Daryl Impey tests positive for Probenecid

Darkglasses

Hate posting this because I really like Daryl, but it's been announced he's tested positive for something called Probenecid. Both his A and B samples tested positive.

OGE statement - http://www.greenedgecycling.com/news/statement-regarding-daryl-impey

Daryl's statement - http://www.darylimpey.com/News/DisplayNewsItem.aspx?niid=34129

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

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?

Borderfox

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


He wouldn't have a touch of gout?

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.

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?

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.

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)

simonrooneyzaga

anyone actually surprised? what a shame.

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:

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

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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

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

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.

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:

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.

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.

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.

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'.

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.

Dr. Bre

im surprised he's not riding with saxo!

godtabh

Dr. Bre wrote: »

im surprised he's not riding with saxo!

How is that helpful to the discussion?

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

laraghrider

death1234567 wrote: »

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.

Tyson Gay and Justin Gatlin were caught and subsequently banned. Their ban's have expired and they are now free to compete again. Alberto Contador, David Millar ( i could go on ) were caught, received bans and are now competing after said bans. How is the Gay/Gatlin case laughable yet at the same time cycling seemingly taking it seriously?

nak

laraghrider wrote: »

Tyson Gay and Justin Gatlin were caught and subsequently banned. Their ban's have expired and they are now free to compete again. Alberto Contador, David Millar ( i could go on ) were caught, received bans and are now competing after said bans. How is the Gay/Gatlin case laughable yet at the same time cycling seemingly taking it seriously?

The only thing laughable is the fact that the media generally forget to mention that they are both ex-dopers. I recently read an article about Justin Gatlin that mentioned his comeback, but not the fact that it was from a doping ban.

dastardly00

Off-topic, but is there a list anywhere of pro road cyclists who are currently serving a ban or are suspended (and who are not retired)? Eg. Kreuziger, Ulissi, Impey, Mauro Santambrogio, Danilo Di Luca ....

And also a list of pro road cyclists who have served a ban, and are now back competing? Eg. Contador, Millar, Frank Schleck ...

Lusk_Doyle

There was one floating around here awhile back....

Darkglasses

There's this Wikipedia page, but it's only updated as far as 2013

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_cycling

hutchy_belfast

It's not much use as a masking agent when it itself is a banned substance though.

godtabh

hutchy_belfast wrote: »

It's not much use as a masking agent when it itself is a banned substance though.

its banned because it is a masking agent

hutchy_belfast

Indeed but because it's banned it makes it a useless masking agent as it isn't going to avoid you getting banned!

simonrooneyzaga

hutchy_belfast wrote: »

Indeed but because it's banned it makes it a useless masking agent as it isn't going to avoid you getting banned!

There's obviously some reason they take it... MisterMathew had a decent theory earlier in the thread.

morana

dastardly00 wrote: »

Off-topic, but is there a list anywhere of pro road cyclists who are currently serving a ban or are suspended (and who are not retired)? Eg. Kreuziger, Ulissi, Impey, Mauro Santambrogio, Danilo Di Luca ....

And also a list of pro road cyclists who have served a ban, and are now back competing? Eg. Contador, Millar, Frank Schleck ...

http://dopeology.org/incidents/

dastardly00

morana wrote: »

http://dopeology.org/incidents/

just had a quick look and it seems like a fantastic database.
Thanks morana

Raymzor

dastardly00 wrote: »

just had a quick look and it seems like a fantastic database.
Thanks morana

This guy wore yellow in the Tour last year. The current fines and bans are not dealing with the issue, so until UCI face up then more breaking news is inevitable

fishfoodie

Raymzor wrote: »

This guy wore yellow in the Tour last year. The current fines and bans are not dealing with the issue, so until UCI face up then more breaking news is inevitable

Only if you believe that the UCI doesn't put its finger on the scales, when it comes to doping enforcement & punishment !

The cynic in me believes these recent positives, were the UCI putting a shot across the bows of the teams to let them know that a British UCI Chief didn't want to be embarrassed in the coming week while the tour was in the UK.

BofaDeezNuhtz

fishfoodie wrote: »

The cynic in me believes these recent positives, were the UCI putting a shot across the bows of the teams to let them know that a British UCI Chief didn't want to be embarrassed in the coming week while the tour was in the UK.

Yeah why does a positive from a sample from back on Feb 6th only come out now?

If true, it shows the UCI's ability to sit on results, for a time, or forever etc.
Who monitors the monitors...

BofaDeezNuhtz

Given the absence of regular posters even commenting in this thread it looks like its really
back to heads in the sand again on this one huh.

gordongekko

Suzuki_TL1000R wrote: »

Given the absence of regular posters even commenting in this thread it looks like its really
back to heads in the sand again on this one huh.

What would you expect posters to say that has not already been said?

Darkglasses

Suzuki_TL1000R wrote: »

Given the absence of regular posters even commenting in this thread it looks like its really
back to heads in the sand again on this one huh.

I don't understand what you're getting at here.

ROK ON

Suzuki_TL1000R wrote: »

Given the absence of regular posters even commenting in this thread it looks like its really
back to heads in the sand again on this one huh.

It's because of the conspiracy.
Now that you have found the truth, we will have to kill you.

BofaDeezNuhtz

gordongekko wrote: »

What would you expect posters to say that has not already been said?

It's not what I expect them to say it's that I don't expect them to say nothing! Dafuk?

Darkglasses wrote: »

I don't understand what you're getting at here.

Almost 900 pages of the "Pat McQuaid that famous Swiss/Moroccan/thai dude" thread
to kick him out 'cause the new guy will clean up the sport and stuffs...

1st positive drug test since then and it gets just 3 pages, feckin' 30 odd posts mostly
by the same 5-6 people outta the whole site and you don't think theres a
story/huge thread discussion there?
Not towards yourself, you posted, others just ignored is what I'm getting at here!

ROK ON wrote: »

It's because of the conspiracy.
Now that you have found the truth, we will have to kill you.

Ohhh...I'm straight telling Jim Corr on you lot! :eek:

godtabh

Suzuki_TL1000R wrote: »

Yeah why does a positive from a sample from back on Feb 6th only come out now?

If true, it shows the UCI's ability to sit on results, for a time, or forever etc.
Who monitors the monitors...

Already posted here that some one in the lab died and held up the results