When I raced bicycles as an elite amateur (against some top pros too) in Europe I was somewhat surprised to see the use of performance enhancing drugs. I was more surprised that there is a cultural discrepency in what people perceive as "doping". I never did or do anything other than caffeine and vitamins. However, in some countries stimulants and other (to me) obviously perfromance enhancing drugs are considered a routine part of conditioning- not cheating. That is a problem. My opinion (NOT supported by any fact) is that the Hawaii Ironman has already been one once by an athlete from one of theose countries using performance enhancing drugs. That athlete has not won since more stringent testing protocols have been in place. The bottom line: When there is money and fame up for grabs people will try to cheat. How many are cheating? Probably some, but hard to say how many.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

Is the Hawaii IM (or any IM) drug tested? Are any triathlons drug tested at any level? I would think that performance enhancing drugs would be an issue within the tri community (unfortunately) just as they are among other sports, yet I have never seen nor heard of any testing program. Is there one in use or one in the works? If not, there should be.

RP

Yes there is a testing program, it is administered under the auspices of WADA. The tests are unannounced and we as referee's only learn about it on race morning.

They did testing at one Norcal race that I worked [not that there was not other testing done but this was the only one I was present for] and they took in all the pros that finished 1-3 for both sexes and they may have done age groupers as well but I was out on the course at that point in time. It is done very discretely so as to protect the athlete’s privacy [you as a fellow competitor or spectator would never know it was being done]. By the way, all the tests from this race did come back clean.

---

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


"on your Left"

They do a few tests at Hawaii (or so I've heard) but the actual testing in our sport is pretty minimal. It costs a fortune to really attempt to keep a sport clean and the only real way would be to random test (and frequently) athletes out of competition. An athlete can be on steriods and stop taking them very close to the competition (for some stopping a week in advance is good enough) and never test positive on the day of the competition. In Canada, we had the Dubin Inquiry into drug use in sports after Ben Johnson tested positive in 1988 and the information that came out of that inquiry was pretty nasty. One Olympic medical team member suggested that a very high number of athletes showed a "steriod profile" indicating that they had been using drugs. However, they can only be banned if the substance can be identified and the molecules are gone by race time. Whenever there is money and glory on the line, people will be tempted to cheat and the technology surrounding drug use seems to be far ahead of the technology for catching them so I think that the testing is essentially a waste of time and money. Obviously, I'm a cynic when it comes to this :)

Your post is pointing out pretty seriously actually.
As you seem to imply that the US is not one of "these countries", it can be only Welchy, LVL or Thomas Hellriegel.
As Welchy is retired, that cannot be him you are referring to. Left are Thomas and Luc. Luc has won in 1999 after the "more stringent tests". So, it has to be Thomas. However, as you raced in Europe, you may have raced in Belgium, and I agree that I have seen strange stuff re. doping in Belgium
(or France...like syringues taped on the frame in a toothbrush box...)

However, talking with Olaf Sabatschus at home, I doubt very strongly that Thomas is on drugs...
LVL: each year he has his share of BS...including after the 1996 win. On RST you could read that he had been DQed because he didn't want to submit to doping test...
all this is earsay...

As for the US being free of all this...humm...
Earsay from France: Mark Allen once told the organizers of Nice that he would not show up if there are drug tests.
didn't Scott Molina test positive there? and was cleared after...(then all you remember is that he was + but noone remembers he was cleared)...

Yes there is certainly doping in tri. No it is not fair to make assumptions "because noone can do that", because "that's impossible".

Eventually, drafting is certainly a bigger problem. With most drugs, many scientists do not even agree of their real positive effects in sport. Drafting always work (ask Mark Allen after he closed a 13' to Hellreigel in Hawaii 95. The comments thanking the others for the ride is very disgracious).

Dr. Modave raises an interesting point regarding drafting. I have been wondering about something that I read in the January edition of Triathlete. On page 34 of the Kona coverage, Chris McCormack was describing riding with Hellreigel and Zack, and made the following statement: "I took about five miles on the way out to Hawi, and they make me take the pull from the airport back home; but other than that I was sitting very comfortably and just doing my thing." Does this mean, state or otherwise imply that the three of them were drafting? I'm not really up on my elite terminology, but I know what "take the pull" means on our local club rides. Could anyone enlighten me on this particular statement?

subject. There is in general a holier than thou attitude in this country with regard to elite athletes and whether they would ever take drugs.

The fact of the matter is that there is as much incentive for an American as any European or other nationality period and singling out one nation or a couple of nations is simply ridiculous.

That said.

The timing of this thread is a little Ironic considering the 2 highest profile US "Athletes" Tim Montgomery and Marion Jones have gone to work with Charlie Francis..............

You really think it is any different in Tri or US cycling? you cant have it both way, either you believe everyone is clean or you accept the possibility that everyone could be on drugs..........not that they are but that they could be.

I defended Mike on duathlon.com because I know him quite well and know he wouldn't take drugs. That being said I know he takes supplements, but none that any other athlete hasn't taken. In regards to Nandrolone there are many problems with the testing (I can show you scientific studies that back this statement up) yet the tests are used to wreck people's lives. Until these tests are scientifically proven to be without a doubt correct, then I think they shouldn't be used. The other huge problem in our sport and others is that it's up to the federation to announce the positive drug test.............so there are many cases that positive drug tests have happened but no one hears about it because the sports federation does not release this info. In regards to here in Canada they have taken a zero tolerance (in triathlon). I have heard from reputable sources that a number of athletes tested positive at the olympics in the track and field sports, but nothing was publicized because the American track federation would not release their names? This simply should not happen, but when you look at the unreliability of drug tests, no wonder they don't want to release the names. Many athletes claim it must be supplements and then many people say why don't they name the supplement.............problem is that they risk being sued by the supplement company. In Mike's case he is having the supplements tested out of his own pocket book before he goes any further. He is also having his body tested for abnormally high levels naturally in his body.

I definitely think there are drugs in our sport, but I think it is minimal compared to other sports such as European cycling. One key reason is that the drugs that would be beneficial in our sport such as epo are prohibitively expensive and hard to get. In Europe it is far easier to get and many cycling teams in the past (can't say currently) have made drugs a part of the "schedule". That being said I don't think you can rule it out...................just not as likely, especially here in North America.

I'm about the most anti-doping person you'll ever meet. However I'm tempered by a very bad experience I had in high school. I failed a drug test because I had taken a Drixoral (over the counter allergy medecine) the day before the test. The test results indicated that I was higher than a kite on X. I can't describe the agony I went through until I got the second half of the sample analyzed by a more reputable lab.

Knowing the effect this false positive had on me, I can't imagine what it would have on a pro athlete. The false positive will haunt them the rest of their lives.

Wow, my intention was to not name any names- so I didn't. But you're pretty smart Francois. I want to say that my comments were only a guess, and not a very good (or as it turns out, responsible) one. Perhaps an apology for the inappropriate nature of my post is the right thing- so I do apologize. Heavy accuasations- I know, made without facts. Bad form on my part.... I thought not naming names would insulate me. It's a small world though. For the little it is worth, I am a HUGE fan of Thomas Hellriegel and think he is clean. Your deuctions about the other person mentioned were correct in that was whom I was in question of, but without anything other than a feeling..... Damn this free speech thing. My shoe tastes funny.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

The demanding nature of both the training and the racing and the increaseing stakes on the money front, would lead me to believe that there may be some use of drugs in triathlon. We would be naive to think that it is not going on at some level. What is possibly saving the sport is the fact that performance enhancing drug use when done right (from what I am told) is very expensive, complicated and time consuming. It is most often seen in a team situation (cycling) or in a sport where an individual athlete has a whole entourage of support (100m Track Sprinters). In triathlon we typically have niether situation. There are no teams and many of the top athletes train on their own without even the support of a coach, let alone an entourage of support people. Furthermore there is the expense issue. After the very top of the sport the money drops off quite quickly. I suspect that few triathletes have the money to afford the bettter performance enhancing drugs.

Now to the Mike Vine issue - All the facts are not in, but this looks like another case of possibly tainted supplements. I know, the guy and I can't imagine that he would do it. Of course, this line of defense is very difficult to speperate from the dedicated drug users line of defense which is always - deny, deny deny. We are sensitive of this in Canada, because we had Ben Johnson first saying that he had no idea what Steroids were and using every defense and explanation in the book, right up until the day he had to testify under oath at the Dubin Inquiry. Then of course, the story changed - He had been taking steroids for years!

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

I feel conflicted about one aspect of the recent positive drug test and the claims of tainted supplements. It is this, does it actually matter if they meant to cheat? If I am racing and accidently cut the course no one would take "I didn't know" as an excuse. If you took steroids, but did not knowingly do so, they still have the same performance enhancing effects, correct?

OTOH, banning someone and potentially ending their career for an accident seems harsh.

I just wonder what anyone else thinks...

Richard

Just curious if anyone knows what supplements the pros take and more specifically the ones that seem to be tainted??

First, the rules for nandro are a bit odd as they are extremely low. That said, if steroids are getting into your supplements, imagine what other crap is going in there that isn't on the label.

Second, Marty, you just hit the nail on the head. If the pros would name the names of the supplements being used, people would more than likely have an open mind about their guilt. The fact that they refuse to disclose the "tainted supplements" just goes to support the case against them.

Another recently positive Victoria-based athlete went so far as to blame extra steaks he was eating. Any scientists out there that can shed some light on whether or not this is possible? Not pointing fingers, just curious.

---

***

My take on the doping thing.

Personally, i don't really care if the pros are doped to the gills. It has absolutely no effect on my sense of self worth, or of whether I feel good about a race or not. However, it is unfair to other pros if some are doped, creating an unfair performance advantage, and therefore less money (prizes and endorsements) goes to the clean pros.

unfortunately, it is impossible to determine the intent of the athlete when confronted with a positive test. You do not know if the athlete intended to cheat, or if they took the product mistakenly.

I also don't really buy the tainted supplement argument anymore. It was valid for a time, but the evidence that the supplement companies do not have the strictest quality control standards is mounting, and cross contamination is relatively common. The athletes should generally know that this occurs, and supplement usage should be seen as a bad idea because of the risks of a positive test.

Bottom line, the current structure is seriously flawed IMHO. Positive tests should "never" be released until the B sample is tested.

The effects are there regardless of intent, so whether the athlete intentionally cheated or not, the positive test should result in a DQ. As for longer bans, I think that depends on the substance in question.

j

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

The problem with cheating pros is that it damages the image of the sport and therefore the amount of money put into it by sponsors. Look at the recent problems in pro cycling and to a lesser extent the NBA (travelling and double dribble having ceased to be rules). This does affect us as age groupers.

I do agree that the B sample is designed to guard against true false positives and therefore no one should be labelled "positive" prior to a B sample test.

I assume that the idea of a ban rather than simply a DQ for doping is that the effect of this cheating lasts longer than a single race.

Richard

The problem with the idea that the test should only be legitimized after the b sample has been tested doesn't always work. At least in Mike's case (therefore Im assuming all itu cases) it's up to the athlete to pay for the test on the b sample.....................this is not cheap and if you are a struggling pro or a pro in a sport such as xterra where the travelling costs almost outweigh the prize money (unless you are conrad stoltz), this is an issue. Also the reason a lot of pro's do not list the companies they use for supplements as I have outlined before is that they risk being sued by the companies............................most athletes do not have the income to fight in a court against big supplement companies. Personally I don't think that athletes need or should be taking supplements other than vitamins, but that's another story and could be argued either way............just my opinion. Also do you really think a 4 year ban for testing positive for something that has so many faults in the testing is acceptable?

While the tainted supplements excuse used to be an interesting one, it has lost its luster for me. It seems that once it became common knowledge in the athletic community that supplement companies could be mixing "clean" supplements in "dirty" vats, it then became incumbent on the pro athlete to get confirmation from his/her supplement mfgr. of choice that they kept their cleans and dirties separate.

Canwi, I'm no lawyer, but if he merely states a list of what he was taking, how can he be liable? "Here is everything I have been taking and the doses in which I have been taking them." He's stating fact, not making accusations.

Disclaimer: This product may or may not improve your performance, and it may or may not improve your performance because it may or may not contain leftover performance enhancing substances from our last batch. Onus on athlete. Some supplements tend to be tainted. Industry is completely unregulated. Use at own risk.

He was told by his lawyer not to................ Most people listen to their lawyers as I suppose they are the experts? I thought the same as you, and it does seem logical though when you think about it..............but I and maybe you, don't think like lawyers or what you are suppose to do in this situtation?

We do have both lawyers and doctors in the Slowtwitch house and I wonder if they might weigh in.

As both Mike Vine and Kelly Guest are Canucks I have followed this story fairly closely and have been frustrated by the contradictory reports.

Report A) the levels are low and could have come from supplements

Report B) there is no way that the high levels found could have come from supplements

What never varies though is the testaments to the character of both men - from Canwi on this forum, to Simon Whitfield's support of Guest, to a recent TV report showing Guest spending his last dime trying to get himself exonerated to participate in a sport that never really has given him much financial benefit.

It's easy to be cynical about these guys. I would prefer to believe they are clean, but I want to believe based on some good information.

---

TonyG

What is Enoch Root?

Massimo Testa (team doc to various cycling teams over the years) gave a speech at the REI i used to work at and commented that he had experiences with pro cyclists who tested ever so slightly over the accepted norm (for something) that he accounted it to hormones in the chicken they ate a day or 2 prior to the testing.

---

Want: 58cm Cervelo Soloist. PM me if you have one to sell

Vintage Cervelo: A Resource

Considering the number of cases that have been dismissed re. nandrolone, the "responsible authorities" should first ensure their tests are valid.

A few years back. Noone ever tested positive to nandrolone. We had some idea of the normal values for athletes and that was it. then in (I think) 1997 came a new test for nandrolone. and suddenly tons of positive

-spencer smith, olivier bernhard, djamel bourras (gold medal judo for france), some in cycling, now two canucks.

ALL (but the two canucks..at least yet) have been cleared (for different reasons however).

One of the big guys againsts doping in france (de mondenard) suggested that this may be due to the fact that the new tests detect lower levels of nandrolone (i.e. before we didn't know we made any, now due to new tests, we know). Then he suggested to make sure the tests catch the truly positive. Coming from him (for those who know him in France and Europe in general), this says a lot.


fighting doping is great. finding scapegoats sucks. My assumption is that those who take "stuff" take the stuff you can't find, not the one everyone can find easily...

hopefully (assuming they are clean), Guest and Vine will be cleared soon.

PS my wife told me the other day that with my great luck in races, the day eventually everything will go fine, I will be found positive to something I don't even know...I laugh now, but it's kinda scary.

Totally agree with Francois, until the tests are 100% accurate, they should not be used, or if used not with the huge consequences they produce at present. He is also right that most found guilty have been cleared............................except the Canadians! Th is is another beef I have that every federation is different in dealing with drug cheats and Canada takes a bold stance against it (so we should after the ben johnson thing), but until the testing is accurate this bold stance is ridiculous (I'm talking about Nandrolone here). I really hope the authorites on this issue come to their senses before it wrecks more athletes lives.