Chip leaked the Asada report ?

[Baldur]

So Dank maybe was getting things on the cheap, yet he was supposedly sacked for being 100k over budget.

My personal opinion is that Alavi was protecting his ass by saying it should be tested, i.e. I never dispensed it, while still being able to be unclear as to what drug he made up for Dank.

Dank did not want it tested, he was very well aware what it was and the last thing he wanted was a test that could be found to prove it.

Did Dank ensure Alavi was looked after? It appears so.

 

[Baldur]

One would have thought that if Dank (via Charters) provided the drug, and the pharmacist's incompetence destroyed it, that the Bombers would have been asking for more than a cancelled invoice, they'd want replacement or compensation?

Am also interested in the 'cost'. If Dank is providing the drug, and Alavi is billing $Nk dollars - he is actually sending a 4 figure bill entirely for compounding services (and being willing to circumvent the need for a prescription)? Alavi himself is not buying the drug or paying for it? Who is actually purchasing it and putting money in Charters pocket? Is there an invoice between Charters and Alavi or Charters and Dank?

Interesting question. Does ASADA know the answer? Another interesting question. Follow the money, it always reveals.

 

[I Rock]

Fair enough. When ASADA come out and say that their stance on AOD in 2012 was that it was a banned substance and that was the information they were giving to independent doctors who asked them about it, and thus issue bans to our players for it's use (instead of hiding behind WADA), then we'll have done something wrong.

As opposed to WADA saying that the substance was banned and always banned. And WADA being the governing body of the code and ASADA only being the local investigation body for WADA......that sort of set up.

 

[Jobe Watson]

As opposed to WADA saying that the substance was banned and always banned. And WADA being the governing body of the code and ASADA only being the local investigation body for WADA......that sort of set up.

Yep, so our players are going to get banned for it's use. Case closed.

What happens if AOD isn't listed on any show cause/infraction notice?

 

[I Rock]

Yep, so our players are going to get banned for it's use. Case closed.

What happens if AOD isn't listed on any show cause/infraction notice?

Do you have trouble remembering things?

Remember the part where I said that you don't have to be found guilty to be guilty and this whole exchange is on your quote that Essendon took a banned substance?

If you do then you would know that those two points have been covered.

 

[Jobe Watson]

Do you have trouble remembering things?

Remember the part where I said that you don't have to be found guilty to be guilty and this whole exchange is on your quote that Essendon took a banned substance?

If you do then you would know that those two points have been covered.

Yeah, I remembered. It was just so ridiculous that I ignored it.

"Don't have to be guilty to be guilty". I guess that's the easy way out for people hoping, praying for and expecting bans. Of course, you can always hold your opinion that even if Essendon players don't receive bans they must be guilty of being drug cheats, ignoring the mitigating circumstances involved.

It's not what you know - it's what you can prove. If not enough evidence is found to convict and suspend our players for prohibited drug use, then they are not guilty. Heck, even if we "get off" on a technicality... the correct process must be followed. As mad as it may make you.

 

[I Rock]

Yeah, I remembered. It was just so ridiculous that I ignored it.

"Don't have to be guilty to be guilty". I guess that's the easy way out for people hoping, praying for and expecting bans. Of course, you can always hold your opinion that even if Essendon players don't receive bans they must be guilty of being drug cheats, ignoring the mitigating circumstances involved.

It's not what you know - it's what you can prove. If not enough evidence is found to convict and suspend our players for prohibited drug use, then they are not guilty. Heck, even if we "get off" on a technicality... the correct process must be followed.

You see there you are wrong again. I didn't once say "Don't have to be guilty to be guilty". I said you "Don't have to be found guilty to be guilty".

Take a moment to reflect on how those two comment differ and then why your little rant at the end of your post is invalid, stupid and screams of desperation. Maybe have a little lie down and a rest. You seem a little high strung at the moment.

See if this help. You said Essendon took a banned drug. Therefor by that statement you are saying that Essendon are drug cheats. It's that simply. Nothing to do with ASADA or anyone. Just on that statement of your alone, that is what you suggested. Your words.

 

[Baldur]

You see there you are wrong again. I didn't once say "Don't have to be guilty to be guilty". I said you "Don't have to be found guilty to be guilty".

Take a moment to reflect on how those two comment differ and then why your little rant at the end of your post is invalid, stupid and screams of desperation. Maybe have a little lie down and a rest. You seem a little high strung at the moment.

See if this help. You said Essendon took a banned drug. Therefor by that statement you are saying that Essendon are drug cheats. It's that simply. Nothing to do with ASADA or anyone. Just on that statement of your alone, that is what you suggested. Your words.

To be fair I think "Guilt" and "Cheat" imply some sort of intent.

In the same way that saying something untrue does not make one a liar unless one eitheir knew it was untrue or was knowlingly reckless about it being true.

So did Essendon intend to take a banned drug or where they reckless in relation to it being banned? If so they are cheats. Many would think that "pushing the boundaries" implies a certain recklessness.

 

[Jobe Watson]

You see there you are wrong again. I didn't once say "Don't have to be guilty to be guilty". I said you "Don't have to be found guilty to be guilty".

Take a moment to reflect on how those two comment differ and then why your little rant at the end of your post is invalid and stupid and scream of desperation. Maybe have a little lie down and a rest. You seem a little high strung at the moment.

See if this help. You said Essendon took a banned drug. Therefor by that statement you are saying that Essendon are drug cheats. It's that simply. Nothing to do with ASADA or anyone. Just on that statement of your alone, that is what you suggested. Your words.

Sorry, I missed a 5 letter word in my re quote - I knew exactly what you meant. Arguing semantics.

I said we 100% took a drug that was 100% banned by WADA (not the body investigating us btw, but who knows, they may come over the top) - they were given a drug that was clarified later to be banned. If you want to ignore all the mitigating circumstances, the fact that the government agency tasked with knowing the status of AOD was unclear on its status during the time of use, who refuses to reveal what information they were giving to doctors calling up and asking them about said drug, who also told the playing group who had 100% been given the drug that they would not pursue charges against them for the use of said drug, who haven't listed said drug on a show cause letter addressed to Dank regarding his time at Essendon, and the fact that it is looking very unlikely players will receive any sort of ban related to the use of AOD, then yes, our players and the club are unproven drug cheats. They are unofficially, unrecorded, non-guilty cheats.

 

[andrewb]

Alavi said he made up the stuff from what he got from Charter. Charter says it was Tb4. Alavi not knowing what it was matters not. Unless somebody can show Charter is lying, it was Tb4. Alavi cannot say it was not.

Alavi gave said Tb4 to Dank. And Dank told him the stuff he made up was destroyed. Note Alavi cannot say it was destoryed, just that Dank told him it was.

The real issue is what was it Dank injected into the players.

Eithier it was the Tb4 Alavi made up or something unknown that Dank got elsewhere. The person who knows this is Dank, problem is Danks story makes no sense. Dank says he injected them with Thymomodulin he obtained from Alavi.

Dank could not have injected the players with another batch of stuff made up by Alavi that was Thymomodulin, becouse Alavi denied making another batch.

The most likely answer is that what Dank injected the players with was Alavi's Tb4. And that Dank is trying to cover this up with his story about the Tb4 being destroyed. I note that Dank also obtained Hexarelin from Alavi and Dank also told Alavi that this was destroyed, but Dank did inject some coaches with Hexarelin.

Is there enough doubt that it might have been something else obtained elsewhere by Dank? Thats the 2+ years suspension question.

The problem for the players is that ASADA can prove that Alavi almost certainly made Tb4 under the name Thymosin and gave it to Dank. They can also prove Dank injected players with something the players was advised was Thymosin (edit used the Tb4 injection dosage obtained from Charters). While Danks story about how he obtained Thymomodulin does not stand up. Dank is their defence and his story does not add up.

Can any chemists tell me whether the 'ingredients' or 'pre-cursors' for compounding thymomodulin and tb-4 are the same or different?

If charters brought tb-4 in compounded form then what's the bloody point of the chemist?

 

[evo]

Warwick Hadfield was part of the chorus on Radio National this morning. Am I right in thinking he is one of Hird's mates?

the name vaguely rings a bell but i dont know if he is one of Hird's 'mates'.

 

[neutralguy]

Sorry, I missed a 5 letter word in my re quote - I knew exactly what you meant. Arguing semantics.

I said we 100% took a drug that was 100% banned by WADA (not the body investigating us btw, but who knows, they may come over the top) - they were given a drug that was clarified later to be banned. If you want to ignore all the mitigating circumstances, the fact that the government agency tasked with knowing the status of AOD was unclear on its status during the time of use, who refuses to reveal what information they were giving to doctors calling up and asking them about said drug, who also told the playing group who had 100% been given the drug that they would not pursue charges against them for the use of said drug, who haven't listed said drug on a show cause letter addressed to Dank regarding his time at Essendon, and the fact that it is looking very unlikely players will receive any sort of ban related to the use of AOD, then yes, our players and the club are unproven drug cheats. They are unofficially, unrecorded, non-guilty cheats.

ASADA is a part of the body that makes WADA, they are merely the Australian representatives of WADA.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

ASADA is a part of the body that makes WADA, they are merely the Australian representatives of WADA.

no they're not. They are a government statutory authority who happen to enforce the WADA code

 

[The Scales]

ASADA is a part of the body that makes WADA, they are merely the Australian representatives of WADA.

That erroneously disseminated the WADA status of AOD 9604 to several parties.

 

[Armchair Critic]

That erroneously disseminated the WADA status of AOD 9604 to several parties.

So we keep hearing, not one bit of evidence backs this though

 

[Argy]

They are unofficially, unrecorded, non-guilty cheats.

Agreed. They cheated. Regardless of any so called mitigating circumstances, they knew they were close to the border of illegality yet they chose to use drugs which were not approved for human therapeutic use. Regardless of what you imply, at no time did they get the all clear from the relevant authority. They ran the risk. They cheated.

 

[The Scales]

So we keep hearing, not one bit of evidence backs this though

Let's see if they have the balls to go after players, citing AOD. I don't think they will risk testifying when perjury could be an outcome.

 

[Armchair Critic]

Let's see if they have the balls to go after players, citing AOD. I don't think they will risk testifying when perjury could be an outcome.

Lol yeah of course.

 

[Cylon7]

'Mr Dank told him that because the peptides had been put in clear rather than amber vials, the Thymosin and Hexarelin were “fried’’ from exposure to light and unusable.'

What sunlight reaches a fridge/freezer?

 

[I Rock]

'Mr Dank told him that because the peptides had been put in clear rather than amber vials, the Thymosin and Hexarelin were “fried’’ from exposure to light and unusable.'

What sunlight reaches a fridge/freezer?

Maybe Dank holds the fridge door open too long.

 

[Cylon7]

And the fridge door faces north.

 

[I Rock]

And the fridge door faces north.

I was thinking more about the light in the fridge.

 

[Armchair Critic]

Let's see if they have the balls to go after players, citing AOD. I don't think they will risk testifying when perjury could be an outcome.

Actually I am not going to let this slide, so tell me Mr Scales , who is going to get called on to the stand to commit perjury, name the person

 

[Cylon7]

As a qualified compounding pharmacist, Alavi would have as a standard procedure prepared peptides in amber vials and insisted that the vials be refrigerated until used for injection as Mimotypes suggest on their website:

http://www.mimotopes.com/files/edit...ies/PU3004-1Handling-and-Storing-Peptides.PDF

Had he not known what the substances were wouldn't he have used these procedures anyway to safeguard the material from denaturing?

 

[The Scales]

Actually I am not going to let this slide, so tell me Mr Scales , who is going to get called on to the stand to commit perjury, name the person

Not being personally acquainted with the staff of the institution, I am uanble to provide you with a name. Isn't that stuff covered in your membership package?