Dank admits using Thymosin Beta 4

[Devington]

I could be very very wrong, but if memory serves something cant be classified under S0 unless it's A: not on any of the other schedules and B: isn't approved for human use. So it couldn't have been classified under both.

In regards to Dank looking for a loophole, it would be idiotic of him. WADA is necessarily overly stringent, and would not accept any loophole (even if there was a loophole, the fact that dank looked for it then used it, would be enough for them to get him under attempted doping I would think)

In regards to Dank thinking he could argue the science of compounds with them... well. ha. good luck with that. That said I believe at one stage he had a mini rant in the media about how they choose substances or somesuch.

I think in general it's easiest to come to the conclusion that he is as dodgy as they come, and if asked to dope players would have, and if not asked to dope players, may well have anyway to get better performance from them and then not told anyone. He seems to have a high opinion of himself and his smarts, so I wouldn't put much past him.

With all that said though, we actually have very little in the way of rock solid facts to go on, though a LOT of circumstantial stuff pointing us to some dark places. I really hope he gets his wish and gets his day in court. One way or another there would be some explosively exciting stories coming out of it.

 

[JakeandFatman]

Clearly Dank is not risk averse, but I doubt he set out to blatantly contravene S2 in the prohibited list. I reckon it's more likely that he thought he had some kind of loophole in the code.

I reckon absolutely no doubt that he was trying to find loopholes. Look at AOD-9604 as a perfect example. He found the loophole there and thought he could give players AOD-9604 knowing full well it was banned but that if they got caught he could get off on a technicality.

This email proves it all. It's Dank's so called "Letter of Approval" from ASADA that he refuses to show anyone.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-03/new-evidence-contradicts-danks-claims-of-wada-approval/4667294

It is clear here that he was setting up an alibi by seemingly deliberately trying to misinterpret ASADA's email, several times even when told it could be banned under S0.

Is it possible that TB4 was classified as an S0 substance in 2011? I find it strange that AOD9604 is not classified as a S2 substance, I would have thought it's neatly captured by the S2 catch-all clause. Alternatively, maybe Dank figured he could successfully argue that TB4 does not share a similar biological effect or chemical structure with other prohibited peptides and hormones.. though that seems like one hell of a long shot and even less likely. And least likely of all, maybe when Dank realised he was under the spotlight it dawned on him that he had been fairly careless throwing around the generic term Thymosin, when in fact he meant Thymomodulin, and thought it best to clarify/backdate everything as Thymomodulin.

For mine "Thymosin" was also there for the same reason. As I wrote in another thread "Thymosin" is what TB4 is called within the industry. Everyone knows that when you ask for "Thymosin" you are asking for TB4.

If you have a look at this website for buying peptides the link to "Thymosin" only talks about TB4.

https://mrcpeptides.com.au/buy_thymosin_6_17.html

 

[jenny61_99]

It seems that the ACC interview and the alleged email about the S2 catch-all clause in May 2012 really got the wind up Dank with regard to the status of TB4. I wonder what changed in his mind at that time.. ASADA have stated that TB4 has been listed as prohibited from "at least 2011", and the same S2 catch-all clause has been part of the WADA prohibited list since 2010, so there should have been no surprises.

Clearly Dank is not risk averse, but I doubt he set out to blatantly contravene S2 in the prohibited list. I reckon it's more likely that he thought he had some kind of loophole in the code. Is it possible that TB4 was classified as an S0 substance in 2011? I find it strange that AOD9604 is not classified as a S2 substance, I would have thought it's neatly captured by the S2 catch-all clause. Alternatively, maybe Dank figured he could successfully argue that TB4 does not share a similar biological effect or chemical structure with other prohibited peptides and hormones.. though that seems like one hell of a long shot and even less likely. And least likely of all, maybe when Dank realised he was under the spotlight it dawned on him that he had been fairly careless throwing around the generic term Thymosin, when in fact he meant Thymomodulin, and thought it best to clarify/backdate everything as Thymomodulin.

Tb4 WAS on the S0 category up until Late 2011 when it was moved onto the S2 category. Dank had used it at cronulla. He had clearly failed to check the changes to the code before he started using it at essendon.

 

[MaddAdam]

Tb4 WAS on the S0 category up until Late 2011 when it was moved onto the S2 category. Dank had used it at cronulla. He had clearly failed to check the changes to the code before he started using it at essendon.

Smartest guy in the room didn't do his numbers.

#Ruddster

 

[CatFan79]

The question here is How much of this evidence was obtained from the joint investigation and how much was it by asada doing their own thing. Me thinks mostly the later which negates the impact of EFC getting an injection against evidence obtained under the joint investigation.

I LOL'd

 

[SizzleChest]

Tb4 WAS on the S0 category up until Late 2011 when it was moved onto the S2 category. Dank had used it at cronulla. He had clearly failed to check the changes to the code before he started using it at essendon.

Thanks, do you have a source? I can't find much about tb-500/tb4 in 2011.

 

[jenny61_99]

Thanks, do you have a source? I can't find much about tb-500/tb4 in 2011.

http://m.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/danks-stunning-admission-20140613-zs7ea.html

 

[SizzleChest]

http://m.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/danks-stunning-admission-20140613-zs7ea.html

Yeah, I think that is in reference to the catch-all clause in section S2.

 

[jenny61_99]

Yeah, I think that is in reference to the catch-all clause in section S2.

Could be right, perhaps I read it wrong.

 

[Dave]

Where did it come from?

34 players have been issued with SC's notices wrt TB4.

The publicly available evidence (and I concede, there may be more we don't know about) seems to indicate a case revolving around the following:

Charters testimony on what he imported
Alavi's testimony on what he made up
Consent forms with Thymosin on them
An interview with Dank in Fairfax media by Nick Mackenzie
and text messages between Dank, Charters & Alavai, including information on dosage levels for TB4, which are the similar as those on the consent forms.

The question I have is this:

If Charters & Alavi's testimony can put vials of "thymosin Peptide" at Essendon, and the other evidence can be used to show it's TB4, how do the dosage levels specified in the text messages and on the consent forms match up with the amounts delivered?

From the AFL's charge sheet:

"In relation to these substances, those 38 players agreed to:

.....

"one Thymosin injection once a week for six weeks and then one injection per month"

so we have 228 doses in the first 6 weeks and 38 per month thereafter.(Or 204 +34/month if it's only 34 players)

According to one of the text messages referred to by the AFL, Dank tells Charters he needs 20 5ml vials of Thymosin ("Thymosin 20 of 5ml vials"). This amount is also specified in texts between Charters and Alavi.

Based on Charters texts to Dank, the recommended dosage is "one vial per injection per week for six consecutive weeks, then 1 vial per month".

So how do 26 vials cater for 34 players worth of treatment - some 200+ dosages?

If Dank was sourcing TB4 from elsewhere, could he not also have been sourcing other substancse? The AFL made a big
deal out of the fact that Alavi never supplied Dank with Thymomodulin.

Given there are only two compounding pharmacists in Melbourne it shouldn't be too hard to determine this I'd have thought.

If Dank was sourcing TB-4 from Alavi on the sly:

What prompted him to stop texting Alavi
Who paid for the additional vials required
Why would Alavi risk producing and distributing said substance without paperwork?

 

[I Rock]

Where did it come from?

How many players ended (alleged) up at clinic getting shot up by the Scumbag Chiro?

That is a possible.

 

[DonsRule]

STEPHEN Dank, Essendon's former sports scientist, ordered a banned peptide in quantities sufficient to treat a team of AFL players, according to a former associate.

Records of Mr Dank's purchasing process reveal he sourced the peptide Thymosin beta 4 from Melbourne biochemist Shane Charter while working for Essendon.

In a text message sent in January 2012, Mr Charter asks: "Which peptides do you need next?"

Mr Dank replies: "Thymosin beta 4, CJC-1295."

The Herald Sun has previously reported that Essendon has been unsure which type of thymosin its players had been given.

Thymosin beta 4 is prohibited for athletes under anti-doping rules.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...ist-stephen-dank/story-e6frf9jf-1226634945498

So Dank needs Tb4 and CJC from Charters. Yet, there seems no evidence of it being used at Essendon. Begs the questioin was the Tb4 even for Essendon?

 

[Dave]

How many players ended (alleged) up at clinic getting shot up by the Scumbag Chiro?

That is a possible.

34 allegedly, and that is a possibility that's been discussed on our board. The AFL's statement of grounds alleged that 'the Amino Acid appears to have been in storage at HyperMED for a considerable time prior to its use.'. From what I've read, TB4 once it has been made up cannot be stored for very long before it breaks down. Whilst I wouldn't discount it, IMO it's less likely because of this.

 

[I Rock]

34 allegedly, and that is a possibility that's been discussed on our board. The AFL's statement of grounds alleged that 'the Amino Acid appears to have been in storage at HyperMED for a considerable time prior to its use.'. From what I've read, TB4 once it has been made up cannot be stored for very long before it breaks down. Whilst I wouldn't discount it, IMO it's less likely because of this.

How did it go....

We will just call it Amino Acids.....well that's what it is a blend of Amino Acids.

 

[Dave]

How did it go....

We will just call it Amino Acids.....well that's what it is a blend of Amino Acids.

The point was though, that it's unlikely to have been TB4 if it had been in storage for a "considerable time prior to use".

But hey, focus on the other bit by all means.

 

[I Rock]

The point was though, that it's unlikely to have been TB4 if it had been in storage for a "considerable time prior to use".

But hey, focus on the other bit by all means.

The point is that 34 players got shot up with no no taco juice and the club still claims it doesn't know what it is. And 34 players have SC notices.

 

[JakeandFatman]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...ist-stephen-dank/story-e6frf9jf-1226634945498

So Dank needs Tb4 and CJC from Charters. Yet, there seems no evidence of it being used at Essendon. Begs the questioin was the Tb4 even for Essendon?

Well that's the evidence ASADA have. Emails from Dank discussing the injection frequency of TB4 matched the injection frequency on the consent forms for "Thymosin" that the Essendon players signed.

Put 2 + 2 together and it will always equal 4.

I mean here is what you are basically alluding to. Someone emails someone else saying "The best way to murder someone is stab them with a Model 578 army issued knife to the heart 14 times and then strangle them with a sock".

Then the police find a body where they've been stabbed 14 times in the heart with a Model 153 Army issued knife and strangled with a sock, have a prime suspect, they investigate him and find an email on his computer that he had sent to someone months earlier outlining exactly the best way to kill someone" and then that person turning around and "Nope I didn't do it! I said it was a Model 578 Army knife and they were stabbed with a Model 153 knife" so there is no evidence.

I mean really? DO you honestly believe that equals no evidence?

 

[Laphroaig]

Where did it come from?

34 players have been issued with SC's notices wrt TB4.

The publicly available evidence (and I concede, there may be more we don't know about) seems to indicate a case revolving around the following:

Charters testimony on what he imported
Alavi's testimony on what he made up
Consent forms with Thymosin on them
An interview with Dank in Fairfax media by Nick Mackenzie
and text messages between Dank, Charters & Alavai, including information on dosage levels for TB4, which are the similar as those on the consent forms.

It's certain there is much more than we know about.

How do I know this? We do know that the case is circumstantial - maybe supported by a body of sworn evidence from some of the people involved, maybe not. In any case, the special rules for a circumstantial case require an unbroken chain of narrative, each link being an item of circumstantial evidence. There can be no gaps - no jumps from ABCDEF to KLMNOP....., or the case fails.

We know there are gaps in the information we have available to us. We know Justice Downes has ticked the cases as right to go, and he knows there can be no break in the narrative. Therefore we know there is more evidence we don't know about.

If Charters & Alavi's testimony can put vials of "thymosin Peptide" at Essendon, and the other evidence can be used to show it's TB4, how do the dosage levels specified in the text messages and on the consent forms match up with the amounts delivered?

From the AFL's charge sheet:

"In relation to these substances, those 38 players agreed to:

.....

"one Thymosin injection once a week for six weeks and then one injection per month"

so we have 228 doses in the first 6 weeks and 38 per month thereafter.(Or 204 +34/month if it's only 34 players)

According to one of the text messages referred to by the AFL, Dank tells Charters he needs 20 5ml vials of Thymosin ("Thymosin 20 of 5ml vials"). This amount is also specified in texts between Charters and Alavi.

Based on Charters texts to Dank, the recommended dosage is "one vial per injection per week for six consecutive weeks, then 1 vial per month".

So how do 26 vials cater for 34 players worth of treatment - some 200+ dosages?

My memory is that there were at least two consignments of peptide Thymosin recorded as delivered in the Statement of grounds.

As for the speculative mathematics which follow. What would lead anyone to believe that the whole lot would be purchased and delivered in one go, or two goes? I doubt that a Club would stock up in advance a full seasons supply of gatorade or liniment or boot polish or binding tape or even feel no pain jabs. Photocopier paper, shredder oil or mirrors for Albert to look at himself in. They probably don't even keep enough FOOTBALLS on hand to last an entire season.

Why would we try to draw conclusions from how much "peptide Thymosin" was on a single invoice?

 

[Dave]

The point is that 34 players got shot up with no no taco juice and the club still claims it doesn't know what it is. And 34 players have SC notices.

No, 34 players were injected with a substance that the AFL has said has no independent verification other than its labelling.

 

[morgoth]

No, 34 players were injected with a substance that the AFL has said has no independent verification other than its labelling.

Intent is enough, you do not need to be injected to be banned. Or did you miss the case of the VFL player who got intercepted by customs, never got the goods, let alone used them and still got banned. But of course the rules are different for a systemic program designed to give your players an edge over other teams. What you did is actually far worse and hopefully you get literally wiped out for it.

Sport is bigger than Essendon.

 

[Dave]

It's certain there is much more than we know about.

Me too. But not completely.

My memory is that there were at least two consignments of peptide Thymosin recorded as delivered in the Statement of grounds.

I could only see one.

As for the speculative mathematics which follow. What would lead anyone to believe that the whole lot would be purchased and delivered in one go, or two goes?

Did I say that? I asked, where did Dank source the additional product from?

I doubt that a Club would stock up in advance a full seasons supply of gatorade or liniment or boot polish or binding tape or even feel no pain jabs. Photocopier paper, shredder oil or mirrors for Albert to look at himself in. They probably don't even keep enough FOOTBALLS on hand to last an entire season.

Why would we try to draw conclusions from how much "peptide Thymosin" was on a single invoice?

I'd have thought the AFL would have detailed the other deliveries if they knew about them. If they didn't know about them, why not? Where did they come from? Who paid for them?

And if you could keep on topic and leave the snide attacks on club personnel out that'd be good too.

 

[Dave]

Intent is enough, you do not need to be injected to be banned. Or did you miss the case of the VFL player who got intercepted by customs, never got the goods, let alone used them and still got banned.

No, however the rules for possession are different to the rules for use or attempted use.

And stick to the subject, where did the additional TB4 come from?

 

[morgoth]

Rubbish, learn the rules, a ban is a ban. Cycling team was banned because their team car had banned drugs in the boot. Never proved use, did not have to, whole team banned.

And the whole thread is about TB4, I should know, I created it. Lots of new Essendon posters coming in hear lately, seems like an effort to turn sentiment, too little too late.

 

[Sir Hugh Percy]

Where did it come from?

34 players have been issued with SC's notices wrt TB4.

The publicly available evidence (and I concede, there may be more we don't know about) seems to indicate a case revolving around the following:

Charters testimony on what he imported
Alavi's testimony on what he made up
Consent forms with Thymosin on them
An interview with Dank in Fairfax media by Nick Mackenzie
and text messages between Dank, Charters & Alavai, including information on dosage levels for TB4, which are the similar as those on the consent forms.

The question I have is this:

If Charters & Alavi's testimony can put vials of "thymosin Peptide" at Essendon, and the other evidence can be used to show it's TB4, how do the dosage levels specified in the text messages and on the consent forms match up with the amounts delivered?

From the AFL's charge sheet:

"In relation to these substances, those 38 players agreed to:

.....

"one Thymosin injection once a week for six weeks and then one injection per month"

so we have 228 doses in the first 6 weeks and 38 per month thereafter.(Or 204 +34/month if it's only 34 players)

According to one of the text messages referred to by the AFL, Dank tells Charters he needs 20 5ml vials of Thymosin ("Thymosin 20 of 5ml vials"). This amount is also specified in texts between Charters and Alavi.

Based on Charters texts to Dank, the recommended dosage is "one vial per injection per week for six consecutive weeks, then 1 vial per month".

So how do 26 vials cater for 34 players worth of treatment - some 200+ dosages?

If Dank was sourcing TB4 from elsewhere, could he not also have been sourcing other substancse? The AFL made a big
deal out of the fact that Alavi never supplied Dank with Thymomodulin.

Given there are only two compounding pharmacists in Melbourne it shouldn't be too hard to determine this I'd have thought.

If Dank was sourcing TB-4 from Alavi on the sly:

What prompted him to stop texting Alavi
Who paid for the additional vials required
Why would Alavi risk producing and distributing said substance without paperwork?

Good post. This is what I would like to see more of from Essendon supporters - present us with alternative theories, explanations and questions that are actually well thought out and logical. Much better than yeah, but nah, but Hirdy reckons we're all good, so what's the problem?

I don't have the answer to your questions, but would be keen to know. My guess only is that it's dangerous to assume that there is only evidence of one batch of TB4 because that's all that's been leaked to the media.

 

[tigerwill]

No, however the rules for possession are different to the rules for use or attempted use.

And stick to the subject, where did the additional TB4 come from?

It was probably shandied down to make more. Accusations of forged scripts, blood tests and the like. It wouldn't surprise me.
Or Charters may have sent it direct to Dank. How many receipts and invoices do ASDADA have. More than one? depends what Charter handed over