TargetTalk

Posted: **Thu Sep 02, 2010 4:22 pm**

I suppose in a perfect world were no athlete would use any performance enhancing drugs to win a competition we wouldn't have our rights invaded like this, but until then, this is what has to be, so be it.Colin

Posted: **Fri Sep 03, 2010 3:45 am**

Alexander wrote:The (German) organizers tried to sweep it under the carpet at fierst:
.....................................
(Edited, thanks to David's rectification, which I appreciate)

I'm not sure why you edited your post to include "(German)". I don't see any attempt to "sweep it under the carpet".

By the time you go through all of the testing, re-testing, hearings, appeal time, etc it can take several months before a public disclosure is made.

Posted: **Fri Sep 03, 2010 4:42 am**

Richard H wrote:
Alexander wrote:Do I sense the ever slightest tinge of bitterness, Richard? ;-)

Regards, Alexander
Nope no bitterness at all, but unlike the sheep, if I don't like it I'll speak up.

I find the systems (because there really isn't one system for all sports), very unfair and draconian, very few would except this intrusion into their lives willingly.

I feel very sorry for those that have to subject themselves to these unfair systems when in the end they give up their individual rights and freedoms to provide entertainment to the masses. In the end even that doesn't satisfy anyone because even if you test negative the suspicion still hangs over you, because you're probably doing something they can't detect. All this from a society that routinely uses drugs and artificial means for the most trivial of excuses.

Plus my post is just a fact, if a doctor gives you a Px and assures you it's not on the list but something in it is, to bad athlete loses, if a drug somehow has a trace amount of a banned substance that could even be from contamination, to bad, athlete loses. The athlete is responsible for everything that goes in his body known or unknown, and that is a pretty big burden. Many amateur athlete's give up a lot in the pursuit of their sport, its sad that they need to give up privacy and freedom too.

Not often I agree with Richard! But he is spot on here, no one agrees with deliberate drugs cheats but the system does appear unable to make provision for genuine medical use or accidental use in genuine medical treatment circumstances. The advantages of deliberate use in shooting are also highly questionable.
Robin

Posted: **Fri Sep 03, 2010 5:44 am**

David Levene wrote:
Alexander wrote:The (German) organizers tried to sweep it under the carpet at fierst:
.....................................
(Edited, thanks to David's rectification, which I appreciate)
I'm not sure why you edited your post to include "(German)". I don't see any attempt to "sweep it under the carpet".

By the time you go through all of the testing, re-testing, hearings, appeal time, etc it can take several months before a public disclosure is made.

Because. It's clear enough for everybody to see.

Normally, a positive doping test (A-test) is immediately announced. Not necessarily always with full name, address and shoe size number, but it is considered an important news item in sports journalism.
And also by many if not most sports federations; while some (few) still try to keep silent and to sweep it under the carpet.

The rest, afterwards, is something else. It is reaction and sanction and legal proceedings, and this indeed takes time, usually - as you write - several months. Sometimes it becomes an epic saga ;-).

Alexander

Posted: **Fri Sep 03, 2010 5:46 am**

RobinC wrote:Not often I agree with Richard! But he is spot on here, no one agrees with deliberate drugs cheats but the system does appear unable to make provision for genuine medical use or accidental use in genuine medical treatment circumstances. The advantages of deliberate use in shooting are also highly questionable.

I'm sure we have had similar discussions before.

The system is perfectly capable of allowing many drugs for genuine medical reasons via the TUE system. In the case of certain drugs however, beta-blockers for example, it's not a case of them not being able to make provision for medical use; they are unwilling to make such provision.

I think it would be very rare for someone to suffer sanctions for accidental use, provided that they have taken reasonable precautions. If I am ever prescribed drugs by my doctor then I will check them on an approved web site and keep a copy of the result. If it is a prohibited substance then I will not compete until I have stopped taking it.

As for your statement that "The advantages of deliberate use in shooting are also highly questionable", not according to shooters I have spoken to who were involved in the beta-blockers trials they aren't. They considered them highly advantageous.

Posted: **Fri Sep 03, 2010 6:32 am**

Alexander wrote:Normally, a positive doping test (A-test) is immediately announced.

I'm not sure whether the ISSF have ever gone for immediate announcements. I thought they normally waited for the completion of the process before making an announcement.

That does not however consitute "sweeping it under the carpet".

Posted: **Fri Sep 03, 2010 5:16 pm**

There really shouldn't be any announcements until the "B" sample has been tested, if requested at a minimum, personally I think it should be private matter until appeals have been exhausted.

Posted: **Fri Sep 03, 2010 5:19 pm**

Richard H wrote:There really shouldn't be any announcements until the "B" sample has been tested, if requested at a minimum, personally I think it should be private matter until appeals have been exhausted.

That is not How The World Works however. In no sport. And neither in any other type of proceeding. Media do report as soon as there as suspects and indictments.

Alexander

Posted: **Fri Sep 03, 2010 5:28 pm**

Alexander wrote:
Richard H wrote:There really shouldn't be any announcements until the "B" sample has been tested, if requested at a minimum, personally I think it should be private matter until appeals have been exhausted.
That is not How The World Works however. In no sport. And neither in any other type of proceeding. Media do report as soon as there as suspects and indictments.

Alexander

Actually that is how the doping rules state it's suppose to happen but the people who are trusted to do the tests and get the results can't seem to be trusted to follow the rules that they agreed to (hmmm).

As for shooting there have really only been a handful that have been caught and lets be truthful the vast majority of the world could care less that a shooter doped.

Posted: **Fri Sep 03, 2010 7:20 pm**

Richard H wrote:...but the people who are trusted to do the tests and get the results can't seem to be trusted to follow the rules that they agreed to (hmmm)...

In my experience the anti-doping personnel cannot be blamed - the leaks (no pun intended) come from outside that group.

Posted: **Fri Sep 03, 2010 7:24 pm**

There have been notable leaks that come from the labs, AFLD is a prime leaking lab especially if you're not french.

TargetTalk

Important CAS decision continuing probition of beta-blockers