# Who was on the new 'undetectable' drugs at this year's Tour?



## Flying_Monkey (7 Oct 2009)

Apparently two new and so-far undetectable new drugs were in use at this year's Tour according to the French anti-doping authority, the AFLD, according to this article. One was a new variant on EPO, Hematide, and the other was a drug called Aicar that is supposed to burn fat and enhance muscles. Pierre Bordey, the Head of AFLD is quoted as saying he was disturbed by the thinness of some of the riders this year, and the article says that many of the top riders are under suspicion. I am beginning to get a bad feeling about certain people who got very much thinner, very quickly and produced so far unprecedented performances. I really hope not...


----------



## Fab Foodie (7 Oct 2009)

Mmmm not good FM, not good at all. Just when we thought the sport might have turned the corner. Let's hope our own skinny rider achieved his success through hard work.
I could certainly use some Aicar though to melt-away the aero-belly, where does one get it?


----------



## Noodley (7 Oct 2009)

I'm sure I read somewhere that there is a urine test for Aicar which was developed by one of the researchers from the Salk Institute and this test was made available to the IOC....<I'll go have a search>

<returns after search>

Yep, blood and urine test:
http://www.isteroids.com/blog/would-aicar-and-gw1516-displace-steroids/


----------



## yello (7 Oct 2009)

A serious question because I really don't know...

This new drug, aicar, would have to be classified as 'performance enhancing' (or some such) before it being designated a banned substance, no? Who makes that decision and on what criteria? 

There must be a plethora of legitimate drugs that athletes take, all falling into different categories. Perhaps it could be argued that certain drugs are/aren't performance enhancing, I don't know. It makes it difficult for the athlete but I guess, if they were being responsible, that they'd ask for the official designation before taking something new.


----------



## Ian H (7 Oct 2009)

Try as I might I can't get exercised about this. It's gone on since the earliest days, mostly pretty openly. It's just part of the game.


----------



## Haitch (7 Oct 2009)

All 17 tests have proved negative.

Breathe out.


----------



## Noodley (7 Oct 2009)

Alan H said:


> All 17 tests have proved negative.
> 
> Breathe out.




That was re-tests from the 2008 Tour.


----------



## Haitch (7 Oct 2009)

Noodley said:


> That was re-tests from the 2008 Tour.




So it was.

Take a deep breath.


----------



## Noodley (7 Oct 2009)

Alan H said:


> So it was.
> 
> Take a deep breath.


----------



## Haitch (7 Oct 2009)

According to a piece in this morning's paper, no plans to retest 2009 samples have been announced yet but if Pierre Bordry, the head of AFLD, is invited to the Tour presentation next Wednesday, that's when you'll hear about it.

Seeing that Hematide and Aicar are still undergoing clinical trials and are not yet on the market, how likely is it that cyclists were using them last summer? (Or is that really just wishful naivety?)


----------



## Flying_Monkey (7 Oct 2009)

Alan H said:


> Seeing that Hematide and Aicar are still undergoing clinical trials and are not yet on the market, how likely is it that cyclists were using them last summer? (Or is that really just wishful naivety?)



Very likely. This is exactly when they would get hold of them as there will be no tests yet, and as the Kohl case has revealed there is a whole shadow industry in dodgy labs and corrupt techs and resesarchers.


----------



## User169 (7 Oct 2009)

yello said:


> A serious question because I really don't know...
> 
> This new drug, aicar, would have to be classified as 'performance enhancing' (or some such) before it being designated a banned substance, no? Who makes that decision and on what criteria?



Aicar is on the 2009 WADA prohibited list - not sure if it was on the 2008 list. 

Here's a link to an outline of the updating process..

http://www.wada-ama.org/en/prohibitedlist.ch2


----------



## yello (7 Oct 2009)

Thank you!


----------



## Noodley (7 Oct 2009)

Delftse Post said:


> Aicar is on the 2009 WADA prohibited list - not sure if it was on the 2008 list.



It was added in 2009.


----------



## andyfromotley (8 Oct 2009)

Flying_Monkey said:


> Apparently two new and so-far undetectable new drugs were in use at this year's Tour according to the French anti-doping authority, the AFLD, according to this article. One was a new variant on EPO, Hematide, and the other was a drug called Aicar that is supposed to burn fat and enhance muscles. Pierre Bordey, the Head of AFLD is quoted as saying he was disturbed by the thinness of some of the riders this year, and the article says that many of the top riders are under suspicion. I am beginning to get a bad feeling about certain people who got very much thinner, very quickly and produced so far unprecedented performances. I really hope not...



please be wrong fm.


----------



## wafflycat (8 Oct 2009)

So... who do we think is going to be named as a doper then?


----------



## girofan (8 Oct 2009)

wafflycat said:


> So... who do we think is going to be named as a doper then?



It certainly won't be "Old One Testicle" as he runs the sport and would sue the a**e off anyone. Even if they had solid proof!!
Just ask his mate, the UCI supremo?


----------



## wafflycat (8 Oct 2009)

As we all know, Lance would never use illegal performance enhancing substances..

Are we thinking Brit?


----------



## Flying_Monkey (8 Oct 2009)

wafflycat said:


> As we all know, Lance would never use illegal performance enhancing substances..
> 
> Are we thinking Brit?



There as indeed a superb performance by a Brit who lost lots of weight very rapidly and developed over a single season into a top mountain performer. To echo AFO, I hope this is merely a coincidence, and that it was all the result of hard work and a newfound dedication to the road...


----------



## rich p (8 Oct 2009)

I'd stake a fair bit of money on the fact that Cav and Wiggo are clean.

I wouldn't put any money on The Schlecks, Bertie and I have serious doubts about Spartacus too.


----------



## Noodley (8 Oct 2009)

I am 100% (seriously) convinced about Cav and Wiggins. And likewise about British Cycling. 

I would, however, like to know who the British riders who BC would not touch due to their *other methods*. I was quite disappointed to learn Brailsford c(w)ould not name them, but understand this may be due to legal reasons....


----------



## rich p (8 Oct 2009)

Who wasn't on the Sky wanted list?
CW?


----------



## Noodley (8 Oct 2009)

rich p said:


> Who wasn't on the Sky wanted list?
> CW?



There were 4 Brits IIRC riding for Continental (not sure if this was 'c' or 'C') teams who were not part of BC plans according to the book: Heroes, Villains and Velodromes: Chris Hoy and Britain's Track Cycling Revolution.


----------



## wafflycat (8 Oct 2009)

Must admit, I'm not anywhere near 100% certain about *anyone* in the pro-peloton!

Edit: except Lance, naturally...


----------



## Noodley (8 Oct 2009)

wafflycat said:


> Must admit, I'm not anywhere near 100% certain about *anyone* in the pro-peloton!
> ...



I did think about saying 99%...but I am actually 100% sure British Cycling is clean. If riders start getting dropped by Brailsford then I'll start looking at them.

Like they'll be bothered about me!


----------



## rich p (8 Oct 2009)

OT, has anyone heard how Jonny Bellis is?


----------



## wafflycat (8 Oct 2009)

Noodley said:


> I did think about saying 99%...but I am actually 100% sure British Cycling is clean. If riders start getting dropped by Brailsford then I'll start looking at them.
> 
> Like they'll be bothered about me!



I'm still nowhere near 100% certain about anyone or any organisation being clean.


----------



## Noodley (8 Oct 2009)

rich p said:


> OT, has anyone heard how Jonny Bellis is?



Lat I read he was stable and docs thinking of bringing him out of coma, but that was a few days ago...


----------



## Noodley (8 Oct 2009)

wafflycat said:


> I'm still nowhere near 100% certain about anyone or any organisation being clean.



I know, it's hard <actress, bishop >


----------



## Chuffy (9 Oct 2009)

Noodley said:


> I know, it's hard <actress, bishop >


As I've said before, regarding Wiggy, I _believe_ that he's clean and I have faith in him, but belief and faith don't necessarily amount to certainty.

Regarding CW, didn't he upset Team GB by riding for one of his (Italian) trade team colleagues in the Worlds a few years ago? That would account for his absence, wouldn't it?


----------



## Flying_Monkey (9 Oct 2009)

Chuffy said:


> As I've said before, regarding Wiggy, I _believe_ that he's clean and I have faith in him, but belief and faith don't necessarily amount to certainty.
> 
> Regarding CW, didn't he upset Team GB by riding for one of his (Italian) trade team colleagues in the Worlds a few years ago? That would account for his absence, wouldn't it?



Yeah, that and other stuff...


----------



## Chuffy (9 Oct 2009)

Flying_Monkey said:


> Yeah, that and his heavy use of asthma medication...


Documented? 
He seems to be The Invisible Brit.


----------



## kennykool (9 Oct 2009)

I don't think anyone takes drugs......well except the guys that get caught!!!


----------



## Flying_Monkey (9 Oct 2009)

It was actually EPO. Wegelius failed a test but was then cleared on medical grounds back in 2003.


----------



## Chuffy (9 Oct 2009)

Flying_Monkey said:


> It was actually EPO. Wegelius failed a test but was then cleared on medical grounds back in 2003.


That would have been the old 50% test wouldn't it? I wonder if they still have the samples...


----------



## Flying_Monkey (9 Oct 2009)

He didn't deny the result, but he had his spleen removed when he was younger (as my Dad did) and this can lead to much higher than normal haemocrit levels. That doesn't prove he wasn't doping of course, but he is considered to be innocent...


----------



## User169 (9 Oct 2009)

Had a bit of a read about Aicar. Its connection with increased endurance appears to be based on one experiment carried out on mice which was reported last year. 

I'm amazed that anyone would be desperate enough to consume a fairly unknown drug on the basis of such scant data, not least because I doubt there's very much known about its long term safety profile.


----------



## rich p (9 Oct 2009)

Delftse Post said:


> Had a bit of a read about Aicar. Its connection with increased indurance appears to be based on one experiment carried out on mice which was reported last year.
> 
> I'm amazed that anyone would be desperate enough to consume a fairly unknown drug on the basis of such scant data, not least because I doubt there's very much known about its long term safety profile.



I agree that it is incredible that riders are willing to take such risks on unknown drugs but as Tommy Simpson said, if it takes 10 to kill you, I'll take 9.
Sadly, he took the whole 10.


----------



## Noodley (9 Oct 2009)

Taking stuff which thickens your blood can hardly be described as 'safe' either...but it doesn't stop people doing it


----------



## Flying_Monkey (9 Oct 2009)

Delftse Post said:


> I'm amazed that anyone would be desperate enough to consume a fairly unknown drug on the basis of such scant data, not least because I doubt there's very much known about its long term safety profile.



That's probably one thing that separates many of the top competitors from the rest of us...


----------



## Chuffy (9 Oct 2009)

Flying_Monkey said:


> That's probably one thing that separates many of the top competitors from the rest of us...


If you can get it before the rest of the cheating b'stards pack do, you've got an edge. Of course they'll try stuff whatever the risk!


----------



## rich p (9 Oct 2009)

Anyway, if Cw was one of Brailsford's 'do not pick', who was Noodley's other suspect?


----------



## Noodley (9 Oct 2009)

rich p said:


> Anyway, if Cw was one of Brailsford's 'do not pick', who was Noodley's other suspect?



I don't have suspects....the book said there were 4 riders. I started to look at it today but could not get far due to my limited knowledge of pro racing.


----------



## rich p (9 Oct 2009)

Noodley said:


> I don't have suspects....the book said there were 4 riders. I started to look at it today but could not get far due to my limited knowledge of pro racing.



Can't we just randomly smear a few possibly innocents? 
I'm slightly miffed that there weren't any positives the other day!


----------



## yello (9 Oct 2009)

rich p said:


> I'm slightly miffed that there weren't any positives the other day!



Are you sure?


----------



## rich p (9 Oct 2009)

yello said:


> Are you sure?



Excusez moi! Did you have M. Bodry round to tea?


----------



## yello (10 Oct 2009)

rich p said:


> Excusez moi! Did you have M. Bodry round to tea?



Oh rich rich rich  I was being the straight man!

The correct response, quite clearly, was..... positive!!


----------



## rich p (10 Oct 2009)

yello said:


> Oh rich rich rich :arrow: I was being the straight man!
> 
> The correct response, quite clearly, was..... positive!!



Je suis desole!!!

What an open goal I missed


----------



## Globalti (10 Oct 2009)

Interestingly Lance won this year's Leadville Classic by a considerable margin after being beaten last year by 2 minutes by David Wiens who had previously won it 6 times. Some comeback, eh?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadville_Trail_100_MTB


----------



## yello (10 Oct 2009)

That happened some time ago RR... I think there was a thread on it at the time.


----------



## Dave5N (14 Oct 2009)

Please do bear in mind that some athletes are just better. Naturally. That's why we have sport.

In my local league, there are two or three little kids who are so much quicker than there peers it's embarrassing. We're used to that with adults in track athletics - why not cycling?


----------



## yenrod (14 Oct 2009)

Rigid Raider said:


> Interestingly Lance won this year's Leadville Classic by a considerable margin after being beaten last year by 2 minutes by David Wiens who had previously won it 6 times. Some comeback, eh?
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadville_Trail_100_MTB



Rigid - i feel he took training a hell of alot serious this yr compared to last when he got beat...


----------



## wafflycat (14 Oct 2009)

Dave5N said:


> Please do bear in mind that some athletes are just better. Naturally. That's why we have sport.
> 
> In my local league, there are two or three little kids who are so much quicker than there peers it's embarrassing. We're used to that with adults in track athletics - why not cycling?



Indeed, there's differeing levels of ability. But there's also cheating, and it goes on even at low-level/kids competition. I've seen it in cycling with my own eyes and when brought to the attention of the 'authorities' they simply didn't want to know. Omerta starts when they're young. Shame really.


----------

