SALADA/VladFL: Slap on the wrist. - STRICTLY ESSENDON SUPPORTERS ONLY

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Last night for example, I didn't watch the pre-match or anything of the sort and was remarkably stoic for the first quarter. It's a hollow feeling. The losses are still shit, yet the victories aren't exactly as sweet a day later. I've got to the stage where even if we are punished I'll almost be relieved.
 
To use a poker analogy, based on the confidence of Hird, Watson, Fogdog et al, I reckon Essendon flopped a Royal Flush and the Media flopped trips. The Media then filled up their Full House on the Turn when Watson "Confessed" and are now betting the house down. We are just waiting for the final card to be dealt so we can scoop the pot and end the game.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

sneakyjetta said:
what does this mean?
http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl...its/story-e6frf3e3-1226671229771#.UczU0_ml5sk

will players get banned? oh lawd
Click to expand...

If it was clear AOD-9604 was banned, then Jobe would already have received a breach notice. The greater probablility is that it is not banned, for reasons posted multiple times in this thread. If a breach notice is issued we will surely seek an injunction and fight it out in court, where we will liklely win, both on the strength of our case and deep pockets.
 
HighettBomber said:
If it was clear AOD-9604 was banned, then Jobe would already have received a breach notice. The greater probablility is that it is not banned, for reasons posted multiple times in this thread. If a breach notice is issued we will surely seek an injunction and fight it out in court, where we will liklely win, both on the strength of our case and deep pockets.
Click to expand...

The way I read it, was if we are found guilty, even if we challenge the ruling, the players will be banned from the day the sanctions are handed down. therefore wouldn't be able to play until the outcome of the challenge.
 
THOMO_31 said:
The way I read it, was if we are found guilty, even if we challenge the ruling, the players will be banned from the day the sanctions are handed down. therefore wouldn't be able to play until the outcome of the challenge.
Click to expand...

That's why we will likely seek an injunction, if this does ovccur, instruction from the courts overide any policies of ASADA or the AFL.
 
DaSawx said:
John Ralph doesn't know if Hirdy will be at the club next year if we're fined, LOL.
Click to expand...


Jon Ralph is a complete ********, I am disgusted that FoxFooty would put such a turd on our screens. I knew there was a reason I normally turn off the TV right after the game finishes if that's the sort of thing they show post game. Eugh.

His most enlightening comment was something like "if essendon are charged and banned that would be amazing, and if they got off that would also be amazing" :rolleyes:
 
benbanjo said:
I know it says Essendon Supporers only, but i have to say WCE booing Jobe is a joke, those guys have a history of all sorts of drugs in their club!!
Click to expand...


Even my gf (WCE supporter) was in complete agreement. Bit rich coming from a club that idolised Cousins and Mainwaring - a couple of junkies!
 
John Ralph is the worst of the worst. And a player from the team he supports is involved in this!!
 
For those who want a compelling argument against AOD9604 being performance enhancing, below is an extract from the scientific journal realting to its clinical testing. you will not that it did not promote the production of growth hormone any more than the placebo treatment.


the hypothesis that AOD9604 does not activate the hGH/IGF-1 axis had to be tested in humans. The studies presented here confirm the in-vitro results. In these studies no clinically relevant changes of IGF-1 levels were observed and no differences to the placebo treatment were found. Together with the lack of any other symptoms associated with known IGF-1 mediated effects, such as sodium retention, tissue oedema, hypertension, or impaired glucose tolerance, the results demonstrate that AOD9604 does not activate the hGH/IGF-1 pathway and therefore has no growth promoting effect.
 
HighettBomber said:
For those who want a compelling argument against AOD9604 being performance enhancing, below is an extract from the scientific journal realting to its clinical testing. you will not that it did not promote the production of growth hormone any more than the placebo treatment.


the hypothesis that AOD9604 does not activate the hGH/IGF-1 axis had to be tested in humans. The studies presented here confirm the in-vitro results. In these studies no clinically relevant changes of IGF-1 levels were observed and no differences to the placebo treatment were found. Together with the lack of any other symptoms associated with known IGF-1 mediated effects, such as sodium retention, tissue oedema, hypertension, or impaired glucose tolerance, the results demonstrate that AOD9604 does not activate the hGH/IGF-1 pathway and therefore has no growth promoting effect.
Click to expand...

Link?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Apparently the reason why the club are so confident in regards to the whole AOD-9604 saga, is because an athlete in the US was given permission to take it in 2012. Or something along those lines.

Anyone heard anything similar?
 
gO_bOmBeRz said:
Apparently the reason why the club are so confident in regards to the whole AOD-9604 saga, is because an athlete in the US was given permission to take it in 2012. Or something along those lines.

Anyone heard anything similar?
Click to expand...



No & suspect something like that would have made headlines by now, but who knows.
 
rumply said:
No & suspect something like that would have made headlines by now, but who knows.
Click to expand...

No, you're assuming AFL journalists would actually do some research more than using Google
 
HighettBomber said:
If it was clear AOD-9604 was banned, then Jobe would already have received a breach notice. The greater probablility is that it is not banned, for reasons posted multiple times in this thread. If a breach notice is issued we will surely seek an injunction and fight it out in court, where we will liklely win, both on the strength of our case and deep pockets.
Click to expand...


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...r-immediate-bans/story-fni5f6kv-1226671088407

ANY Essendon player cited for an alleged doping offence would be barred from playing until his case was determined by an AFL tribunal.
The AFL Anti-Doping Code states the only way a player could compete before a tribunal decision was reached would be by the intervention of the AFL Commission.
Click to expand...

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...r-immediate-bans/story-fni5f6kv-1226671088407

Now, ASADA, in all their shoot first, ask questions later glory, would surely have already issued an infraction notice already if it was a cut and dried case, which it isn't, so they haven't.
 
Jack Package said:
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...r-immediate-bans/story-fni5f6kv-1226671088407



http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...r-immediate-bans/story-fni5f6kv-1226671088407

Now, ASADA, in all their shoot first, ask questions later glory, would surely have already issued an infraction notice already if it was a cut and dried case, which it isn't, so they haven't.
Click to expand...

Because they are all in it as a story, clearly they are just waiting until we are best placed before they strike for maximum attention. Crafty buggers.
 
1010272_10151664095189356_42628812_n.png
 
For what it's worth my take on all this is that it is going to come down to WADA Clause S0 and whether AOD9604 is prohibited based on the grounds of not being approved safe for human consumption.

The statement from Calzada (the company responsible for AOD9604 development) which clarifies certain points regarding AOD9604 may work in favour of EFC in trying to eliminate the validity of clause S0 in relation to AOD9604.

In the six (6) human clinical trials involving 925 patients conducted at Medeval, Manchester, UK and sixteen (16) major Australian hospitals and medical centres between 2001 and 2007, and in further substantial pre-clinical testing, it has been shown that AOD9604 is very safe.

This record has been further validated in June 2012 by AOD9604 receiving a pivotal GRAS status recognition to enter the U.S. market as a food additive, conditional only on publication of existing safety data in peer-reviewed journals. One paper in this regard is due for imminent publication.

This status is in accordance with Section 201(s) of the U.S. Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. The GRAS status was verified by an independent panel of U.S. experts who are qualified to make such determinations.
Click to expand...

and

Since April 2011, AOD9604 has been used as an ingredient in a topical cosmeticcellulite cream (BodyShaperTM) that is readily available through pharmacies and cosmetic counters at major Department stores throughout Australia and Asia.
Click to expand...
I would have thought that since AOD9604 is being used as a food additive in the USA, and is an ingredient in cellulite creams that are being sold in Australia that there is a fair argument that it is safe for human use (obviously depending on the dosage).

(NOTE: I don't pretend to be an expert or know how all this will end, these are just my observations from FACTS released by Calzada). Sorry if all this has been posted before, I don't have the time to read through all 222 pages ;)

Source: http://www.evaluategroup.com/Universal/View.aspx?type=Story&id=419857
 
3votes said:
Not the same link - credible none the less.

http://www.crimecommission.gov.au/publications/other-publications/appendix-one-overview-of-peptides
Click to expand...
That's part of the infamous ACC document that says AOD-9604 isn't prohibited:

http://www.crimecommission.gov.au/s...ganised-crime-and-drugs-in-sports-feb2013.pdf (page 41)

http://www.crimecommission.gov.au/p...-legal-status-status-sport-of-peptides-hormon


Funnily enough, page 41 of the report says that AOD-9604 is "about to enter the final phase of clinical human trials".

Does anyone know anything about this 'final phase of clinical human trials' ? Is this another error from the ACC ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

eth-dog
Retired #45: Anthony Munkara - Leaving the club, returning to Tiwi - 7/9
13 14 15 16 17
Replies
414
Views
44K
FlyingV
FlyingV

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top