Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 46
  1. #1
    Team NFI
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,845
    www.teamnfi.blogspot.com



    Depression...can eat a sack of manure and die.

  2. #2
    Sissy Pants FTW Moderator
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,424
    It's doping.

    If a rider wants to have "anti-aging" treatments to enhance what they consider their quality of life, including riding a bike, I don't have any problem with that concept.

    Just do it in other types of riding, and skip entering races. Competing against others who accept aging and participating in the activity to keep healthy as age advances, is part of the challenge.

  3. #3
    More than a little slow
    Reputation: dskunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    599
    "The diagnosis was hypogonadism, and now he takes supplemental testosterone to raise his levels to average for a man of his age, 58. He also takes the medication to combat low bone density."
    I don't think I would call that "anti aging" treatments.
    Cheers, Dave

  4. #4
    Sissy Pants FTW Moderator
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,424
    Quote Originally Posted by dskunk View Post
    "The diagnosis was hypogonadism, and now he takes supplemental testosterone to raise his levels to average for a man of his age, 58. He also takes the medication to combat low bone density."
    I don't think I would call that "anti aging" treatments.
    This was the information the subject presumably gave to the writer, but I'll bet that USADA declined to give the TUE because they had access to more detailed information that lead to their decision to decline the TUE on strictly medical grounds (which they can't comment on for privacy reasons), and instead thought the treatments were a lot closer to elective anti-aging than a medical requirement. Just my opinion based on what I see, and I could be totally off base but in the absence of more details that's the interpretation I'm sticking with.

  5. #5
    More than a little slow
    Reputation: dskunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    599
    The information was also given to the writer by the subject’s doctor.
    Which do you think the general public would consider sadder; 1) to willingly take performance enhancing drugs which are probably damaging to one’s health in order to compete in sub-sub-elite amateur sport (presumably in order to be competitive) or 2) to refrain from following a doctor’s prescribed course of treatment in order to continue to compete in sub-sub-elite amateur sport ?
    Cheers, Dave

  6. #6
    Team NFI
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,845
    Circlip, so are you putting forth the opinion then anyone with a medical condition that brings them below the athletic norm in any capacity should not compete at all while taking their required meds?
    www.teamnfi.blogspot.com



    Depression...can eat a sack of manure and die.

  7. #7
    Evil Jr.
    Reputation: garage monster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,835
    I'm not even sure why a mid-pack Cat 4 Master would bother applying for a TUE. It seems like the odds of going through a control are extremely low (though things may be different in Colorado) and from what I read, I don't have the impression that he's cheating "in spirit". Maybe I'm just cynical... or not cynical enough, can't decide.
    Please enjoy seeing this terrible collection of me - something wonderful is about to happy.

  8. #8
    Sissy Pants FTW Moderator
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,424
    Quote Originally Posted by dskunk View Post
    The information was also given to the writer by the subject’s doctor.
    Which do you think the general public would consider sadder; 1) to willingly take performance enhancing drugs which are probably damaging to one’s health in order to compete in sub-sub-elite amateur sport (presumably in order to be competitive) or 2) to refrain from following a doctor’s prescribed course of treatment in order to continue to compete in sub-sub-elite amateur sport ?
    You left out an important option 3, which is that some doctors may be "over enthusiastic" in their recommendation of treatment. Not saying that's necessarily the case in this situation, but I can guarantee you there are a lot of doctors out there knowingly engaging in what the formal authorities responsible for managing this (WADA and the various NADAs) would classify as banned performance enhancing methods, at both the professional and amateur levels. That's why there's a control (ADA) set up so that individual doctors aren't the ones deciding what is or isn't fair, as it's not a requirement of their treatments to understand how that interfaces with anti-doping regulations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Enduramil View Post
    Circlip, so are you putting forth the opinion then anyone with a medical condition that brings them below the athletic norm in any capacity should not compete at all while taking their required meds?
    No, I'm putting forth the opinion that if you want to compete you follow the rules. Some medical treatments will be offside from the rules, and some are perfectly allowable. Further, sometimes treatments that are normally off side can be allowed through a TUE.

    If you don't like the rules, work to change them, but don't sign a license application saying you are following the rules regarding performance enhancing methods and then ignore them. That's cheating, and it's why the rules exist.

    Not every event falls under the WADA/NADAs umbrella. People who don't like the WADA rules can choose non-WADA events instead.

  9. #9
    Sissy Pants FTW Moderator
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,424
    Quote Originally Posted by garage monster View Post
    I'm not even sure why a mid-pack Cat 4 Master would bother applying for a TUE. It seems like the odds of going through a control are extremely low (though things may be different in Colorado) and from what I read, I don't have the impression that he's cheating "in spirit". Maybe I'm just cynical... or not cynical enough, can't decide.
    I should have noted also in my responses above that I think the parties involved in this particular instance, both the athlete Hammond in abstaining from races and also USADA, are going about this in exactly the right way. Further, that it's fair game for Hammond to get his story out there in hope that it may spur some interest in reviewing the rules to ensure they fit the need.

  10. #10
    Team NFI
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,845
    Hmm....this discussion is missing something...


    Oh...I know. Where is Uncle Oggie?
    www.teamnfi.blogspot.com



    Depression...can eat a sack of manure and die.

  11. #11
    Sissy Pants FTW Moderator
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,424
    Quote Originally Posted by Enduramil View Post
    Hmm....this discussion is missing something...

    Oh...I know. Where is Uncle Oggie?
    So, you have elected to escalate to the next level of management? Sounds serious.

  12. #12
    snowbound
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    212
    From the information shared in the article I am going to have to side with the USADA.

    The USADA is pretty clear in saying what the requirements are
    http://www.usada.org/uploads/testost...guidelines.pdf

    In the article the USADA also says
    I feel very strongly about allowing the athlete to come back with more medical information,” said Fedoruk. “And they’re provided very extensive commentary on the reasons for denial as well, if their application is denied … it’s a denial letter with a very detailed opinion as to why the athlete doesn’t meet the criteria.”
    It sounds to me like they are being very reasonable. It will be interesting to see what response is made by Hammond - and I do hope he does make it public.
    The article also says "and now he takes supplemental testosterone to raise his levels to average for a man of his age, 58."
    What is average? From the quick search I have done, there is variation in what is considered "normal" and if you look at a "standard" as below, there is a huge range. From what has been shared we don't know what Hammond's results were
    Testosterone, total
    Adult Males:
    19-49 years old 249-836 ng/dL
    50 years and older 193-740 ng/dL

    (Sourced from Testosterone, Free and Total, Adult, Plasma )

    Given more information and a better understanding of the issue I may have a different opinion.

  13. #13
    Sissy Pants FTW Moderator
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,424
    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    The USADA is pretty clear in saying what the requirements are
    http://www.usada.org/uploads/testost...guidelines.pdf
    Nice link - thanks. I'm no doctor, but from a quick layperson's review it seems USADA and WADA have their crap together on this issue. Whether they applied these guidelines properly in this case is impossible to say as 1) I'd have to be a doctor, and 2) need access to the full documentation submitted by Hammond, but seeing their thorough treatment of the guidelines and process in the documentation, I'll give them the benefit of doubt. They have no vested interested in rejecting TUE applications that properly meet the criteria.

  14. #14
    Team NFI
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,845
    Quote Originally Posted by Circlip View Post
    So, you have elected to escalate to the next level of management? Sounds serious.
    Nope... Just sitting back and wondering what the more European opinion on this is.
    www.teamnfi.blogspot.com



    Depression...can eat a sack of manure and die.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Raineman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    451
    Why do I feel like I did when I read the article about a guy who blew his life's savings on a game of chance at a carnival and then blamed the carney and sought remuneration?

    I think there is a fundamental aspect being overlooked. There is no entitlement to race in cycling once you are taking prohibited PEDs. Aging comes with natural limitations. If a racer seeks to restore hormone levels, that's altering a natural process so that they regain lost attributes - which can change race outcomes.

    The racer involved seems to overlook this. He has convinced himself to see an injustice and is even attempting to overcome it. He can take all the treatment he wants. Agencies don't prohibit him taking hormones for his health(however dubious hypogonadism diagnoses may sometimes be. Does "Just ask you doctor for a little T." sound familiar? ) Racing when under this sort of treatment is prohibited and any rationalization otherwise is fundamentally flawed.

    Egos often eclipse sound judgement. Tempering your own ego takes maturity.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: secret agent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    459
    I am with Raineman on this. We don't really know the extent of the diagnoses, but if you have any condition for which the treatment is a well known PED, then you don't get to race. It is not fair to him, but then it is also unfair to the whole field and adds a level of mistrust and suspicion if allowed at all. It is not like it is a life threatening situation for which he needs the drug. Race without it if racing is that important. It is not that he wants to race, it's that he wants to win.
    Burnt Norton

  17. #17
    Sissy Pants FTW Moderator
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,424
    Quote Originally Posted by secret agent View Post
    It is not that he wants to race, it's that he wants to win.
    Doesn't sound like Hammond is going to be winning anything with or without the extra "T" supplements, but then where do you draw the line? Is it OK for a someone to use unauthorized/banned medical treatments (in the athletic sense) to go from non-participant to Category 4 road racing? Exactly how high in the results is it OK for them to place before they are taking away a position from someone else? If it's OK for a Cat 4 racer, is it then OK also for a Cat 3 racer who is still really low on the overall global scale but just wants to be able to race at the same level they could 10 years ago? Maybe then it's OK for top tier local racers, because they aren't pulling down six or seven figure salaries like a pro? But then if it's OK for local amateurs, then surely it must be acceptable also for full-time professionals who are actually paid to ride a bike for a living? If it's fair for professionals, then surely it must also be OK for young talents who have demonstrated they may have the capacity to become pro cyclists?

    Hopefully the slippery slope described above becomes obvious, when people start deciding on all sorts of grey lines of justification. There are rules to try to eliminate those grey lines as best as possible.

    Hammond says he just wants to go out and challenge himself. There are tons of ways to do that on a bike without racing against other people in a formal event.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: serious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,912
    I realize that rules are rules, but I think this situation has some room for remedy. I would let him compete and if his results improve dramatically and he suddenly goes from mid-pack to podiums, then remove his license. Otherwise, nothing is achieved except keeping him from his passion for racing.
    My rides:
    Lynskey Ti Pro29 SL singlespeed
    GF Superfly 29er HT
    S-Works Roubaix SL3 Dura Ace
    Pake French 75 track

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: secret agent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    459
    I am not sure I agree. It is either ok or not not ok to dope. How high in the rankings before he gets yanked. What if he keeps needing more and more juice to keep his youthful performance. Maybe he has a medical issue; let's grant him that it is fully on the up and up. Even so, I would not allow him to race if the solution to his problem is a PED. It is just an unfortunate situation, but allowing him to race under this condition would open a can of worms in a sport that has a huge black eye and many would not take seriously for so many years. It's not like we are preventing the guy from a career or even riding his bike. As pointed out above, he can challenge himself in many ways.
    Burnt Norton

  20. #20
    Evil Jr.
    Reputation: garage monster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,835
    Quote Originally Posted by serious View Post
    I realize that rules are rules, but I think this situation has some room for remedy. I would let him compete and if his results improve dramatically and he suddenly goes from mid-pack to podiums, then remove his license. Otherwise, nothing is achieved except keeping him from his passion for racing.
    This is procedurally problematic for the same reason that we (Commissaires) try to pull DQ'ed riders out of the peloton as soon as possible at a road race. While they may not podium or take points, they have every chance of affecting the outcome.
    Please enjoy seeing this terrible collection of me - something wonderful is about to happy.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: serious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,912
    Yeah, I see your points guys. It is an unfortunate situation.
    My rides:
    Lynskey Ti Pro29 SL singlespeed
    GF Superfly 29er HT
    S-Works Roubaix SL3 Dura Ace
    Pake French 75 track

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    37
    Not trying to bring up a touchy situation again. But I was just told I have low T. Doctor did all the tests and said that I was at half what I should be and my "free" T is very low as well.

    I have felt like complete **** for the past month and a half and haven't felt real good for 6 months. I want to continue to race when I can but I don't know what to do. It's not my fault my body isn't doing what it should. But I also don't want to get accused of cheating when I am 100% on the up and up. I am never close to the podium and probably never will.

    I am just hoping I am going to start feeling better and get back to my normal self.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    470
    Low T is more complicated than most doctors understand. See Masters Men's Clinic For Andropause (Male Menopause)* Diagnosis & Treatment for an opinion. There are different ways of measuring testosterone, bio-available testosterone is different.

    And as far as Hammond in the original post, this part,

    There has to be more than just generalized symptoms, or a single low blood test, a single low value. They have to be able to show a diagnosis and pinpoint a reason for why they have hypogonadism. So without that, it’s impossible for us to grant a TUE

    is important as if he is diagnosed properly, not just an opinion about his condition,and treated there would be a history of low t and he would have a better chance for the exemption. P.S. I have an 8 year history of treatment for this.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: secret agent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    459
    This Master Men's Clinic seems like one of these drug company backed organizations trying to medicalize aging or just jumping on that bandwagon. Drug companies are trying to create a market for a vague condition. The Current on CBC is running a show on this this morning. I read an article on this a while ago that I managed to find again and linked below. According to the great Dr. OZ and others, testosterone prescriptions have risen to 5 times what they were in the 90's. There was a huge backlash a few years back when drug companies were trying to market the "viagra for women" They pay off tons of mouthpieces from the medical community to suddenly come up with a syndrome or a bunch of vague symptoms that they group into a so called disease. There are instances of actual need for medication, but these types of treatments are highly profitable for drug companies as the patient is on it for years or for life. This is the same for many osteoporosis treatments that have women on a perpetual drug regimen with very little study as to risk/benefit.

    Study shows testosterone therapy doubles the risk of heart attack | The Current with Anna Maria Tremonti | CBC Radio

    Testosterone Boom: Taking the 'Testo Test' Online - SPIEGEL ONLINE
    Burnt Norton

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    5,625
    Competing naturally means just that.
    Regardless of whether or not the guy has a legitimate medical condition, treating that condition no longer makes him natural.

    Some guys have naturally bigger muscles or higher testosterone levels. If a guy like that beats you, its fair. God didn't create us all equally.

    If a guy takes a drug that could in any way possibly effect his performance, then its not fair to those people who are not doping.

    Even if a guy is taking testosterone to reach the "normal level" of T, its not fair. Everyone has different testosterone levels. We don't normalize everyone's level to be fair. Whatever you have naturally is fair, what ever comes unnaturally is unfair.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Medicine Park - Lawton Riders
    By fat-but-slow in forum Great Plains - OK, KS, NE, SD, ND
    Replies: 138
    Last Post: 1 Week Ago, 07:52 PM
  2. Specilialized getting a taste of their own medicine?
    By frank daleview in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 09-05-2013, 09:28 AM
  3. Medicine of Cycling
    By akakuk in forum Rider Down, injuries and recovery
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-23-2013, 07:25 AM
  4. Replies: 54
    Last Post: 03-01-2012, 06:56 PM
  5. Sports Medicine Doc in SLC?
    By JTrue in forum Rider Down, injuries and recovery
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-17-2011, 12:08 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •