So is Sir Wiggo a cheat then?

Transmission breaker
Don
Joined
20 Oct 2002
Posts
16,793
Location
In a house
I think I actually said that I have no proof and am not saying he was cheating, only and that the only way to prove it, would be to get someone to admit the drugs were prescribed falsely.
Until this is proven, they should leave him and anyone else who is passing the required testing regime alone.

The sport has an issue that it is perceived to be filled with cheats.

There may be some truth to it, hell, if history tells us anything about drugs cheats it is that they have existing at the top of most sports, and cycling is one of the worst offenders.

It is very likely that some of the top "supposedly" clean sportsmen and women will be guilty of cheating. There is even a possibility that the best just do not ever get caught.
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Feb 2006
Posts
29,263
Location
Cornwall
I think I actually said that I have no proof and am not saying he was cheating, only and that the only way to prove it, would be to get someone to admit the drugs were prescribed falsely.
Until this is proven, they should leave him and anyone else who is passing the required testing regime alone.
Yeah we're both saying the same thing I think.

Only I would say that without evidence that he cheated, the "possibility that he is a cheat" applies equally to all the athletes. We shouldn't say just of Wiggins that "he could be a cheat". It's not right to single him out as "possibly a cheat" when there is as much evidence for him cheating as any of the other athletes.

He's surely not the only one to have used TUEs?

e: No, he isn't. Apparently it's normal/common for pro-cyclists to have TUEs for asthma.
 
Soldato
Joined
1 Mar 2010
Posts
21,780
Started reading the new government report Wiggins/Coe/Farah 4th Report - Combatting doping in sport
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmcumeds/366/36602.htm

interesting including

65.The stated purpose of some of the use of corticosteroids used under TUEs was to treat long-term conditions such as asthma. Our predecessors received briefings from several doctors, who wished not to be named, about the validity of this approach. They were told that, on average, 20% of British Olympians have asthma, higher than the UK population average of about 8%. Some sports are ‘respiratory-heavy’, such as: swimming, where 70% suffer from asthma, probably exacerbated by breathing in chemicals used in swimming pools; cycling, where between 30-40% of elite cyclists are affected; and about 25-30% of footballers and rugby players. On the other hand, athletes competing in sports like shooting and archery have rates of asthma at around 5-10%.

66.Some medical experts were of the view that having to resort to the use of drugs such as triamcinolone to treat asthma was a sign that the athletes and their medical advisers were not managing their condition effectively. They were of the view that corticosteroids are such an aggressive form of treatment that they should be reserved for emergencies, and used only for a brief period of time. One noted of the British Olympic swimming team (of whom 70% suffered from asthma and most had lung capacity of only 50%), with the effective management of their asthma, none of them required any banned treatments and therefore none needed a TUE. Professor Brian Lipworth of the Scottish Centre for Respiratory Research said that it would be “utterly bonkers” to prescribe drugs like triamcinolone to treat asthma, adding “there are so many alternatives which are just as effective but with less severe adverse effects.
 
Transmission breaker
Don
Joined
20 Oct 2002
Posts
16,793
Location
In a house
Indeed, TUEs are rife in MANY sports.
The problem is they are VERY hard to refute. The use of drugs is not an exact science, despite what you may think. Some doctors will prescribe some drugs freely, whilst others would not use the same drug.
Humans are all slightly different, and that's why drugs are tested so intensively, what works for one person will actively hurt someone else.
As such, whilst there are any grey areas, the cheats will capitalise on this.
There is no easy fix for this, so we just have to work on improving testing, educating young sports-people, and make sure that the cheats, when caught, are punished correctly.
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Feb 2006
Posts
29,263
Location
Cornwall
Indeed, TUEs are rife in MANY sports.
The problem is they are VERY hard to refute. The use of drugs is not an exact science, despite what you may think. Some doctors will prescribe some drugs freely, whilst others would not use the same drug.
Humans are all slightly different, and that's why drugs are tested so intensively, what works for one person will actively hurt someone else.
As such, whilst there is any grey areas, the cheats will capitalise on this.
There is no easy fix for this, so we just have to work on improving testing, educating young sports-people, and make sure that the cheats, when caught, are punished correctly.
Saying that tho, unless Wiggins knew his prescription was unnecessary/wrong, any wrong-doing would fall on the doctor making the prescription?

Sure, Wiggins could have said "no" to the treatment regardless, but even if the prescription was erroneous, he could still have been acting in good faith?
 
Transmission breaker
Don
Joined
20 Oct 2002
Posts
16,793
Location
In a house
Saying that tho, unless Wiggins knew his prescription was unnecessary/wrong, any wrong-doing would fall on the doctor making the prescription?

Sure, Wiggins could have said "no" to the treatment regardless, but even if the prescription was erroneous, he could still have been acting in good faith?

Ask Justin Gatlin the same question!
 
Permabanned
Joined
8 Feb 2004
Posts
4,539
Team sky have enough cash they can easily find just the right 'expert' in the field to prescribe exactly what is required to take them right up to the point of cheating but not quite over per the technical interpretation of the rules... I think Wiggins has probably self-brainwashed himself in to believing it is legit by years of association.... If he was an outsider looking in he would probably see it very differently... That said I suspect other teams are doing something similar but possibly not as well as team sky.

Has anyone looked at just how many tour cyclists take or have taken asthma related medication?
 
Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
20,997
Location
Just to the left of my PC
I always wondered when performance enhancing drugs actually became an issue.

The original Greek professional Olympians would have had no problem at all and indeed used narcotics widely to gain an advantage (Particularly pain killers)

Even in the 19th, early 20th century I done think it was considered an issue. Long distance runners were routinely topped up with Brandy during their races for instance (Though I cannot think that this would have helped much :p). Since pretty much everybody was permanently stoned in the 19th century anyway I have no doubt that other narcotic use such as cocaine was pretty routine.

Alcohol was by far the most widely used drug in the 19th century in the UK, with gin being the biggest public health issue (cheap and potent). You could legally buy pretty much any drug in existence at the time, but other drugs were more expensive so alcohol was by far the most widely used. Hardly anyone was stoned often. It certainly wasn't true that "pretty much everybody was permanently stoned".

Drug use in sport was commonplace later than the early 20th century, especially in some sports. Cycling, for example. "Vitamins" were routinely given to cyclists at least as recently as the 1960s...vitamin amphetimine. Cycling even had its own drug cocktail - pot belge - of stimulants and painkillers. That was common at least until the early 1980s.

Then all of the sudden everything changed.

I can think of some reasons for doing so, but the level playing field thing doesn't really wash.

Why is it any more unfair to use steroids than it is to use a specially designed and built ultra-light graphine bicycle?

Or fancy trainers?

Or training at altitude?

Or whatever?

Which is why there are regulations about those things too. Lots of regulations. The difficulty with designing equipment isn't designing the best equipment. It's designing the best equipment that doesn't break the rules. We see it most obviously in motorsport, but it's everywhere and often covers things you probably wouldn't think of. For example, there are regulations regarding the shape and size of water bottles in competitive cycling. That came in because of people designing the best equipment that doesn't break the rules - it's possible to design a "water bottle" that the rider wears on their back and which improves aerodynamics. So someone did. It's also possible to design a holder for a water bottle on the frame that improves aerodynamics. So someone did. And now there are regulations about that too.

If you have enough money, you can buy a more efficient bicycle than the ones used in competition. Lighter, more aerodynamic, etc.

The level playing field thing does wash. It's not perfectly implemented, but it is the intention.
 
Soldato
Joined
7 Jul 2011
Posts
4,418
Location
Cambridgeshire
Saying that tho, unless Wiggins knew his prescription was unnecessary/wrong, any wrong-doing would fall on the doctor making the prescription?

Sure, Wiggins could have said "no" to the treatment regardless, but even if the prescription was erroneous, he could still have been acting in good faith?

It's a tricky one. If the Doctor is actively involved in the deception then there are consequences, Michele Ferari was banned from working in sport and in some countries could potentially be tried for breaking the laws around doping in sport.

Having said that there's a good chance that Wiggins was prescribed legitamitely, as mentioned previously it's not a banned substance, the question then becomes around the use of the substance which isn't necessarily a problem for the Doctor. But I don't know what the prescription process is, is it one size per scrip? Or can you get say a weeks worth and therefore potentially abuse the system without the Dr being culpable?

I do wonder if this could be solved by eliminating team Drs ability to provide prescriptions. Maybe the tour could provide the meds through a central Dr? Still open to abuse but maybe less so.
 
Soldato
Joined
24 Oct 2002
Posts
14,162
Location
Bucks and Edinburgh
No, it didn't cause any confusion in my mind. Have read loads of stuff on this since that post. If Wiggins was prescribed Clenbuterol, it was never intended as a "Just in case". He either needed it, in which case he shouldn't have been racing, Or it was was fully intended to help him in the race.

You obviously are very confused as he wasnt prescribed Clenbuterol for a start, it was Triamcinolone
 
Soldato
Joined
24 Oct 2002
Posts
14,162
Location
Bucks and Edinburgh
Has anyone looked at just how many tour cyclists take or have taken asthma related medication?

I have read somewhere in the region of 45%. As said already, excercise induced asthma is very well known and understood and when you think pro cyclists can ride 17k+ miles in a year on roads in all weathers and breathing in all the associated pollution is it any wonder?
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
5,148
Location
Riding my bike
Maybe we have to just get rid of TUEs. If I have a dodgy leg I have to accept that I'm not going be a top level cyclist. If I get exercise induced asthma, maybe I need to accept the same.

Or go the other way and just allow all medications and drugs. Sure most of them will drop dead by 35 - cough Flo-Jo - cough, but it'll be great watching them overtake the motorbikes on Tourmalet and run 100m in 6.2secs.
 
Soldato
Joined
24 Feb 2013
Posts
4,125
Location
East Midlands
Basing things on the definition of the word cheat, it would appear from what is in the media that he has cheated, however he hasn't seemingly broken the rules, just bent them for his and the teams gain. By definition, people cheat in high level sport on a daily basis, it just depends where you draw the line.
 
Permabanned
Joined
8 Feb 2004
Posts
4,539
Lance Ar
Basing things on the definition of the word cheat, it would appear from what is in the media that he has cheated, however he hasn't seemingly broken the rules, just bent them for his and the teams gain. By definition, people cheat in high level sport on a daily basis, it just depends where you draw the line.

Yeah and Lanace Armstrong never failed a drugs test.
 
Soldato
Joined
24 May 2009
Posts
20,154
Location
North East
Whole sport is a den of cheats, someone once said it flippantly but key them take anything and everything and just tell us they are.

Who wins the race and a side bet on the most efficient cheaters is the best way to go.
 
Soldato
Joined
26 May 2009
Posts
22,100
Basing things on the definition of the word cheat, it would appear from what is in the media that he has cheated, however he hasn't seemingly broken the rules

That's not cheating, I think you're miss-applying a different definition of cheating, context is quite important. "Cheating in sports is the intentional breaking of rules in order to obtain an advantage over the other teams or players".
 
Back
Top Bottom