supplements for irish rugby team

eroo

just wondering what supplements(if any!) do the irish team take?as you can see they have all seriously bulked up in the last few years,as well as every other team!
-eroo

Leon11

Darcy and stringer have said in newspapers when asked what they eat in a day that they don't take supplements other than multi-vits, I'd assume most of them have used protein and creatine and maybe one or two other "supplements"

JM MARCONI

Id say the skin tight jerseys are one of the reasons they all look bigger.

Malteaser!

Hanley's gonna effin kill me for putting this poster of him up but it's gotta be done...

Hanley

AFAIK The Irish Sports Council classifys all "supplements" as "steroids". And since Irish Rugby recieves a whole chunk of Sports Council money, it means they can't be seen to endorse any supplements. Obviously since they're NOT ACTUALLY steroids the players are free to take them because they can't be "tested" for.... So yes, they do take them, but they don't endorse them. And I doubt they say anything about it in any publications. So don't tell anyone

EDIT: Oh dear... I can't believe you put that poster of me up.

tribulus

Soon lucozade and powerade will be classed as steroids too...

Then they're all f*ucked!

floor_pie

yeah it's just the shape of the jerseys, they have sculpted white patches under their arms to make their lats look bigger and a sculpted white patch on the calves,(calfs?) to similar effect, and some wear padding.Also the jerseys are skin tight as mentioned

eroo

http://www.usn.co.uk/pages/12933/Jerry_Flannery.htm
just found this..

Dragan

I suggest people look at there diet and workouts and recovery over their supplements.

All my spies tell me that most of the lads use Nutrition X supplements though!

Poster looks good Hanley! You still have some of those supplements from that day? I do!

thirtyfoot

Hanley wrote:

AFAIK The Irish Sports Council classifys all "supplements" as "steroids". And since Irish Rugby recieves a whole chunk of Sports Council money, it means they can't be seen to endorse any supplements. .

The ISC don't classify everything as steriods but they do advise athletes to take no supplements - this includes Vitamin C! Obviously most athletes take supplements and I know some who have endorsed supplements. I was at an ISC sponsored nutrition conference a while back and a guy from the Australian Sports Institute spoke about their attitude towards supplements. They grade supplements based on known benefits and legality and advise their athletes. Their athletes are then able to make educated decisions and not go into these things blind. Great approach compared to the ISC head in the sand attitude.

g'em

Tingle wrote:

I was at an ISC sponsored nutrition conference a while back and a guy from the Australian Sports Institute spoke about their attitude towards supplements. They grade supplements based on known benefits and legality and advise their athletes. Their athletes are then able to make educated decisions and not go into these things blind. Great approach compared to the ISC head in the sand attitude.

Well said. This is from the ISC website:

ISC wrote:

Are supplements permitted in sport?

Irish athletes are advised that the use of unlicensed supplement products is at your own risk and the Irish Sports Council strongly recommends that they be avoided altogether. Neither the Irish Sports Council nor your National Governing Body can guarantee the status of unlicensed supplement products in sport. This is because supplements are not subject to the same stringent manufacturing, testing and labelling standards as licensed medicinal products. You have no way of guaranteeing what is in the supplement, or if the declaration of ingredients on the label is complete and accurate.

Could I test positive from taking supplements?

These products may contain ingredients not listed on the label. In some cases supplements may contain undeclared prohibited substances. Some supplements have been found to contain undeclared ephedrine and even steroids. An International Olympic Committee study has reported that nearly 15% of supplement products tested contained substances not listed on the label that would lead to a positive drug test. In many cases, athletes who have tested positive have blamed a supplement they were taking. However, athletes are responsible for any substance found in their bodies. It doesn't matter how it got there.

This blanket approach to supplements however is really quite backwards, and as Tingle said the ISC consider common-place vitamins to be in the same supplement category as anabolic steroids and stimulants:

ISC wrote:

Dietary supplements are products taken to supplement a normal diet. Supplements can be vitamins, minerals, herbs, homeopathic remedies or other substances

The website also links to www.eirpharm.com the Irish Pharmaceutical website which aids the ISC regulate drugs in sport. If you're taking prescribed medicaction you can check for it's legality in sport there.

Interestingly I came across this about creatine:

www.eirpharm.com wrote:

Creatine
Creatine has been used by a number of athletes to increase muscle mass.
There have been number of varying reports on the efficacy of the product, and as to how it should be used effectively. There also has also been some debate as to the classification of creatine as a medicine or as a food substance and currently there is no product authorised as a medicinal product. There is little conclusive data on the long-term effects, on the use of creatine. There have been reports, mainly in the US, of products labelled as creatine which when tested also contained the stimulant ephedrine. Athletes should be aware of the dangers of taking any such substance.

If an athlete does decide to take creatine, it should be done under medical supervision.

They also stress that any supplements bought should be obtained from a reputable source, and to me this is the key point. A lot of the issues that have arised from supplementing in sport have come about following a sutdy that found 15% of supplements containing banned substances, but I tracked down the paper a while back and if you read it more closely you see that those products that were tainted were pretty dubious products to begin with. Bog-standard whey and creatine, when bought from a known and recognised company have never (to my knowledge anyway) been found to have anything other than what's on the ingredietns list.

The scare-mongering about creatine and even whey is largely undfounded and unfair, and gives all supplements a bad name.

The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) Prohibited List of Substances can be found here, and includes:
* anabolic agents
* hormones and related substances
* beta-2 antagonists
* anti-oestrogens
* diuretics
* stimulants (in 2007 caffeine, phenylephrine and pseudophedrine were removed from the prohibited list)
* narcotics
* cannabinoids
* gluticosteroids

and the following are prohibited in certain sports:
* alcohol
* beta-blockers

Creatine is most certainly not on that list! PErsonally I know I need to be extremely aware of what supplements I take as the powerlifting federation I compete in (and one of the ones that Hanley lifts with) test regularly for substances according to that WADA list. If I was in any doubt about whther my whey and creatine was safe I wouldn't take it, simple as. But it's clear that most of those banned substances are 'heavy-duty' ones, and not your garden-variety vitamin and mineral supps that you pick up in Boots. The ISC seems to be taking an incredibly blinkered, misinformed and uneducated view of supplementation, and instead of helping to fund research into the safety of well-regulated safe supps (like creatine and whey) it chooses to stick its head in the sand and brand anything it doesn't like the look of as evil.

jeawan

main reason they are so bulked up , is the amount of training they do , the leinster Squad spend 5 days a week in the Gym training with Weights then back again on the pitch doing ball work , alot of Rubgy players take Maxiemuscle now as well , im not 100% sure what the irish team take , but the training they is quite tough , shame they playing so crap at the moment

rubadub

Hanley wrote:

it means they can't be seen to endorse any supplements.

Wasnt powerade the "official sports drink" for the Irish team?
Or do they not class refined carbohydrate as supplements, only refined proteins? or do they class whey as a supplement at all?

The definition of supplements is a bit of a grey area, you could argue that fruit juices are supplements- many are extracted and concentrated, then watered down again. Similar to how protein is concentrated from milk products and then diluted up again .

g'em

eroo wrote:

http://www.usn.co.uk/pages/12933/Jerry_Flannery.htm

Nice find, so Flannery is sponsored by USN and uses Muscle Grow ( a weight-gainer), Creatine, a Glucosamine supplement and protein bars. I'd wager that a protein/carb complex or straightforward whey and creatine is being taken by the many of the players i.e. the basics.

rubadub wrote:

The definition of supplements is a bit of a grey area, you could argue that fruit juices are supplements- many are extracted and concentrated

you could... but we won't. That's the same sort of pedantic crap that's so frustrating about the ISC. Supplements, in a sports context are surely items not normally found in a diet but are used under the understanding that they are used to enhance performance?

davyjose

The English side Wasps are sponsored by Maximuscle, as is Gavin Henson. given that, I'd say it's highly unlikely the Irish players are gonna be left behind just eating spuds and chicken.

justsomebloke

davyjose wrote:

sponsored by Maximuscle, as is Gavin Henson.

and before anyone asks no it is not the maximuscle that makes him orange;)

peterk19

Doesnt Musashi supply Leinster?

cowzerp

Hanley wrote:

AFAIK The Irish Sports Council classifys all "supplements" as "steroids"..

Thats funny because the whole team buy creatine from power bar all the time..

justsomebloke

peterk19 wrote:

Doesnt Musashi supply Leinster?

I have to say some of that stuff looks quite pricey for what you are getting

King of Kings

i know that munster players are fond of maximuscles cyclone.

rubadub

g'em wrote:

Supplements, in a sports context are surely items not normally found in a diet but are used under the understanding that they are used to enhance performance?

Still a grey area in my mind. Does the volume of the items count towards what is normally in a diet? e.g. a "normal diet" could be 1 egg a day, yet people could eat 8 a day with the intention of enhancing performance. Somebody might be drinking 2 litres of grape juice specifically to get the extra sugars.

I was talking of whey to a mate of mine and another mate was totally against it, telling him to avoid it completely, yet later I heard he was recommending glucose gel packs. In my mind they are both supplements, but this guy only considered whey a supplement.

Whey powder is used in a variety of foods now too, I notice it more & more nowadays.

g'em

rubadub wrote:

Still a grey area in my mind. Does the volume of the items count towards what is normally in a diet? e.g. a "normal diet" could be 1 egg a day, yet people could eat 8 a day with the intention of enhancing performance. Somebody might be drinking 2 litres of grape juice specifically to get the extra sugars.

I think it's safe to say that in the context of the thread we're not talking about how much grapefruit juice the Irish rugby players are drinking on a daily basis :rolleyes:

Leon11

Musahi supply a few AIL Div.1 clubs for sure, it's a given the majority of rugby players use legal supplements to aid their diet and recovery.

Last summer I had to look after the England A side when they were playing the Churchill Cup in Canada. Each player had their own shaker prepared before the game with a whole bunch of **** in it and they had them replaced again for the end of the match. I'd wager it's the same in every dressing room at provincial/international level.

Had a talk from John Tracey (ISC) a year or so ago on general everyday fitness. It eventually moved into sports nutrition and supplements. It was embarrassing to hear his views. Totally opposed to them, his reason "you don't know what's in them", "there's no medical studies to prove they're safe". I got tired of his ****e and left.

Frank Bullitt

I'm sure most of them worry more about their food rather than the supplements they take, I'm pretty sure they all eat like horses anyway.

Hanley

cowzerp wrote:

Thats funny because the whole team buy creatine from power bar all the time..

I know they BUY it. Infact I've heard reports they're big fans of NutritionX's xplode too. DO you not think they'd have a sponsorship deal with them already if they were allowed (or not discouraged from doing so)?


My post in full was;

hanley wrote:

AFAIK The Irish Sports Council classifys all "supplements" as "steroids". And since Irish Rugby recieves a whole chunk of Sports Council money, it means they can't be seen to endorse any supplements. Obviously since they're NOT ACTUALLY steroids the players are free to take them because they can't be "tested" for.... So yes, they do take them, but they don't endorse them. And I doubt they say anything about it in any publications. So don't tell anyone

Did you just choose to quote the part of my post that you could "prove" me wrong on? Or did you not notice the bolded part?

Clive

A lot of confusion here as to what the ISC are actually saying.

It's very simple - MEDICINES have a product authorisation (PA) number. The ISC can stand over them and tell you whether what's in them is prohibited, permitted, requires a therapeutic use exemption (TUE) etc or not. Off the top of my head, Pharmaton and Vivioptal are two multivitamins that have PA numbers, so that's the situation there.

SUPPLEMENTS do not have PA numbers. The ISC are simply saying, look, we can't be 100% about what's in them, so we can't say it's okay to take them.
If they said XYZ supplement was permitted, and then someone tests positive, it immediately throws the case into turmoil. The athlete would claim it was product XYZ that caused it and the ISC said it was fine. This is exactly the case that happened with Geraldine Hendricken, but the ISC had stuck to their guns and could not stand over the product.

Obviously, if people have brands or products that they have confidence in, then sure take them to your hearts content - if you trust them you shouldn't care about whether the ISC can stand over them or not.

As an athlete it is 100% YOUR responsibility to ensure what you put into your body is permitted. Not coaches, parents, team-mates, geezers at the gym, some guy you're staying with. If a product has a PA number, the ISC, your chemist, eirpharm.ie or an up to date copy of MIMS can tell you what it's status in sport is.

If it doesn't, it's up to you to decide for yourself.

cowzerp

Hanley wrote:

I know they BUY it. Infact I've heard reports they're big fans of NutritionX's xplode too. DO you not think they'd have a sponsorship deal with them already if they were allowed (or not discouraged from doing so)?


My post in full was;



Did you just choose to quote the part of my post that you could "prove" me wrong on? Or did you not notice the bolded part?

Hanley i've no interest in proving you wrong and dont see where i did-i just know that the irish rugby team, not the players buy powerbar's creatine, so if they consider them steroids!! then they are buying steroids!! thats why i cut that bit out,maybe i did not explain the team buy them as opposed to the players-ps, they have not bought them in about 4 months. the thread is about what they take so i just wanted to say it in a factual manner. sorry if i upset you.

Hanley

The problem is not with the IRFU tho. The problem is with the ISC and their guidelines.

I can only guess that the "official" ie public stance from the IRFU is that they won't go against the sports council...

But of course the IRFU are going to do everything they can to help the team. Even if it means buying suppplements that have an absoluely minute chance of provoiding a false positive if tested.

The ISC it would seem aren't a fan of supplements for the above reason (ie false positives). Not that they're viewed as "steroids", but that they might have become contaminated or perhaps have unlisted ingredients in them.

g'em

Do the teams get tested actually?

Leon11

random testing of players at AIL level and Provincial level. I'm not sure though if the IRFU would test every player on the senior team though, they've had the same doctor for aeons now, if something was amiss with a player he'd sure as hell know.

Roper

Clive should be listened to, as an ex-tester!

Interestingly, in the next free edition of Irish MMA Online, there'll be an article on this very matter. Check out www.irishmmaonline.com for subscription details if you're interested.

thirtyfoot

http://www.irishsportscouncil.ie/pressandpub-news-latest-article.aspx?article=fd56515c-2bd6-4b87-8f05-cea1543cfc7a downloads at the bottom

Here is the ISC review on doping for last year. There are testing numbers towards the end. Athletics is the highest, then cycling, rugby only had 42 tests. By the way they test clay pigeon athletes (if thats the right term:) )

In the 892 tests there were 2 positives - a jockey and a kickboxer.

Hanley

~OT~

I can't believe fcuking surfing and tug of war get ISC funding and powerlifting gets nothing.

thirtyfoot

Hanley wrote:

~OT~

I can't believe fcuking surfing and tug of war get ISC funding and powerlifting gets nothing.

They do get funding? Surfing isn't really a sport while I grew up in a village where tug-o-war was king so I'll give that the benefit of the doubt!

Hanley

That'd be the only reason they're being tested by the ISC!!

justsomebloke

Hanley wrote:

I can't believe fcuking surfing get ISC

is it windsurfing or surfing. As I was a member of the UCD windsurfing club for many a year and having traveled to a few comps (supporting not competing ) there is actually quite a big community that is quite established in Ireland. surfing on the other hand is quite popular (even if it sucks compared to windsurfing) so I would say that has quite a following with a large proportion of comps and participants as well

slemons

Laporte has said many times that other rugby nations are not testing nearly enough to meet international guidelines in other sports.
He particularly pointed the finger at SA, NZ and England.

The lack of positive's in such a power dominated, professional sport is actually shocking when you think about it. Many props are squatting with over 250kg. Brian Habana has a top speed almost equal to Asafa Powell. over 11metre/sec.

I've only ever heard of 1 or 2 positives worldwide ever. One was in Ireland

thirtyfoot

slemons wrote:

Brian Habana has a top speed almost equal to Asafa Powell. over 11metre/sec.

Are you sure about that? I know he is fast but 11m sec is unbelievable, have you a link to the source? Was it electronic timing or hand and under what conditions?