The legal team representing Chris Froome is reported to have submitted a new scientific study that claims the test for Salbutamol is 'fundamentally flawed'. The UCI are unimpressed however after discovering that some of the paper’s conclusions are based on research on dogs.
Froome – whose nickname is ‘Froomedog’ – had twice the permitted limit of the anti-asthma drug Salbutamol when tested at the Vuelta a Espana last September.
Since then, the legal teams have been hard at work and the case has dragged on. Mail Sport reports that Froome’s team have cited a study published in the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, which claims as many as 15.4 per cent of tests could turn up a false positive.
At one point the study states: “In short, a PK model of salbutamol in dogs was used as the basis and extrapolated to humans using allometric scaling.”
The World Anti-Doping Agency’s (Wada) science director, Dr Olivier Rabin, said the study contained, “Nothing new as their model is based on three well-known studies.”
Wada has previously had the exercise physiology laboratory at the University of British Columbia run some studies on Salbutamol, after which it defined its threshold.
“We believe the current threshold is solid considering the scientific literature published on Salbutamol over the past 20 years,” said Rabin.
Around 1,500 pages of scientific material have been submitted by Froome's team as part of his defence and some at the UCI have asked whether it is all simply a delaying tactic to allow the rider to pursue a fifth Tour title next month.
Earlier this month, UCI president David Lappartient conceded that a decision on the case was now unlikely until after the race.
Add new comment
38 comments
Froomedog and Team Sky, please stop damaging the reputation of professional cycling! You're both embarrassing.
Fixed that for you.
No, I'm happy with what I said. No need for correction. UCI have their part, but without the cheating UCI would have an easier job.
The line that Team Sky use is about as wonky as the VAR in a Huddersfield v Man Utd FA Cup quarter final. And then the bullshit games they play with missing laptops, lost notes, problematic memories regarding Jiffy bag contents, the need to send medication across a continent instead of going to the local pharmacy, not being able to count the coreect number of puffs, etc, etc are not the making of UCI, are they?
lol, what a total crock of shit. It was damaged/tarnished long ago, you must be a noobie to cycling, just hopped on board the last 5 or 6 years have we?
You'll have to explain where I've said that this is the first intstance of damaging the sport, or that there haven't been instances before. You may wish to re-read what I wrote, I am talking about a current situation and current circumstances. Slow down a little bit and reign in this desire to fight with everyone.
I'll make it clear for you; I have no time for Armstrong and his bullying, lying and denial of wrongdoing, I have no time for the bullshit games from Team Sky.
I am willing to accept dopers who get caught, who initially deny, then take the punishmnet on the chin. They can even return to the sport as they've paid their penance.
I have time for the Kiko Gambas or Hector Guerras of this world who disappeared and subsequently were never proven to have doped (they didn't insult my intelligence), in spite of Hector getting caught (he did the honourable thing and retired).
Even newbies have valid opinions.
EDIT: No Googling now cycling expert.
"noobie"??? It's noob grandpa.
Well it could be 'newbie' or 'noob' (or often 'n00b') and they are indeed somewhat different my young padawan.
it's grandpop you fooking newb!
Pages