Bomber smuggly stands in front of the press and states that no one has proven that illegal performance enhancing drugs were given to the players. Well Bomber I hope you, Hird, Corcoran and the good old Doc are proud of youselves.The only problem is that no one has definitively proven that the players were not given performance enhancing experimental drugs. What does it tell you about a club that goes to the lengths to protect the instigators of a conspiracy then spend millions to protect the same people?
Instead of being so smug, maybe you should stand before your players and their partners and parents and explain to them what efforts you have taken to find out what was injected into the lab rats who were the players. But I suppose you don't care, because you got off the charge and your precious reputation is now in tact. They are the ones who will have to deal with the consequences. The spin merchants will no doubt argue in 10 or 20 years that there is no conclusive proof or link between the supplement regimen and any disease. The same line that the Cigarette companies successfully used for 30 years.
The letter from Doc Reid unravelled your carefully orchestrated plans and then we had the sight of James Hird trying to claim legal privilege as everyone shook their collective heads.
I would have been impressed if the Essendon hierarchy or even the AFL had sued Danks & Robinson and compelled them to tell a court under oath what they had administered to the players. The problem with this course of action is that other dirty little secrets may come out, like who really knew what was being injected. No leave it to the players to do it and let them incur the costs and ridicule.
This story is far from finished and when Danks comes clean I would not be surprised if 30 Essendon players are issued with infraction notices. If Danks reveals that he injected players with drugs which were banned at the behest of the coaching staff then we will see how smug Hird and Bomber and are when the truth comes out.
****************************************************************************
Dear James/Paul
I have some fundamental problems being club doctor at present.
This particularly applies to the administration of supplements.
Although we have been giving supplements for approximately three months, despite repeated requests as to exactly what we are giving our players and the literature related to this, have at no time been given that until last Sunday [15 January 2012]. Last week the players were given subcutaneous injections, not by myself, and I had no idea that this was happening and also what drug was involved.
It appears to me that in Sydney with Rugby League the clubs do not answer to the governing body (e.g. A.F.L.). It seems that their whole culture is based on trying to beat the system as are close to the edge as one can. It is my belief in A.F.L. that we should be winning flags by keeping a drug free culture.
It is all very well to say this is not banned and that is not banned but for example, the injection that we have given our players subcutaneously, was a drug called AOD/9604, is an Oligomeric Peptide. This drug is derived from the growth hormone. This molecule has been constructed so it has removed what we call IGF1, which is part of the growth hormone that causes muscle and organ growth and bone length and photosynthesis.
It is at the moment used for fat metabolism but also bone strength in children and may have some side effects that may be beneficial in bone growth. This to me just seem ludicrous at this stage where the only trials I have got are on how to lost weight and fat around the abdomen.
If we are resorting to deliver this altered growth hormone molecule, I think we are playing at the edge and this will read extremely badly in the press for our club and for the benefits and also for side effects that are not known in the long term, I have trouble with all these drugs.
I am still not sure whether AOD/9604 is approved by the drug authorities in Australia at this stage. Just because it is not classified as illegal, doesn’t mean that it can be used freely in the community, it cannot. The other interesting thing about AOD/9604, is that its market in America is in body builders. This also should raise a red flag if we are worried about perception.
When it comes to Actovegin, this has been used around the world for many years. There is some flimsy evidence that it may help in speeding up the healing of tendons when they are damaged, though after speaking to radiologists, the recent opinion is that platelets and one’s own blood, probably does a better job.
We are claiming that we should use it as a recovery agent. To me it seems ludicrous that a few mls of calf’s blood spun down, is going to give you a concentration of growth factors and other factors that would speed up recovery.
I am very frustrated by this and now feel I am letting the club down by not automatically approving of these things.
I need to collect my thoughts as these drugs have been given without my knowledge.
I am sure Steve Danks believes that what we are doing is totally ethical and legal, however, one wonders whether if you take a long stance and look at this from a distance, whether you would want your children being injected with a derivative hormone that is not free to the community and whether calf’s blood, that has been used for many years and is still doubted by most doctors, is worth pursuing.
Kind Regards
Dr. Bruce Reid
M.B.B.S.
Senior Medical Officer