It is unfair that the fate of the Essendon players – the real victims of the whole supplement saga – now reside in the hands of ASADA.
The Switkowski report did not recommend the sacking or suspension of any of the Essendon staff responsible for the recruitment of sports scientist Stephen Dank and the monitoring of his “pharmacologically experimental” regimen.
That may be a fair judgement, it may not be.
But the future of the players is not so certain.
The interrogation of the club’s players has begun. Permitted one support person and requiring legal representation provided by the AFLPA, the players are to be grilled during “lengthy and often intensive interviews”.
The purpose of the interviews is presumably to discover what substances were administered.
The only person who knows the truth is Stephen Dank. And Dank does not have to be, and apparently doesn’t want to be, interviewed.
If James Hird believed everything was above-board why would the players know any better.
They’ve been advised by ASADA to be “open and honest” which is all very well however by telling the anti-doping authority everything they know about being treated like laboratory monkeys they may be unwittingly setting themselves up.
Under WADA’ strict and sometimes ruthless code of liability, if the Essendon players were found to have been injected with AOD-9604 (which WADA have made a point of announcing, after being swamped by numerous enquiries resulting from the Bomber saga, is banned on account of it “not being approved for therapeutic use by any government health authority in the world”) they could be found to be guilty of doping and liable for suspension even if Dank lied about the type of substance he was administering, or its prohibited status.
It’s unfair and absurd, really. WADA’s tenet that “athletes are responsible for their choice of medical personnel” clearly does not apply at a major sporting club, as they are chosen for them.
Furthermore the people involved in the administering of supplements are not doctors but “sports scientists”.
A 17-year-old draftee at the beginning of his career is not going to voice his concerns or challenge coaches who may be legends of the game and in the words of Ziggy Switkowski, “charismatic alpha males who carry the weight of supporters’ expectations on their shoulders”.
As well as being suspended and having their reputation tainted there are the potential risks to long-term health resulting from ingesting substances not yet approved for human use.
Previous to the Switkowski report AFLPA chief Matt Finnis had stressed to players the need to report drug breaches which if the only player to be suspended for taking a banned substance, Justin Charles, was correct (“if you think I was the first or the last, you are absolutely kidding yourself.”) is still a problem, at least at an individual level.
After the release of the report, however, Finnis stressed his concerns that club weren’t fulfilling their duty of care towards their players.
Even the controversial biochemist Shane Charter, the convicted importer of large quantities of pseudoephedrine, used to make amphetamines, and once a supplier of prohibited substances to Dank hopes the players are cleared of any wrongdoing.
The problem for the players is, they don’t need to have done anything wrong to be found guilty.
Let’s hope the news this morning that the Essendon interviews will be sped up and that ASADA and the AFL are “on the verge of reaching a mutually satisfactory arrangement” is good news for the players.
vocans
Guest
Got it, dasilva. Thanks for the effort.
dasilva
Guest
Interesting thing about the IV flip drip It's a recent ban in WADA code "Intravenous infusions and/or injections of more than 50 mL per 6 hour period except for those legitimately received in the course of hospital admissions or clinical investigations" Why is IV injections of more than 50 ml over a 6 hour period not related to medical treatment banned? Well have a read of how cyclist (including Lance Armstrong) escape positive drug test (such as EPO) Before the drug test they would inject or infuse saline in the body to dillute the concentration of drugs and therefore would get a negative result in the blood test. There's no way the blood testers coukld picked that up. So therefore theoretically before iV drips were banned, someone could inject players with EPO before the match and then participate during the match doped up. Then infuse the players with IV drip for "rehydration" at half time and any drug test at the end of the match would result in the negative for EPO. I'm not accusing previous practictioners of IV drips during matches of doing that but it's a good thing WADA closed that loop hole.
dasilva
Guest
For example let say I search "Pseudo" on the ASADA database I then get the following results Panax pseudoginseng root powder Picato Gel Piscidia piscipula stem bark Pseudoephedrine Pseudoephedrine hydrochloride Pseudoephedrine sulfate So these were the closest match to the word pseudo on the ASADA database. Then I choose the drug I really want. Essentially what happen with Andrew is that the closest match of AOD on the database was ADT The database search engine tries to give out the closest estimate to what you search for
dasilva
Guest
Sorry I think you misunderstood my point Check Your substance is a public online database containing lots of drugs and medications and supplements that athletes can search for to see if the drug is legal or not However like most search engine (I used the analogy of google. I did not state that ASADA determines whether the drug is legal or not via google) if you search for something that isn't an exact match to something in the database. It picks out the closest match and allows you to click on the drug you are looking for from the selection in the case where you spelt the drug wrong. andrew Sutherland is being disingeneous He searched AOD 9604 and then clicked on ADT Booster to find out that ADT booster was legal. You can have a look yourself https://checksubstances.asada.gov.au/
vocans
Guest
Don't know how a previous post got repeated here dasilva. I wanted to say that if it happened the way you suggest ASADA would have to be the most incompetent organisation I've heard of for some time. I find it hard to believe someone who didn't know about the science simply googled like you and me. So, maybe another explanation ...?
vocans
Guest
I have wondered before how much the Dank influence led to the Bomber injuries last year, and also to low team morale. If some players refused and some didn't, there is a potential for conflict and ill-feeling within the team and towards management and so on. Further, the players with a conscience would be wondering where the club was going, and them in it. Could they still be wholly proud to be a Bomber? I hope my conjecture is wrong, but injuries and morale would explain why the Bombers fell in a hole. Dank is gone; the club has reversed direction; the team can bond again, and take a look at them now.
vocans
Guest
I have wondered before how much the Dank influence led to the Bomber injuries last year, and also to low team morale. If some players refused and some didn't, there is a potential for conflict and ill-feeling within the team and towards management and so on. Further, the players with a conscience would be wondering where the club was going, and them in it. Could they still be wholly proud to be a Bomber? I hope my conjecture is wrong, but injuries and morale would explain why the Bombers fell in a hole. Dank is gone; the club has reversed direction; the team can bond again, and take a look at them now.
dasilva
Guest
It's not a mix up It's a simple case of searching a drug over a search engine and the closest name drug comes up as a result. It's like if you search something on google and you get a few non-useful results. 'Check your substances' on ASADA website is a search engine for drugs Search AOD 9604 and the result was ADT Booster ADT booster is legal However it never stated that AOD 9604 is legal THe reason why AOD 9604 is not on the database is because that drug is not approved for human use and is not commercially available on its own. I
vocans
Guest
Am I being paranoid to wonder how that ASADA 'mix-up' occurred? A simple mistake?
Richard
Guest
According to some reports, a number (not sure how many) of players refused to be injected and walked out. Now I don't know if this is true or not. And before you shoot me down, I am only being theoretical. However, if that is indeed true, then those players are smart, didn't take what they were being told on blind faith, and did indeed show the leadership that was lacking within the football department. Again, I am only speculating. I have tried to put myself in the players situation. I go to a doctor when I am ill, and I do not question whatever they prescribe for me to take to get well. However, to be a professional sportsperson, despite being surrounded by all the support in the world, you still need to be 100% sure that what you are being given is legal. I have stated many times in these forums that I like the club, respect the history and like the football they are playing and am sure they will be challenging come September, but it kind of continues to reiterate how important Dr Reid's letter was, and how much it has impacted the club through not being tabled at the board level or acted upon by the CEO or whoever. Food for thought.
Andrew Sutherland
Roar Guru
Agree vocans. The overwhelming amount of supplements coming on to legitimate and black markets to service mainly amateur bodybuilders and vain women, as well as athletes is proving too much for WADA hence the "including but not restricted to" and "other substances with similar chemical structure or similar biological effects" lines used on its prohibited list. Out of interest, I did what a wary Essendon player may have done when told by Dank that AOD 9604 was not on the prohibited substance list by visiting WADA online. AOD 9604 produces "no results" which is b/c it has not yet been given govt approval, but they advise you to check with your local anti doping authority. So I keyed in AOD 9604 on the ASADA Check Your Substances section and guess what: APPROVED for: in competition, out of competition, via all routes! Turns out it confuses AOD 9604 for an ADT Booster which is, as far as I can tell, a vaccine for diphtheria and tetanus! I think the Essendon players could have been forgiven for not researching further.
Andrew Sutherland
Roar Guru
Yes, very interesting article Redb.
Pope Paul VII
Guest
Hey lads, Judging from the Dank/Hird text exchange there seems to be keeness from those two ( if not pressure ) to give the best 22 the injection. This is probably because several baulked at it and did indeed discuss why they were being injected before all falling into line. The crux of the matter remains; Will ASADA determine that a banned substance has been given? Interesting times ahead.
vocans
Guest
Thanks Redb. The plot thickens. It also leads me to ask where will all this go, with so many vested interests in players taking substances of all kinds, including some in the legal profession who get business from arguing over it? Not to mention the research and development of a whole new field that once upon a time never existed. You can see the articles and journals and books and lectures proliferating all on the back of some people kicking a footy around.
Jimbo
Guest
I have to agree about injections, most people hate them, i know i do, and a IV fluid drip at half time is also way over the top IMO, which has been stopped now, thank goodness.
Pot Stirrer
Guest
I dont buy this, surely players would have been talking about this between themselves and realised perhaps we should get an outside opinion.
Pot Stirrer
Guest
For me thats the whole point. Apart from a flu shot or a pain killing injection no one should be getting needles. Seriously, who would not ask questions if someone is trying to inject you and its all becuase some blow in thats been there 5 minutes reccomends it. questions id ask if i was a player, if its legal and not a performance enhancer why do i have to inject it. Why i am getting so many injections Why i am i feeling stronger and more energetic and the only difference is the injections Why are we being secretive
Andrew A
Guest
There is a difference between an individual athlete or player taking supplements that they have found themselves and a club organised program to be administered en masse to the playing group. The players in such a program have trusted that the club has checked that any supplement is allowed.
Redb
Roar Guru
http://www.lawinsport.com/articles/anti-doping/item/the-wada-prohibited-list-catchalls-and-consistencies Some light reading to enlighten.
Gezza
Guest
Good grief! I no elite athlete but I always want to know what's in it - when someone is coming at me with a syringe I even knew that when I was seventeen!