AOD-9604 not performance enhancing: Evans

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
rfctiger74 said:
I should note however before I spoke to my mate I thought I was screwed. Reading the contract it had no leeway, and I thought they were buying both my silence and agreement to take a career break (effectively) if I left
Click to expand...

What they are really worried about is you stealing their IP or clients and taking it/them to a competitor. If you don't do that then no worries.
 
tassiedog said:
Legal question for a legal mind.

Does the circumstance in which the agreement is signed impact on its legality
Click to expand...

Yep, there are all sort of Acts about this, in NSW the Contracts Review Act is one. See sections 7 and 9.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/cra1980201/

There are many others, as this is an employment situation, there would be relevent provisions in various state and federal employment law as well as trade practices.
 
SaintsSeptember said:
SO you are claiming that they were using AOD as a Narcotic? Since its not approved for medicinal purposes, you'd have to assume it falls foul of the illicit drug code.
Click to expand...


Are you serious? When did I claim that? Why would it be illicit?

Also it has been shown to you many times it can be used legally for therapeutic reasons. This line of argument doesn't mean that it passes s0, but it's not illegal.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Hawker83 said:
I hate witch hunts.

Its scary to observe how the witch-hunting mob will reject any report that doesn't conform to their prejudices. But will slavishly repeat any report that does.

The best advice remains: wait for the full facts and don't pre-judge. People are way too eager to trash people's reputations and careers - based on what? A confected outrage designed to sell papers.
Click to expand...


I hate drug cheats.
 
fishardansin said:
Are you serious? When did I claim that? Why would it be illicit?

Also it has been shown to you many times it can be used legally for therapeutic reasons. This line of argument doesn't mean that it passes s0, but it's not illegal.
Click to expand...

Wrong check with the lab rat results. I mean the players results
 
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/essendon-fears-drug-deceit-20130726-2qq3f.html

This is exactly what I have argued on this thread from the very beginning.

Nobody knows if AOD has anabolic properties. All studies previously performed have been on far lower doses (or given orally where bioavailability is low).

Most drugs and certainly all peptides, work by attaching themselves to certain receptors in the body. They either activate the receptor and thus start series of physiological events or they block the receptor and prevent the body's own peptides/hormones/chemicals from activating it.

Now you don't have to be clever to work out that a peptide like AOD has to attach itself to certain receptors. Of course the body does not have AOD receptors. As a fragment of hGH it most likely works by attaching itself to hGH receptors. Now the effect it creates is probably dose dependent. At low doses it activates few receptors. This is most likely not enough to increase IGF-1 secretion but enough to see lipolysis (fat breakdown). So when studying it as Prof Wittert has, he will only be able to see the fat breakdown effects without the anabolic effects.
When you increase the dose it is more likely to behave like hGH and cause IGF-1 secretion.

Now I'm not saying this definitely does happen. I am postulating that it could happen and we need to study the drug in greater detail and in appropriate dosages.

I do know a little bit about pharmacology. I am not making these things up.
I have always maintained that Evans has quoted selectively. Yes, he is correct when he says there is no evidence in human subjects that have been tested of PE effects. But that has a big qualifier - AS YET.

Even the ACC which was erroneously informed by ASADA, carefully says about AOD: "AOD-9604 is not currently a WADA prohibited substance". Note the words not currently, as even they recognized that there was not enough information to ban it under S2. Obviously they missed the S0 classification all together. That is discussed in another thread.
 
fishardansin said:
Ok lets go to the actual paper, and focus on the actual bits with the footballers:




Now seeing that Ancient Tiger, jenny61_99 and a few others are medical experts. Perhaps they can explain to you guys what transdermal application means .....

Or you could do research like IanW does:

http://bit.ly/1caESNB
Click to expand...

3 ways, dermis, oral, hypodermis.

come of fishie, you gotta quit it with the minutae and trees from forest shit.

your question in everything, a meta-question. what is doping, is it ok.

not the fricken fine print. the lanes father and daughter, robbo and whately, they all want to parse these sub-regulations to an enth of their life.

someone will help me out here, there is a quote on fraud, about when some esoterica hits a threshold point, and the issue at hand has some value or commodity, unnecessary complexity can become fraud.

well, this entire embroglio is bullshit. i dont see how you can reconcile David Evans being of the board of the Victoria Police, and telling us straightfaced, fanciful made-up crap. one cannot just make these ends meet.

seems all of these people or pretty good bedfellows.

football would be much better back in the 1980s with suburban ovals, VFL, and the Wednesday night State of Origin. that was the heyday imo.

today, loads of cash. but since when was that the imprimatur of life
 
blackcat said:
3 ways, dermis, oral, hypodermis.

come of fishie, you gotta quit it with the minutae and trees from forest shit.

your question in everything, a meta-question. what is doping, is it ok.

not the fricken fine print. the lanes father and daughter, robbo and whately, they all want to parse these sub-regulations to an enth of their life.

someone will help me out here, there is a quote on fraud, about when some esoterica hits a threshold point, and the issue at hand has some value or commodity, unnecessary complexity can become fraud.

well, this entire embroglio is bullshit. i dont see how you can reconcile David Evans being of the board of the Victoria Police, and telling us straightfaced, fanciful made-up crap. one cannot just make these ends meet.

seems all of these people or pretty good bedfellows.

football would be much better back in the 1980s with suburban ovals, VFL, and the Wednesday night State of Origin. that was the heyday imo.

today, loads of cash. but since when was that the imprimatur of life
Click to expand...

From Wren to Waterhouse, some things stay the same.
 
Echols said:
LOL what?

You think WADA are going to bend over and say "Yeah, you know what, we don't actually have a full grasp of what is on the banned list and why. You got us this time, Essendon. All power to you. We will lift AOD from the list, ok. "
Click to expand...

I must bow to you on this one.

Incredibly prophetic!

(I'm serious, btw).

Shame you were obviously taking the piss.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

fishardansin said:
Wow what an over inflated sense of importance for this tosser. Bunk has bumped about 10 threads and one was about him ... thinks Bunk has a crush!! Leepfrog is obviously Bunk's crush and this tosser is **** giving hand jobs at lunch time behind the football oval.
Click to expand...
You don't get to call other people tossers, fish.

*even in broken English.
 
Echols said:
I think he has a crush.
Click to expand...

I haven't been on this site for long and to see that you were just as full of it 12 months ago as you are now is hilarious - and so sure of yourself too. Keep these bumps going.
 
telsa1962 said:
I haven't been on this site for long and to see that you were just as full of it 12 months ago as you are now is hilarious - and so sure of yourself too. Keep these bumps going.
Click to expand...
Oh, I'm sure you're very new around here. ;)

Just calling it as I see it, try not take it to heart.
 
Echols said:
Oh, I'm sure you're very new around here. ;)

Just calling it as I see it, try not take it to heart.
Click to expand...
Is Echols the hawthorn word for Cerberus?
 
Echols said:
Oh, I'm sure you're very new around here. ;)

Just calling it as I see it, try not take it to heart.
Click to expand...
I am actually new around here and one of my first experiences was a silly smart arsed reply to a sensible comment I made expressing caution about believing all you read in a newspaper by one of the mods around here - who might that have been
 
Echols said:
Oh, I'm sure you're very new around here. ;)

Just calling it as I see it, try not take it to heart.
Click to expand...
Not taking it to heart - just amused really :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top