Mega Thread All AOD-9604 Discussion - Still Illegal but ASADA will not press charges on AOD9604 - McDevitt

[Oneiros]

Yep - but look at all the imbeciles here who think they KNOW what has happened.

I'm not sure whether to be angry at them or embarassed for them; we've got a toxic, slanderous and 'suggestive' media leading a whole bunch of sheep.

What do you mean THINK - I definitely KNOW what has happened here. What has happened is that Caroline Wilson has made a freaking fortune.

 

[Barkly St End]

WADA sit each September to discuss substances that go on the S lists. If AOD goes onto the S2 list then, any use of ADO9406 from that point will be addressed by that part of the code.

S2 contains a general test, and many have put forward strong views that AOD meets that test, therefore, ASADA is already in a position to determine whether S2 addreses S0 or not.

ASADA does not have to wait for WADA to specifically list AOD - the general test contained in S2 is sufficient.

 

[Southern Urchins]

If Hird & co. have been relying on an email from the drug manufacturer as the "evidence" that can save them, then they are more deluded than we thought. Goodnight essendon

Mxett said it's not a PED, so nothing to see here. Letter or no letter.
I'm shocked to be quoting your post.

 

[Gavstar]

Because it is a new substance, it couldn't be assessed under S.2's similar chemical structure test by simple expedient of not knowing what the chemical structure is. Clearing it under Section 2 is due to a lack of information, which is why S.0 exists.

Its a peptide fragment of human growth hormone the structure is known.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1549776

 

[Oneiros]

Fraid so

Its not too late to return to your senses - BSE talks a good game but the thrust of his argument is simply madness.

 

[The Goon]

The great thing about footy as a passion is that when it all turns to shit you can simply shrug your shoulders, admit it's just a game, and focus on the important things in life for a while.

No shame in that even if anonymous people on an Internet forum might try and tell you otherwise.

 

[Sloth]

I thought according to Fox's top journalist ASADA said it was legal?

Not legal...just not on the banned list. Still prohibited though (because it is not for human use)

 

[Mattrox]

It's complicated and sensitive.

There is an ointment for that now.












Becareful it could contain AOD.

 

[Oneiros]

Its a peptide fragment of human growth hormone the structure is known.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1549776

They know the chemical structure of hGH, but that does not mean that they would at that stage know enough about AOD-9604 to be able to conclusively categorise the substance. They may yet add it to the S.2 banned list if it turns out to, in fact, have a similar structure to an already banned agent. But until it is explicitly banned, it cannot be cleared by it. It is a fundamental misunderstanding of the code to interpret any section as clearing a substance or method. But with so many substances on (and off) the market they cannot assess them all for categorisation in an expedient manner. S.0 exists entirely because of this inability.

 

[Brown Bottle]

I would never put my professional sporting career at risk

 

[Barkly St End]

They know the chemical structure of hGH, but that does not mean that they would at that stage know enough about AOD-9604 to be able to conclusively categorise the substance. They may yet add it to the S.2 banned list if it turns out to, in fact, have a similar structure to an already banned agent. But until it is explicitly banned, it cannot be cleared by it.

S2 contains a general test, a very broadly worded test - so AOD does not have to be explicity listed in S2 to be addressed by S2.

 

[fleabitten]

The great thing about footy as a passion is that when it all turns to shit you can simply shrug your shoulders, admit it's just a game, and focus on the important things in life for a while.

No shame in that even if anonymous people on an Internet forum might try and tell you otherwise.

I think as Tigers we understand this better than anyone. I do feel for the honest Bombers supporters who are having trouble coming to terms with what's been happening at their club.

 

[GarnerSmash]

S2 contains a general test, and many have put forward strong views that AOD meets that test, therefore, ASADA is already in a position to determine whether S2 addreses S0 or not.

ASADA does not have to wait for WADA to specifically list AOD - the general test contained in S2 is sufficient.

As WADA state to determine if a specific substance is to be considered banned there must medical or other scientific evidence, pharmacological effect or experience that the substance or method, alone or in combination with other substances or methods, has the potential to enhance or enhances sport performance.

I'm curious as to what kind of test can ASADA apply for an unknown substance that can determine this over the phone?

 

[Oneiros]

S2 contains a general test, a very broadly worded test - so AOD does not have to be explicity listed in S2 to be addressed by S2.

As previously mooted - there is no point to engaging you on this subject and I will not spend my time doing so.

- Although Gavstar may still be saved, so if he wants to reply

 

[Barkly St End]

As WADA state to determine if a specific substance is to be considered banned there must medical or other scientific evidence, pharmacological effect or experience that the substance or method, alone or in combination with other substances or methods, has the potential to enhance or enhances sport performance.

I'm curious as to what kind of test can ASADA apply for an unknown substance that can determine this over the phone?

S2 contains the general test - very broadly worded.

That's not me talking - it's in S2 itself.

As Gavstar says:

Its a peptide fragment of human growth hormone the structure is known.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1549776

So ASADA have all the information they need to reference S2, and S2 alone.

 

[Barkly St End]

As previously mooted - there is no point to engaging you on this subject and I will not spend my time doing so.

- Although Gavstar may still be saved, so if he wants to reply

Gavstar is backing up what I have been trying to say since day one: S2 addresses AOD.

 

[GarnerSmash]

S2 contains the general test - very broadly worded.

That's not me talking - it's in S2 itself.

As Gavstar says:

Its a peptide fragment of human growth hormone the structure is known.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1549776

So ASADA have all the information they need to reference S2, and S2 alone.

Can you point me to a link between that article and the chemical structure of AOD9406?

 

[Barkly St End]

Can you point me to a link between that article and the chemical structure of AOD9406?

It's Gavstar's area of expertise, not mine - it's all gobbledegook to me.

 

[Gavstar]

Gavstar is backing up what I have been trying to say since day one: S2 addresses AOD.

BSE has an arguable point because of the broadness of the definitions relating to growth factors, that with my knowledge of biochemistry and the law may be a winning argument in court. This would be decided on the merits of the arguments in court should either party choose to contest them there.

It still doesn't help if AOD-9604 was administered via I.V. drip and >50 ml (total volume including saline) was infused as this would be caught by M2. Likewise if S2 substances Hexarelin and Thymosin - Beta 4 were administered.

None of this impacts the disrepute charges that the AFL may bring as they may stand the test solely on the findings of the Ziggy report.

 

[STFU Donnie]

From the article:

Investigators have also obtained text messages from Essendon's former high performance coach Dean Robinson in which he cautioned Mr Dank that some of the peptides the sports scientist was considering using at the club could potentially break the anti-doping code.

Sounds like Robinson has second thoughts, but Dank was gung-ho. Did he also text Hird with these concerns? If so, and Hird ignored them ... ?

 

[Gavstar]

Can you point me to a link between that article and the chemical structure of AOD9406?

Crystal structure shows how hGH is structured, AOD-9604 is a portion of this structure.

How about this link

http://www.chemblink.com/products/221231-10-3.htm

 

[teknodeejay]

Take it for what you will... Just had a lunch chat with a mate who's a PT and who does a lot of work with body builders around the Ascot Vale and Essendon area (not that it means much) and he said that he and his colleagues/clients were commenting last year that they thought the Bombers were on something different when they were blowing up on soft tissue injuries, because in their eyes it generally doesn't happen to that extent unless you're really pushing them beyond natural growth... Anyway he was more concerned that in learning about the substance(s) suggested - and believes he can reasonably guess at some - that he's more concerned about what they could be doing outside of just muscle/injury assistance. That doing what they did in the alleged extremities (which to him make sense given the visible circumstances) could certainly result in acceleration of cancer cells. His concern is not about what penalties may or may not come, but what health implications these young men could quite possibly have in their futures. Refers the recent reports of Isaac Gordon to be an example of his fear. He's an Essendon supporter and believes the young players especially simply don't question "do this, take this, receive this injection". Says if it was his son in these conditions, anger would only be the start how he'd feel. He doesn't care about the legality so much, just the players health.

Like I said take it, dismiss it, TLDR or been there discussed that, I just thought it interesting enough to share.

 

[Jamie007]

So hang on. Essendon supporters are telling us that it isn't performance enhancing, yet the firm who own the product told essendon last year that if it was legal, body builders would be using a lot more of the stuff.
Is this the same firm who are now saying that the drug is not very effective (or is that some other company??).
Makes u wonder if they are in bed with essendon and trying to protect them and themselves.
Essendon are gone.

 

[2DMB]

I think the challenge itself was more to 'call out' a ridiculous statement (which it was), but your thinking has some merit.

I personally won't be going anywhere, but some might - who knows.

Certainly I know quite a few non-Essendon supporters that have been.... ummm..... vocal on this board - they would very quickly retreat into nothing and would be hounded mercilessly should Essendon largely 'get off'.

I love it how Essendon supporters (and the club) have shifted from saying they would be found completely innocent to statements like this.

Does "largely get off" still mean you are found guilty of cheating? Would only 5 players getting suspended constitute "largely getting off" What about the integrity of the game and the damage you have done?

It seems the issues has got lost in the last desperate throws of denial

 

[Mofra]

I think the chances of there not being an Essendon next year are vanishingly remote unless either a) there are still some wild bombshells under wraps or b) the fight to prevent loss of points/players suffers a spectacular backfire (arguably more likely than point a). A less likely scenario even than Essendon being totally cleared on all charges, for instance (in my opinion, based on the weight of articles we've seen to date).

There is no way the AFL will want to forgo media revenue from havign Essendon sit out the competition for a year. Money talks.

If players are suspended, the AFL will make arrangements to ensure Essendon can field a side every week.