ABC's 7:30 on New Hird/Dank evidence - 11 April; 3AW/9 Report Text Msg Contents

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Can you honestly believe he will tell the truth today? He is a Liar,Liar,Liar about coaching the bombers. He knew months before the board sacked Knights.They sucked up to Hird,who told us repeatedly,"I will not be coaching the bombers"..Sure,such an honest person..I hope the sinkhole gets bigger to fit him in too..:rolleyes:
And remeber,he doesn't have to swear to tell the truth, the whole truth,and nothing but the truth,he is very lucky he can say what he likes to cover his bum..
 
RussellEbertHandball said:
If as reported, Dank would ring ASADA about a drug and record his telephone conversation, then he was smart enough to CYA.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily.

The regulator I used to deal with virtually said this verbatim every time:

"Now RFCTiger74, you know what I'm going to say. From the information you have provided it appears that this product complies with XXXX regulation. However no definitive assessment cannot be made without a proper inspection, and its the duty of the seller to ensure the product fully complies to XXXX regulation".

Asked if I sent the item in, gave them test reports, would it change things. Answer was as per above.

They don't commit 100% because if you lie to them, or more importantly - find a loophole they want to shut, they still have enough rope to hang you.

I won't say its impossible, but I've dealt with a number of regulators (ACCC, TGA, FSANZ, Customs, DAFF, ACMA), and they all bend in knots to avoid saying "yes that product complies". I suspect all they said is its not on the banned list (as this is published so they can commit to it), and Dank has run with it. Thats just my guess though
 
LuvMyHawks said:
Can you honestly believe he will tell the truth today? He is a Liar,Liar,Liar about coaching the bombers. He knew months before the board sacked Knights.They sucked up to Hird,who told us repeatedly,"I will not be coaching the bombers"..Sure,such an honest person..I hope the sinkhole gets bigger to fit him in too..:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Yeah, because players and coaches of sports world wide never deny plans about movements to other clubs :rolleyes:
 

Log in to remove this ad.

rfctiger74 said:
Not necessarily.

The regulator I used to deal with virtually said this verbatim every time:

"Now RFCTiger74, you know what I'm going to say. From the information you have provided it appears that this product complies with XXXX regulation. However no definitive assessment cannot be made without a proper inspection, and its the duty of the seller to ensure the product fully complies to XXXX regulation".

Asked if I sent the item in, gave them test reports, would it change things. Answer was as per above.

They don't commit 100% because if you lie to them, or more importantly - find a loophole they want to shut, they still have enough rope to hang you.

I won't say its impossible, but I've dealt with a number of regulators (ACCC, TGA, FSANZ, Customs, DAFF, ACMA), and they all bend in knots to avoid saying "yes that product complies". I suspect all they said is its not on the banned list (as this is published so they can commit to it), and Dank has run with it. Thats just my guess though
Click to expand...

ASADA isn't a regulator like the TGA is, so their officials will have a different level of CYA, compared to a government regulator.

Then again have you ever dealt with the Tax Office?? Speak to 4 different officials about the same problem and you probably get at least 5 different answers.
 
mxett said:
It has already undergone 10 years of clinical trials with no known adverse affect. Its reportedly used in the body building to eliminate pockets of fat. I would hardly say its use constitutes experimentation
Click to expand...

It was 10 years in development which includes initial development, testing on mice, development of the product and human trial, which constituted a 2 year period. There were 6 trial in stage 2 with periods of 12 and 24 weeks of treatment. There were 925 subjects in total of which 536 were talking the substance with the remainder in the placebo group.

Stage 1 was an assessment on safety for the purposes of proceeding the trial. 100 healthy subjects were chosen that were not on any other medication. There were side effects but no chronic or acute side effects were observed. On that basis it was classified as "generally safe" in the confines of further trials.

Stage 2 was an assessment on effectiveness and safety with generally healthy but overweight people not on other medications. It was found to be effective over the placebo group but not hugely so. The TGA refused approval to proceed to stage 3 on the basis of insufficient empirical data due to a small sample size, in effect it needed to be tested on more people, again there were little acute or chronic adverse effects. The company decided to terminate further development as they had spent $50m and the investors were not convinced of the commercial viability.

Stage 3 had it proceeded would have been a real patients study where it would have looked at the interaction with other medications and the long term effects as to date the longest trial lasted for 24 weeks.

In relation to your safety point, it was classified as generally safe in the control group of healthy individuals on no medication and on short term use. It was not found to be safe in otherwise healthy obiese individuals on no medication as the sample size was to small to determine such, even though it was anticipated to be so. It was not found to be safe in long term use or with use with other medications because it simply wasn't tested for therefore that conclusion cannot be reached even though it was anticipated to be so.

Basically it was part way through the second step of a three stage process. Now if your taking your health cues from bodybuilders, I'd be concerned.
 
Chameleon75 said:
It was 10 years in development which includes initial development, testing on mice, development of the product and human trial, which constituted a 2 year period. There were 6 trial in stage 2 with periods of 12 and 24 weeks of treatment. There were 925 subjects in total of which 536 were talking the substance with the remainder in the placebo group.

Stage 1 was an assessment on safety for the purposes of proceeding the trial. 100 healthy subjects were chosen that were not on any other medication. There were side effects but no chronic or acute side effects were observed. On that basis it was classified as "generally safe" in the confines of further trials.

Stage 2 was an assessment on effectiveness and safety with generally healthy but overweight people not on other medications. It was found to be effective over the placebo group but not hugely so. The TGA refused approval to proceed to stage 3 on the basis of insufficient empirical data due to a small sample size, in effect it needed to be tested on more people, again there were little acute or chronic adverse effects. The company decided to terminate further development as they had spent $50m and the investors were not convinced of the commercial viability.

Stage 3 had it proceeded would have been a real patients study where it would have looked at the interaction with other medications and the long term effects as to date the longest trial lasted for 24 weeks.

In relation to your safety point, it was classified as generally safe in the control group of healthy individuals on no medication and on short term use. It was not found to be safe in otherwise healthy obiese individuals on no medication as the sample size was to small to determine such, even though it was anticipated to be so. It was not found to be safe in long term use or with use with other medications because it simply wasn't tested for therefore that conclusion cannot be reached even though it was anticipated to be so.

Basically it was part way through the second step of a three stage process. Now if your taking your health cues from bodybuilders, I'd be concerned.
Click to expand...

Have you got a link for this information? I'd be interested to read it.

If true doc Reid will have a lot to answer for then because the leaked email suggest he was the one responsible for checking and then permitting the use of proposed supplements
 
I reckon the list is strong and ready to achieve special things.

Shame if someone has stuffed it up.
 
mxett said:
Have you got a link for this information? I'd be interested to read it.

If true doc Reid will have a lot to answer for then because the leaked email suggest he was the one responsible for checking and then permitting the use of proposed supplements
Click to expand...

I downloaded the study reports, won't let me link from my phone. It's not one document, if you Google aod9604 clinical trials the researchers have posted their findings.

I'm not contending that the substance isn't safe, in likelihood the data was encouraging. Maybe because I have a scientific background I view things through that prism. So if a hypothesis is substance x is safe and there's insufficient data I default to therefore it isn't, but that doesn't mean it isn't safe it just means there's not the data to support that statement, it's the default position I take being a conservative one.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

RussellEbertHandball said:
ASADA isn't a regulator like the TGA is, so their officials will have a different level of CYA, compared to a government regulator.

Then again have you ever dealt with the Tax Office?? Speak to 4 different officials about the same problem and you probably get at least 5 different answers.
Click to expand...

Actually I dealt with the ATO on a HECS interpretation (submitted one years tax a year late - earned SFA on that year, significantly more on the current year, but they wanted to deduct my debt for the first year based upon the higher income bracket of the second).

Took over 6 months to get a formal reply (plenty of non-commital verbals in the interim though), at which time I had missed the lodgement deadline for my second return, and they then wanted to penalize me for late payment of an overdue tax bill (despite them telling me not to lodge until a decision was made). Told them to GTFOOH, and took another 3 months to get them to back down

Bloody ATO :mad:
 
Chameleon75 said:
I downloaded the study reports, won't let me link from my phone. It's not one document, if you Google aod9604 clinical trials the researchers have posted their findings.

I'm not contending that the substance isn't safe, in likelihood the data was encouraging. Maybe because I have a scientific background I view things through that prism. So if a hypothesis is substance x is safe and there's insufficient data I default to therefore it isn't, but that doesn't mean it isn't safe it just means there's not the data to support that statement, it's the default position I take being a conservative one.
Click to expand...
I just struggle to believe the clubs medical staff including doc Reid would ok untested drugs. Goes against everything they represent.
 
mxett said:
Agree. It would be a real shame given they seem to be building a decent team. Imagine a 2yr ban for 40 players in the prime of their careers. Some massive law suites would follow
Click to expand...

I'm curious why you think there was a perceived 'rush' to get Essendon firing?

It appears the list was naturally evolving towards success, and really just experienced the normal hiccups as a list consolidates and matures in age...

Things like leaking goals, concentration lapses.

I'm still not convinced that Knights was a poor coach, the Cats think he is a great leader of young men.
 
mxett said:
I just struggle to believe the clubs medical staff including doc Reid would ok untested drugs. Goes against everything they represent.
Click to expand...

There may be other studies done, I just looked at the Australian ones as they relate to the TGA, but I know that they were looking at it in Canada and the US, maybe they proceeded with further testing, I know it's being marketed in the US as Lipotropin as it's a fragment of hgh and the name is derived from that fragment, it was shown to have fewer side effects than hgh, particularly in relation to cardiotoxity.

I'm not trying to prosecute the case, I just don't think the Australian trials that finished in 2006 we're sufficiently advanced enough to draw a definitive conclusion.
 
campbell said:
not sure doc reid did, hence done off site, overseen by an mo who didnt actually see the players....etc etc
Click to expand...
Well the leaked email demanded he be the key decision maker in the approval of supplements. He was the person who was to examine the efficacy of all proposed supplements. If he was included in this email then he was aware of plans to begin a new supplement regime. If he was then frozen out but knew of the use of banned substances he is also implicated because of this knowledge and his role as chief medical officer. As mike Sheehan has said, if foul play was occurring during his watch he should have made a bigger noise and even resigned.
 
mysainters said:
I'm curious why you think there was a perceived 'rush' to get Essendon firing?

It appears the list was naturally evolving towards success, and really just experienced the normal hiccups as a list consolidates and matures in age...

Things like leaking goals, concentration lapses.

I'm still not convinced that Knights was a poor coach, the Cats think he is a great leader of young men.
Click to expand...
I think knights was one dimensional in his game plan and approach. He also seemed pretty stubborn despite results that numerous games where his game plan broke down. He lost all support from fans, and probably the club, and his positional became untenable.
 
mxett said:
I just struggle to believe the clubs medical staff including doc Reid would ok untested drugs. Goes against everything they represent.
Click to expand...


Yes. But as the reverence and acquiesence shown to James Hird by anyone with Red & Black in their veins becomes ever more apparent, it kind of illustrates how respected, experienced and talented people did unusual things that they normally wouldn't.

People like Evans, Reid, Robson etc seem to have either believed implicitly in or not been able to say no to James Hird.
 
TerryWallet said:
Yes. But as the reverence and acquiesence shown to James Hird by anyone with Red & Black in their veins becomes ever more apparent, it kind of illustrates how respected, experienced and talented people did unusual things that they normally wouldn't.

People like Evans, Reid, Robson etc seem to have either believed implicitly in or not been able to say no to James Hird.
Click to expand...
I don't believe that for a minute. Bomber fans may idolise Hird but people at the club are there to do a job. doc Reid was doctor there since Hird was a toddler. He commands reverence in his field and I cannot believe he would deliberately be involved in actions that would put the club and his patients at risk because Hird says so.
 
TerryWallet said:
Yes. But as the reverence and acquiesence shown to James Hird by anyone with Red & Black in their veins becomes ever more apparent, it kind of illustrates how respected, experienced and talented people did unusual things that they normally wouldn't.

People like Evans, Reid, Robson etc seem to have either believed implicitly in or not been able to say no to James Hird.
Click to expand...

I too can be critical of hird, but come on, he's not the "penguin".
 
mxett said:
I don't believe that for a minute. Bomber fans may idolise Hird but people at the club are there to do a job. doc Reid was doctor there since Hird was a toddler. He commands reverence in his field and I cannot believe he would deliberately be involved in actions that would put the club and his patients at risk because Hird says so.
Click to expand...

I realise you don't believe it. But there is no way what happened at Essendon happens unless it was James Hird pushing for it.

No way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

CASEYS9420
Moved Thread James Hird - is it time to give him a second chance at coaching an AFL club? Gil says yes! - The PEDs Forum Version
2 3 4
Replies
88
Views
6K
Caligo
Caligo

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top