Another reminder of the delusional mind of the man who ran the Essendon doping programme ~ Thymosin Beta 4 is not on WADA banned list: Dank

What a moron trying to argue something he says was not used isn't banned. Obviously it was used and this is the defence.

Edited March 29, 201510 yr by Clintosaurus

Another reminder of the delusional mind of the man who ran the Essendon doping programme ~ Thymosin Beta 4 is not on WADA banned list: Dank

and nominations for fcukwit of the year are

S.Dank...able to leap logic in a single bound !!!

Another reminder of the delusional mind of the man who ran the Essendon doping programme ~ Thymosin Beta 4 is not on WADA banned list: Dank

THYMOSIN BETA 4

IN COMPETITION Route of administration:Status:

• all routes Banned in sport

OUT OF COMPETITION Route of administration:Status:

• all routes Banned in sport

Another threat by dank to sue people. Get on with dank old boy.

Funny also that all along he has said he wouldn't let the players cop it yet says he has detailed records but won't release them until his much talked about civil court cases

Another threat by dank to sue people. Get on with dank old boy.

Funny also that all along he has said he wouldn't let the players cop it yet says he has detailed records but won't release them until his much talked about civil court cases

Quite right. If the media don't see this contradiction and give him hell for it, then they are a gutless bunch of fools beneath contempt.

A loose canon and a loud explosion will ensue:

Dank said he was considering legal action against the Bombers' 2013 internal report conducted by former Telstra boss, Ziggy Switkowski.

"It is really laughable to suggest we conducted anything in a pharmacologically experimental manner. It was well known what was used at Essendon Football Club so the furphy that has been portrayed by the AFL, ASADA and the Essendon Football Club, that they don't know, is completely wrong," he said.

comedy gold.

what planet is the guy on?

Quite right. If the media don't see this contradiction and give him hell for it, then they are a gutless bunch of fools beneath contempt.

the media aren't aside from all this they are a side !!!

Mark Thompson says Essendon captain Jobe Watson should keep his 2012 Brownlow Medal

LOL

Mark Thompson says Essendon captain Jobe Watson should keep his 2012 Brownlow Medal

LOL

"AFL boss Gillon McLachlan revealed on Friday he had read the majority of the evidence from the anti-doping tribunal and closing submissions."

Very independent tribunal.

Another reminder of the delusional mind of the man who ran the Essendon doping programme ~ Thymosin Beta 4 is not on WADA banned list: Dank

So 3 yrs after he conducted his frankenstein experiments he is now making selective comments through selective media. Yeah, we believe you Dank you moron.

Had plenty of time to clear the air and the players.

So the U.S has friendly fire incidents because it gives drugs to its pilots?

Wow, just........wow. Evidence please, or you will need to excuse me for thinking you are a fool.

Sorry to use wikipedia, but it's easy to get the info in one place that way. Also a couple of other articles from NBC News and New York Times.

Dextroamphetamine:

The U.S. Air Force uses dextroamphetamine as one of its "go pills", given to pilots on long missions to help them remain focused and alert. Conversely, "no-go pills" are used after the mission is completed, to combat the effects of the mission and "go-pills".^{[130][131][132][133]} The Tarnak Farm incident was linked by media reports to the use of this drug on long term fatigued pilots. The military did not accept this explanation, citing the lack of similar incidents. Newer stimulant medications or awakeness promoting agents with different side effect profiles, such as modafinil, are being investigated and sometimes issued for this reason.^[131]

Tarnak Farm:

One of the issues highlighted by the Inquiry related to the use of amphetamines in combat.^[9][10][11] In testimony it was revealed that Schmidt and Umbach were told by their superiors to use "go pills" on their missions, and the airmen blamed the incident on the drugs. This was a significant part of the defense of the two pilots. Schmidt's defense also blamed the fog of war.

Modafinil:

In the United States military, modafinil has been approved for use on certain Air Force missions, and it is being investigated for other uses.^[74] As of November 2012, modafinil is the only drug approved by the Air Force as a "go pill" for fatigue management.^[75] The use of dextroamphetamine (a.k.a., Dexedrine) is no longer approved.^[75] One study of helicopter pilots suggested that 600 mg of modafinil given in three doses can be used to keep pilots alert and maintain their accuracy at pre-deprivation levels for 40 hours without sleep;^[76] however, significant levels of nausea and vertigo were observed. A second helicopter study found modafinil was comparable to dextroamphetamine and was well-tolerated.^[77] Another study of fighter pilots showed that modafinil given in three divided 100 mg doses sustained the flight control accuracy of sleep-deprived F-117 pilots to within about 27 percent of baseline levels for 37 hours, without any considerable side effects.^[78] In an 88-hour sleep loss study of simulated military grounds operations, 400 mg/day doses were mildly helpful at maintaining alertness and performance of subjects compared to placebo, but the researchers concluded that this dose was not high enough to compensate for most of the effects of complete sleep loss.^[79] In law enforcement, tactical paramedics in Maryland (US) may administer 200 mg of modafinil once daily in order to "enhance alertness / concentration" and "facilitate functioning with limited rest periods."^[80]

Sorry to use wikipedia, but it's easy to get the info in one place that way. Also a couple of other articles from NBC News and New York Times.

Dextroamphetamine:

Tarnak Farm:

Modafinil:

I say again, where is the evidence that it has caused friendly fire incidents?

Simple question

But, thanks for posting the links. Interesting reading, and not at all surprising.

Sorry for getting off topic everyone. My apologies.

Also, needed to highlight this, as yet another extraordinary attempt to pre-empt a soft landing for the drug cheats

"They might be forced to serve one more week of suspension — if found guilty — with the understanding that they were so keen to play for Australia they accepted that potential ramification."

So they serve a huge extra 1 week? Not sure if serious, but the guy who wrote that must have been slobbo surely??? Selective suspensions, either time based, or match based, whatever is smaller??

God I hope they get annihilated.

Edited March 29, 201510 yr by faultydet

I say again, where is the evidence that it has caused friendly fire incidents?

You don't accept the testimony of the pilot?

"AFL boss Gillon McLachlan revealed on Friday he had read the majority of the evidence from the anti-doping tribunal and closing submissions."

Very independent tribunal.

Now that's the kind of integrity I've come to expect from Dill and the boys at the AFL.

1

Mark Thompson says Essendon captain Jobe Watson should keep his 2012 Brownlow Medal

LOL

A man of integrity, impeccable morals. Pillar of society.

THYMOSIN BETA 4IN COMPETITION Route of administration:Status:

• all routes Banned in sport

OUT OF COMPETITION Route of administration:Status:

• all routes Banned in sport

Regarding Dank's claim that "Thymosin Beta 4 is not on WADA banned list", I carried out a little test today, based on current data although I believe the same applied in 2012.

I went to the WADA website ~ http://list.wada-ama.org/?submit=Search&s=Thymosin+Beta+4 and typed in "Thymosin Beta 4". I received a message which says:

Search Results for "Thymosin Beta 4"

No results

If a Substance or a Method you have searched for is not found, please verify with your Anti-Doping Organization to ensure that this Substance or Method is not prohibited as a related Substance or Method that falls under an existing category.

I then went to the local Anti-Doping Organization (ASADA) website https://checksubstances.asada.gov.au/Details.aspx?prodid=&subid=-219&resultid=499D166B-A583-4F01-822D-44F776C2A9AE and typed in "Thymosin Beta 4". I received a message which says that it is "prohibited" with the following additional message:

"PROHIBITED RESULTS

Athletes may at times need to use a prohibited medication to treat a legitimate medical condition. A Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) is an exemption that allows an athlete to use, for therapeutic use only, an otherwise prohibited substance or method (of administering a substance) which may be present during competition."

The site referred me to the Australian Sports Drug Medical Advisory Committee (ASDMAC).

ASDMAC is the Australian body that gives approval for athletes to use prohibited medications for legitimate therapeutic purposes, in addition to other functions.

There has never been any evidence that the Essendon players received an exemption from ASDMAC for use of TB4 and therefore Dank is as usual being disingenuous when he claims the substance is not on WADA's banned list. It is a banned substance and if the Tribunal concludes to its comfortable satisfaction that TB4 is the "Thymosin" ingested by the players it will have to find them guilty as charged.

I'm so nervous.

Quite right. If the media don't see this contradiction and give him hell for it, then they are a gutless bunch of fools beneath contempt.

What's new?

"AFL boss Gillon McLachlan revealed on Friday he had read the majority of the evidence from the anti-doping tribunal and closing submissions."

Very independent tribunal.

Where is the lack of independence here? He's read the evidence, there is no mention he has any input into the decision, the AFL prepared a submission I'd have thought and I would have imagined the AFL were present during the hearing although I don't know that to be true. Is it that the AFL is not a party to the hearing or were the interested parties not present when the evidence from other parties was presented?

Has ASADA had access to the same material? If GIl has I bet McDermot has.

I'm all for exposing corruption but I'm struggling with the independence issue hear.

It actually wouldn't surprise me if the AFL and ASADA were told of the decision prior to the announcement to give them time to prepare a response. But that doesn't mean the Tribunal isn't independent.

Where is the lack of independence here? He's read the evidence, there is no mention he has any input into the decision, the AFL prepared a submission I'd have thought and I would have imagined the AFL were present during the hearing although I don't know that to be true. Is it that the AFL is not a party to the hearing or were the interested parties not present when the evidence from other parties was presented?

Has ASADA had access to the same material? If GIl has I bet McDermot has.

I'm all for exposing corruption but I'm struggling with the independence issue hear.

It actually wouldn't surprise me if the AFL and ASADA were told of the decision prior to the announcement to give them time to prepare a response. But that doesn't mean the Tribunal isn't independent.

He shouldn't have access to the evidence 'Bob'. You or I aren't able to see it nor should Dill, he has no part in making the decision and he was not privy, or so I thought to the proceedings.

What it has allowed him to do is set the spin masters in motion a week before the decision is handed down. I would hardly think this is the action of an independent tribunal.

He shouldn't have access to the evidence 'Bob'. You or I aren't able to see it nor should Dill, he has no part in making the decision and he was not privy, or so I thought to the proceedings.

What it has allowed him to do is set the spin masters in motion a week before the decision is handed down. I would hardly think this is the action of an independent tribunal.

I agree with BB, I don't see an issue here.

The AFL have a competition to run, and need to be able to plan the contingencies for whatever may come. and it makes no mention as to penalties or the outcome that the tribunal has come to.

In response to BB and Ouch, I do not see how any party, not actually involved in the proceedings, namely the players, Dank and ASADA should see anything until the decision is finalised. Anything else smacks of the possibility of improper influence.

Now I may be wrong as to who the parties are. Perhaps the AFL is party to the proceedings? In which case I withdraw my remark.

But I replace it with the comment that it is improper for Gil to have commented on it publicly. For example, I just heard him 'quoted' on ABC radio as saying the players have no case to answer. Now that it not exactly what he did say, but it shows the dangers of him saying anything at this stage.

The big problem I have with this statement is that the AFL are actually the prosecution in this trial. ASADA are preserving the case on behalf of the AFL.

The evidence had been reviewed by multiple legal minds period to infraction notices being issued.

What makes Gil think he should be commenting publicly?

Smacks of reckless desperation to me having just read the excerpts again.