Chris Froome tests positive for Salbutamol

Lumen

https://www.wada-ama.org/en/prohibited-list/prohibited-at-all-times/beta-2-agonists

"The presence in urine of salbutamol in excess of 1000 ng/mL or formoterol in excess of 40 ng/mL is presumed not to be an intended therapeutic use of the substance and will be considered as an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) unless the Athlete proves, through a controlled pharmacokinetic study, that the abnormal result was the consequence of the use of the therapeutic dose (by inhalation) up to the maximum dose indicated above."

Urindanger

It enhances performance and he overshot the allowed amount by a lot. He openly said to Kimmage he uses it before big days. Unless you want to side with his comparison of it to eating a big meal before a day's racing.

Time to get those frozen piss and blood bags out as well and retro test the hell of out them.

Lumen

Urindanger wrote: »

It enhances performance

No.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2657501/

"Apparently, inhaled β2 agonists also induce some degree of bronchodilation in healthy athletes. This improved lung function, however, does not lead to performance enhancement in competitive athletes, perhaps because the ease of ventilation is generally not a limiting factor during maximal exercise in young non‐asthmatic subjects.49 During maximal exercise pulmonary ventilation is not as high as the maximal achievable ventilation during clinical tests of ventilation"

07Lapierre

A backdated prescription should do the trick!

death1234567

Deleted User wrote: »

Some quotes from Nibali on the matter.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/nibali-chris-froome-salbutamol-case-is-terrible-for-the-sport/

He has asthma too? Quélle surprise. It must be a terrible handicap in cycling to have lungs that work.

nak

death1234567 wrote: »

He has asthma too? Quélle surprise. It must be a terrible handicap in cycling to have lungs that work.

Most people never push their CVS that far so could have asthma and not know it. I was diagnosed with asthma once I started racing. Looking back it was there as a child when I was competing in sports but didn't really think anything of it as I didn't have a full on attack.

I had a conversation with people at work who have all done 5/10km runs, a couple marathons and spoke about almost passing out at the end of a race - they all looked at me like I was crazy.

terrydel

death1234567 wrote: »

He has asthma too? Quélle surprise. It must be a terrible handicap in cycling to have lungs that work.

These lads consider a bit of hay fever or sinusitis as asthma, it seems its like whiplash and anyone can claim they suffer from it without comeback.

Weepsie

death1234567 wrote: »

He has asthma too? Quélle surprise. It must be a terrible handicap in cycling to have lungs that work.

His comment about rain and asthma is nonsense

magicbastarder

https://twitter.com/SecondCaptains/status/940944634951491584

Taxuser1

has it been reported what type of asthma he has? nibali comments on pollen but not all asthma is allergy related so his comments can be taken with a grain of salt.

as far as i'm concerned asthma and sport go hand in hand. as young asthmatics the routine advice me and my family heard from doctors was to get active as much as you could. 2 of my brothers won national titles and couldn't breathe at the best of times when non active. You can be asthmatic and go to the depths in sport and achieve highly, regardless of the condition. in my opinion, it doesn't go past the point where you are getting a benefit past those who are non asthmatic.

personally, inhalors didn't work for me but other medication has and continues to manage asthma and related respiratory symptoms, certainly never felt i was gaining an edge by taking it for a real issue. so with Froome, its whether you choose to believe he has a real issue or not? if the facts are there to prove he's had an underlying condition, then like Yates last year, this is a no news story to me and maybe he's slightly unfortunate.

terrydel

Weepsie wrote: »

His comment about rain and asthma is nonsense

As I said, its hayfever passed off as asthma.

ozzy jr

I had bad asthma as a child and could hardly walk a couple of hundred meters. I couldn't even cycle till I started to grow out of it at about 12 years old.

When I hear about the majority of pro cyclists taking ventolin and inhalers (which I took) for their asthma, it makes me laugh.

He might not have broke any rule (did he?) but they're bending them as far as they go.

Sky whiter than white, that's a joke too.

walshb

ozzy jr wrote: »

I had bad asthma as a child and could hardly walk a couple of hundred meters. I couldn't even cycle till I started to grow out of it at about 12 years old.

When I hear about the majority of pro cyclists taking ventolin and inhalers (which I took) for their asthma, it makes me laugh.

He might not have broke any rule (did he?) but they're bending them as far as they go.

Sky whiter than white, that's a joke too.

Bending rules is fine.....

Frome may have broken rules, no? Twice the permissible limit I heard this morning. Hast at been clarified or accepted as truth now?

Eamonnator

My son has asthma.He took Ventolin for the condition. When he was 12 or 13, he started mountain bike racing, but always felt that he was at a disadvantage to non asthmatics. When he was 16, he and I were at the Mountain Bike Tour of Britain. At the start of a stage, I noticed the race leader taking Ventolin. I pointed him out to my son. Partly as a result, his attitude changed and he started taking his racing more seriously. He went on to win 5 National Downhill titles and competed in 10 World Championships and I don't know, how many European Champs. and World Cup races.
I have no doubt, that he wouldn't have been able to compete at that level without Ventolin. At the time, I felt that he wasn't gaining any advantage, but rather that he was treating an ailment.
I always felt that he was gaining no unfair advantage because of his drug use.
However, I am now having doubts about the fairness of athletes using Ventolin.

walshb

Froome is 100 percent clean unless he is not....

walshb

Eamonnator wrote: »

My son has asthma.He took Ventolin for the condition. When he was 12 or 13, he started mountain bike racing, but always felt that he was at a disadvantage to non asthmatics. When he was 16, he and I were at the Mountain Bike Tour of Britain. At the start of a stage, I noticed the race leader taking Ventolin. I pointed him out to my son. Partly as a result, his attitude changed and he started taking his racing more seriously. He went on to win 5 National Downhill titles and competed in 10 World Championships and I don't know, how many European Champs. and World Cup races.
I have no doubt, that he wouldn't have been able to compete at that level without Ventolin. At the time, I felt that he wasn't gaining any advantage, but rather that he was treating an ailment.
I always felt that he was gaining no unfair advantage because of his drug use.
However, I am now having doubts about the fairness of athletes using Ventolin.

If it is allowed then whether or not not you are gaining an advantage (on your old self or on your competitors) is irrelevant. Isn't competitive sport all about trying to gain advantages? Whether that be via medicines, equipment, advice, dietitians, finances etc; it is all used to gain advantage...

irishrover99

terrydel wrote: »

Nothing stopping him un-retiring.
Then we can have one cheat profit from the misfortune of another. Doesnt that just warm your heart?!

If Froome does get a ban, i'd be very very sceptical about the next man up been clean.
History has shown that after a suspicious dominant period in cycling like in the Indurian and Armstrong glory days that doping has seemed to get worse after they quit as their is a void to fill and money to win.

Eamonnator

walshb wrote: »

If it is allowed then whether or not not you are gaining an advantage (on your old self or on your competitors) is irrelevant. Isn't competitive sport all about trying to gain advantages? Whether that be via medicines, equipment, advice, dietitians, finances etc; it is all used to gain advantage...

The point, I was trying to make was that I'm having doubts about whether it should be allowed or not.

Urindanger

Lumen wrote: »

No.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2657501/

"Apparently, inhaled β2 agonists also induce some degree of bronchodilation in healthy athletes. This improved lung function, however, does not lead to performance enhancement in competitive athletes, perhaps because the ease of ventilation is generally not a limiting factor during maximal exercise in young non‐asthmatic subjects.49 During maximal exercise pulmonary ventilation is not as high as the maximal achievable ventilation during clinical tests of ventilation"

Stolen from another forum, but:

Just doing a naive literature search, I was able to find some papers on the effect of acute (Froome levels) ingestion of Salbutamol on aerobic performance. There aren't a ton, but the consensus is that low doses (4 puffs) do nothing. High doses (4-6 mg) don't affect short term performance (10 minutes), but do elevate blood glucose and insulin. High doses do improve performance in a huge way. Time to exhaustion increased by 29% in those who didn't have an adverse reaction. So in high doses I could see this used as a mostly legal PED and a recovery product. Just don't go over the max allowed!

Abstracts:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11071049
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10912897
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11028047_Effects_of_Salbutamol_and_Caffeine_Ingestion_on_Exercise_Metabolism_and_Performance

"After Sal intake, resting C-peptide, lactate, FFA and blood glucose values were higher whereas exercise lactate and free fatty acid concentrations were greater during and at the conclusion of the exercise period (p < 0.05). These results suggest that acute salbutamol ingestion improved performance during submaximal exercise probably through an enhancement of the overall contribution to energy production from both aerobic and anaerobic metabolisms."

"Peak expiratory flow increased from 601 +/- 67 L x min(-1) to 629 +/- 64 L x min(-1) after salbutamol (P < 0.05). Peak torque was higher after salbutamol than after placebo (4.4% for the knee extensors, 4.9% for the knee flexors) (P < 0.05). Mean endurance time increased from 3,039 +/- 1,031 s after placebo to 3,439 +/- 1,287 s after salbutamol (P = 0.19). When four subjects complaining about adverse side effects were excluded from the analysis, the increase in endurance time (729 +/- 1,007 s or 29%) was statistically significant (P <-0.05)."

It mentions non-asthmatic athletes, and even if one is gullible to believe that he has asthma (sure they all have asthma don't they :rolleyes:), he also said he had bilharzia (the supposed reason for his late transformation) and it is said bilharzia cures asthma and the two cannot exist simultaneously. So this makes no sense either.

Considering Froome was caught with high dosage there, it can be taken that there are indeed PE effects with Sal/albuterol.

I also read that Sal may have masking benefits as well as fat loss benefits as it isn't a million miles different from Clenbuterol.

RobFowl

It's not the use of ventolin, thats allowed. It is the fact that there seems to be a massive dose taken.
Either he was one very sick MoFo or else......

Expect this to drag on............

walshb

Eamonnator wrote: »

The point, I was trying to make was that I'm having doubts about whether it should be allowed or not.

You could say the same for so many "PEDs."

Something in life will help and give an advantage.....

We cannot legislate for everything....In this case they are allowing a certain level. Above this level will need explanation and clarification from the "offender."

I am one who thinks that lists should be scrapped (within reason) and allow people compete with whatever means they want. It's a minefield of nonsense at the moment.

Bring in some health and safety rules and guidelines, but stopping man wanting to do better is simply not working, and anti man!

I ma not saying a 100 meter sprinter should be allowed a jet pack or a long distance runner a motorbike.....But I am sure people can come up with something a lot better than what is now.

terrydel

RobFowl wrote: »

It's not the use of ventolin, thats allowed. It is the fact that there seems to be a massive dose taken.
Either he was one very sick MoFo or else......

Expect this to drag on............

He looks on his last legs here in fairness to him....

https://youtu.be/SkBT13_ELCM

Weepsie

terrydel wrote: »

He looks on his last legs here in fairness to him....

https://youtu.be/SkBT13_ELCM

Why not pick the interview from the previous day when he looked ruined and was the reason for increasing his dosage, and presumably the reason for him looking healthier

benneca1

nak wrote: »

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.

There are no studies which prove it enhances endurance athletes but that is not the same as saying it doesn't. It is  bronchodilator even in non asthmatics so is opens up airways. Tis is how we adapt to increased effort and salbutamol enhances this effect. While it might not help your endurance a few puffs at the bottom of a big hill will give you a fair advantage when the gradient kicks in and breathing goes up.

carltonleon

walshb wrote: »

You could say the same for so many "PEDs."

Something in life will help and give an advantage.....

We cannot legislate for everything....In this case they are allowing a certain level. Above this level will need explanation and clarification from the "offender."

I am one who thinks that lists should be scrapped (within reason) and allow people compete with whatever means they want. It's a minefield of nonsense at the moment.

Bring in some health and safety rules and guidelines, but stopping man wanting to do better is simply not working, and anti man!

I ma not saying a 100 meter sprinter should be allowed a jet pack or a long distance runner a motorbike.....But I am sure people can come up with something a lot better than what is now.

But what about in your sport Walshy, It could have a serious implications on an opponent. Say painkillers before a fight and you take too much punishment because you can't actually feel the pain. That is a serious health risk, and that would just be painkillers not to mention all the other Drugs available. Slightly off topic I know

terrydel

Weepsie wrote: »

Why not pick the interview from the previous day when he looked ruined and was the reason for increasing his dosage, and presumably the reason for him looking healthier

I dont get you. Im not defending him in any way, quite the opposite. This for me shows just how advantageous the inhaler can be, if he can be in bits the day before and the next day finish a tough stage and appear in an interview like he hasnt even been cycling.

Lumen

Urindanger wrote: »

Stolen from another forum, but:

"After Sal intake, resting C-peptide, lactate, FFA and blood glucose values were higher whereas exercise lactate and free fatty acid concentrations were greater during and at the conclusion of the exercise period (p < 0.05). These results suggest that acute salbutamol ingestion improved performance during submaximal exercise probably through an enhancement of the overall contribution to energy production from both aerobic and anaerobic metabolisms."

"Peak expiratory flow increased from 601 +/- 67 L x min(-1) to 629 +/- 64 L x min(-1) after salbutamol (P < 0.05). Peak torque was higher after salbutamol than after placebo (4.4% for the knee extensors, 4.9% for the knee flexors) (P < 0.05). Mean endurance time increased from 3,039 +/- 1,031 s after placebo to 3,439 +/- 1,287 s after salbutamol (P = 0.19). When four subjects complaining about adverse side effects were excluded from the analysis, the increase in endurance time (729 +/- 1,007 s or 29%) was statistically significant (P <-0.05)."

It mentions non-asthmatic athletes, and even if one is gullible to believe that he has asthma (sure they all have asthma don't they :rolleyes:), he also said he had bilharzia (the supposed reason for his late transformation) and it is said bilharzia cures asthma and the two cannot exist simultaneously. So this makes no sense either.

Considering Froome was caught with high dosage there, it can be taken that there are indeed PE effects with Sal/albuterol.

I also read that Sal may have masking benefits as well as fat loss benefits as it isn't a million miles different from Clenbuterol.

OK, so 5mg (in between the 4mg and 6mg described as "acute" doses in research) is 50 x 100 mcg puffs.

Wada limits are: Inhaled salbutamol: maximum 1600 micrograms over 24 hours, not to exceed 800 micrograms every 12 hours;

I'm struggling a bit to understand how close Froome's dose was to the acute limits in the research, because the abstract doesn't say anything about how the doses were given or over what period.

But if we assume Froome dumped 1.6mg into his body in short order, timed appropriately before or during the stage, believing that a post-stage urine test would be OK, then that 1.6mg is still well below the 4mg of the research.

Quick, someone go up Stocking Lane with a load of inhalers and a power meter. The internet needs an answer.

walshb

carltonleon wrote: »

But what about in your sport Walshy, It could have a serious implications on an opponent. Say painkillers before a fight and you take too much punishment because you can't actually feel the pain. That is a serious health risk, and that would just be painkillers not to mention all the other Drugs available. Slightly off topic I know

I understand that. Not a free for all, just a real overhaul and change. Not all sports to be treated the same.

velo.2010

Weepsie wrote: »

Why not pick the interview from the previous day when he looked ruined and was the reason for increasing his dosage, and presumably the reason for him looking healthier

This is the problem. What constitutes it being just a very hard day for him or an asthma related episode? Either way, he was treated and improved his performance the next day. Others on GC (whether on meds or not/they didn't fail any test) lost time to Froome. Is this fair?

There is an arbitrary level that seemingly anyone can work up if they can prove they are asthmatic. One could argue for the allowable limit to be dropped and allow everyone to compete on their natural ability, or let everyone use Salbutamol to the allowed limit regardless if they have asthma or not. You might actually get a read on just how much it improves performance in those who were suspected of not actually having asthma in the first place.

Whatever the case, cycling again looks like a oddball sport were doping appears rampant and nobody in the sport gives two fcuks. Froome already had a distant relationship with the UK press and public. He'll be completely ostracised and have the piss taken out of him now.

Chips Lovell

I've a Power2Max and a full Ventolin inhaler. We could probably do this.