Chris Froome tests positive for Salbutamol

crazy_kenny

http://www.uci.ch/pressreleases/uci-statement-christopher-froome/


Dodgy inhaler maybe....

godtabh

A cheat maybe

KellyXX

I can't complain about him. I would test positive for that too.

crazy_kenny

Apparently over twice the legal limit so should not of being racing a bike.

Galego

Is this a similar drug that the one Wiggins was taking while winning the Tour?

ThisRegard

crazy_kenny wrote: »

Apparently over twice the legal limit so should not of being racing a bike.

Claims his asthma got really bad towards the end of the race so his team increased his dosage within permissible levels outlined by the UCI.

I'm sure we have an old kids inhaler lying around here, might be worth a try myself.

godtabh

https://twitter.com/friebos/status/940843632541696000

benneca1

Read in the Spanish paper if he can explain why for thereputic reasons he needed such high doses he’ll be ok. Guess This will set Kimmage off again he was always a bit suspect of sky.

ThisRegard

benneca1 wrote: »

This will set Kimmage off again he was always a bit suspect of sky.

He and every other adult that share Kimmage's trait of breathing.

death1234567

It's amazing how having asthma is such an advantage that pretty much every endurance athlete has it these days. What's the figure in cycling, around 80% of the pro-peleton?

The great thing about this is that is again shows up that teams are still doping, they are just using "legal" drugs now.

nak

Galego wrote: »

Is this a similar drug that the one Wiggins was taking while winning the Tour?

No. You don't need a TUE for salbutamol. Plus it's has no real benefit to non asthmatics.

Interestingly I've been taking a drug that is on the WADA banned list and have been finding cycling really difficult. I had good form which disappeared pretty much overnight and feel awful so not sure what aspect could be considered performance enhancing.

ThisRegard

His result is a hell of a lot more than what Contador had too.

Pretty amazing how Team Sky can get two such people, Wiggins and Froome, to such heights when they have such problems with their lungs. They really should drop out of cycling and start opening medical clinics and sell their miracle health programs.

irishrover99

My 3 year old Son had been sick with a cough for about a year. Eventually about 4 weeks ago the Doc said he has Asthma and prescribed him a Steroid inhaler, at very low amounts.
Since then he's been a different child altogether. His moods and sleeping have really improved.
But the biggest improvement is that now his 5 year old Sister can't keep up with him going around the garden on the balance bikes :pac::pac:

lissard

Given how Diego Ulissi got a substantial ban for a similar offense I can't see how Froome will get away with this.

ThisRegard

https://twitter.com/MRasmussen1974/status/940860049500536832

Pa8301

If he does get a ban it will be interesting to see if Team Sky adhere to their zero tolerance policy and sack him.

Lusk_Doyle

lissard wrote: »

Given how Diego Ulissi got a substantial ban for a similar offense I can't see how Froome will get away with this.

Because one is Diego Ulissi and the other is Chris Froome is how he will get away with it.

robyntmorton

The statement from Team Sky.

TL:DR No rules have been broken (at this point)

https://www.teamsky.com/article/ts-statement

Personally I think Sky shouldn’t be showing favourable results from their lab, and that UCI should be mandating an independent facility for Froome to submit to for testing.

All My Stars Aligned

What I find amazing is that this as taken since September to be dealt with. Is that normal? I really like Froome (although I don't like Team Sky) and very disappointed with him regardless as to wether he receives a ban or not.

Chips Lovell

ThisRegard wrote: »

His result is a hell of a lot more than what Contador had too.

This is Salbutamol. Contador tested positive for Clenbuterol, which is a different drug.

terrydel

Team Sky and anyone associated with them have zero credibility.
Pro cycling is a sport with zero credibility.
Nothing has changed in essence since the Arsmstorng era, they are just better at it, in fact more cynical than back then because they play in these grey areas.
How anyone bothers with the pro sport is beyond me personally. Its a complete fraud top to bottom.

Swamp3

Ah marginal gains

Is there any check by an independent doctor for TUE's or is it simply a case of my doctor says I need X for Y and the UCI issue a TUE

Urindanger

Took long enough but glad to see it all starting to unravel. I doubt anything will be done given its Sky and he's the poster boy but his whole career has finally got that big fat asterisk that everyone was crying out for.

ThisRegard

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

This is Salbutamol. Contador tested positive for Clenbuterol, which is a different drug.

Ah, yes, that's correct. Different methods too, steak and asthma medicine.

terrydel

Urindanger wrote: »

Took long enough but glad to see it all starting to unravel. I doubt anything will be done given its Sky and he's the poster boy but his whole career has finally got that big fat asterisk that everyone was crying out for.

So basically thats another 4 Tdf's that bite the dust!
The entire sport should be beyond ashamed of itself.

Thud

supposedly it'd be about 15 to 20 puffs of a regular inhaler to go over the limit

Chips Lovell

No, he may lose the Vuelta title alright, but there isn't any question at the moment his Tour titles may be stripped.

py

Interesting to see what effect it had on his BBC sports personality chances now.

godtabh

robyntmorton wrote: »

The statement from Team Sky.

TL:DR No rules have been broken (at this point)

https://www.teamsky.com/article/ts-statement

Personally I think Sky shouldn’t be showing favourable results from their lab, and that UCI should be mandating an independent facility for Froome to submit to for testing.

I love there transparency. Found out in September. Release a statement just before the UCI.

terrydel

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

No, he may lose the Vuelta title alright, but there isn't any question at the moment his Tour titles may be stripped.

What I meant was that if hes found to be a cheat here and its proven, an * goes against his tdf victories, and essentially they are tainted.
In my opinion, which is not necessarily everyone's, any victory with an * means nothing til the person proves the * isnt warranted.
If another 4 tour wins are tarnished by the stench of cheating, it really is utterly pitiful, if its not already. There would be virtually no winners in the last quarter of a century or more with untainted victories, outside of Evans and Sastre. That is a shameful legacy for a sport and really does render the whole thing a waste of time and a huge con.

Chips Lovell

Hang on, he didn't test positive at any of the Tours though, so there'll be no star.

And remember, this is going overboard on Ventolin, not EPO or blood doping. Very different things.

It's quite likely he'll get a suspension, like Petacchi, Trentin or Ulissi previously, but to say its a shameful legacy for the sport is going way over the top.

ThisRegard

Well, it is. Top team purporting to be whiter than white with apparently the best medical team around manage to get this so wrong? That's a ****ty legacy from the self proclaimed best pro cycling team. Has it been used as a masking agent in the past?

What "mistakes" are the other lesser teams doing?

There may be no physical star but it's there mentally for all to see.

terrydel

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

Hang on, he didn't test positive at any of the Tours though, so there'll be no star.

And remember, this is going overboard on Ventolin, not EPO or blood doping. Very different things.

It's quite likely he'll get a suspension, like Petacchi, Trentin or Ulissi previously, but to say its a shameful legacy for the sport is going way over the top.

Glad you think so. Its that kind of nonchalant attitude to the whole thing that allows it to carry on in my view. But we obviously disagree on the issue.

Miklos

ThisRegard wrote: »

Well, it is. Top team purporting to be whiter than white with apparently the best medical team around manage to get this so wrong? That's a ****ty legacy from the self proclaimed best pro cycling team. Has it been used as a masking agent in the past?

The purported to be whiter than white in the beginning, they are happy to just be grey these days I think.

zurbfoundation

godtabh wrote: »

I love there transparency. Found out in September. Release a statement just before the UCI.

To all noting the timing, its quite a normal time frame - just compare it to boxer Tyson Fury's anti-doping result from last night - gave a positive test for a steroid in February 2015, was allowed to box on and beat Klitschko months later (which still stands) and last night the whole thing got backdated and he is cleared to continue. Or Ciaran Kelly at the Gorey 3 day, April 2014, news made public late June 2015. When there are procedures to follow, it can take time.

Then again you could just get thrown under the Team Sky Bus like Jon Tiernan Locke.

py wrote: »

Interesting to see what effect it had on his BBC sports personality chances now.

of course - the big prize

terrydel

zurbfoundation wrote: »

of course - the big prize

BBC sports pesonality - does anyone give a two bob bit about that anymore?!

DKmac

Thud wrote: »

supposedly it'd be about 15 to 20 puffs of a regular inhaler to go over the limit

"Salbutamol doesn’t need a TUE as long as you don’t exceed a certain amount. And, to be honest, you can’t go near that amount using an inhaler, unless you are taking 20 to 40 puffs [a day]. You just can’t. "

That's from an interview with Conor McGrane on CyclingTips a while back.
https://cyclingtips.com/2016/04/why-do-so-many-elite-cyclists-have-asthma/
So Froome must have been taking 40-80 puffs a day to have twice the allowable amount.

velo.2010

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

It's quite likely he'll get a suspension, like Petacchi, Trentin or Ulissi previously, but to say its a shameful legacy for the sport is going way over the top.

If he's banned, he's finished. Sky will have no choice but to sack him, if only to appear to enforce their 'strict' policy on doping. No other team will touch Froome (apart from Astana, as he is fond of a selfie with Vino).

Sky will soon have new owners... Disney. I wonder what they will think of BSKYB's ventures in the world of pro cycling!

terrydel

velo.2010 wrote: »

If he's banned, he's finished. Sky will have no choice but to sack him, if only to appear to enforce their 'strict' policy on doping. No other team will touch Froome (apart from Astana, as he is fond of a selfie with Vino).

Sky will soon have new owners... Disney. I wonder what they will think of BSKYB's ventures in the world of pro cycling!

Mickey mouse I'd say :P

nilhg

DKmac wrote: »

"Salbutamol doesn’t need a TUE as long as you don’t exceed a certain amount. And, to be honest, you can’t go near that amount using an inhaler, unless you are taking 20 to 40 puffs [a day]. You just can’t. "

That's from an interview with Conor McGrane on CyclingTips a while back.
https://cyclingtips.com/2016/04/why-do-so-many-elite-cyclists-have-asthma/
So Froome must have been taking 40-80 puffs a day to have twice the allowable amount.

Or taken some orally?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10850394

Look at the timeline, bad day on the 6th, loses time, big comeback on the 7th, fails test..........

death1234567

nak wrote: »

No. You don't need a TUE for salbutamol. Plus it's has no real benefit to non asthmatics.

Really? So if I'm non-asthmatic and in the middle of a three week tour and I take "a short-acting bronchodilator medication that opens up the medium and large airways in the lungs" it won't give me any benefit at all?

death1234567

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

No, he may lose the Vuelta title alright

Good job Paddy Power have already paid out

velo.2010

There's an interview Froome did with Kimmage floating around on Twitter from a few years ago. Froome says his Ventolin inhaler is for 'big efforts'. Kimmage said that sounded like performance enhancement. Froome said it was the same as eating a large breakfast before a long day on the bike. Not really the same thing, is it?

Chips Lovell

velo.2010 wrote: »

If he's banned, he's finished. Sky will have no choice but to sack him, if only to appear to enforce their 'strict' policy on doping.

I'd be surprised if they willingly let their prize asset go. I know Petacchi was sacked in 2008, but Ulissi and Simon Yates were both kept on by their teams without much fuss.

godtabh

zurbfoundation wrote: »

To all noting the timing, its quite a normal time frame - just compare it to boxer Tyson Fury's anti-doping result from last night - gave a positive test for a steroid in February 2015, was allowed to box on and beat Klitschko months later (which still stands) and last night the whole thing got backdated and he is cleared to continue. Or Ciaran Kelly at the Gorey 3 day, April 2014, news made public late June 2015. When there are procedures to follow, it can take time.

Then again you could just get thrown under the Team Sky Bus like Jon Tiernan Locke.



of course - the big prize

Sky could have issued a statement back then if they wanted to. They didnt. No transparency.

terrydel

Cant wait to hear what kimmage has to say!

godtabh

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

I'd be surprised if they willingly let their prize asset go. I know Petacchi was sacked in 2008, but Ulissi and Simon Yates were both kept on by their teams without much fuss.

Yates was kept on because the team ****ed up (and also he will be/is a star)

nak

death1234567 wrote: »

Really? So if I'm non-asthmatic and in the middle of a three week tour and I take "a short-acting bronchodilator medication that opens up the medium and large airways in the lungs" it won't give me any benefit at all?

It doesn't have that effect in non-asthmatics. You might see increased heart rate presenting as palpitations with inhaled salbutamol but that's pretty much it.

Water John

Seen a few reports recently on extreme athletes and about 1 in 8 have induced athsma. Does this fit in here and how should such a phenomenon be regulated?

Chips Lovell

godtabh wrote: »

Yates was kept on because the team ****ed up

Froome said the team's doctor advised him he could increase his dosage. It's possible the doctor didn't factor in the effect of exercise and dehydration on urine concentration of the drug.