Fantastic timing

Quoted message said:

The Spanish judicial system implicated these guys (interestingly) the
same number of days BEFORE the TDF as they did in clearing their names
afterward. What an amazing cooincidence!

http://velonews.com/race/int/articles/10588.0.html

Note that these guys not only lost their chance to ride the Tour, but
they also lost their livelihoods (at least for the season). The team
was devastated. Sick.

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

Quoted message said:

The Spanish judicial system implicated these guys (interestingly) the
same number of days BEFORE the TDF as they did in clearing their names
afterward. What an amazing cooincidence!

http://velonews.com/race/int/articles/10588.0.html

Andrew Hood, repeating a Spanish press report, states that they were
"cleared" of involvement ,but that may not be what happened. The court
statement, as reported by Hood states in part, "there are not any type of
charges against them nor have there been adopted any type of legal action
against them." My understanding is that the consumption of doping
substances in Spain is not yet a crime. Thus, there can be no charges
against the riders. Does this mean that they had no involvement with Dr.
Fuentes? That isn't at all clear.

Quoted message said:

The Spanish judicial system implicated these guys (interestingly) the
same number of days BEFORE the TDF as they did in clearing their names
afterward. What an amazing cooincidence!

http://velonews.com/race/int/articles/10588.0.html

Dumb question, but does "there are not any type of charges against them
nor have there been adopted any type of legal action against them"
really mean they are now cleared from the implication of having doped (I
mean only relating to this case)? I read some here saying that blood
doping isn't illegal anyway.

Ernst Noch said:

Quoted message said:

The Spanish judicial system implicated these guys (interestingly) the
same number of days BEFORE the TDF as they did in clearing their names
afterward. What an amazing cooincidence!

http://velonews.com/race/int/articles/10588.0.html

Dumb question, but does "there are not any type of charges against them
nor have there been adopted any type of legal action against them"
really mean they are now cleared from the implication of having doped (I
mean only relating to this case)? I read some here saying that blood
doping isn't illegal anyway.

I think it means that the prosecutors are done with them. Perhaps they
were just doping customers of his and the cops found no evidence of
them helping to commit the medical fraud part.

I suppose that a month ago, if you went to a Spanish doctor and said
"Can I have some EPO?", he gave it to you, and you did not help him
hide the fact, then that would probably be the end of it for them. The
doctor, on the other hand, has to committ all kinds of fraudulent acts
in order to get those drugs into his hands. Perhaps cooperating with
the doc by using a code name, or falsely claiming to have anemia puts
you in the "conspriacy" group.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

http://velonews.com/race/int/articles/10588.0.html

Andrew Hood, repeating a Spanish press report, states that they were
"cleared" of involvement ,but that may not be what happened. The court
statement, as reported by Hood states in part, "there are not any type of
charges against them nor have there been adopted any type of legal action
against them." My understanding is that the consumption of doping
substances in Spain is not yet a crime. Thus, there can be no charges
against the riders. Does this mean that they had no involvement with Dr.
Fuentes? That isn't at all clear.

Yes, in the same way that neither Ullrich or Basso are going to be
arrested if they go to Spain, but that's not the point, that article
is simplistic and misleading.

what I see is that the teams didn't let folks go for doping.
they were released for being less than open about their
relationships with the doc. that's all. apparently they all
had contracts that allowed their teams to release them if
they did something bad for the team. that's that.
tough.

from:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2006/jul06/jul01news

When asked what the documents contained, Frommert replied, "They
clearly point to contact between the implicated trio and the doctor
at the centre of the probe, Eufemiano Fuentes. Ullrich and Oscar
Sevilla as well as Rudy Pevenage have denied this so far and also
testified to it in a written statement. There are clear guidelines
arranged with the riders, which leave no room for interpretation.
This was also clear to Jan Ullrich, Oscar Sevilla and Rudy
Pevenage. So we had to react."

in message <[email hidden]>, Ernst Noch ([email hidden]'😉

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The Spanish judicial system implicated these guys (interestingly) the
same number of days BEFORE the TDF as they did in clearing their names
afterward. What an amazing cooincidence!

http://velonews.com/race/int/articles/10588.0.html

Dumb question, but does "there are not any type of charges against them
nor have there been adopted any type of legal action against them"
really mean they are now cleared from the implication of having doped
(I mean only relating to this case)? I read some here saying that blood
doping isn't illegal anyway.

That's right. This doesn't by itself necessarily mean they're cleared of
the doping charges, because they were not legal charges in the first
place. So I'll wait until we have a bit more news before I start
crowing.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
Copyright (c) Simon Brooke; All rights reserved. Permission is
granted to transfer this message via UUCP or NNTP and to store it
for the purpose of archiving or further transfer. Permission is
explicitly denied to use this message as part of a 'Web Forum', or
to transfer it by HTTP.

in message <[email hidden]>,

(') said:

Ernst Noch said:

Quoted message said:

The Spanish judicial system implicated these guys (interestingly)
the same number of days BEFORE the TDF as they did in clearing their
names
afterward. What an amazing cooincidence!

http://velonews.com/race/int/articles/10588.0.html

Dumb question, but does "there are not any type of charges against
them nor have there been adopted any type of legal action against
them" really mean they are now cleared from the implication of having
doped (I mean only relating to this case)? I read some here saying
that blood doping isn't illegal anyway.

I think it means that the prosecutors are done with them. Perhaps they
were just doping customers of his and the cops found no evidence of
them helping to commit the medical fraud part.

I suppose that a month ago, if you went to a Spanish doctor and said
"Can I have some EPO?", he gave it to you, and you did not help him
hide the fact, then that would probably be the end of it for them. The
doctor, on the other hand, has to committ all kinds of fraudulent acts
in order to get those drugs into his hands.

No, he could have given them EPO perfectly legally, too. It's a
recognised and permitted medicine, which as a doctor he's in his rights
to prescribe. The Spanish case is around blood doping, on the rather
tenuous basis that since there are some risks involved, performing the
operation (of reinfusing) was a 'danger to public health'. Myself, I
think that in the face of a good defence lawyer, that won't stand up in
court.

Quoted message said:

Perhaps cooperating with
the doc by using a code name, or falsely claiming to have anemia puts
you in the "conspriacy" group.

There's no evidence that the riders used, or even knew, their code names.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

See one nuclear war, you've seen them all.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The Spanish judicial system implicated these guys (interestingly) the
same number of days BEFORE the TDF as they did in clearing their names
afterward. What an amazing cooincidence!

http://velonews.com/race/int/articles/10588.0.html

Note that these guys not only lost their chance to ride the Tour, but
they also lost their livelihoods (at least for the season). The team
was devastated. Sick.

Whatever these riders lost or regained is not attributable to the
Guardia Civil. It was the team and riders, all signatories to the Pro
Tour 'Code of Ethics', compliance to their own 'professional' standards
that resulted in suspensions from the tour. That these standards may be
in need of revision is not the responsibility of the GC.

Luke

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>,

(') said:

Ernst Noch said:

[email hidden] wrote:
> The Spanish judicial system implicated these guys (interestingly)
> the same number of days BEFORE the TDF as they did in clearing their
> names
> afterward. What an amazing cooincidence!
>
> http://velonews.com/race/int/articles/10588.0.html
>
Dumb question, but does "there are not any type of charges against
them nor have there been adopted any type of legal action against
them" really mean they are now cleared from the implication of having
doped (I mean only relating to this case)? I read some here saying
that blood doping isn't illegal anyway.

I think it means that the prosecutors are done with them. Perhaps they
were just doping customers of his and the cops found no evidence of
them helping to commit the medical fraud part.

I suppose that a month ago, if you went to a Spanish doctor and said
"Can I have some EPO?", he gave it to you, and you did not help him
hide the fact, then that would probably be the end of it for them. The
doctor, on the other hand, has to committ all kinds of fraudulent acts
in order to get those drugs into his hands.

No, he could have given them EPO perfectly legally, too. It's a
recognised and permitted medicine, which as a doctor he's in his rights
to prescribe. The Spanish case is around blood doping, on the rather
tenuous basis that since there are some risks involved, performing the
operation (of reinfusing) was a 'danger to public health'. Myself, I
think that in the face of a good defence lawyer, that won't stand up in
court.

This is not a drug that a doc writes a script for and the rider goes to
the pharmacy and is handed. The drug has what are called
"indications"...which means the medical issues for which the drug is
intended. EPO is intended for severe anemia caused by kidney failure
or chemotherapy. If the doctor is using false pretenses to obtain the
drug, THAT is fraud. The doctor would need to be creating medical
records showing that he prescribed the drugs for patients suffering
from conditions that the drugs are indicated for. If the patients are
not actually suffering from these medical conditions, the fraud
certainly exists.

Quoted message said:

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>,

(') said:

Ernst Noch wrote:

>[email hidden] wrote:
>
>>The Spanish judicial system implicated these guys (interestingly)
>>the same number of days BEFORE the TDF as they did in clearing their
>>names
>>afterward. What an amazing cooincidence!
>>
>>http://velonews.com/race/int/articles/10588.0.html
>>
>
>Dumb question, but does "there are not any type of charges against
>them nor have there been adopted any type of legal action against
>them" really mean they are now cleared from the implication of having
>doped (I mean only relating to this case)? I read some here saying
>that blood doping isn't illegal anyway.

I think it means that the prosecutors are done with them. Perhaps they
were just doping customers of his and the cops found no evidence of
them helping to commit the medical fraud part.

I suppose that a month ago, if you went to a Spanish doctor and said
"Can I have some EPO?", he gave it to you, and you did not help him
hide the fact, then that would probably be the end of it for them. The
doctor, on the other hand, has to committ all kinds of fraudulent acts
in order to get those drugs into his hands.

No, he could have given them EPO perfectly legally, too. It's a
recognised and permitted medicine, which as a doctor he's in his rights
to prescribe. The Spanish case is around blood doping, on the rather
tenuous basis that since there are some risks involved, performing the
operation (of reinfusing) was a 'danger to public health'. Myself, I
think that in the face of a good defence lawyer, that won't stand up in
court.

This is not a drug that a doc writes a script for and the rider goes to
the pharmacy and is handed. The drug has what are called
"indications"...which means the medical issues for which the drug is
intended. EPO is intended for severe anemia caused by kidney failure
or chemotherapy. If the doctor is using false pretenses to obtain the
drug, THAT is fraud. The doctor would need to be creating medical
records showing that he prescribed the drugs for patients suffering
from conditions that the drugs are indicated for. If the patients are
not actually suffering from these medical conditions, the fraud
certainly exists.

My understanding is that part of the charges against Fuentes are based
on his defrauding the public medical system. He was ordering material
for some public hospital but diverting the substances to his private
practice.

Gabe Brovedani

Gabe Brovedani said:

Quoted message said:

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] ([email hidden]'😉 wrote:

>Ernst Noch wrote:
>
>>[email hidden] wrote:
>>
>>>The Spanish judicial system implicated these guys (interestingly)
>>>the same number of days BEFORE the TDF as they did in clearing their
>>>names
>>>afterward. What an amazing cooincidence!
>>>
>>>http://velonews.com/race/int/articles/10588.0.html
>>>
>>
>>Dumb question, but does "there are not any type of charges against
>>them nor have there been adopted any type of legal action against
>>them" really mean they are now cleared from the implication of having
>>doped (I mean only relating to this case)? I read some here saying
>>that blood doping isn't illegal anyway.
>
>I think it means that the prosecutors are done with them. Perhaps they
>were just doping customers of his and the cops found no evidence of
>them helping to commit the medical fraud part.
>
>I suppose that a month ago, if you went to a Spanish doctor and said
>"Can I have some EPO?", he gave it to you, and you did not help him
>hide the fact, then that would probably be the end of it for them. The
>doctor, on the other hand, has to committ all kinds of fraudulent acts
>in order to get those drugs into his hands.

No, he could have given them EPO perfectly legally, too. It's a
recognised and permitted medicine, which as a doctor he's in his rights
to prescribe. The Spanish case is around blood doping, on the rather
tenuous basis that since there are some risks involved, performing the
operation (of reinfusing) was a 'danger to public health'. Myself, I
think that in the face of a good defence lawyer, that won't stand up in
court.

This is not a drug that a doc writes a script for and the rider goes to
the pharmacy and is handed. The drug has what are called
"indications"...which means the medical issues for which the drug is
intended. EPO is intended for severe anemia caused by kidney failure
or chemotherapy. If the doctor is using false pretenses to obtain the
drug, THAT is fraud. The doctor would need to be creating medical
records showing that he prescribed the drugs for patients suffering
from conditions that the drugs are indicated for. If the patients are
not actually suffering from these medical conditions, the fraud
certainly exists.

My understanding is that part of the charges against Fuentes are based
on his defrauding the public medical system. He was ordering material
for some public hospital but diverting the substances to his private
practice.

Gabe Brovedani

That's what I mean. You and I can't just walk up to a corner pharmacy
and walk out with EPO. This stuff is dispensed only to clinics and
hospitals. The druggist/chemist/pharrmacists in possession of the
original drugs would have to have been hoodwinked into giving the stuff
out. A lot of people think that you can walk into a corner pharmacy in
TJ and walk out with EPO. I don't think you really can. The chain of
distribution is kept rather tight. You either have to steal it or
committ fraud in order to get it into the medical clinic of a sports
doctor.

It's a lot easier to get than you think. Just need cash and google.

Mark VandenBerghe

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That's what I mean. You and I can't just walk up to a corner pharmacy
and walk out with EPO. This stuff is dispensed only to clinics and
hospitals. The druggist/chemist/pharrmacists in possession of the
original drugs would have to have been hoodwinked into giving the stuff
out. A lot of people think that you can walk into a corner pharmacy in
TJ and walk out with EPO. I don't think you really can. The chain of
distribution is kept rather tight. You either have to steal it or
committ fraud in order to get it into the medical clinic of a sports
doctor.

Here for example:

http://www.cytoshop.com/products/cytokines/rHuEPO-a.aspx

Mark VandenBerghe

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

Quoted message said:

It's a lot easier to get than you think. Just need cash and google.

Mark VandenBerghe

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That's what I mean. You and I can't just walk up to a corner pharmacy
and walk out with EPO. This stuff is dispensed only to clinics and
hospitals. The druggist/chemist/pharrmacists in possession of the
original drugs would have to have been hoodwinked into giving the stuff
out. A lot of people think that you can walk into a corner pharmacy in
TJ and walk out with EPO. I don't think you really can. The chain of
distribution is kept rather tight. You either have to steal it or
committ fraud in order to get it into the medical clinic of a sports
doctor.

Mark VandenBerghe said:

Here for example:

http://www.cytoshop.com/products/cytokines/rHuEPO-a.aspx

Mark VandenBerghe

Doctor's are too lazy to do that [censored]. Too much hassle. They just
write an order and tell the hospital pharmacist a white lie when they
want to do something unorthodox. Besides, why let an underground
internet dealer profit from the mark-up when the good doc can keep all
that profit for himself?

in message <[email hidden]>,

(') said:

That's what I mean.  You and I can't just walk up to a corner pharmacy
and walk out with EPO.

No, we can't. We're not registered medical practitioners, and we don't
have a valid prescription from a recognised medical practitioner. If I
did, then, here in Scotland anyway, I could[1]. I'm prepared to bet you
could in the US, too.

[1] Chances are they wouldn't have it in stock, though. When I had my
second DVT the locum doctor at my surgery gave me a prescription for
heparin, and said she had to inject within four hours or I was toast.
Oh, and I mustn't drive and shouldn't even walk in the mean time. So I
went to the local pharmacy... where they didn't have any.

So I went to a friends house where we phoned every pharmacy within fifty
miles, and they didn't have any... except the hospital pharmacy, which
wasn't allowed to supply it to me for accounting reasons. So what
actually happened was the hospital gave one of the pharmacies some
heparin 'under the counter', and they gave it to my friend, and she
brought it to the surgery, and I got injected, and the pharmacy then
bought more heparin from their supplier and gave it back to the hospital
so that their stock records were OK and there was no evidence of this
nefarious transaction... The National Health Service /is/ wonderful.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
/-\ You have discovered a security flaw in a Microsoft product. You
|-| can report this issue to our security team. Would you like to
| | * Be completely ignored (default)?
| | * Receive a form email full of platitudes about how much we care?
\_/ * Spend hours helping us fix this problem on your own phone bill?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If you walked up to a pharmacy with a script/prescription for Epogen,
first of all, the pharmacist would think something was awry.

Or s/he might just assume that you've got cancer, and your doctor has
prescribed Epogen as a way of fighting the anemia caused by your
chemotherapy.

Quoted message said:

Andy Coggan

Andy, No one with cancer takes the Epogen home with them

I can tell you from first-hand experience that this is patently not
true.

(BTW, related to Simon's (?) previous experience: yesterday my wife
walked away from the local Walgreens with 300,000 U of heparin. She had
to wait to have her 'scrip filled, but they did have the drug in stock.)

Quoted message said:

Andy, No one with cancer takes the Epogen home with them from a
pharmacy. It's administered through an IV injection.

BTW, not only do some cancer patients take Epogen home with them, it is
approved for administration via subcutaneous injection. So, you're
wrong on both counts. :-)

Andy Coggan

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:

> If you walked up to a pharmacy with a script/prescription for Epogen,
> first of all, the pharmacist would think something was awry.

Or s/he might just assume that you've got cancer, and your doctor has
prescribed Epogen as a way of fighting the anemia caused by your
chemotherapy.

Quoted message said:

Andy Coggan

Andy, No one with cancer takes the Epogen home with them

I can tell you from first-hand experience that this is patently not
true.

(BTW, related to Simon's (?) previous experience: yesterday my wife
walked away from the local Walgreens with 300,000 U of heparin. She had
to wait to have her 'scrip filled, but they did have the drug in stock.)

I never said you can't walk out of a Pharmacy with heparin.

That drug is administered subcutaneously. The same way insulin is
administered. They assume anyone who comes in with a heparin script
has been trained in how to administer it (same with a diabetic who
wants insulin). But a drug given via an IV, that's different. It
requires (at a minimum) licensure to be allowed to administer it.
Perhaps you have been in a situation where you walked away with Epogen,
but I can tell you that unless you were a pharmacist, pharmacy delivery
boy or a doctor, there was likely some illegal action going on. And
that illegal action is probably very rare in the states.