avoiding testing positive for drug use?

There are ways to avoid testing positive.
As the French rider Philippe Gaumont told Cyclingnews
(http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2004/mar04/mar16news)

Gaumont reveals his methods
[ ... ]
In his interview this week, Gaumont focused on the ineffectiveness of
certain doping controls, and the variety of doping methods which remain
undetectable. He claims to offer the information to force the sport and its
federations to better understand how riders go about enhancing their
performances illegally.

"First of all, there are a lot of products that aren't detectable, like
growth hormones, that riders use as they like," Gaumont explained. "On the
other hand, since EPO has become detectable, people can't take it during the
races any more. But blood transfusions are still undetectable."

Gaumont also revealed the importance of having a doctor willing to write
justifications for certain products, notably corticoids. As Gaumont explains
it, there are no masking products, rather masking prescriptions.

"Here's how it works," he said. "The team doctor sends you to see an allergy
specialist. The specialist says you are allergic to dust mites and
prescribes a spray... When you go to a doping control, you declare your
allergy and that you have a prescription for Nasacort (a product Gaumont
says masks cortisone), which you used in the morning in a nasal inhaler. At
the same time, you've taken in injection of Kenacort (a banned substance),
since at the control they can't tell the difference between a spray and an
injection."

"Monty" <[email hidden]> skrev i en meddelelse
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

How does one avoid being testing positive for drug use?

I've read in this newsgroup that Armstrong has been tested more than any
other athlete. But yet, he has never tested positive for drugs. Isn't he
tested after every stage win? Wouldn't something definitive show up?
Wouldn't traces show up in his urine or blood?

If he is using drugs and he is tested as much as people say, how is he

doing

Quoted message said:

it?

Unless he tests positive, my opinion is that he is NOT using drugs. You
know, innocent until proven guilty.

Please forgive me if this has been covered before. And please, don't

attack

Quoted message said:

me; I would just like to know.

Thanks

Monty

But if everyone is doped then perhaps it is more of a level playing field
that most people presume.

Thomas Lund said:

There are ways to avoid testing positive.
As the French rider Philippe Gaumont told Cyclingnews
(http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2004/mar04/mar16news)

Here's part of what Gaumont said that didn't appear in the article you
cited but that did appear in the original interview in Le Monde:

"Et pour le taux de cortisone, par exemple, s'il est effondré - ce qui
dénote la prise de cortisone -, il suffit de prendre un cachet
d'hydrocortisone avant le contrôle et de boire trois litres d'eau, et
l'affaire est réglée."

Monty said:

How does one avoid being testing positive for drug use?
Monty

VERY simple .......... don't take them in the first place ......

"Drugs are bad, mmmmkay??"

"Robert Chung" wrote...

Quoted message said:

Here's part of what Gaumont said that didn't appear in the article you
cited but that did appear in the original interview in Le Monde:

"Et pour le taux de cortisone, par exemple, s'il est effondré - ce qui
dénote la prise de cortisone -, il suffit de prendre un cachet
d'hydrocortisone avant le contrôle et de boire trois litres d'eau, et
l'affaire est réglée."

I wish you guys would put stuff in the international language. Babelfish
ain't called babble for nuthin:
Et for the rate of cortisone, for example, s'il is ploughed up - what
indicates the cortisone catch -, it is enough to take a seal
d'hydrocortisone before control and of drinking three liters d'eau, and
l'affaire is réglée."

"Jim Flom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:NFPNc.54752$2i3.46843@clgrps12...

Quoted message said:

"Robert Chung" wrote...

Quoted message said:

Here's part of what Gaumont said that didn't appear in the article you
cited but that did appear in the original interview in Le Monde:

"Et pour le taux de cortisone, par exemple, s'il est effondré - ce qui
dénote la prise de cortisone -, il suffit de prendre un cachet
d'hydrocortisone avant le contrôle et de boire trois litres d'eau, et
l'affaire est réglée."

I wish you guys would put stuff in the international language. Babelfish
ain't called babble for nuthin:
Et for the rate of cortisone, for example, s'il is ploughed up - what
indicates the cortisone catch -, it is enough to take a seal
d'hydrocortisone before control and of drinking three liters d'eau, and
l'affaire is réglée."

One word--Esperanto

Jim Flom said:

Quoted message said:

"Et pour le taux de cortisone, par exemple, s'il est effondré - ce qui
dénote la prise de cortisone -, il suffit de prendre un cachet
d'hydrocortisone avant le contrôle et de boire trois litres d'eau, et
l'affaire est réglée."

I wish you guys would put stuff in the international language.

RBR is only meant for the elite who can read and write at least 3 modern
languages, and can, in layman's terms, explain both meanings of QED.

Quoted message said:

Et for the rate of cortisone, for example, s'il is ploughed up - what
indicates the cortisone catch -, it is enough to take a seal
d'hydrocortisone before control and of drinking three liters d'eau, and
l'affaire is réglée."

And for the cortisone level, if it is up - what indicates taking of
cortisone -, it is enough to take a dose of hydrocortisone before the
check and drink 3 liters of water, and everything's under control.

Ewoud Dronkert said:

And for the cortisone level, if it is up - what indicates taking of
cortisone -, it is enough to take a dose of hydrocortisone before the
check and drink 3 liters of water, and everything's under control.

After drinking 3 litres of water its no wonder they need so many natural
breaks.

"B. Lafferty" wrote ...

Quoted message said:

One word--Esperanto

One word -- eat me.

"Jim Flom" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de :
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"B. Lafferty" wrote ...

Quoted message said:

One word--Esperanto

One word -- eat me.

Clearly, the words "one word" do not indicate that there will be "one word".
Interesting, this American syntax. That would not, of course, be the same
in English...
:-)
--
Bonne route,

Sandy
Paris FR

"Jim Flom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"B. Lafferty" wrote ...

Quoted message said:

One word--Esperanto

One word -- eat me.

du vortos--mangi mi

On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:44:14 GMT, "Monty" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

How does one avoid being testing positive for drug use?

I've read in this newsgroup that Armstrong has been tested more than any
other athlete. But yet, he has never tested positive for drugs. Isn't he
tested after every stage win? Wouldn't something definitive show up?
Wouldn't traces show up in his urine or blood?

What makes you think the people doing the testing want to catch
anyone?

Read _Breaking the Chain_.

JT

"SMMB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Jim Flom" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de :
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"B. Lafferty" wrote ...

Quoted message said:

One word--Esperanto

One word -- eat me.

Clearly, the words "one word" do not indicate that there will be "one

word".

Quoted message said:

Interesting, this American syntax. That would not, of course, be the same
in English...
:-)

No, it really does mean "one word" but there are many people that don't
think about what they say and write. Sometimes it is intentional in an
effort to be humorous or ironic.

Quoted message said:

--
Bonne route,

Sandy
Paris FR

"Jim Flom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:NFPNc.54752$2i3.46843@clgrps12...

Quoted message said:

"Robert Chung" wrote...

Quoted message said:

Here's part of what Gaumont said that didn't appear in the article

you

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

cited but that did appear in the original interview in Le Monde:

"Et pour le taux de cortisone, par exemple, s'il est effondré - ce

qui

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

dénote la prise de cortisone -, il suffit de prendre un cachet
d'hydrocortisone avant le contrôle et de boire trois litres d'eau,

et

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

l'affaire est réglée."

I wish you guys would put stuff in the international language.

Babelfish

Quoted message said:

ain't called babble for nuthin:
Et for the rate of cortisone, for example, s'il is ploughed up - what
indicates the cortisone catch -, it is enough to take a seal
d'hydrocortisone before control and of drinking three liters d'eau,

and

Quoted message said:

l'affaire is réglée."

potm yet again by the great Jim Flom.

"DFN" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

But if everyone is doped then perhaps it is more of a level playing

field

Quoted message said:

that most people presume.

Apparently not:
http://www.google.com/groups?q=dope+author:Jiyang+author:Chen&hl=en&lr=&
ie=UTF-8&safe=off&selm=c42lcm%243p5%40dispatch.concentric.net&rnum=1

I think I read in a David Millar interview that the EPO urine test
only detects usage within the past few days. The effects of EPO or
its equivalent last several weeks.
And that's only one drug. The designer testosterone the American
track and field athletes were using was undetectable until someone on
the inside ratted them out.

"Monty" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

How does one avoid being testing positive for drug use?

I've read in this newsgroup that Armstrong has been tested more than any
other athlete. But yet, he has never tested positive for drugs. Isn't he
tested after every stage win? Wouldn't something definitive show up?
Wouldn't traces show up in his urine or blood?

If he is using drugs and he is tested as much as people say, how is he doing
it?

Unless he tests positive, my opinion is that he is NOT using drugs. You
know, innocent until proven guilty.

Please forgive me if this has been covered before. And please, don't attack
me; I would just like to know.

Thanks

Monty

Thomas Lund said:

There are ways to avoid testing positive.
As the French rider Philippe Gaumont told Cyclingnews
(http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2004/mar04/mar16news)

Gaumont reveals his methods
[ ... ]
In his interview this week, Gaumont focused on the ineffectiveness of
certain doping controls, and the variety of doping methods which remain
undetectable. He claims to offer the information to force the sport and its
federations to better understand how riders go about enhancing their
performances illegally.

"First of all, there are a lot of products that aren't detectable, like
growth hormones, that riders use as they like," Gaumont explained. "On the
other hand, since EPO has become detectable, people can't take it during the
races any more. But blood transfusions are still undetectable."

Gaumont also revealed the importance of having a doctor willing to write
justifications for certain products, notably corticoids. As Gaumont explains
it, there are no masking products, rather masking prescriptions.

"Here's how it works," he said. "The team doctor sends you to see an allergy
specialist. The specialist says you are allergic to dust mites and
prescribes a spray... When you go to a doping control, you declare your
allergy and that you have a prescription for Nasacort (a product Gaumont
says masks cortisone), which you used in the morning in a nasal inhaler. At
the same time, you've taken in injection of Kenacort (a banned substance),
since at the control they can't tell the difference between a spray and an
injection."

Except that most inhaled corticosteriods used for allergies are
"single-pass." They act locally. Anything that gets into the blood
stream is broken down its first time through the liver. I'd be suprised
if they could detect these inhaled steroids at all.

"Thomas Lund" <[email hidden]> wrote, quoting French rider Philippe
Gaumont:

Quoted message said:

"Here's how it works," he said. "The team doctor sends you to see an

allergy

Quoted message said:

specialist. The specialist says you are allergic to dust mites and
prescribes a spray... When you go to a doping control, you declare your
allergy and that you have a prescription for Nasacort (a product Gaumont
says masks cortisone), which you used in the morning in a nasal inhaler.

At

Quoted message said:

the same time, you've taken in injection of Kenacort (a banned substance),
since at the control they can't tell the difference between a spray and an
injection."

This is a good description of riders general level of understanding of
doping but pretty inaccurate from a medical and technical point of view.

Several points:
1) Nasacort does not mask cortisone but actually contains triamcinolone
which is itself a corticosteroid, like cortisone. In fact, Kenacort is also
triamcinolone in injectable format. All corticosteroids, including
cortisone, are allowed if used topically (on the skin), inhaled or injected
into a joint. Corticosteroids are banned if taken orally, or by
intramuscular or intravenous injection.

2) It is correct that testing can not accurately tell about the different
routes of administration but it is not correct to imply that different
corticosteroids can not be distinguished. Proper drug control will use
techniques that will identify the specific individual agent. Route of
administration can be implied by drug levels, as it is much easier to get
higher levels with drugs given by the banned routes.

3) Although corticosteroids have been abused in the hope of increasing
performance, there is little reason to think that they actually would have
any benefit even at the higher doses obtainable by the banned routes of
administration. Certainly there is no reason to cast aspersions on people
who use these drugs via the allowed routes.

Mike Murray MD

|"First of all, there are a lot of products that aren't detectable, like
|growth hormones, that riders use as they like," Gaumont explained. "On
|the other hand, since EPO has become detectable, people can't take it
|during the races any more. But blood transfusions are still
|undetectable."

1st of all, I'm no the one to spill the beans but I do believe
on of the most abused growth hormone is Andro-Gel, its
also manufactured by a French company. So whether Armastrong
is using this as an Rx is purely subject to conjecture.
That's all I'm saying.