AOD-9604 not performance enhancing: Evans

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
jenny61_99 said:
So on one hand we have Essendon supporters yelling "Nah Nah, it's not performance enhancing" and on the other hand we have sane other supporters yelling "then why the bloody hell did it get injected into your players?" NOBODY from Essendon seems to be able to answer this very fundamental question.

Shits and giggles?
Scientific Experiment on players?

Actually, I can't think of ONE VALID REASON you would inject this prohibited substance, multiple times, into anyone, let alone elite athletes governed by an anti-doping code that just happens to frown on substances that have yet to be approved for human therapeutic use being pumped into athletes.

Can ANYONE come up with a valid reason for doing this?
Click to expand...
Mxett uses the word efficacy a lot though...... ;)
 
grrofunger said:
Section 4.3.3

WADA’s determination of the Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods that will be included on the Prohibited List and the classi- fication of substances into categories on the Prohibited List is final and shall not be subject to challenge by an Athlete or other Person based on an argument that the substance or method was not a masking agent or did not have the potential to enhance performance, represent a health risk or violate the spirit of sport.
Click to expand...

Just curious as to why no Essendon supporters seem to be quoting this.
 
grrofunger said:
Section 4.3.3

WADA’s determination of the Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods that will be included on the Prohibited List and the classi- fication of substances into categories on the Prohibited List is final and shall not be subject to challenge by an Athlete or other Person based on an argument that the substance or method was not a masking agent or did not have the potential to enhance performance, represent a health risk or violate the spirit of sport.
Click to expand...


Game set match

goodnight Essendon

rot in hell snake Evans
 

Log in to remove this ad.

broden said:
I wonder how ASADA will view Mr. Evans' statement?
Click to expand...
Once they're done laughing their **** off, I'm guessing they'll release some short and sweet statement like ummm "its irrelevant if its performance enhancing or not" and put honest Davo back in his box. Like they've been doing throughout EFC's entire comic routine.
 
mxett said:
I have.

His researched results were discussed in this article http://indaily.com.au/news/2013/05/...ions-has-euphoric-effect-adelaide-researcher/

Further, he is considered an expert in this field so his understanding of substances and their potential far out way BF experts.
Click to expand...


oh cool, an adelaide independent news article, some peer-reviewed shit right there.

all it says is he examined whether AOD had an impact on weight loss. no mention on how it might influence muscle growth or cartilage repair... because he didn't measure those things.

have you considered that the reason why there's is no evidence from human clinical trials to suggest that AOD increases the number of muscle or cartilage cells... is because no one's measured those things in humans? the only known research that has examined AOD and muscle and cartilage cells has been conducted on animal cell lines. and they found a positive result.

also, if he knew how every substance worked... then what would be the point of doing clinical trials at all?
 
mxett said:
http://indaily.com.au/news/2013/05/...ions-has-euphoric-effect-adelaide-researcher/

Contradicted by Wittert
Click to expand...


Mxett,

Once again, you've created unintentional hilarity. See what name jumps out from the report

For the full set of 22 patients, the average cumulative weight change
over the three AOD9604 treated weeks was a loss of 0.58 kg (making an
average 0.19 kg per week) compared with a gain of 0.05 kg in the
placebo treated week (p>0.05, not significant). Again the response of
the younger patients was variable and the effects were concentrated
and significant in the older group. In the week when the highest
AOD9604 dose was given, the average weight loss in the older group
was 0.50 kg compared to the placebo week gain of 0.31 kg (p<0.01).

These results from the effects of single doses over 1 week should be
interpreted as an encouraging indication which needs confirmation in
future appropriately designed weight loss trials.

NEXT STEPS

The principal investigator for the trial, Associate Professor Gary Wittert MD at the Royal Adelaide Hospital, is preparing a manuscript
for publication of the trial results in a peer-reviewed journal.

http://stocknessmonster.com/news-item?S=CZD&E=ASX&N=186762
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Barry Zuckercorn said:
Once they're done laughing their **** off, I'm guessing they'll release some short and sweet statement like ummm "its irrelevant if its performance enhancing or not" and put honest Davo back in his box. Like they've been doing throughout EFC's entire comic routine.
Click to expand...

But Essendon have co-operated fully and openly
 
mxett said:
Therapeutic use! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

ASADA said while therapeutic-use exemptions for athletes were available in limited cases, AOD-9604 was not one.
"Substances falling under the S0 category are prohibited at all times (in and out of competition),'' it stated. "Given substances under S0 do not have current approval by any governmental regulatory health authority for human therapeutic use, no TUE (Therapeutic Use Exemption) would be granted under any circumstances.''
Click to expand...
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...llegal-substance/story-e6frg6n6-1226669509975
 
When the details of the WADA report are provided and resulting penalties (if any) are applied, we are going to see a massive shift in discussion here on BF and across all media streams.

Interesting times ahead for a subject we all wish never occurred. Hard for all involved.
 
IanW said:
Mxett,

Once again, you've created unintentional hilarity. See what name jumps out from the report

For the full set of 22 patients, the average cumulative weight change
over the three AOD9604 treated weeks was a loss of 0.58 kg (making an
average 0.19 kg per week) compared with a gain of 0.05 kg in the
placebo treated week (p>0.05, not significant). Again the response of
the younger patients was variable and the effects were concentrated
and significant in the older group. In the week when the highest
AOD9604 dose was given, the average weight loss in the older group
was 0.50 kg compared to the placebo week gain of 0.31 kg (p<0.01).

These results from the effects of single doses over 1 week should be
interpreted as an encouraging indication which needs confirmation in
future appropriately designed weight loss trials.

NEXT STEPS

The principal investigator for the trial, Associate Professor Gary Wittert MD at the Royal Adelaide Hospital, is preparing a manuscript
for publication of the trial results in a peer-reviewed journal.

http://stocknessmonster.com/news-item?S=CZD&E=ASX&N=186762
Click to expand...


I like his aim of the study:


The aim of the trial was to assess safety and tolerability of the
drug in clinically obese patients after single intravenous doses, and
at the same time to measure and compare short term changes in fat
metabolic parameters.
Click to expand...
 
mxett said:
Why was he selected by calzada to investigate, and Essendon and the afl for opinion? Did you read the info I posted on him?
Click to expand...


I've read the study. Injections ONCE A WEEK for Four weeks. On 22 subjects.

You are claiming he knows this isn't a PED based on THAT? You had better hope Essendon has something far better than Prof Wittert as their "expert" witness.
 
IanW said:
Bomberblitz is actually completely wrong.

The banned status may be lifted if it is ever approved for human theraputic use.
Click to expand...
Which will probably never happen as the company who own it haven't found a use for it that it works for. So they stopped trials, why spend money to get it approved when it doesn't work.
 
Funny how essendon supporters are clinging to the idea that its not performance enhancing. And if anyone says "it could be a masking agent" they go all apeshit.

To any essendon fan I'd ask "what do you think S0 is in the code for?"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top