doge's kid needs a "my dad dremeled my chainring bolts" exemption
|
Maybe TUEs should just be listed somewhere so I can look up who is racing on ++T w/a doctor's note?
|
I think it was velonews that did an article on Test, and it said it's essentially impossible to get a TUE for it. From what I've read/heard, it's actually supposed to be difficult to get those exemptions for a lot of things.
|
Originally Posted by Ygduf
(Post 18374538)
Maybe TUEs should just be listed somewhere so I can look up who is racing on ++T w/a doctor's note?
The cheating part is a reflection of the riders character. But do you care so much when they beat you that the authorities helped them vs they cheated? |
In 2009, UCI granted something like 290 TUE's.
2014 they only granted 24 TUE's. TUE abuse is definitely a loophole that was exploited but they seem to be cracking down. They must have a list of athletes on TUE's but I don't know where to find it. |
keep in mind there was a time where albuterol was on the list and then came off the list, which I suspects accounts for a lot of the drop.
again, people aren't getting secretive TUEs for testosterone. this isn't the conspiracy theory forum. |
Originally Posted by cruiserhead
(Post 18374619)
...
They must have a list of athletes on TUE's but I don't know where to find it. I am unaware of physical TUES in cycling, but certainly the equivalent exist in other sports. Blade running, golf carts, bionic eyes have been allowed when some argued they gave the athlete an advantage over their competitors. I'd like them all gone. From your post 290->24 - why not 0 or go the other way and allow every rider to do what those 24 are doing. So if Froome gets an inhaler, all riders are allowed them. |
Originally Posted by Doge
(Post 18374666)
So if Froome gets an inhaler, all riders are allowed them.
Inhaled beta-2 agonists are prohibited and require a therapeutic use exemption (TUE), except for albuterol (also called salbutamol) dosages under 1600 micrograms/24 hours, formoterol dosages less than 54 micrograms/24 hours, and salmeterol when taken according to manufacturer’s instructions. |
Originally Posted by gsteinb
(Post 18374642)
keep in mind there was a time where albuterol was on the list and then came off the list, which I suspects accounts for a lot of the drop. ...
Yea, it is conspiracy stuff we talk about in feed zones (particularly EU) while you guys are out riding. But there is always someone who knows someone that got around it. |
Originally Posted by gsteinb
(Post 18374542)
I think it was velonews that did an article on Test, and it said it's essentially impossible to get a TUE for it. From what I've read/heard, it's actually supposed to be difficult to get those exemptions for a lot of things.
https://wada-main-prod.s3.amazonaws....sm-v4.0-en.pdf "TUE should only be approved for androgen deficiency that has an organic etiology. TUE should not be approved for androgen deficiency due to functional disorder." |
did you not hear? i fought we brought this up earlier.
there is now a TUE of sorts for testosterone. this guy (a doctor who does these treatments, no less) sued to have the exemption allowed. read about it here. it's not for UCI-level athletes, but it brings up a new "recreational TUE" which is, IMO, pretty murky. basically, if you suck, you can get it, but then it expires when you suck less. (Seriously.) |
I think I've mentioned this before, but I have asthma. Not exercise induced asthma, but regular, full-time asthma that requires daily medication to keep things in check.
A couple years ago, I sat down with my doctor to go through my medication and fill out my TUE forms to make sure everything was on the up and up. On the form, it required doctors to certify that there were no other non-banned medications to control my asthma. Doctor pointed out there were several options that were not banned that I could use. We changed my medications to those options to see if they would work. Turns out they did. |
Originally Posted by Doge
(Post 18374442)
The UCI issuing Therapeutic Use Exemptions (TUEs) in cycling - where someone judges that a rule can be changed for an individual is also unfair. Rather than accept bad luck, average genes, or results of risk, other people judge how things can be made even again. Cheating - no, unfair yes.
|
Originally Posted by gsteinb
(Post 18374642)
keep in mind there was a time where albuterol was on the list and then came off the list, which I suspects accounts for a lot of the drop.
again, people aren't getting secretive TUEs for testosterone. this isn't the conspiracy theory forum. |
Originally Posted by Wylde06
(Post 18374800)
So are you saying there should never be any TUE's, no matter what its for?
I'm fine with leveling the field in the other classes. Some folks have more talent and some more disadvantages and some take risks. It is all part of sports. |
Originally Posted by tetonrider
(Post 18374711)
....
basically, if you suck, you can get it, but then it expires when you suck less. (Seriously.) How do you stop "cheating" by going to the physician and having them write you a legal excuse to dope? |
Originally Posted by tetonrider
(Post 18374711)
did you not hear? i fought we brought this up earlier.
there is now a TUE of sorts for testosterone. this guy (a doctor who does these treatments, no less) sued to have the exemption allowed. read about it here. it's not for UCI-level athletes, but it brings up a new "recreational TUE" which is, IMO, pretty murky. basically, if you suck, you can get it, but then it expires when you suck less. (Seriously.) It makes sense to me that he is from Amarillo. If any of you have driven through Amarillo it probably makes sense to you too. |
Originally Posted by Doge
(Post 18374820)
Yes. In the open / unlimited pro class.
|
Originally Posted by tetonrider
(Post 18374711)
did you not hear? i fought we brought this up earlier.
there is now a TUE of sorts for testosterone. this guy (a doctor who does these treatments, no less) sued to have the exemption allowed. read about it here. it's not for UCI-level athletes, but it brings up a new "recreational TUE" which is, IMO, pretty murky. basically, if you suck, you can get it, but then it expires when you suck less. (Seriously.) |
Originally Posted by Wylde06
(Post 18374870)
So then what about diabetics that race. Just ban them from competition? Insulin is a prohibited substance that requires a TUE.
|
Originally Posted by Doge
(Post 18374960)
Diabetics are not banned, just substances are. At the "top" level - yes - no TUEs. OR allow all riders the same TUE. If the diabetic needs something that also improves performance now they have an advantage - if they choose to exploit it. The infirmity that has a PED cure and can be faked - will be.
This doesn't make any sense to me. Lets ban insulin, which is REQUIRED by most diabetics to keep their sugar in check (Team Novonordisk), but let the riders continue to race.. Ive never looked to see what kind of performance enhancing "qualities" insulin has..but you would have to be ****ing stupid to use it. When I still had to take it regularly, I would purposely take less than I should have the night before a big ride or race. Calling it a PED cure is ridiculous. |
Originally Posted by Wylde06
(Post 18375006)
Ive never looked to see what kind of performance enhancing "qualities" insulin has..but you would have to be ****ing stupid to use it. Calling it a PED cure is ridiculous.
How to catch an insulin-doping athlete
Originally Posted by that article
Insulin, when used as a performance enhancer, works to slow down the degradation of muscle tissue, which is attractive to such athletes as bodybuilders especially when they are also doping with a growth hormone. For endurance athletes, cyclists and runners, for example, insulin provides fuel for muscle cells and improves stamina. Although the prevalence of insulin doping is not known, luggage seizures at airports and testimonials from formerly doped athletes suggest that the abuse of this hormone is a real problem.
|
Saying no TUEs does not mean ban all drugs. It means if something is banned it is banned for everyone and no exceptions. You brought up diabetics. A substance that isn't even banned it has no place in an argument about TUEs. TUES are only for banned stuff. I am not checking the list right now for what is banned or not, but if insulin is not a PED then it shouldn't be on the list and should not require a TUE and everyone can use it. If insulin helps performance it is a Performance Enhancing Drug (PED). PED in not pejorative - it is descriptive. Something that is a drug is or is not a PED.
If something is both a cure and performance enhancer (PED) that is where the problem is. Because once you allow one group to get it for a cure they also may get it for performance. |
Originally Posted by Doge
(Post 18374960)
Diabetics are not banned, just substances are. At the "top" level - yes - no TUEs. OR allow all riders the same TUE. If the diabetic needs something that also improves performance now they have an advantage - if they choose to exploit it. The infirmity that has a PED cure and can be faked - will be.
Originally Posted by TheKillerPenguin
(Post 18374838)
It makes sense to me that he is from Amarillo. If any of you have driven through Amarillo it probably makes sense to you too.
|
Originally Posted by Wylde06
(Post 18375006)
This doesn't make any sense to me. Lets ban insulin, which is REQUIRED by most diabetics to keep their sugar in check (Team Novonordisk), but let the riders continue to race..
Ive never looked to see what kind of performance enhancing "qualities" insulin has..but you would have to be ****ing stupid to use it. When I still had to take it regularly, I would purposely take less than I should have the night before a big ride or race. Calling it a PED cure is ridiculous. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:39 AM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.