Chris Froome tests positive for Salbutamol

RobFowl

Overuse of Ventolin is associated with an increased risk of brittle asthma and sudden cardiac death....

DirkVoodoo

Lumen wrote: »

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.

You're assuming there was an inhaler and he was puffing like mad. In the tests the subjects were taking an oral capsule. It's not impossible to assume Sky would also use the same.

Also, these stages are much longer than the trial period and in the trial they were measuring concentrations before, during and after. Whereas Froome was only measured after.

A lot of assumptions, is what I'm saying. We can't categorically say that the amount he ingested was far or not far below the test protocol.

It is reasonable to assume, however, that this was done to enhance performance. In which case, Sky would not leave anything to chance "Ah, take a few puffs!"...I'm sure the dosage was administered to both provide a boost and hopefully be dissipated to avoid detection. Except they failed.

Lumen

RobFowl wrote: »

Overuse of Ventolin is associated with an increased risk of brittle asthma and sudden cardiac death....

Thanks Dr Buzzkill.

el tel

Is there any way to tell how many puffs a particular person can take of their inhaler in a given period that would see you over the 2000mg (or whatever it is) limit?

I have taken 20-30 odd inhaler puffs on occasion to "level the playing field" © Bradley Wiggins  but was I impermissibly doping and how would I know?

Urindanger

Yeah I'd assume it was oral too. Salbutamol has a very short lifespan so you'd imagine if it was inhalers it would have been spotted on TV of him puffing away on an inhaler given the amount of puffs needed to get to that concentration found. Oral dosage could just look like he was munching on food or a gel or taking in fluids.

Seen some interesting theories online to do with blood bags and that which is somewhat plausible.

Kaisr Sose

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.

Agreed. Ultimately he is responsible for what is in his body.

DirkVoodoo

This is kind of key, and like everyone is saying here "how would you puff on it so much?", "How many puffs would you need?"

Personally I know after a few puffs I used to get quite dizzy.

There is research pointing to inhalation having greater bronchodilation effects, which is why that method is used to administer it in Asthmatics.

But we're not dealing with an asthmatic here, so we can probably discard the "that's too many puffs argument".

Chips Lovell

This is worth a read. Sums up most of the talking points and links to a lot of the studies done.

NIMAN

Cycling is rotten to the core.

I used to watch with horror as so many fans believed that all these English riders were clean?

Sport has zero credibility left.

It's about time all this "I have asthma" nonsense was shown up for the drug cheating that it is.

el tel

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

This is kind of key, and like everyone is saying here "how would you puff on it so much?", "How many puffs would you need?"

Personally I know after a few puffs I used to get quite dizzy.

There is research pointing to inhalation having greater bronchodilation effects, which is why that method is used to administer it in Asthmatics.

But we're not dealing with an asthmatic here, so we can probably discard the "that's too many puffs argument".

Tramdol can do that to you too :angel:

el tel

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

This is kind of key, and like everyone is saying here "how would you puff on it so much?", "How many puffs would you need?"

Personally I know after a few puffs I used to get quite dizzy.

There is research pointing to inhalation having greater bronchodilation effects, which is why that method is used to administer it in Asthmatics.

But we're not dealing with an asthmatic here, so we can probably discard the "that's too many puffs argument".

Tramdol can do that to you too :angel:

ILIKEFOOD

each puff of a ventolin inhaler (salbutomol) delivers 100micrograms of Salbutomol - as an asthmatic I personally need 2 puffs to go back to normal - I'm guessing 20 puffs would freeze my lungs! 2 puffs , even when cycling, keeps me right for about 6 hours. I wouldn't describe my asthma as severe by any means but when I need it, i really need it, absolutely could not continue without it. But i find it amazing that someone who requires 2000micrograms can compete at that level, like you'd want to be a serious asthmatic I would have thought to require that amount, and maybe he is. It just seems incredible that someone needs that amount in respect of my own experience, of course we are all different and have different needs.

Chips Lovell

It was 2,000 nanograms he tested positive for, not 2,000 micrograms.

1,600 micrograms is the max permitted dosage in 24 hours. 1,000ng is the max permitted urinary concentration.

ILIKEFOOD

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

It was 2,000 nanograms he tested positive for, not 2,000 micrograms.

1,600 micrograms is the max permitted dosage in 24 hours. 1,000ng is the max permitted urinary concentration.

ah! silly me not reading that right

walshb

NIMAN wrote: »

Cycling is rotten to the core.

I used to watch with horror as so many fans believed that all these English riders were clean?

Sport has zero credibility left.

It's about time all this "I have asthma" nonsense was shown up for the drug cheating that it is.

Claiming to have asthma doesn't mean you have it. They are medically assessed and cleared and certified as being asthma sufferers, that then allows them to abide by the rules in place.

AstraMonti

What a shocking revelation :rolleyes:

Urindanger

Doc07

He'll be exonerated.
Are Team Sky murky and unethical...yes
Are their primary sponsor...yes
Have they a history of using dubious doctors...absolutely yes.

Is salbutamol in the same league as Triamcimone(Bradley's steroid injection) or EPO/Blood products.....absolutely not.

Doesn't make it right but this is small fry in the grand scheme of doping. If UCI make the limits/rules easy to bend then Sky will bend them to breaking point and beyond.

El Caballo

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?

Nope. Bronchodilators only soothe inflammation and airway resistance in the lungs and if there is no inflammation or restriction, you won't get any benefits from them. There is a mountain of studies out there to back this up as well as studies on the performance enhancing benefits on highly trained athletes which show no performance gains from the use of ventolin inhalation.

Still, the rules are the rules and it can also be a masking agent. Tbh, I don't know how Froome can take that amount through inhalation, my breathing and performance actually gets worse after a certain amount of puffs. As bizarre as it sounds, highly active people are almost 10 times as likely to have asthmatic symptoms than the general population as noted in the Ultra longitudinal Study on high mileage runners.

brooke 2

Urindanger wrote: »

The book was thrown at Contador for a miniscule concentration of a PED. Froome was double the legal amount of his PED. If there is any decency left in the sport they have to make an example of him and Team Sky. I doubt they will though unfortunately.

Looking forward to what Kimmage response to this is as well as Dave Walsh the coward. That bullsh*t book he wrote and his whole biased stance on Team Sky has been diabolical and a damn shame after all the work he did in the Lance case.

Dave Walsh cashed in on the good reputation he earned in exposing Lance Armstrong, but sold his soul to the devil when he went to Sky. Paul Kimmage is the only one left with any credibility at this stage. Walsh is just a spoofer.

flatty

Too much salbutamol would surely have a negative effect. I think it causes accelerated heart rate. It'd be completely counter productive.
I am an utter cynic, but Froome is a genuinely nice man, this I know from a lad who worked on the cars for team Sky, back when Froome was a domestique. He said back then that wiggins was an ahole of a high order, but Froome was always extremely pleasant and kind.
I suspect the sky doctors are behind this.
The same lads that lost all details of sbw's envelope, and I know what that contained. Ironically, it certainly wasn't an over the counter inhaler as may have been suggested.

pelevin

If Nibali is clean, then that's this Vuelta he should have won. Froome for one thing should surely be stripped of the title for the specific adverse reading- and ideally this would have happened before the next day's racing but perhaps that was never feasible. Also seems very significant that the day before his adverse reading, Froome was in big trouble, lost time & would have lost lots more only for strong team help. Next day when he's twice the limit his form startlingly is better than everyone again.

Then there's the Veulta Chris Horner bested Nibali which was a farce.

Of course that's assuming Nibali is himself legit but you could say that about every rider.

velo.2010

flatty wrote: »

Too much salbutamol would surely have a negative effect. I think it causes accelerated heart rate. It'd be completely counter productive.
I am an utter cynic, but Froome is a genuinely nice man, this I know from a lad who worked on the cars for team Sky, back when Froome was a domestique. He said back then that wiggins was an ahole of a high order, but Froome was always extremely pleasant and kind.
I suspect the sky doctors are behind this.
The same lads that lost all details of sbw's envelope, and I know what that contained. Ironically, it certainly wasn't an over the counter inhaler as may have been suggested.

David, is that you?

Kaisr Sose

terrydel wrote: »

Mickey mouse I'd say :P

I don’t know what’s funnier, your ‘Mickey Mouse’ comment or the thanks from ‘Big Ears’!

death1234567

El Caballo wrote: »

Nope. Bronchodilators only soothe inflammation and airway resistance in the lungs and if there is no inflammation or restriction, you won't get any benefits from them.

I'd guess that after 16 stages of a grand tour my lungs would be pretty inflamed/restricted but I'm no doctor.

Dr. Ross tucker was on newstalk there and he said that there are studies that show a performance improvement in non asmathics if it's ingested rather than via an inhaler.

walshb

brooke 2 wrote: »

Dave Walsh cashed in on the good reputation he earned in exposing Lance Armstrong, but sold his soul to the devil when he went to Sky. Paul Kimmage is the only one left with any credibility at this stage. Walsh is just a spoofer.

Kimmage’s problem is that his OTT zealousness means that his credibility is pants..

He can’t be impartial and reasonable. Tries too hard to find things that aren’t there.

This is another non story. Pure sensationalism.. Froome is a good guy. No way with all that’s gone on and all the sh1tty mud thrown his way that he is going to intentionally cheat and break rules. At least not now and recently.

ThisRegard

walshb wrote: »

that his credibility is pants..
....

This is another non story. Pure sensationalism.. .

On doping matters you don't have much credibility yourself based on any of your posts about it across the forums.

walshb

ThisRegard wrote: »

On doping matters you don't have much credibility yourself based on any of your posts about it across the forums.

Same for you...they’re all cheats in your world...

You and Kimmage would get on like a house on Fire..

ThisRegard

My eyes are just open to the realities of certain performances in tandem with positive drugs tests.

magicbastarder

walshb wrote: »

This is another non story. Pure sensationalism.. Froome is a good guy. No way with all that’s gone on and all the sh1tty mud thrown his way that he is going to intentionally cheat and break rules.

non-story? you mean it doesn't even warrant debate, that the winner of the race ended up with double the legal limit in his system?

surely his doctors should have him paranoid about coming anywhere near the limit, let alone sailing clear through it like it wasn't there. of *course* it's a story, even if it was accidental.