Watson and Bombers have a 'fighting chance'

[Higgs Boson]

Simpsons did it

 

[mjonc]

did you even read the article?

Yep read it 5 times.

You keep believing Lance ;-)

 

[rumply]

fits in with FogDog's assertion that the players have been told they won't miss games, doesn't it?

Certainly does & there's little doubt in my mind that it is the basis for Hirdy's et al ongoing confidence.

 

[Messenger]

The ​

Concise Oxford English Dictionary ​

defines pharmacology as the branch of medicine concerned the use, effect and action of drugs. A ''drug'' is a substance which has a marked physiological effect when ingested. A necessary limb of any prosecution of Watson must be ASADA proving that AOD-9604 actually has some real effect on the human body.​

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/watson-and-bombers-have-a-fighting-chance-20130628-2p2wt.html#ixzz2XYr6x2wb​

So the argument is we took this drug in the belief it would have an effect but now we can see it doesn't it is no longer a drug and not subject to TGA oversight?

There are a whole group of pharmaceuticals used in medical imaging that do not illicit a physiological response. They are still subject to TGA approval.

Having said that, there is just enough grey in the argument for Essendon and ASADA to make a few SC's rich and perhaps even slide through the eye of a needle.

 

[byronstjames]

The Age is certainly softening it's stance.

Starting to print positive Essendon stories? That doesn't sell papers!!

Seriously though, everyone needs to read it. As more information slowly comes to light, more educated and less sensational opinions are coming forth.

That doesn't actually go for everyone who has already made up their mind. You guys are a lost cause, but I do acknowledge the fact that you know better than the AFL, ASADA and their legal representation, the EFC, the players, doctors, scientists, the ACC and the criminal justice system.

It still boggles the mind that all parties involved aren't simply forwarding an email with a link to this sub board in the quest for the truth.

 

[Armchair Critic]

The Age is certainly softening it's stance.

Starting to print positive Essendon stories? That doesn't sell papers!!

Seriously though, everyone needs to read it. As more information slowly comes to light, more educated and less sensational opinions are coming forth.

That doesn't actually go for everyone who has already made up their mind. You guys are a lost cause, but I do acknowledge the fact that you know better than the AFL, ASADA and their legal representation, the EFC, the players, doctors, scientists, the ACC and the criminal justice system.

It still boggles the mind that all parties involved aren't simply forwarding an email with a link to this sub board in the quest for the truth.

There is some Sydney Lawyer who loves to get his name in the paper and then there is WADA. I know who my money is on

 

[erbenz]

I'm glad the Age printed this article, as it does show the legal limbo this case is likely to go through.

However, it doesn't erase my concerns either.

 

[Sector 7G]

The article should be titled : "I'm a lawyer and I can get you off anything"

On his linkedin page amongst other things it says "He advises in areas including sports governance"

Maybe he should write an article about Sports Governance and the Bombers. I'd say that would dampen their excitement.

Worked extensively for the ARL/NRL setting up the commission and unwinding the invovlement of Fox. Wonder why he is so interested in this one?

 

[JeffDunne]

Sage words?

The ACC report is proof of nothing. It's irrelevant as it's second hand information. He may was well be quoting from a newspaper report.

He also quotes Calzada as evidence of it's status as a drug - yet he does so after arguing it's a not a drug since it has no physiological effect. Wonder what Calzada has to say about that?

I'm guessing he's either just another Bomber supporter living in denial or he's desperately looking for another case to lose in court.

 

[Bombfire]

So the argument is we took this drug in the belief it would have an effect but now we can see it doesn't it is no longer a drug and not subject to TGA oversight?

There are a whole group of pharmaceuticals used in medical imaging that do not illicit a physiological response. They are still subject to TGA approval.

Having said that, there is just enough grey in the argument for Essendon and ASADA to make a few SC's rich and perhaps even slide through the eye of a needle.

I guess that's why everyone takes a pharmaceutical; it's supposed to have an affect. Not that they always do.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

So the argument is we took this drug in the belief it would have an effect but now we can see it doesn't it is no longer a drug and not subject to TGA oversight?

There are a whole group of pharmaceuticals used in medical imaging that do not illicit a physiological response. They are still subject to TGA approval.

Having said that, there is just enough grey in the argument for Essendon and ASADA to make a few SC's rich and perhaps even slide through the eye of a needle.

The problem I see is that the authority they appeal to may not accept the company's testing as a final word on the (lack of) efficacy of the drug. WADA can say it's used extensively in body building, the same said company has boasted it works, and the testing does not effectively cover effects from anything other than oral doses.

 

[GreatBradScott]

The Age is certainly softening it's stance.

Starting to print positive Essendon stories? That doesn't sell papers!!

The article of one author does not indicate the stance of an entire publication.

But nonetheless, a very good read.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

I guess that's why everyone takes a pharmaceutical; it's supposed to have an affect. Not that they always do.

Are you saying that sometimes the drugs don't work?

 

[Armchair Critic]

I wonder how the ACC report was conceived? On second hand information? Don't think so champ.

It is irrelevant to WADA though

 

[Bombfire]

Are you saying that sometimes the drugs don't work?

Could I have been any more succinct?

 

[Messenger]

The problem I see is that the authority they appeal to may not accept the company's testing as a final word on the (lack of) efficacy of the drug. WADA can say it's used extensively in body building, the same said company has boasted it works, and the testing does not effectively cover effects from anything other than oral doses.

I haven't read the trial testing in detail, but my understanding is it was used in diabetics to reduce weight and help control their diabetes. I wonder what the end point was then? Was it simply reduction in body fat or did they require a more stable blood glucose profile as well?

 

[Bombfire]

It is irrelevant to WADA though

Don't forget Adriana's mob, they're the first port of call.

 

[JeffDunne]

The ACC report also says it's not approved for human use.

Is that 100% correct too?

 

[DivideandMultiply]

fits in with FogDog's assertion that the players have been told they won't miss games, doesn't it?

This whole thing will be cleared up very soon...

...or not?

 

[1990crow]

The ACC report also says it's not approved for human use.

Is that 100% correct too?

Doesn't support their argument, so no.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

So, what I would like to know is, who is Darren Canes client in this case?

Is he currently representing Essendon, Jobe, or under the employ of Jobe's management company?

Paid up sports lawyer doing a PR piece for the press, well colour me surprised...

 

[RegHickeyStand]

I haven't read the trial testing in detail, but my understanding is it was used in diabetics to reduce weight and help control their diabetes. I wonder what the end point was then? Was it simply reduction in body fat or did they require a more stable blood glucose profile as well?

Too much fat in the diet, or excess weight, can cause insulin resistance which leads to chronic high blood sugar. I have a family member with diabetes.

 

[byronstjames]

It is irrelevant to WADA though

WADA don't hand down the sanctions. They have the ability to appeal if they feel the need to.

If Essendon are cleared because ASADA have signed off on their supplement program do you think WADA are going to appeal that decision?

"We're sorry, but despite the fact that you were given permission to go ahead with your supplement program by our local governing body, they were wrong and you're going to be heavily sanctioned".

Yeah, nah.

The AFL would disassociate itself from WADA so fast it would make your head spin.

 

[Armchair Critic]

Don't forget Adriana's mob, they're the first port of call.

Do you honestly not think the reason this is taking so long is because all this is already being argued.

The players may end up getting reduced /Suspended sentences which I have no issue with but the club is screwed, they will not being playing finals this year

 

[Armchair Critic]

WADA don't hand down the sanctions. They have the ability to appeal if they feel the need to.

If Essendon are cleared because ASADA have signed off on their supplement program do you think WADA are going to appeal that decision?

"We're sorry, but despite the fact that you were given permission to go ahead with your supplement program by our local governing body, they were wrong and you're going to be heavily sanctioned".

Yeah, nah.

The AFL would disassociate itself from WADA so fast it would make your head spin.

It was reported yesterday ASADA have denied this happened