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

[BACCS]

One thing is for sure, everyone on here should be experts in the classifications of drugs by WADA after this investigation! No excuses if you don't know your S0s from your S9s from your S2s..... it's basic knowledge now.

 

[the distributer]

Not banned.

What about s0? Not relevant

Oh, they got proof of this?

 

[Kerleys Ghost]

No semantics at all. You obviously don't understand how ASADA work. They cannot authorise drugs for use, only advise if they are banned.

sigh...

anything without govt. approval is banned by asada.

anything illegal outside of sports is banned by asada

so if they advise you that something is "not banned", then they have officially "permitted it's use" in sport.


aod is banned, theres no evidence that asada informed otherwise, essendon are screwed. stop being such a tool, it's obvious to everyone except your s**tstain of a club.

 

[mxett]

Oh, they got proof of this?

Told to multiple parties including an afl representative in February this year

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Sorry but this is incorrect. ASADAs own website says they never advise substances for use, only what has been banned

Why did they put out the statement then? They may as well put out a statement saying they never say anything is permitted!!

 

[I Rock]

They advised it was banned under S0 in 2012 and then in 2013 told people a long and convoluted reason why it was not banned. Is that the answer you were looking for? I think it's the answer many posters in here are looking for. Really doesn't seem right though does it?

My head hurts

 

[kfc1]

What a paid EFC consultant says on a program aired by one of EFC's official sponsors is wide open to interpretation.

But what AFL mouthpiece and serial liar Carowhine Wilthen writes is gospel? Got it.

 

[cfc to aufc]

Gerard created this level of uproar about five weeks ago And we have seen what transpired after that

 

[Alfred E Neuman]

Look it's clear that ASADA has not said 'you guys can take AOD-9604' But it seems as though they have also said (i'm paraphrasing) ' AOD-9604 is not banned' So where does that leave us?

 

[the distributer]

Told to multiple parties including an afl representative in February this year

cheers. carry on with your business then.

 

[yebiga]

you again?

show me where they ever said that once.

there are plenty of sources where asada explicitly state that aod-9604 has been banned since jan 1 2011, and that they have never advised anyone to the contrary.

show us one scrap of information that in any way proves asada told essendon it was not banned.

provide something, or stop posting this shit. youre embarassing yourself.

I what is your problem, there was afl doctor on 360tonight stated that is what WADA and ASADA confirmed : not prohibited

Yes the doctor has been sent down to Essendon by the afl to placate the parents and family of players who are concerned

Unbelievable! You rabbit on and on about nonsense
You want some reassurance form WADA and ASADA as if Essendon were lance Armstrong

Really get a grip

 

[Hearts to hearts]

Told to multiple parties including an afl representative in February this year

Before it was given to players would be better.

 

[mxett]

sigh...

anything without govt. approval is banned by asada.

anything illegal outside of sports is banned by asada

so if they advise you that something is "not banned", then they have officially "permitted it's use" in sport.


aod is banned, theres no evidence that asada informed otherwise, essendon are screwed. stop being such a tool, it's obvious to everyone except your s**tstain of a club.

An afl representative has stated it. There's your proof unless youre claiming he's a liar

 

[Murphkreuzmitch]

Is it delusion or lack of comprehension ability that prevents you from digesting the information?

It's all laid out in plain language for the general football watching moron.

Watch it again and you may find your question in answered.

AOD does not fall under s2, it does not mean it is not prohibited under s0. Don't worry about what is on 360, read the clause for s0. any substances that have not passed clinical trials are prohibited under s0. Just because it is not banned as a peptide this does not mitigate the fact it was not approved for human use..There is no exception to this.

one side of the fence is essendon saying but they said it was ok, dank said so, our consultant said so

vs

asada/ wada saying it is not permitted, they have never given such advice, they have put in writing that it is banned in various statements, they have also got it in the code if it is not approved for human use it is category s0 which corresponds to the reports on AOD.

But apparently another essendon paid consultant going on tv show trying to get a scoop is a reliable source..

The players deserve to be cleared but if essendon use these types of arguments good luck to them in trying..The point I am trying to make is that ASADA & WADA are willing to refer to documented factual evidence, Essendon are basing there argument on here say from a questionable internally paid consultant..

Get it now..

 

[grrofunger]

Look it's clear that ASADA has not said 'you guys can take AOD-9604' But it seems as though they have also said (i'm paraphrasing) ' AOD-9604 is not banned' So where does that leave us?

with no idea until the final hearing and penalties(if any) are handed down

 

[TerryWallet]

He was and I believe still is an afl employee.

He is a paid EFC consultant.

 

[jenny61_99]

No.
That absolutely makes no sense at all.

Please explain to me why Irene Mazzoni (on February 2 2012) of WADA told Dank that it wasn't banned under S2 BUT to check with local authorities as it may still be banned under S0. She knew it was possibly S0 but wasn't sure it it had been recently approved by the TGA and hence to check.

The only plausible explanation is that it was still banned under S0 just as WADA has said it has been since January 2011. All this other stuff you are writing makes no sense at all.


According to your logic, I can invent a peptide that is a PED and because nobody has heard of it I can get it passed as not banned under S2 and because it is a peptide it is not considered under S0.

Sorry, but that again defies all logic.

What has happened here is a stuff up of major proportions by the AFL and ASADA. That is all.

Hang on. Dank emailed WADA in Feb 2012? Didn't Doc Reid put an immediate stop to the program in January?

 

[Linda Lovelace]

The old 360 AOD-9604 'revelation', eh?

Yawn.

 

[Murphkreuzmitch]

An afl representative has stated it. There's your proof unless youre claiming he's a liar

paid by EFC...

 

[I Rock]

Look it's clear that ASADA has not said 'you guys can take AOD-9604' But it seems as though they have also said (i'm paraphrasing) ' AOD-9604 is not banned' So where does that leave us?

In the not permitted category; like most of the substances under S0.

 

[lones37]

Told to multiple parties including an afl representative in February this year

Makes no difference.

Wada will ensure the AFL follows the code.

The AFL said in its interim report AOD is banned.

Once its over WADA can, and probably will, act.

 

[mxett]

Before it was given to players would be better.

And dank claims this was the case, as do the club doctors from 2 clubs.

 

[the distributer]

I what is your problem, there was afl doctor on 360tonight stated that is what WADA and ASADA confirmed : not prohibited

Yes the doctor has been sent down to Essendon by the afl to placate the parents and family of players who are concerned

Unbelievable! You rabbit on and on about nonsense
You want some reassurance form WADA and ASADA as if Essendon were lance Armstrong

Really get a grip

Deep down most people want the doomsday scenario, they'll never admit though.

 

[jacko57]

Let's just assume for a minute that AOD9604 is somehow all safe & clear...................even if that's the case, does that mean that Essendon is off the hook?

Or were there other substances taken that were definitely banned? Or just as bad, were other substances taken that Essendon kept no record of, and can't be sure if they were banned or not, safe or not?

 

[mxett]

Makes no difference.

Wada will ensure the AFL follows the code.

The AFL said in its interim report AOD is banned.

Once its over WADA can, and probably will, act.

Didnt WADA advise dank to proceed to ASADA? Seems like they allowed this situation. Good luck with that