    GlennaMaddy
    Registered Users Posts: 851 ✭✭✭GlennaMaddy


    Just looking at his 2014 Palmares, all but one were in and around the time of the positive test, meaning he's cheated somebody else out of a result, if it were me that he'd cheated, I'd be suing for damages:mad:


  • Options
    #19
    hutchy_belfast
    Registered Users Posts: 32 ✭hutchy_belfast


    It's not a PED and it's a pretty lousy masking agent given that it masks nothing in blood tests. Likely a contaminated medicine or supplement. I feel for him, but don't let that get in the way or the pitch forks witch hunting.


  • Options
    #20
    gordongekko
    Registered Users Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭gordongekko


    hutchy_belfast wrote: »
    Likely a contaminated medicine or supplement. I feel for him, but don't let that get in the way or the pitch forks witch hunting.

    That's a usual line of defence that also does not work so let's continue the witch hunting.


  • Options
    #21
    couerdelion
    Registered Users Posts: 2,910 ✭✭✭couerdelion


    Probenecid can also be given to make antibiotics more effective by preventing them from entering the urine. So it's possible that a doctor prescribed them as part of a course of antibiotics and he didn't realise that they were seperate and on the banned list - although professionals not checking against UCI/WADA lists is unlikely in this day and age.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    death1234567
    Registered Users Posts: 3,327 ✭✭✭death1234567


    hutchy_belfast wrote: »
    Likely a contaminated medicine or supplement.
    How likely is it that a medicine or "supplement" is actually contaminated with a banned substance? Not Likely I imagine. How likely is it that this "contamination" just happened to be at the exact time when he was drug tested? Really not likely. How likely is it that this contamination just happened to be at the same time when he was in the form of his life?

    The bottom line is that he is responsible for what goes in his body and given the history of the sport then sharpen up your pitchfork and get stabbin'.


  • Options
    #23
    simonrooneyzaga
    Registered Users Posts: 1,001 ✭✭✭simonrooneyzaga


    couerdelion wrote: »
    Probenecid can also be given to make antibiotics more effective by preventing them from entering the urine. So it's possible that a doctor prescribed them as part of a course of antibiotics and he didn't realise that they were seperate and on the banned list - although professionals not checking against UCI/WADA lists is unlikely in this day and age.

    'Didn't Realise' just doesn't cut it any more (and never should have). These are professionals competing in the most drug tarnished sport in the world. (Drug use tends to be ignored totally in all other major sports).

    It is their professional duty, along with their teams, to ensure that nothing they ingest can show up on a negative test. They have failed in this regard, bringing cycling back into the doping spotlight. It's as black and white as that. Even if he is innocent, his failure to regulate such means he deserves the full ban.


  • Options
    #24
    Dr. Bre
    Registered Users Posts: 7,537 ✭✭✭Dr. Bre


    im surprised he's not riding with saxo!


  • Options
    #25
    godtabh
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 23,204 Mod ✭✭✭✭godtabh


    Dr. Bre wrote: »
    im surprised he's not riding with saxo!

    How is that helpful to the discussion?


  • Options
    #26
    couerdelion
    Registered Users Posts: 2,910 ✭✭✭couerdelion


    simonrooneyzaga wrote: »
    'Didn't Realise' just doesn't cut it any more (and never should have). These are professionals competing in the most drug tarnished sport in the world. (Drug use tends to be ignored totally in all other major sports).

    It is their professional duty, along with their teams, to ensure that nothing they ingest can show up on a negative test. They have failed in this regard, bringing cycling back into the doping spotlight. It's as black and white as that. Even if he is innocent, his failure to regulate such means he deserves the full ban.

    I disagree with some of that. Yes as a professional athlete he has a duty to check every thing that is going into his system and make sure it's ok. I don't argue with that.

    However, this isn't performance enhancing it is its possible use as a masking agent that makes it a banned substance - stopping things from showing up in urine tests. From reading Froome's Kimmage interview it seems blood work is also done at testing these days so it kinds of makes it irrelevant to ban anyway as it use of a masking agent is flawed I would think? Therefore for me a full ban for being a numpty isn't the same as a full ban for EPO use.


  • Options
    #27
    quozl
    Registered Users Posts: 3,308 ✭✭✭quozl


    Masking Agents are as serious as PEDs. They're there to reduce the window during which a PED can be detected.

    There are a lot more urine tests than blood tests administered. So even if a masking agent is only effective against urine tests it is still useful. I also don't know that this masking agent only effects urine tests and haven't seen any proper evidence to support that claim yet but am willing to accept it for the point of this argument.

    Check out http://www.wada-ama.org/en/Anti-Doping-Community/IFs/ADO-Statistics/

    You can browse WADA doping tests statistics for various sports. The latest year is 2012.

    Picking a single federation at random there were almost 4 times as many urine tests as blood tests performed by them in Cycling.


  • Options
    #28
    mistermatthew
    Registered Users Posts: 790 ✭✭✭mistermatthew


    quozl wrote: »
    Masking Agents are as serious as PEDs. They're there to reduce the window during which a PED can be detected.

    There are a lot more urine tests than blood tests administered. So even if a masking agent is only effective against urine tests it is still useful. I also don't know that this masking agent only effects urine tests and haven't seen any proper evidence to support that claim yet but am willing to accept it for the point of this argument.

    Check out http://www.wada-ama.org/en/Anti-Doping-Community/IFs/ADO-Statistics/

    You can browse WADA doping tests statistics for various sports. The latest year is 2012.

    Picking a single federation at random there were almost 4 times as many urine tests as blood tests performed by them in Cycling.

    Yeah and there are possibilities such as previous years the national champs had been urine test only and this year they changed it up and included blood and it had been unexpected by Impey.

    No sympathy, hope Orica are clean in general, great team.

    Shame on you Daryl Impey


  • Options
    #29
    death1234567
    Registered Users Posts: 3,327 ✭✭✭death1234567


    quozl wrote: »
    Masking Agents are as serious as PEDs. They're there to reduce the window during which a PED can be detected.
    Exactly. Dopers use them so that the performance enhancing drugs don't show up in tests and then even if the masking agent does show up they can claim that they tested positive for something that has zero effect on their performance.

    It's just a shame that cycling seems to be the only sport to take doping seriously. I see Tyson Gay and Justin Gatlin are racing in the Diamond league this week. Laughable.


  • Options
    #30
    godtabh
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 23,204 Mod ✭✭✭✭godtabh


    death1234567 wrote: »

    It's just a shame that cycling seems to be the only sport to take doping seriously.

    If they took it serious it would be a life time ban. I think that would make the risk to big for many to take.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Hermy
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 11,302 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hermy


    Darkglasses wrote: »
    Hate posting this...
    You shouldn't.
    It's actually a good thing to see riders who dope being caught, reported and sanctioned.

    Genealogy Forum Mod



Advertisement