ASADA case against Essendon hanging by a thread (The Age, 1 Nov 14)

Remove this Banner Ad

To all you unquestioning EFC/Hirdittes faithful, think of the following:

People have been convicted in criminal courts under the higher 'beyond reasonable doubt' burden of proof when all the prosecution had were associations to drug dealers and text records/phone conversations that the prosecution argued were code names for illicit drugs.

ASADA operating under a lesser burden of proof will have a much easier time convincing a tribunal that the injections received by EFC players could only have been TB4 because after 2 years of a exhaustive investigation, not one single bit of paper evidence supports the EFC theory that it was the good form of Thymosin.
How on earth can any EFC supporter even for a second entertain the idea that the tribunal will accept that the good form of Thymosin just magically appeared at EFC to be injected into the players? How can any one for a second think that the tribunal will accept the theory coming from EFC that they used the good thymosin when EFC cannot produce one shred of evidence that even suggests they ordered, paid for, got delivery and injected the substance?

Sorry but the bolded is just wrong. Paper evidence that Essendon has is only for the "good" thymosin. However, there is that one batch that is highly suspicious and ASADA is testing the waters on that one.

You have to ask yourself why the footy club and the players are not concerned about the outcome of the tribunal.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Sorry but the bolded is just wrong. Paper evidence that Essendon has is only for the "good" thymosin. However, there is that one batch that is highly suspicious and ASADA is testing the waters on that one.

You have to ask yourself why the footy club and the players are not concerned about the outcome of the tribunal.
Yeah, club and players aren't concerned at all....
 
this post made me laugh, not because of what you wrote, but who liked it.
Dank referring to Thymomodulin, yet the fish thinks the players used TA1

I got it wrong! I was very busy and without lunch so I just hoped that the 3 letter acronym would suffice. However, it is the immune drug that Dank was talking about.

I also find it funny that so many people really think that

1. Dank thought TB4 was cool,

2. Finds out it's not,

3. Panics and tries to cover his tracks (which include pissing off the suppliers by not paying them maybe motivating them to tip him in the s**t),

4. Lies under oath that he didn't use it,

5. A few months later is shocked that it's banned.

I am not saying that this proves he didn't dope the team. I'm just saying that it strikes me as particularly strange that Dank didn't know that TB4 was banned at the time considering the history leading up to it. Coupled with the fact that he's talking about an immune booster which also indicates thymomodulin. There is hardly any literature regards TB4 and the immune system, whereas there is plenty regarding thymomodulin.
 
Sorry but the bolded is just wrong. Paper evidence that Essendon has is only for the "good" thymosin. However, there is that one batch that is highly suspicious and ASADA is testing the waters on that one.

You have to ask yourself why the footy club and the players are not concerned about the outcome of the tribunal.
I think they are..... why the federal court action? Why are essendon desperately trying to be involved in the tribunal? Why has Little said they are attacking the evidence and finding any hole?

If so confident, show the records.... oh I forgot, the dog chewed it
 
I got it wrong! I was very busy and without lunch so I just hoped that the 3 letter acronym would suffice. However, it is the immune drug that Dank was talking about.

I also find it funny that so many people really think that

1. Dank thought TB4 was cool,

2. Finds out it's not,

3. Panics and tries to cover his tracks (which include pissing off the suppliers by not paying them maybe motivating them to tip him in the s**t),

4. Lies under oath that he didn't use it,

5. A few months later is shocked that it's banned.

I am not saying that this proves he didn't dope the team. I'm just saying that it strikes me as particularly strange that Dank didn't know that TB4 was banned at the time considering the history leading up to it. Coupled with the fact that he's talking about an immune booster which also indicates thymomodulin. There is hardly any literature regards TB4 and the immune system, whereas there is plenty regarding thymomodulin.
I think you may find a little for TB4 if you care to look.
how could anyone really believe a word Dank says, i have no idea if he meant TB4 or thymomodulin, the only person that knows that answer is the reporter, as Dank gave him the doses.
Isn't Dank being investigated for medicare fraud?
What happened about that credit card scandal?
The bloke cannot be trusted.
 
Sorry but the bolded is just wrong. Paper evidence that Essendon has is only for the "good" thymosin. However, there is that one batch that is highly suspicious and ASADA is testing the waters on that one.

And yet it's never been produced. Like the Yeti and the great white whale, it is said to exist.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I got it wrong! I was very busy and without lunch so I just hoped that the 3 letter acronym would suffice. However, it is the immune drug that Dank was talking about.

I also find it funny that so many people really think that

1. Dank thought TB4 was cool,

2. Finds out it's not,

3. Panics and tries to cover his tracks (which include pissing off the suppliers by not paying them maybe motivating them to tip him in the s**t),

4. Lies under oath that he didn't use it,

5. A few months later is shocked that it's banned.

I am not saying that this proves he didn't dope the team. I'm just saying that it strikes me as particularly strange that Dank didn't know that TB4 was banned at the time considering the history leading up to it. Coupled with the fact that he's talking about an immune booster which also indicates thymomodulin. There is hardly any literature regards TB4 and the immune system, whereas there is plenty regarding thymomodulin.


Not quite true. There is plenty of literature available, a quick google gives this. It looks like Dank knew exactly what the properties were, plus others of course. ;)

THYMOSIN BETA 4 HAS BEEN SHOWN TO BOOST THE IMMUNE SYSTEM SIGNIFICANTLY. CURRENTLY IMMUNE COMPROMISED PATIENTS RELY ON THYMOSIN B4 DAILY TO MAINTAIN A HEALTHY IMMUNE SYSTEM.
Thymosin Beta 4 can be used in the short term as an immune stimulant to assist in overcoming any sort of infection
.

Thymosin βeta 4 – TB-500
Immune Enhancer, Rapid Injury Repair and Recovery, Reduces Inflammation, Tissue Regeneration, Increases Muscle Growth, Improves Muscle Tone, Increases Strength and Endurance, Promotes Hair Growth
https://www.peptideclinics.com.au/peptide-products/buy-thymosin-beta-4-australia/


Thymosin beta-4 is involved in regulating the immune system. Increasing levels of Thymosin Beta-4 through the use of TB500, would decrease our inflammatory response to injury, because the injury would be healing at a much faster rate. Inflammation is our body’s signal to repair. Once that repair is underway, inflammation goes down.
http://www.metabolicalchemy.com/thymosin-beta-4/

What is TB4?

TB4 belongs to a group of peptides or family of peptides called thymosins. Thymosins modulate cell migration (normally cells are fixed with no motility), angiogenesis (growing of blood vessels from other blood vessels) and immune responses.4 They have been categorized as biological response modifiers. Usually the term refers to substances that arouse the body's response to an infection. TB4 specifically is a key regulator of tissue regeneration as it arouses an immune response which leads to regeneration.
http://canadapeptides.org/thymosin-beta-4-tb500
 
Are they as confident as they were in the middle of the year when they though Middleton was going to give them the thumbs up.

They can't do anything but be positive in the circumstances. A bit like how SC notices were highly unlikely (for a day at least)

It' simpler than that.

THe spin campaign has always been aimed primarily at the true believers.

The current version of the spin campaign is aimed at ensuring that the true believers don't believe the bad stuff. After crying "innocent until proven guilty" for so long, they are being prepared to scream "innocent even after being proven guilty".
 
I got it wrong! I was very busy and without lunch so I just hoped that the 3 letter acronym would suffice. However, it is the immune drug that Dank was talking about.

I also find it funny that so many people really think that

1. Dank thought TB4 was cool,

2. Finds out it's not,

3. Panics and tries to cover his tracks (which include pissing off the suppliers by not paying them maybe motivating them to tip him in the s**t),

4. Lies under oath that he didn't use it,

5. A few months later is shocked that it's banned.

I am not saying that this proves he didn't dope the team. I'm just saying that it strikes me as particularly strange that Dank didn't know that TB4 was banned at the time considering the history leading up to it. Coupled with the fact that he's talking about an immune booster which also indicates thymomodulin. There is hardly any literature regards TB4 and the immune system, whereas there is plenty regarding thymomodulin.

Not as strange as the logical gymnastics required to wish away that things that did happen.

What exactly is strange about a person involved in an organised doping program lying? You think maybe he's too honest to lie?
 
It' simpler than that.

THe spin campaign has always been aimed primarily at the true believers.

The current version of the spin campaign is aimed at ensuring that the true believers don't believe the bad stuff. After crying "innocent until proven guilty" for so long, they are being prepared to scream "innocent even after being proven guilty".
What will your view be if they're cleared?

More so, you don't think there wil be people who do thesame thing if they are cleared? THey they got away with it, or the AFL made a deal?


Granted, I can see your POV that they would keep the line we did no wrong.


As I've said before though, I think ASADA are just as much running the PR campaign via the media

McDevitts roadshow.

The ADO9604 thing. Thre was the very distinct play on words by ASADA at the time. The term used in the media ws ASADA advised them that it was not prohibited under S2.

ASADA released a statement saying they had never advised anyone it was permitted for used in sport. For me that is a very purpose change in language never really addressing the claim made against them. Most bought it. More to the point the court case found there was at least uncertainty within ASADA about it's status.

I accept as others have said maybe ASADA did not know for sure if they would prosecute, but they could have clearly conveyed that 'ASADA is currently reviewing the status of AOD9604 regarding the investigation into Essendon. A decision will be made at a later point. ASADA will make no further comment on this until the investigation is over'

Both have played the PR/Spin game
 
Last edited:
I don't know if its their sole defence. I don't know what ASADA's evidence is. But I would point out that proving a negative is extremely hard - it is why the onus of proof is on the prosecution/plaintiff. If ASADA can't produce proof then the court case will be lost. There is no onus on EFC to prove ASADA's case for them. Whether innocent or guilty, they would be idiots to help ASADA make a case....
But if ASADA can provide enough evidence to satisfy the tribunal it will require the EFC players to refute that or come up with evidence that contradicts that. Do you think it likely that ASADA have spent 3 days so far with more to come if they cannot present a strong case?
Absolutely - if ASADA makes a case, EFC will need to try and refute it in some way. Which, if they have evidence is really hard to do. How do you prove a negative? If the negative is "were you at place X at time Y when the incident happened" you can prove you were somewhere else. If it is "across these months X happened" it is much harder. So a lot of the focus will be on showing inaccuracies/issues with the ASADA data. How much of that challenge occurs during ASADA's presenting versus in the second part, who knows.

I personally have no idea how strong or weak the case is. But I did highlight before the recent South African case which cost the SA prosecutors millions, years to extradite the British citizen accused, and was considered by the judge to be so weak she didn't even call on the defence to present as she threw it out. So although I would assume ASADA's case is stronger than that (although of course I hope it isn't), it isn't out of the realms of possibility. There is precedent for government cases to be incredibly weak yet still go to trial.
 
Sorry but the bolded is just wrong. Paper evidence that Essendon has is only for the "good" thymosin. However, there is that one batch that is highly suspicious and ASADA is testing the waters on that one.

You have to ask yourself why the footy club and the players are not concerned about the outcome of the tribunal.

Sorry but what paper trail would that be. Which version of the 'good' Thymosin is that because the Essendon commentary seems to drift between TA1 and Thymomodulin depnding on which way the wind is blowing? We have some claiming that TA1 was used because thats the 'good' thymosin and photographs of something in a bottle with a label that says Thymomodulin. It might actually help if you could just pick one of those and stick to it.

Having said that, that photo of a photo is utterly meaningless. There is no link in that photo to a date or location or any examination of the contents to indicate what it contains. It could well be a urine sample for all anybody could demonstrate and a post dated spreadsheet has just as much value.

I'd really be happy to hear about any paper trail for either TA1 or Thymomodulin as that would knock a big hole in ASADA's efforts to link TB4 to use by the players.
 
To all you unquestioning EFC/Hirdittes faithful, think of the following:

People have been convicted in criminal courts under the higher 'beyond reasonable doubt' burden of proof when all the prosecution had were associations to drug dealers and text records/phone conversations that the prosecution argued were code names for illicit drugs.

ASADA operating under a lesser burden of proof will have a much easier time convincing a tribunal that the injections received by EFC players could only have been TB4 because after 2 years of a exhaustive investigation, not one single bit of paper evidence supports the EFC theory that it was the good form of Thymosin.
How on earth can any EFC supporter even for a second entertain the idea that the tribunal will accept that the good form of Thymosin just magically appeared at EFC to be injected into the players? How can any one for a second think that the tribunal will accept the theory coming from EFC that they used the good thymosin when EFC cannot produce one shred of evidence that even suggests they ordered, paid for, got delivery and injected the substance?
Gee, if the players get off then it must be evident in the tribunal's eyes that no players were at any time given banned substances.

Will you accept this conclusion if it eventuates?
 
In the Nick Mckenzie interview Dank talks to them about dosages of TB4 that he gave the players and asks The Age not to publish. I assume this is because he wanted to protect his intel.

NM:
How often were Essendon players taking Thymosin Beta 4?

SD: [Explains the dosage level but asks that this be not published].

Has what he told Mckenzie ever been published or is it still off limits? Wouldn't this hold the key?
Is Mckenzie a witness at the tribunal and will he spill the beans if so?

Sorry if this has already been discussed.
 
In the Nick Mckenzie interview Dank talks to them about dosages of TB4 that he gave the players and asks The Age not to publish. I assume this is because he wanted to protect his intel.

NM:
How often were Essendon players taking Thymosin Beta 4?

SD: [Explains the dosage level but asks that this be not published].

Has what he told Mckenzie ever been published or is it still off limits? Wouldn't this hold the key?
Is Mckenzie a witness at the tribunal and will he spill the beans if so?

Sorry if this has already been discussed.


ASADA requested the off the record part of the interview.

The Age/ Nick McKenzie refused to provide it, only gave the on the record section.


I suspect it holds a key one way or another.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top