Frank Tests Positive at TdF

goldencleric

Here

****e, big Frandy fan!

Morrisseeee

:eek::eek::eek::eek::pac:

Darkglasses

For all the good it did him

Orizio

I, for one, am absolutely gobsmacked.

Raam

I'm not.

mloc123

Raam wrote: »

I'm not.

You mean those payments to Dr Ferrari may not have been just an average consultation?

retalivity

So him riding sh1te was all a ruse then??

have to say though, im pretty surprised by this

bryaner

Tell me who's not on some form of gear and I'll be surprised..

goldencleric

Well Kolobnev got let off with the same thing so there's hope Frank might escape too - we can only pray.

<snip>

Undercover Elephant

Can anyone explain to me what the benefit of taking a diuretic would be?

goldencleric

Undercover Elephant wrote: »

Can anyone explain to me what the benefit of taking a diuretic would be?

Make you piss and therefore eliminate traces of whatever drugs you have been taking.

Jawgap

Why Xipamide - it's a diuretic?

EDIT: The trunked one beat me to it!

retalivity

twitter saying radioshack have kicked him off the tour

goldencleric

Plausible that it is from a supplement/ medicine as well of course.

Kolobnev's story.

ednwireland

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/jul/17/tour-de-france-frank-schleck

The Luxembourg rider Frank Schleck has failed a doping test, taken on July 14, for the banned diuretic Xipamide, cycling's governing body the UCI has said.

Xipamide is a sulfonamide used for the treatment of oedema, fluid retention and hypertension.

"Earlier today, the UCI advised the Luxembourger rider Frank Schleck of an adverse analytical finding (presence of the diuretic Xipamide …) in the urine sample collected from him at an in competition test at the Tour de France on 14 July 2012," the UCI said in a statement.

retalivity wrote: »

twitter saying radioshack have kicked him off the tour

wonder if they will pay him now ?

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/schleck-cancellara-complained-to-uci-about-non-payment-team-owner-confirms

Undercover Elephant

goldencleric wrote: »

Make you piss and therefore eliminate traces of whatever drugs you have been taking.

Does that work? I can understand how that would flush out an excess, but if the real dope is still effective then you must still be metabolising it. Unless you're just hoping to cut the quantity down enough that it doesn't show.

Jawgap

Diuretics as masking agents

".....to mask the ingestion of other doping agents by reducing their concentration in urine. This effect may be accomplished either by increasing the urine volume, or by increasing the urinary pH"

The articles seems to suggest they are used for a wide range of products, but mostly for stimulants.

niceonetom

As far as I know, diuretics aren't performance enhancing (aside from the weight-loss effect of peeing) but are used as a masking agent and to speed the flushing of other banned substances from the body. I think it might be possible to use them to manipulate blood values too to hide the effects of micro-dosing from the blood passport system.

From now on I'll mentally be referring to Andy as "the other shoe".

lennymc

nico moves up one place.

fairly shocking tho.

Raam

goldencleric wrote: »

there's hope Frank might escape too - we can only pray.

Eh, no! You've read about him, right? Of course, maybe you are being facetious, in which case, well played sir, you got me.

One_Time

We're all avoiding the important issue here - will anyone with him in their fantasy tour team get his points stripped from them?

Cos the guy in front of me in my league has him on his team :P

Jawgap

Here's another paper....

The abuse of diuretics as performance-enhancing drugs and masking agents in sport doping: pharmacology, toxicology and analysis

This bit might interesting....

"It is important to note that the diuretics most abused by athletes (furosemide, hydrochlorothiazide and triamterene) have a short half-life and are therefore undetectable in urine if samples are not collected within 24–48 h after the last administration."

Although, you'd wonder why take something like that during the race......

"Caldwell et al. performed a diuretic-induced cycling workload reduction study to assess the effects of hypohydration on cycle ergometer performance. In this study, VO2 max (maximum oxygen uptake) and workload while cycling decrease in athletes after furosemide intake. Even after rehydration, muscular endurance and performance are greatly compromised by diuretic use."

furiousox

retalivity wrote: »

twitter saying radioshack have kicked him off the tour

Johan Bruyneel takes a very dim view of that kind of thing.

donfers

:pac:


EducatedMonkey ‏@EducatedMonkey for a guy on illegal substances #frankschleck has had a pretty ordinary #tourdefrance - giving a bad name to honest dopers out there

Captain Havoc

Please don't quote full articles, one paragraph only plus link

Captain Havoc

bryaner wrote: »

Tell me who's not on some form of gear and I'll be surprised..

I consider this drug speculating, any more and there will be bans

ednwireland

radioshack nissan trek statement

http://www.radioshacknissantrek.com/news/frank-schleck-statement

Our team attaches great value to transparency. Because of these values, we can announce the following as a response to the adverse analytical finding of xipamide in Fränk Schleck's urine sample of July 14 during the Tour de France.

After being informed by the UCI about the presence of xipamide in the urine sample of Fränk Schleck on July 14, the team has decided to immediately withdraw Fränk Schleck from the Tour de France.

Even though an abnormal A sample does not require these measures, Mr. Schleck and the team believe this is the right thing to do, to ensure the Tour de France can go on in calm and that Fränk Schleck can prepare his defense in accordance with the legal timing to do so.

On the subject of xipamide the team can declare the following: it is not a product that is present in any of the medicine that the team uses and the reason for the presence of xipamide in the urine sample of Mr. Schleck is unclear to the team. Therefore, the team is not able to explain the adverse findings at this point.

However, the team is fully determined to collaborate with the anti-doping agencies in order to resolve the matter.

i'm guessing i can quote all of this (or i'm going to get sherlocked )

funnights74

Captain Havoc wrote: »

I consider this drug speculating, any more and there will be bans

Take a look on the CYCLING NEWS page in face book and no such speculative comments exists. Freedom of speech well and truly rules the roosts there and every comment under the sun is being posted about the schlecks and everyone they have had anything to do with. Their legal team will have a field day if these allegations prove untrue.

Diarmuid

Frank Schleck cheating? Shocking

kenmc

aye, whodathunkit?

dermur

If I were him I'd be asking Ferrari for my money back.

Beasty

funnights74 wrote: »

Freedom of speech well and truly rules the roosts there

... but not here. The site owners determine policy (in conjunction with some of the senior guys who you will see on site). They have put in place rules that require us to stop any unsubstantiated allegations of this nature

This policy is not something for discussion here. Any questions PM me

elduggo

dermur wrote: »

If I were him I'd be asking Ferrari for my money back.

was it not Fuentes he was found to be sending money to?

Lusk Doyle

Captain Havoc wrote: »

bryaner wrote: »

Tell me who's not on some form of gear and I'll be surprised..

I consider this drug speculating, any more and there will be bans

If the whole boards thing goes tits up for you, there's always the chance of a job at the CAS for you. They'd eat up that sort of insight to prove cases

dermur

elduggo wrote: »

was it not Fuentes he was found to be sending money to?

Yup - you're right.

What'll be very interesting is how the peloton in general and Wiggins in particular reacts to this.

Bunnyhopper

The Fuentes payments always looked dodgy, but what surprises me is that he might get caught out now, after all that.

bryaner wrote: »

Tell me who's not on some form of gear and I'll be surprised..

Of course they're all using some form of gear. Derailleurs have been standard in the peloton for decades

GT_TDI_150

Bruyneel's team have a rider caught for doping?!?!

shoxter

The whole RNT team is a joke, Bruyneel not getting on with the Schlecks, dropping Horner for the tour then reinstating him, the payment problems and now this. A lot of throwing the dummy out of the pram from Frank and Andy this year, something going on behind the scenes for a while now.The press release is basically cutting him loose, goodbye Radioshack?

RobFowl

RobFowl

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToQ0n3itoII

paulieb2006

Personally I am SHOCKED. He has had a tough year, not wanting to do the Giro and then crashing out of it. Andy not doing the Tour! Problems a plenty with RSNT team.
One for the Conspiricy Theorists (has to be spelt wrong ) though, whats the chances of someone contaminating his Biddon! Someone who he doesent get on with, someone who is under a bit or a lot of pressure from USADA. Might just take the spotlight away from him to try and sort out his own problems!!!!!! I am sure Xipamide is easily gotten in most chemists!!!!

decisions

Will this have any effect on the overall team classification?

alfalad

Question for those in the know, it seems accepted that there are no real performance enhancing benefit to Xipamide (correct me if wrong) but it's primary use is as a masking agent. So does it only mask what ever it's masking in urine or does it also mask in blood? As in if someone had a blood sample taken instead of urine would they be caught out? Or is it a case of some drugs would only be detected in urine and not blood?

Just to be clear asking a general question not saying that Frank was taking anything else, just trying to get an understanding. Maybe Frank likes to pee a lot.

wonderfullife

maybe bit of a stupid question but this stuff is hardly over the counter in chemist type stuff is it?! Xipamide? And i can't see him getting it on prescription, so he has to get it somewhere.....

ahhhh it's just sad, i like Frank!! liked anyway!

Sad timing, it'll cast a shadow on the best stage tomorrow and the whole tour now.

wonderfullife

decisions wrote: »

Will this have any effect on the overall team classification?

well yeah it'll drop them back a little, time wise, but still 1st overall afaik.

Sundy

No surprises really. I have never trusted Schleck since his new of the payment came out. Many people over looked it because they were too distracted in witch hunting Lance and Contador.

Glad he has been caught.

witty username

Happy days, Nico up to 12th...

AstraMonti

I would be very interested to see what Andy has to say...

Idleater

Was watching a programme on bbc4 last night about the ben Johnson era up to the seoul Olympics. Interesting hearing from the athletes about how the (perceived) gap between their own performance and that of their rivals affected them.
The LA Olympic medical centre wondering why they had so many water instead of urine samples thanks to the diuretics was "funny".

bbolger

Never been a fan of either of the the Schlecks tbh, but the UCI aren't doing much better in their handling of this (and most other cases) as per usual...

http://inrng.com/2012/07/schleck-uci-vs-uci-rulebook/

The rules vary depending on the class of banned substance discovered but let’s cut to the chase: tonight Franck Schleck has the right to stay in the race because if his A-sample is positive, his B-sample has yet to be tested. The UCI is using exactly the same wording as it deployed last year when Russia’s Sacha Kolobnev tested positive.

The call that Radioshack-Nissan takes “the necessary steps to enable the Tour de France to continue in serenity” (identical wording was used with the Kolobnev case last year) is an open call for him leave the race. It is astonishing to see the governing body calling for its own rules and due process to be suspended.

jinkypolly

The UCI once again showing themselves for the idiots they are. Breaking their own rules for a bit of grandstanding to show 'hey look at us, we really are fighting against doping'. Why was this announced and why before a B test are they pressuring teams to withdraw a rider from the tdf. Now a lot of people don't like Franck Schleck for one reason or another but whether that's the case or not he is still entitled to due process.