Muggs
Premiership Player
Update on page 7.
chip has a long story in today's Australain outlining evidence from the defemation case. Way to big to cut and paste so main things.. (Edit Actually might be a online blog.. Think it's 4-5 A4 pages....)
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...tory/64956ddedbfb7cacc74eab6e418fc09e?login=1
Dank provided sworn testimony about what went on at Cronulla.
He publicly admitted to overseeing a regimen that involved the administration of two growth hormone-releasing peptides, CJC-1295 and GHRP-6.
Both substances are banned by the World Anti-Doping Code; Dank admits both were injected into Cronulla players. The players were also given lozenges and creams containing the peptides. “I directed their administration,’’ Dank said.
The admission is significant, both for the 12 players who pleaded guilty without knowing what they were given and five players who refused the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority’s plea deal and are waiting for their cases to be resolved.
As the central figures in the Cronulla saga entered the witness box — former club doctor David Givney, physiotherapist Konrad Schultz, high-performance manager Trent Elkin and football manager Darren Mooney — the gross deception carried out at Shark Park was laid bare.
Not only were the Cronulla players given false assurances by Dank and Elkin the substances they were given were permitted for use in sport, but they were also instructed to deliberately conceal the injection program from Givney, the long-serving team doctor.
Next
What records were kept of players being injected?
Dank told the court that every week he had provided Elkin with a list of all the treatments administered. “I suspect the records were there, like I left at every football club,’’ he said. Elkin said no such records were kept. Dank’s work at Cronulla was loosely managed and undocumented.
When Givney asked for details about what the players were given, he received a vague reply about amino acids and vitamins. The similarity with how Dank operated at Essendon a year later is striking.
Next
Dank denies injecting Mannah with peptides. If he did, it is uncertain if these substances hastened his death. Nonetheless, the expert medical testimony detailing the risks inherent in giving growth hormone-releasing peptides to anyone with a history of cancer — and the potentially fatal ignorance displayed by Dank about this — makes for alarming reading.
Dank’s version of events surrounding Mannah have changed since The Daily Telegraph revealed in April 2013 that an independent report by former Industrial Court of NSW Justice Tricia Kavanagh into the Cronulla scandal raised concerns that he might have injected Mannah with peptides.
Dank did not deny injecting Mannah when he first spoke to a journalist about the Telegraph stories. Instead, he defended his actions, claiming he received an assurance from an oncologist that his treatments were safe for Mannah, who at the time was thought to be in remission.
In a sworn statement provided to lawyers for Nationwide News last June, Dank suggested this advice came from Paul Mainwaring, an oncologist at Brisbane’s Mater Hospital. In his statement, he described a lengthy telephone conversation with the oncologist in March 2011 in which he “stated the nature of Mannah’s condition, who I had been advised was in remission, and asked if CJC, GHRP-6, BB formula or Humanofort in any way, shape or form could exacerbate or reinitiate any form of cancer.’’
By Dank’s fourth day on the stand, his story had shifted. He told the court he had not mentioned either peptide in his conversation with Mainwaring about Mannah’s condition and that their discussion was limited to other supplements. Mainwaring was not called to give evidence. Counsel for Nationwide News, Tom Blackburn SC, was incredulous.
Dank denies he gave Mannah either CJC-1295 or GHRP-6. He said that, when he was outlining his program to the players, Mannah raised concerns about his history of cancer and opted not to receive any injections. Yet despite having no medical qualification, Dank says he advised Mannah that the peptides would be safe for him to use.
Blackburn: “That was an extremely and exceptionally reckless thing to do, wasn’t it?’’
Dank: “No it wasn’t given the dosages that we were going to apply.’’
Blackburn: “What were you doing telling Mr Mannah that it would be safe to inject these peptides which caused the release, to your understanding, of growth hormone?’’
Dank: “Because growth hormone does not stimulate the proliferation of cancer cells.’’
This is where Dank is dead wrong. Monash University professor of medicine and endocrinologist Leon Bach explained to the court how CJC-1295 and GHRP-6, both synthetic compounds, stimulate the pituitary gland to produce growth hormone. When growth hormone is released into the blood stream, it causes a chemical reaction in the liver that causes the production of a natural growth factor, IGF-1. He said neither peptide was safe to use in any patient as no studies had been conducted on the impact of long-term use.
Can understand why EFC not going after Dank after he gave evidence like this... The can of worms it would open....
There is also more stuff expanding in these points in the article.
Can't believe Dank claims he is innocent.. Yet has no problem providing sworn evidence he oversaw banned substances...
chip has a long story in today's Australain outlining evidence from the defemation case. Way to big to cut and paste so main things.. (Edit Actually might be a online blog.. Think it's 4-5 A4 pages....)
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...tory/64956ddedbfb7cacc74eab6e418fc09e?login=1
Dank provided sworn testimony about what went on at Cronulla.
He publicly admitted to overseeing a regimen that involved the administration of two growth hormone-releasing peptides, CJC-1295 and GHRP-6.
Both substances are banned by the World Anti-Doping Code; Dank admits both were injected into Cronulla players. The players were also given lozenges and creams containing the peptides. “I directed their administration,’’ Dank said.
The admission is significant, both for the 12 players who pleaded guilty without knowing what they were given and five players who refused the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority’s plea deal and are waiting for their cases to be resolved.
As the central figures in the Cronulla saga entered the witness box — former club doctor David Givney, physiotherapist Konrad Schultz, high-performance manager Trent Elkin and football manager Darren Mooney — the gross deception carried out at Shark Park was laid bare.
Not only were the Cronulla players given false assurances by Dank and Elkin the substances they were given were permitted for use in sport, but they were also instructed to deliberately conceal the injection program from Givney, the long-serving team doctor.
Next
What records were kept of players being injected?
Dank told the court that every week he had provided Elkin with a list of all the treatments administered. “I suspect the records were there, like I left at every football club,’’ he said. Elkin said no such records were kept. Dank’s work at Cronulla was loosely managed and undocumented.
When Givney asked for details about what the players were given, he received a vague reply about amino acids and vitamins. The similarity with how Dank operated at Essendon a year later is striking.
Next
Dank denies injecting Mannah with peptides. If he did, it is uncertain if these substances hastened his death. Nonetheless, the expert medical testimony detailing the risks inherent in giving growth hormone-releasing peptides to anyone with a history of cancer — and the potentially fatal ignorance displayed by Dank about this — makes for alarming reading.
Dank’s version of events surrounding Mannah have changed since The Daily Telegraph revealed in April 2013 that an independent report by former Industrial Court of NSW Justice Tricia Kavanagh into the Cronulla scandal raised concerns that he might have injected Mannah with peptides.
Dank did not deny injecting Mannah when he first spoke to a journalist about the Telegraph stories. Instead, he defended his actions, claiming he received an assurance from an oncologist that his treatments were safe for Mannah, who at the time was thought to be in remission.
In a sworn statement provided to lawyers for Nationwide News last June, Dank suggested this advice came from Paul Mainwaring, an oncologist at Brisbane’s Mater Hospital. In his statement, he described a lengthy telephone conversation with the oncologist in March 2011 in which he “stated the nature of Mannah’s condition, who I had been advised was in remission, and asked if CJC, GHRP-6, BB formula or Humanofort in any way, shape or form could exacerbate or reinitiate any form of cancer.’’
By Dank’s fourth day on the stand, his story had shifted. He told the court he had not mentioned either peptide in his conversation with Mainwaring about Mannah’s condition and that their discussion was limited to other supplements. Mainwaring was not called to give evidence. Counsel for Nationwide News, Tom Blackburn SC, was incredulous.
Dank denies he gave Mannah either CJC-1295 or GHRP-6. He said that, when he was outlining his program to the players, Mannah raised concerns about his history of cancer and opted not to receive any injections. Yet despite having no medical qualification, Dank says he advised Mannah that the peptides would be safe for him to use.
Blackburn: “That was an extremely and exceptionally reckless thing to do, wasn’t it?’’
Dank: “No it wasn’t given the dosages that we were going to apply.’’
Blackburn: “What were you doing telling Mr Mannah that it would be safe to inject these peptides which caused the release, to your understanding, of growth hormone?’’
Dank: “Because growth hormone does not stimulate the proliferation of cancer cells.’’
This is where Dank is dead wrong. Monash University professor of medicine and endocrinologist Leon Bach explained to the court how CJC-1295 and GHRP-6, both synthetic compounds, stimulate the pituitary gland to produce growth hormone. When growth hormone is released into the blood stream, it causes a chemical reaction in the liver that causes the production of a natural growth factor, IGF-1. He said neither peptide was safe to use in any patient as no studies had been conducted on the impact of long-term use.
Can understand why EFC not going after Dank after he gave evidence like this... The can of worms it would open....
There is also more stuff expanding in these points in the article.
Can't believe Dank claims he is innocent.. Yet has no problem providing sworn evidence he oversaw banned substances...
Last edited:
