Watson to Hird: Don't come back in 2014.

[I Rock]

yep, dunno.

All I can say is what I've said for about 15 months now. There is definitely something up with AOD.

On this we agree; I keep expecting to hear more in regards too "The financials are ready for you and David on the AOD project". Imagine, just imagine Mr Evans got his good friend Mr D in on an investment opportunity......Not saying I think that is the case, however I wouldn't be shocked to be sitting here if it was.

 

[DonsRule]

On this we agree; I keep expecting to hear more in regards too "The financials are ready for you and David on the AOD project". Imagine, just imagine Mr Evans got his good friend Mr D in on an investment opportunity......Not saying I think that is the case, however I wouldn't be shocked to be sitting here if it was.

Happy to accept that side too, I think though shows how just a few pieced of information can be interpreted so many different ways none have been proven as correct, nor incorrect for that matter yet

 

[I Rock]

Happy to accept that side too, I think though shows how just a few pieced of information can be interpreted so many different ways none have been proven as correct, nor incorrect for that matter yet

Well what we do know is this:

- AOD9604 is for all intents and purposes an untested substance that potentially has a number of effects on the human body.
- James Hird & David Evans attended a seminar/meeting held by the company that owns the rights to the substance AOD-9604
- There is huge speculation this seminar/meeting was an investment opportunity.
- AOD9604 was used in a non fully tested, yet to be compliant, unsafe manner as an injectable at Essendon.
- There is wide speculation that Steven Dank was in fact running a (unregistered) clinical trial of the substance AOD-9604 on Essendon players.
- There was leaked text message sent to James Hird by someone at Calzada (?) about financials and an AOD project.
- The name David was mentioned in that text, David Evans was not only at the EFC. He also attended the seminar/meeting with Hird.

Now, one or two of those things in isolation means little at best. However all of them together make up more than a few connected circumstances at the very least.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

On this we agree; I keep expecting to hear more in regards too "The financials are ready for you and David on the AOD project". Imagine, just imagine Mr Evans got his good friend Mr D in on an investment opportunity......Not saying I think that is the case, however I wouldn't be shocked to be sitting here if it was.

Well what we do know is this:

- AOD9604 is for all intents and purposes an untested substance that potentially has a number of effects on the human body.
- James Hird & David Evans attended a seminar/meeting held by the company that owns the rights to the substance AOD-9604
- There is huge speculation this seminar/meeting was an investment opportunity.
- AOD9604 was used in a non fully tested, yet to be compliant, unsafe manner as an injectable at Essendon.
- There is wide speculation that Steven Dank was in fact running a (unregistered) clinical trial of the substance AOD-9604 on Essendon players.
- There was leaked text message sent to James Hird by someone at Calzada (?) about financials and an AOD project.
- The name David was mentioned in that text, David Evans was not only at the EFC. He also attended the seminar/meeting with Hird.

Now, one or two of those things in isolation means little at best. However all of them together make up more than a few unconnected circumstances.

the one significant point you've missed I think is when Dank messaged the Melbourne Doctor and said he had an R&D program nearly ready at Essendon which they could write off as a tax benefit which he wasn't able to enact, and was offering it to them instead. I think it's far more likely the whole thing is more about making it a tax write off for the club than anything to do with clinical tests on uninformed subjects. I just can't envisage anyone thinking that's a remotely sane idea, but writing it down from my tax bill? Where do I sign

 

[I Rock]

the one significant point you've missed I think is when Dank messaged the Melbourne Doctor and said he had an R&D program nearly ready at Essendon which they could write off as a tax benefit which he wasn't able to enact, and was offering it to them instead. I think it's far more likely the whole thing is more about making it a tax write off for the club than anything to do with clinical tests on uninformed subjects. I just can't envisage anyone thinking that's a remotely sane idea, but writing it down from my tax bill? Where do I sign

It may have a lot to do with the Medicare fraud Dank is accused of. Again I am not suggesting that the Clinical Trial "conspiracy" is set in stone. Just that it's a possibility not beyond the realms of s**t that might have happened. If we are to discuss all possibilities, it is one to throw into the discussion ring.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

It may have a lot to do with the Medicare fraud Dank is accused of. Again I am not suggesting that the Clinical Trial "conspiracy" is set in stone. Just that it's a possibility not beyond the realms of s**t that might have happened. If we are to discuss all possibilities, it is one to throw into the discussion ring.

yeah understand. No problems. It's a discussion forum innit.

I also can't believe clubs would be ok with medicare fraud, I reckon that's Danky on his own personally

 

[I Rock]

yeah understand. No problems. It's a discussion forum innit.

I also can't believe clubs would be ok with medicare fraud, I reckon that's Danky on his own personally

2 years ago I wouldn't have believed that clubs would be ok with large amounts of injections using a mixture of substances that would have such unknown health side effects when used together.

However I also can't see Dank pulling the Essendon bean counter aside and saying I have a way to make some sweet scratch stitching up Medicare.

 

[Fwaygo]

Didn't The Weapon say that he was told that someone (was it the then CEO - I was too busy focussing on the bombshell re. the location of whitegoods in employee workspaces to remember) had no problem with tax minimisation but they do with tax avoidance. Maybe this was part of the tax minimisation strategy?

 

[BlueWorld]

Geez - for a guy who's team smacked the Bombers on Friday night you certainly are feisty today ??

If only it were his team.

 

[jenny61_99]

obviously I have NFI, but the probably might well make it unsuitable as a test case for S0. That seems kind of legit to me.

Interestingly USADA have a specific section on their website about compounding chemists not changing the status of a drug. ASADA does not.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Interestingly USADA have a specific section on their website about compounding chemists not changing the status of a drug. ASADA does not.

that is interesting. It's always been an Australian loophole as far as I've understood it

 

[Argy]

that is interesting. It's always been an Australian loophole as far as I've understood it

I thought that loophole was dismissed ages ago as a possibility.

 

[DonsRule]

I thought that loophole was dismissed ages ago as a possibility.

I don't think it ever was, had people discuss whether it would stand up, but never 'proven' one way or the other.

Has not made it through any court (whether that be CAS, or a court outside the WADA system), just lots of opinions.

 

[I Rock]

WADA were very quick to announce there was no S0 loophole anywhere. Just after that announcement was when Essendon changes their story to we don't know what was given.

 

[Laphroaig]

Interestingly USADA have a specific section on their website about compounding chemists not changing the status of a drug. ASADA does not.

that is interesting. It's always been an Australian loophole as far as I've understood it

I thought that loophole was dismissed ages ago as a possibility.

I don't think it ever was, had people discuss whether it would stand up, but never 'proven' one way or the other.

Has not made it through any court (whether that be CAS, or a court outside the WADA system), just lots of opinions.

The informal advice I referred to earlier from a couple of friends - a lawyer and a (non compounding) pharmacist was:

From the pharmacist, that the compounding exemption in Australia is written in such a way that it allows wriggle room far beyond it's widely accepted intent, and that certain members of the profession were very happy to sell now and worry about the interpretation of the law if and when it ever became an issue.

The lawyer felt that the intent of the provision appeared to be a limited waiver, but wasn't happy that the perceived intent was properly defined. He declined to predict an outcome if it was tested in court.

 

[DonsRule]

The informal advice I referred to earlier from a couple of friends - a lawyer and a (non compounding) pharmacist was:

From the pharmacist, that the compounding exemption in Australia is written in such a way that it allows wriggle room far beyond it's widely accepted intent, and that certain members of the profession were very happy to sell now and worry about the interpretation of the law if and when it ever became an issue.

The lawyer felt that the intent of the provision appeared to be a limited waiver, but wasn't happy that the perceived intent was properly defined. He declined to predict an outcome if it was tested in court.

Yep, pretty much agree, with all of that.

It does possibly touch on what jenny61_99 refered to earlier compounding in the us with USADA, may have a different legal definition there (not related to anti doping) .