Charter underwrote bought peptides were not for human use

[Ancient Tiger]

0.5ml? That would be a very small dosage, and it's based on your assumptions

Actually it is a very common volume for subcutaneous injection. Anything more than 1ml is very unusual for subcut injections.
Anybody that takes insulin (a peptide) will tell you that the injections rarely are more than 0.3ml.

 

[mxett]

Do you know the difference between a "dose" and a "concentration". The way that these sites are selling TB-500 is in single "dose" vials. You then dissolve the powder in saline and inject the whole dose. If you dissolve the powder in 0.5 ml or 5 ml it doesn't effect the size of the "dose", just the concentration it is administered at.

of course i know mg/ml. However that would be an extremely concentrated formula for half a ml to be effective. doesnt answer the other point i raised about Alavi supplying all compounded doses at once though

 

[mxett]

Actually it is a very common volume for subcutaneous injection. Anything more than 1ml is very unusual for subcut injections.
Anybody that takes insulin (a peptide) will tell you that the injections rarely are more than 0.3ml.

arent they daily injections? TB4 was weekly then monthly

 

[mxett]

Go look up the storage information for tb4 (not tb-500 which is a fragment of tb4) it can be stored at -20 (e.g. frozen) for an extended period of time.

6 months?

 

[FuManchu]

arent they daily injections? TB4 was weekly then monthly

You yourself said, Dank drummed to a different beat.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

arent they daily injections? TB4 was weekly then monthly

What has that got to do with anything? Its the total dose that is important e.g. 2mg. Whether it's in 0.5ml or 5ml doesn't make the drug last longer!
What we really need to know is how much drug was in each ampoule and how much each player got.
I was just saying low volumes are the norm for subcutaneous injections as they are less painful and just as efficacious than larger volumes.

 

[mxett]

What has that got to do with anything? Its the total dose that is important e.g. 2mg. Whether it's in 0.5ml or 5ml doesn't make the drug last longer!
What we really need to know is how much drug was in each ampoule and how much each player got.
I was just saying low volumes are the norm for subcutaneous injections as they are less painful and just as efficacious than larger volumes.

fair enough. Can TB4 be administered IV?

 

[coryne]

6 months?

The GL Biochem site doesn't have any storage specs, but from another company

http://www.prospecbio.com/Thymosin_beta-4_7_171/

Stability. Lyophilized Thymosin b4 although stable at room temperature for 3 weeks, should be stored desiccated below -18°C. Upon reconstitution T beta 4 should be stored at 4°C between 2-7 days and for future use below -18°C.
For long term storage it is recommended to add a carrier protein (0.1% HSA or BSA).
Please prevent freeze-thaw cycles.


I am assuming that AT has cleared up your dose and concentrations issues.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

fair enough. Can TB4 be administered IV?

I would say yes.
Most subcut drugs can be given IV but to do that is harder than to give a jab in the abdomen. You need to establish a safe IV access via a cannula usually first and that is more expensive as you need someone skilled in the placement of the cannula plus the cost of the disposables. That is why subcut injections often are done - easier and cheaper.

 

[coryne]

I would say yes.
Most subcut drugs can be given IV but to do that is harder than to give a jab in the abdomen. You need to establish a safe IV access via a cannula usually first and that is more expensive as you need someone skilled in the placement of the cannula plus the cost of the disposables. That is why subcut injections often are done - easier and cheaper.

Also knowing Dank he has probably just mixed up the terms IV and SC anyway (I mean they are almost the same ................)

 

[onemancyclone]

Also knowing Dank he has probably just mixed up the terms IV and SC anyway (I mean they are almost the same ................)

The thought of some unsuspecting child asking Dank for help planning his SuperCoach team scares the shit out of me.

 

[mxett]

I would say yes.
Most subcut drugs can be given IV but to do that is harder than to give a jab in the abdomen. You need to establish a safe IV access via a cannula usually first and that is more expensive as you need someone skilled in the placement of the cannula plus the cost of the disposables. That is why subcut injections often are done - easier and cheaper.

iv cannulation is easy, usually

 

[Ancient Tiger]

iv cannulation is easy, usually

It is, but people that put them in easily are usually expensive!

 

[mxett]

It is, but people that put them in easily are usually expensive!

now days many health workers do it, and those that do it often are often pretty good at it. In fact better than some of the highest paid folk, anaethetists excluded of course

 

[Laphroaig]

How would you know? 26 vials at 1 vial per subject isnt even going to provide enough for 1 injection each. 50ml vials may give 10 doses per vial but again, for 34 players to have 10 injections that still isnt enough

How the **** do you know that only 26 vials of any size is all there is?

 

[mxett]

How the **** do you know that only 26 vials of any size is all there is?

i dont, but the claim is it is enough anyway

 

[the conch]

That well may be the case. If it is an excuse then how can drug control in sport ever be enforced? It should go to mitigating the penalty if deception can be proved, as ASADA have stated. If EFC are going down that path then why haven't the pleaded guilty with this mitigation?

It appears that EFC are chasing a finding of innocent, which seems a bit silly as all courts only find guilty/not guilty.

".... If EFC are going down that path then why haven't they pleaded guilty...." - Excellent point.
Crass arrogance of EFC? Like Hird they still think they can beat the system.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

indeed. But can you come up with even a remotely plausible scenario the ACC are coercing him into helping ASADA? I can't. Only the exact opposite.

this caught my eye:

Mr Charter met his lawyers this week to discuss whether appearing as a witness in the ASADA case would put him at risk of self-incrimination. The current criminal proceedings against him, the result of a sting operation last year by Victoria Police detectives from the anti-gangland Purana taskforce, are not related to the Essendon case.

do you reckon his lawyers were saying to him "yeah nah it's cool mate, go for it?"

I don't

Interesting article on old mate in The Aus today

--

The Australian can reveal ASADA spent several hours yesterday morning preparing its key witness Shane Charter, a self-styled anti-ageing consultant who imported a banned peptide that ASADA alleges was administered to Essendon players by Mr Dank during 2012. As of last night, Mr Charter had not agreed to appear as a witness in the case nor sign a statutory declaration affirming the evidence he provided to ASADA’s investigators last year. He has been advised by his lawyer not to testify or swear to his evidence.

--
I seem to recall quite a few people heatedly disagreeing with my very reasonable thought processes around this.

As of last night, Charters isn't even willing to affirm the evidence he has already provided.

Like I said, pretty hard to mount a case when your key witness can't testify...

 

[Keys]

In the absence of a positive blood test ASADA really needed someone to fess up and confirm that TB4 was actually used. Charter couldn't do that exactly but his testimony that he supplied it to Dank was a key piece of the circumstantial case they have tried to put together. Without him their case gets a whole lot harder to prove I would've thought and it was never a slam dunk with his evidence. It also might explain why ASADA want a closed hearing as it might help encourage him to appear

Personally I think TB4 was used but I doubt that ASADA are going to be able to prove that to a level of comfortable satisfaction. Given the apparent lack of evidence (even caro is spouting the likelihood of the players being found not guilty) I fail to understand hirds continuing legal action to have evidence ruled out

 

[The 747]

I seem to recall quite a few people heatedly disagreeing with my very reasonable thought processes around this.

As of last night, Charters isn't even willing to affirm the evidence he has already provided.

Like I said, pretty hard to mount a case when your key witness can't testify...

Pretty hard not to notice the stench about the EFC too. Key witness with long standing association with disgraced coach has epiphany and may not testify.

It gets spun this way and that, but to most people it is pretty obvious what is going on here and what went on in the past.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

In the absence of a positive blood test ASADA really needed someone to fess up and confirm that TB4 was actually used. Charter couldn't do that exactly but his testimony that he supplied it to Dank was a key piece of the circumstantial case they have tried to put together. Without him their case gets a whole lot harder to prove I would've thought and it was never a slam dunk with his evidence. It also might explain why ASADA want a closed hearing as it might help encourage him to appear

Personally I think TB4 was used but I doubt that ASADA are going to be able to prove that to a level of comfortable satisfaction. Given the apparent lack of evidence (even caro is spouting the likelihood of the players being found not guilty) I fail to understand hirds continuing legal action to have evidence ruled out

there's no doubt that's why they want a closed hearing. And that's fair enough IMO.

But even if it's closed, it all comes back to that one word: why?

Why on earth would he?

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Pretty hard not to notice the stench about the EFC too. Key witness with long standing association with disgraced coach has epiphany and may not testify.

It gets spun this way and that, but to most people it is pretty obvious what is going on here and what went on in the past.

well who is to argue with the great court of public opinion eh?

Certainly not me. The amount of ****s I give regarding what you or others think hovers somewhere south of zero. We have a robust legal system, and if ASADAs case is good enough they'll get it up, if not they won't

 

[replicant]

Don't they already have his statement on record, and supposedly have texts and emails between him, Alavi and Dank, as well as files form the drug manufacturer?

I mean, sure, an affadavit would be good, but in it's absence, surely that evidence doesn't become invalid does it?

 

[Keys]

there's no doubt that's why they want a closed hearing. And that's fair enough IMO.

But even if it's closed, it all comes back to that one word: why?

Why on earth would he?

I agree there's no reason for him to testify as he certainly gets no benefit from doing so, closed or otherwise

 

[Keys]

Don't they already have his statement on record, and supposedly have texts and emails between him, Alavi and Dank, as well as files form the drug manufacturer?

I mean, sure, an affadavit would be good, but in it's absence, surely that evidence doesn't become invalid does it?

An unsigned statement would be next to useless I would have thought