AOD-9604 not performance enhancing: Evans

[BF Tiger]

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. "

To further this point, Essendon, like all AFL clubs, are a pissant blip on world sport. Essendon spent just under $20 million last year on the football department. According to Forbes 80 sportsmen earnt at least that much last year! They could buy an AFL club as their plaything. So if WADA lie down to the EFC then what hope would they have against European soccer giants, the best tennis players in the world, etc...

 

[The King!]

Good to see him support watson but again its nothing new, of course essendon are confident etc, we knew this, otherwise it would be done now surely if essendon said yep we are guilty

 

[mxett]

That is just an opinion. It is not a proven fact.

No, but given the clubs response to the "trial" revelation in the Age on Saturday it seems logical

 

[Saint Shags]

it is proven safe in IV and oral form so I'd suggest he is talking about constant large IV doses.
@ProfDocHealth: More AOD9604 facts 5. Injections into blood stream - ltd testing. Max of 3 Single doses week apart. So cant be considered safe for reg IV
http://calzada.com.au/wp-content/up...-of-the-Hexadecapeptide-AOD9604-in-Humans.pdf

It is s0 banned

Further: @ProfDocHealth: Time for AOD9604 facts: 1.doesn't increase IGF1 under any circumstances. Only growth hormone does. 2.Never shown to have anabolic activity

So your assuming now even though he states 'Not safe for Regular IV use'

 

[BF Tiger]

That appears to be the case, but for whatever reason Essendon were under the impression that this wasn't the case.

Which still has to be fully explained why.

 

[mxett]

@ProfDocHealth: @ringsau regarding these websites promoting AOD9604.They contain incorrect & misleading info. For one thing it does not increase IGF1

@ProfDocHealth: @Stevo7AFL incorrect, deceptive & misleading. e.g. no effect on IGF-1 for example either given oral or IV. This is clear & certain.

Blowing Charters claims out of the water

 

[Bunk Moreland]

When it's covered under S.0 then yes.

And what does S.0 actually mean in practice?

Nobody disputes the existence of S.0 - it's clearly there, in black and white.

What's important here is ASADA and WADA's ability and willingness to issue an infraction and penalise based purely on S.0.

I don't even know that there's a precedent for it that would guide us to this ability and willingness.

 

[mxett]

So your assuming now even though he states 'Not safe for Regular IV use'

Assuming what?

 

[bad setanta]

I don't think it's that high. You might be getting a bit caught up in the media shitstorm of the last week. There's no current precedent for the stripping of premiership points.

Maybe I'm just being overly optimistic but I think the stripping of points would be an absolute worst case scenario and third in line [in order] behind fines and draft sanctions as the likely punishments. I agree though, the last thing the AFL would want is for us to win the premiership this year.


Also, I don't think many people associated with the club truly care about the rep we've copped from this saga. Carlton will always be salary-cap cheating, tanking scum. Richmond will always be the club who's supporters spat on their coach and delivered chicken shit to Punt Road's doorstep. Melbourne will always be tankers. North will always be the poor little brother of the other Melbourne clubs. Now granted the label of "drug cheats" is worse than those insults, but it's just something we're going to have to live with regardless of the outcome.

Here, let me help you reach acceptance ; Drug cheating scum

 

[mxett]

Then, you pair of intellectual giants, why is it on the S0 schedule for drugs not approved for human use?

Ohh and Bunk... the term 'guinea pig' is a generic term used to represent anyone or thing used in a testing program. I dont take my cues from the herald sun... it's a term that I have been using since high school back in the 70's.

Therapeutic use!

 

[fishardansin]

Seeing a certain description of a person gets changed to moo in here .... this place is turning into a cattle run!

DAVID EVANS DIDN'T SAY THAT THIS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER OR NOT ESSENDON OR ESSENDON PLAYERS WILL BE PUNISHED. HE IS SIMPLY SAYING THAT THE PEOPLE IN THE MEDIA AROUND THIS STORY KNOW FULL WELL THAT AOD IS NOT A PED AND IF ESSENDON GETS PENALISED FOR USING IT IT WILL BE FOR THE TECHNICALITY OF S0.

 

[mxett]

So your assuming now even though he states 'Not safe for Regular IV use'

He says not proven safe for regular use. His trial: @ProfDocHealth: our trial: 3 diff doses of AOD IV @ weekly intervals & 1 GH. Can't say safe for prolonged dosing.

I'm pretty sure his trial indicated IV was safe in the form he used.

 

[mjonc]

Section 0 is a section of the WADA code. It's not a category of the prohibited list.

It's the first item of the prohibited list.

 

[blaze036]

Evans and Hird need to face criminal charges for putting players health at risk and using them as guinea pigs. Maybe 3 years in jail will send a good message to people thinking about using drugs not approved for human use (with possible serious health consequences) on their human guinea pigs

 

[Spongebob]

Wow, nice way to pot one of our most decorated doctors!

He investigated AOD and canned it as a failure. How does that help calzada?

Can you point me to any refereed publications by Wittert investigating AOD?

I have spent a lot of time on Scopus, and can find no research published and would be interested to read it. As I did post last week, the patent for the euphoric anti-depressant did not cite any work published by Wittert.

 

[Plugger_87]

Lol, Danks pamphlet was a sales brochure! Are you suggesting sales information that doesn't have scientific backing is evidence now?

He's suggesting ur club fell for Danks sales pitch and are screwed.

 

[mjonc]

@ProfDocHealth: @ringsau regarding these websites promoting AOD9604.They contain incorrect & misleading info. For one thing it does not increase IGF1

@ProfDocHealth: @Stevo7AFL incorrect, deceptive & misleading. e.g. no effect on IGF-1 for example either given oral or IV. This is clear & certain.

Blowing Charters claims out of the water

What about injection in the stomach?

What did @ProfDocHealth say its benefits are then?

 

[IanW]

Seeing a certain description of a person gets changed to moo in here .... this place is turning into a cattle run!

DAVID EVANS DIDN'T SAY THAT THIS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER OR NOT ESSENDON OR ESSENDON PLAYERS WILL BE PUNISHED. HE IS SIMPLY SAYING THAT THE PEOPLE IN THE MEDIA AROUND THIS STORY KNOW FULL WELL THAT AOD IS NOT A PED AND IF ESSENDON GETS PENALISED FOR USING IT IT WILL BE FOR THE TECHNICALITY OF S0.

S0 isnt a technicality.

S0 is one of the things that stops cheats using stuff they believe is not detected by current tests.

Otherwise, you will get ethics-free scum arguing 'this substance isnt on the prohibited list'.

You may have recently seen - or indeed made - this argument.

 

[Saint Shags]

He says not proven safe for regular use. His trial: @ProfDocHealth: our trial: 3 diff doses of AOD IV @ weekly intervals & 1 GH. Can't say safe for prolonged dosing.

I'm pretty sure his trial indicated IV was safe in the form he used.

But what is prolonged?

 

[PieBeast]

oh boohoo you guys are screwed

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.

This post needs to be quoted on every page of every thread, specifically for our deluded Bomber brethren that are very very slow on the uptake

 

[mxett]

Can you point me to any refereed publications by Wittert investigating AOD?

I have spent a lot of time on Scopus, and can find no research published and would be interested to read it. As I did post last week, the patent for the euphoric anti-depressant did not cite any work published by Wittert.

No. I gather he didnt publish his study because the drug was abandoned and his results proved it wasnt worthy of development.

 

[mxett]

He's suggesting ur club fell for Danks sales pitch and are screwed.

Yeah, nah

 

[mjonc]

@ProfDocHealth: @ringsau regarding these websites promoting AOD9604.They contain incorrect & misleading info. For one thing it does not increase IGF1

@ProfDocHealth: @Stevo7AFL incorrect, deceptive & misleading. e.g. no effect on IGF-1 for example either given oral or IV. This is clear & certain.

Blowing Charters claims out of the water

Maybe the TGA haven't approved its use because of this:

@ProfDocHealth No evidence that regular injections of AOD9604 are safe. relevant safety tests have not been done. Therefore at best it is experimental use.

 

[Byron_Clanger]

Well, if the President of the offending club says the banned substance isn't performance enhancing then I'm sold!

 

[Smotie]

Seeing a certain description of a person gets changed to moo in here .... this place is turning into a cattle run!

DAVID EVANS DIDN'T SAY THAT THIS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER OR NOT ESSENDON OR ESSENDON PLAYERS WILL BE PUNISHED. HE IS SIMPLY SAYING THAT THE PEOPLE IN THE MEDIA AROUND THIS STORY KNOW FULL WELL THAT AOD IS NOT A PED AND IF ESSENDON GETS PENALISED FOR USING IT IT WILL BE FOR THE TECHNICALITY OF S0.

Love how the only people who think Essendon are not guilty are Essendon and their supporters.

LAUGH OUT ****ING LOUD