Likes Likes:  499
Dislikes Dislikes:  10
Page 318 of 324 FirstFirst ... 218268308316317318319320 ... LastLast
Results 3,171 to 3,180 of 3237

Thread: The Sanctions Thread

  1. #3171
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    324
    Post Thanks / Like
    Official ADRV list for Tokyo updated on 10 June:

    https://www.iwf.net/wp-content/uploa...V_10062021.pdf

  2. #3172
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    2,177
    Post Thanks / Like
    The International Testing Agency (ITA), leading an independent anti-doping program for the International Weightlifting Federation (IWF), asserts anti-doping rule violations against Bulgarian weightlifter Yunder Beytula.

    The ITA reports that based on an incident that occurred during an Out-Of-Competition testing mission conducted by the ITA on 29 December 2020, the ITA has charged Yunder Beytula with committing Anti-Doping Rule Violations (ADRVs).

    The ITA alleges that Mr. Beytula provided wrong whereabouts information to the ITA and then when located, refused to provide a sample during the abovementioned doping control.

    Mr. Beytula has thus been charged with committing violations of Article 2.3 (Evading and Refusing Sample Collection) and Article 2.5 (Tampering or Attempted Tampering with any part of Doping Control) of the IWF Anti-Doping Rules (IWF ADR).
    https://www.iwf.net/2021/06/14/public-disclosure-192/

    All the cool kids refuse tests!

  3. #3173
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    324
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by erpel View Post
    I really don't understand the timeline here. The IWF disclosure states that the incident occurred in December 2020:

    >"The ITA reports that based on an incident that occurred during an Out-Of-Competition testing mission conducted by the ITA on 29 December 2020"

    But in April 2021 he was permitted to travel to Moscow and compete in the European Champs where he placed 6th in the total with 150/196/344

    https://www.iwf.net/new_bw/results_by_events/?event=508

    Why wasn't there a provisional suspension? Under what grounds was he allowed to continue competing at international tournaments?

  4. Likes Hawkpeter, erpel liked this post
  5. #3174
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    2,177
    Post Thanks / Like
    Since 2003 Colombia had 8 IWF sanctions and for 7 of them we know the substance - always boldenone (and no additional steroid or hormone).

    Since the 3 current offenders, but also Lopez et al. back in 2018, argue meat contamination as the steroid source I had a look around if this defense ever actually worked before.

    Well, yes it did! But not for weightlifters...

    Here's a recent-ish case from a Colombian cyclist and therein some data is provided:

    https://www.uci.org/docs/default-sou...rta-zapata.pdf





    ---
    Unfortunately the concentrations for WL aren't provided.

  6. Likes Blairbob liked this post
  7. #3175
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Wakanda Highlands
    Posts
    589
    Post Thanks / Like
    here's the nuts and bolts:

    i) Meat contamination with boldenone cannot be considered as a widespread problem in certain
    country, such as Colombia.
    ii) According to the Colombian Agricultural Institute, the withdrawal time is generally respected in
    Colombia.
    iii) Even assuming that boldenone is often used in cattle farms in Colombia and injection of
    boldenone are performed in the rear part of the animal rather than in the neck, it cannot be
    deduced from the two farm managers statements that generally, withdrawal time would not be
    respected in Colombia. In this regard, one could wonder what the benefits of using such product
    only a couple of days before slaughtering livestock would be.
    iv) In view of all circumstances of the case, in particular taking into account the concentration of
    boldenone metabolites found in his sample (20ng/mL), Mr. Puerta’s explanation is unlikely. In that
    respect, the case of Ms. Sara Lopez Bueno cannot be used as a precedent.
    7
    v) Last but not least, considering the concentration of boldenone metabolites found in your client’s
    sample and boldenone excretion time, an intentional boldenone injection (several days before the
    test) or an oral intake (1-2 days before the test) cannot be excluded.
    Their ng/ml are likely way too high.

    you wouldn't dope up livestock just before culling them .... you would do that while they were still growing and feeding them.

    Then, the amount of carryover from the animals blood/endocrine systems, to its meat tissues, thru the athlete's digestion processes, and then the athlete's metabolism, etc etc ... the amount in the urine/blood would be low by then. They're probably seeing real high numbers.

    It would seem to make sense to take what's readily available and easy to get in the country ....
    and then as a bonus, if caught, you always get to go down the road of "they do use a lot of that in this country's meat industry" excuse. Its logically the drug to use.

  8. Likes Blairbob liked this post
  9. #3176
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    2,177
    Post Thanks / Like
    A picture worth a thousand words? (or whatever fits on twitter, to keep up with the times)


  10. Likes Hawkpeter, Blairbob, Cleddau liked this post
  11. #3177
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    131
    Post Thanks / Like

  12. #3178
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    324
    Post Thanks / Like
    Thanks for posting this. The arguments made by the Romanian Federation and their rebuttals by the IMFSP are fascinating reading - I am really pleased that the IWF has published this:

    https://www.iwf.net/wp-content/uploa...l-Decision.pdf

  13. Likes Blairbob liked this post
  14. #3179
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    2,177
    Post Thanks / Like
    Point 43 and onwards is just embarrassing. "They're retired, not with us" (LOL) - "We didn't do the retest, so we don't know anything" - "They were clean in 2012 damnit!" - and the best: "but we're not Russia!"
    Last edited by erpel; 06-17-2021 at 01:43 PM.

  15. Likes Blairbob liked this post
  16. #3180
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Wigan, UK
    Posts
    14
    Post Thanks / Like
    An interesting read for sure. Forgive my ignorance but does anyone know what the reference to the UK case referred to at point 46 (below) is all about??

    The fact that the FRH or Romania never practiced a sponsored doping activity
    such as Russia’s and was also never involved in “a program regarding the use
    of a grey area substance as is the case concerning United Kingdom that starts
    to take shape”

Posting Permissions

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