Investigation into Essendon Fitness Program

[Hollow Knight]

Haven't seen the 7:30 report episode yet. Did they hint at who is doing the leaking of these emails?

 

[Saint Shags]

Haven't seen the 7:30 report episode yet. Did they hint at who is doing the leaking of these emails?

Think WADA may have decided to release some of the correspondence to the 7:30 report, especially after Danks statement last night to 7 news.

 

[The Jet From Poowong]

seeing Mr Dank is suing everyone else in Australia, when will he sue WADA for defamation. I mean those emails are just so ......

 

[TerryWallet]

Haven't seen the 7:30 report episode yet. Did they hint at who is doing the leaking of these emails?

Dr Howman, the WADA boss lobbed here in Oz the other day.

He may have had a sitdown with Caro-Meldrum-Hanna.

I'd say he's prolly having a sit down with a few people....media and otherwise.

 

[WATiger86]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/tea...sendon-took-them/story-e6frf9l6-1226634210537

Flying hey.... Like 5-0 flying?!

 

[Jobe Watson]

Dank is under the impression that because AOD is a 'constituent of an approved' (his words), legal, topical weight loss cream, Bodyshaper Cellulite Contour Creme, Section 0 of the code would not apply.

Could any of the Google detectives find out whether this is actually the case?

 

[Sunshine Saint]

If I had a dollar for every moron who compared Armstrong to Essendon.

Just highlighting your stupidity, the two cases could not be any more different.

Very true. Lots of differences between both cases:

1. Armstrong was an individual involved in doping and drug / supplement taking, whereas Essendon adopted a club wide approach, with most, or all players involved

2. Armstrong won seven Tour de France events. Essendon put on bulk in a very short period of time and suffered a large number of soft tissue injuries and finished 11th in 2012.

3. Armstrong admitted innocence and gave his public apology via Oprah. Essendon are toughing it out and have some parts of a compliant media portraying them as the victims

4. Armstrong took drugs and other non approved products in an attempt to give him an advantage in his chosen sport. Essendon, mmmm well clearly you are different on the first three items listed above.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Dank is under the impression that because AOD is a 'constituent of an approved' (his words), legal, topical weight loss cream, Bodyshaper Cellulite Contour Creme, Section 0 of the code would not apply.

Could any of the Google detectives find out whether this is actually the case?

Why would a bunch of supposedly underdeveloped players need a weight loss product anyway?

 

[dymot]

Where are all the Essendon supporters at?

 

[LanceRomance]

I've just seen a screen shot on Bomberblitsz of another email from Dank to WADA, some words are blurred out and its hard to tell what it says but my interpretation of it is

Dank says he got a confirmation about AOD not being on the prohibited list and himself came to the conclusion it does not fall under S0, despite being told otherwise by WADA.

Here it is http://www.flickr.com/photos/85225270@N02/8701729170/in/photostream/lightbox/

Looks like he was playing the old

"Thank you for confirming that ##### is not on the list"

It showed up in the other WADA email.

That very careful word usage suggests to me he was fishing for the answer he wanted and that fact it appears to have queried AOD more than once suggests that once again.

That's if these emails are true. And we don't have the context of the phone conversations he had either.

 

[Jamie007]

And for those Essendon supporters who think that they are getting no benefits from last years supplement program, take a read of this.
http://m.heraldsun.com.au/afl/teams...sendon-took-them/story-e6frf9l6-1226634210537

 

[SPREWELL]

And for those Essendon supporters who think that they are getting no benefits from last years supplement program, take a read of this.
http://m.heraldsun.com.au/afl/teams...sendon-took-them/story-e6frf9l6-1226634210537

Minor issue CHAS clinically trials have proven no perf enhancing properties. Kindly read the recent press release from the pharma company.

 

[mxett]

Where are all the Essendon supporters at?

Probably sleeping

 

[mxett]

And for those Essendon supporters who think that they are getting no benefits from last years supplement program, take a read of this.
http://m.heraldsun.com.au/afl/teams...sendon-took-them/story-e6frf9l6-1226634210537

The company who are developing AOD have conceded it doesn't add muscle mass or repair cartilage

 

[Haggis McHaggis]

Dank is under the impression that because AOD is a 'constituent of an approved' (his words), legal, topical weight loss cream, Bodyshaper Cellulite Contour Creme, Section 0 of the code would not apply.

Could any of the Google detectives find out whether this is actually the case?

The product you speak of doesn't make Dank's case, as it's never been through a medical approval process. It gets around regulation by virtue of being a personal care product. It does contain AOD9604 (although the formulation was changed in late 2012, there is no information as to whether this was removed, but I doubt it would've been). It's produced by an Australian company that developed & patented the trans-dermal delivery method. This particular product was an attractive starting point for them to capitalise on that patent, precisely because it didn't have to pass the kind of stringent approval process that would be required for using AOD9604 itself, intravenously. To quote Phosphagenics Ltd's 2010 Annual Report

In 2010, Phosphagenics launched its Elixia skincare range using its unique platform technology.

Personal care products are commercially attractive as they do not require large financial resources for product research and development, nor are they subject to the same stringent regulations as drugs. Products can be commercialised efficiently at less cost and risk.

 

[Spongebob]

Dank is under the impression that because AOD is a 'constituent of an approved' (his words), legal, topical weight loss cream, Bodyshaper Cellulite Contour Creme, Section 0 of the code would not apply.

Could any of the Google detectives find out whether this is actually the case?

There is a huge difference between what can be sold over the counter as a cosmetic and what can be used as medicine. The head of the company has said that because they have not been able to proceed to full clinical trials and approvals, they sell it as cellulite cream. Threshold much much lower.

S0 specifically refers to pharmaceutical approval, not cosmetics.

Basically, it does not matter if it is sold as a cosmetic, it does not have pharmaceutical approval and falls under S0.

One of the cautions always to athletes (personal experience because of my and one of my children having been under the code) is that over the counter purchases may contain banned constituents.

S0. NON-APPROVED SUBSTANCES

Any pharmacological substance which is not addressed by any of the subsequent sections of the List and with no current approval by any governmental regulatory health authority for human therapeutic use (e.g drugs under pre-clinical or clinical development or discontinued, designer drugs, substances approved only for veterinary use) is prohibited.

 

[mxett]

The product you speak of doesn't make Dank's case, as it's never been through a medical approval process. It gets around regulation by virtue of being a personal care product. It does contain AOD9604 (although the formulation was changed in late 2012, there is no information as to whether this was removed, but I doubt it would've been). It's produced by an Australian company that developed & patented the trans-dermal delivery method. This particular product was an attractive starting point for them to capitalise on that patent, precisely because it didn't have to pass the kind of stringent approval process that would be required for using AOD9604 itself, intravenously. To quote Phosphagenics Ltd's 2010 Annual Report

Where has it been said AOD was used intravenously? I thought subcutaneous injections were suspected

 

[mjonc]

Minor issue CHAS clinically trials have proven no perf enhancing properties. Kindly read the recent press release from the pharma company.

Clinical trials on humans? Might want to check that.

 

[Haggis McHaggis]

Where has it been said AOD was used intravenously? I thought subcutaneous injections were suspected

My mistake, but you're splitting hairs. Both methods would require the same regulatory approvals.

 

[Snake_Baker]

The company who are developing AOD have conceded it doesn't add muscle mass or repair cartilage

Why would a bunch of supposedly underdeveloped players need a weight loss product anyway?

Ironically, the only fat bloke on your list has denied taking the stuff.

 

[SPREWELL]

Ironically, the only fat bloke on your list has denied taking the stuff.

So dank alerts authorities is warned then uses it without good reasons. Tricks two doctors and two clubs. Yep. Story is finished. All info is out in the public domain..

 

[mxett]

My mistake, but you're splitting hairs. Both methods would require the same regulatory approvals.

Not for ASADA to make a mistake and assume 1 covers all

 

[mxett]

Ironically, the only fat bloke on your list has denied taking the stuff.

It failed as weight loss too

 

[blackshadow]

Not for ASADA to make a mistake and assume 1 covers all

Time to head for the lifeboats.

The Titanic is going down.

 

[Snake_Baker]

So dank alerts authorities is warned then uses it without good reasons. Tricks two doctors and two clubs. Yep. Story is finished. All info is out in the public domain..

​