Ian Thorpe

[Ford Fairlane]

What do you think? Did he or didn't he?

You'd hope not, but there's all those familiar refrains ...

I don't know how this happened
I am notified of results for every test but can't remember this
I want this investigated fully to clear my name

Then deflection from the issue, to the 'leak'

 

[shaz63]

With both the hormones being naturally occuring in the human body, Im giving him the benefit of the doubt..

The drug test was taken in May last year the same time he went under the knife for hand surgery. There couldve been something that was given to him to raise the level of the hormones and no-one had bothered to inform him.

I would be very shocked to hear that Thorpie had taken anything at all.

 

[morell]

GUILTY! - only cos I can't stand him.

in all seriousness I really dont know, would be a shame but...

 

[Ford Fairlane]

He would've been tested like crazy when he ws the best swimmer in the world, so you'd think he was clean then.

But this whole set of circumstances is a bit strange. Have they said yet how highly elevated his testosterone levels were?

 

[shaz63]

No, only what was in the paper yesterday where they reported it to be between 4.1 and 6.1..

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

These two stories were on ABC's AM program this morning. Firstly Thorpe's lawyer defending him and Craig Lord the swimming correspondent for the Times asking some pertinent questions, and then Richard Ings, chairman of the Australian Sport Anti-Doping Authority. If you'r to slack to read them click the link and you will see a link to real audio and media player to listen to the interviews.

ASADA may come out of this looking very poorly. There are reasons why this has taken awhile but did ASADA just stop working on it because Thorpe retired and turn a few months into ten? Also it was my understanding that samples had codes on them and only a couple of people not many knew who the the codes belonged to and were not realeased until a positive test was detected. This isn't a postive test, but an abnormal reading as Ings details below and distinguishes between the two, therefore why did so many people at ASADA know it was Thorpe's sample??

Who knows why this has happened but if I was Thorpe I would be pissed off that a) this has got out before he was notified and b) that they have taken 10 months when it should have been 3 or 4. If the abnormal levels occured because of the medication when he had a hand operation then some of the mud will stick.


http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2007/s1887226.htm

Lawyer concerned at Thorpe drug test leak
AM - Monday, 2 April , 2007 08:20:00
Reporter: Paula Kruger
TONY EASTLEY: While swimming champion Ian Thorpe waits on the outcome of further investigations after he recorded unusual levels of two naturally occurring hormones in a urine sample taken last May, other areas of international swimming are under question.

Thorpe has vowed to clear his name and co-operate with an investigation by the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority.

But his lawyer also wants to know what happened to the confidential test process and who leaked the results to the media.

Paula Kruger reports.

PAULA KRUGER: Anti-doping authorities around the world pride themselves on protecting the integrity of sport by catching drug cheats.

But there are a range of rules and codes in place to protect an athlete's reputation until investigations are complete.

When a French newspaper published details of an "adverse analytical result" in a urine sample taken from Ian Thorpe in May last year those rules were breached and the swimmer says his reputation will never be the same.

IAN THORPE: It's already tarnished, it's as simple as that. And ... you know, because ... and you know, quite simply because of this leak.

PAULA KRUGER: The next step for the swimming legend, his doctor and his lawyer, is to go through medical records from last year to try to find a reason for the abnormal levels of testosterone and a hormone related to testosterone production luteinizing hormone.

The case is complicated by the fact that both are naturally occurring hormones and there could be physiological explanations for the higher than normal levels.

Craig Lord is the Swimming Correspondent for the Times and has covered many doping scandals in the sport.

He is currently in Melbourne at the World Swimming Championships and says the way Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority, ASADA, has handled this case may have made things worse for Ian Thorpe.

CRAIG LORD: There were seven cases that are going back to '94 that are very similar in nature to this. Six of them ended up in positive tests and one ended up a negative test. All of those cases took an average of 10 weeks to sort out. This has taken 10 months.

Now, I just thought that on the very day that the name Ian Thorpe popped up on the ASADA system, because they know it from day one, and they knew there was a problem that you know, they'd have kind of locked the doors to the laboratory and said to people, "I'm afraid you're going to have to roll your sleeves up and we're going to have to deal with this. So, kiss goodbye to your families, we've got some work to do". But 10 months on, we're still waiting to find out what the hell is going on.

PAULA KRUGER: Would that slow response have frustrated the world body FINA (Federation Internationale de Natation)?

CRAIG LORD: I'm sure that's why they've sort of sought appeal at CAS (Court of Arbitration for Sport). I'm sure they're thinking you know, we're not letting this go, there may be nothing wrong, there may be something wrong, but we're not prepared to wait more.

You know, is this going on for a year, for another three years. When is the timeline on this? And given that they didn't get any satisfactory answers as I understand it, that it when they decided, ok we're going to CAS on this and we're going to court on the issue.

PAULA KRUGER: While the case is headed for CAS, the Court of Arbitration for Sport, Ian Thorpe's lawyer Tony O'Reilly says he will also be investigating how details of the irregular sample became public when not even the athlete knew of it.

TONY O'REILLY: The breach of confidentiality is a very stark one. These provisions are in the code to protect people when those routine processes are going on. They're to stop this sort of media speculation that damages people's reputations.

They're there for a very good reason and everybody who signs on to the wider code is obliged to comply with it. So, somebody hasn't and that's a very, very serious matter.

TONY EASTLEY: Lawyer Tony O'Reilly ending Paula Kruger's report.


http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2007/s1887228.htm

Anti-Doping Authority responds to Thorpe case criticism
AM - Monday, 2 April , 2007 08:24:00
Reporter: Barbara Miller
TONY EASTLEY: The Australian Sport Anti Doping Authority has been criticised for the time it's taken to resolve the Thorpe case.

Richard Ings is the chairman of ASADA and he's speaking to AM's Barbara Miller.

RICHARD INGS: This sample was collected in May of 2006. It indicated a slightly elevated or unusual levels of two naturally-occurring hormones. That triggers in an examination which involves up to three months worth of follow-up testing, consultation with medical and scientific experts.

Those experts gave us some conflicting opinions as to whether these ... this sample was unusual or not and we don't like to contact an athlete and burden them until we are absolutely sure that we have a question to ask.

BARBARA MILLER: So, what happened after those three months. What's been happening since then?

RICHARD INGS: Well, what's been happening after those three months is we've now accumulated all the information, all the longitudinal testing data. We've sought and resought input from a variety of experts both domestically and internationally on the readings and we're in a position to go and ask the athlete a question.

And the question is very simple. There's no allegation that this athlete has committed a rule violation. So, all the reports of failed drug tests are simply incorrect. We need now to go to the athlete and seek that athlete's input as to whether there may be a medical explanation, a pathological or physiological explanation for these unusual readings.

BARBARA MILLER: Is it, you're saying a coincidence then that you we're going to go to the athlete, just at the time that this story was leaked to the press?

RICHARD INGS: We were planning to go to the athlete this week. We actually had made a decision that we would be going to the athlete early last week. We brought the timeline forward to contact the athlete as a result of the media activity over the weekend, and that was a matter of professional courtesy because until we spoke to the athlete, he was completely unaware of the fact that this sample was being examined.

BARBARA MILLER: Had you decided to wait until the championships in Melbourne were over before telling Ian Thorpe?

RICHARD INGS: No, definitely not. No, it was ... a decision was made last week once all the information had been collated. And you know, our lawyers are working through what we needed to do to communicate with the athlete and his support personnel, and a meeting was going to be scheduled for this week. So, no it is coincidental.

BARBARA MILLER: But FINA (Federation Internationale de Natation) seems to be unhappy with the procedure. What are their concerns?

RICHARD INGS: Well FINA has brought an action against ASADA through the Court of Arbitration for Sport, seeking to clarify the process that we've been working through in managing this sample.

We appreciate and respect the right of FINA to do that, but we're working through the management of this sample based on the information that we received from our independent scientific experts, and we're not going to be coerced or cajoled by any party in assuming or proceeding with any matter are speaking with an athlete until we are absolutely certain of the need to do so.

BARBARA MILLER: Will you be conducting your own investigations into whether the leak might have come from your ranks?

RICHARD INGS: Well, that's something that we're going to be taking on board this morning. We understand that the article has emanated from a French speaking journalist from a Parisian-based sports newspaper, and I am very, very sure that the handful of people in my Canberra-based office who were aware of the details of this matter have not been in contact with a French-speaking journalist from a Parisian-based newspaper to break this story.

TONY EASTLEY: Richard Ings, chairman of the Australian Sport Anti-Doping Authority, speaking to Barbara Miller.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Jacquelin Magnay has written 3 good small articles in today's SMH. She is the blonde reporter from Sydney who appears on Offsiders on the ABC at 10.30am Sunday. She was on the program yesterday.

She was a general writer from the SMH who was looking into dodgey dealings with the Liverpool council, a huge RSL leagues club development which was tied up with the Cantebury Bulldogs management team/board and stumbled onto the Cantebury Bulldogs Salary Cap breach in 2003. Her digging around saw the top side and premiership favourites lose all their competition points. She transferred to the sports section of the SMH in 2005. I have very little respect for her understanding of individual sports themselves, tends to take a righteous matronly attitude towards sportstars, but she does ask good quetions about accountability issues.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/swimming/evidence-key-not-emotion/2007/04/01/1175366083940.html

Evidence key, not emotion
Jacquelin Magnay
April 2, 2007

IAN Thorpe's contentious drug test result 10 months ago moved from speculation in a French newspaper on Saturday to confirmation yesterday that he had an adverse finding.

This is a key point. Thorpe now not only has to declare his innocence, he has to prove it.

Over the next couple of weeks, Thorpe and his lawyer, the Sydney-based drugs expert Tony O'Reilly, will look at the initial requirement from the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority. This is to find any pathological or physiological evidence that could support the laboratory findings of unusually high testosterone and leutinising hormone (LH).

Usually, athletes here try to isolate factors that may have influenced the result: diet, medications, family history. Some have obtained a prior authorised therapeutic use exemption (TUE). These are often in cases involving asthma drugs, not testosterone.

Around May last year, when Thorpe submitted the drug sample, he had broken his hand and was preparing to relocate to the US. He had had a frustrating period, having missed the Commonwealth Games due to fatigue illness.

If Thorpe's pathological or physiological evidence fails to satisfy ASADA, he will be told he has failed an A test.

At this point Thorpe can request a re-testing of the second half of the original sample - the B sample - and he and his lawyer can attend the laboratory testing of it. If the B sample confirms the original diagnosis, his name will be placed on the register of notifiable findings, or, more plainly, be recorded as having a positive drug test to excessive testosterone and LH.

Either ASADA or Swimming Australia will convene a drugs tribunal of three independent people - a doctor, a sports official, a lawyer - who will determine the sanction, usually two years. Thorpe can appeal any decision of this tribunal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Also, Thorpe could choose to bypass the initial drugs tribunal and have the determination made by the CAS in the first instance.

Notwithstanding this process, world body FINA's appeal to the CAS to issue an advisory opinion on whether the levels of testosterone and LH determine a positive test may complicate issues. It is understood that with ASADA's declared intention of pursuing this case and notification to Thorpe, the scientists from both ASADA and FINA are on the same wavelength. There is now no dispute that the case should move forward, and it is likely the CAS hearing may be dropped or postponed indefinitely.


http://www.smh.com.au/news/swimming...double-standard/2007/04/01/1175366083957.html

Hue and cry reveals double standard
Jacquelin Magnay
April 2, 2007

FROM the Prime Minister to the taxi driver in Melbourne ferrying spectators to the world swimming championships, there has been shock, indignation and protest at Ian Thorpe's adverse drug test results.

Amid the character references to Thorpe's vocal anti-drugs stance, his honesty and integrity, there have been disturbing conflicts of interest that could have a strong bearing on the outcome of any potential drugs hearing.

Would there have been such an outcry if the swimmer in question was Chinese? In recent years, there have been five Chinese swimmers rubbed out of the sport for high testosterone levels, as well as four from other countries. Australia's reaction against those swimmers was as damning, and quick, as the strident defence of Thorpe was over the weekend. Many in the swimming community were quick to blame the French journalist, rather than read the story in L'Equipe.

The news was so shocking, it was incomprehensible. Sure, it was totally inappropriate that Thorpe's name was announced at this point in the process, but criticising the process is different to rejecting what it has uncovered.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/swimming/im-in-the-dark/2007/04/01/1175366083935.html

Thorpe: I'm in the dark
Jacquelin Magnay
April 2, 2007

IAN Thorpe has raised questions over why it took the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority nearly 10 months to decide whether to proceed with his case, as well as the timing of its intention to act on the case.

ASADA notified Thorpe only on Saturday morning that the laboratory test of a drugs sample he submitted in May 2006 showed abnormally high levels of testosterone and the testosterone booster luteinizing hormone.

ASADA chairman Richard Ings said: "This is a very complex matter. We had to be satisfied of the need to contact the athlete and to ascertain whether there is any pathological or psychological reasons for the [unusual drug] levels. ASADA is not going to be cajoled or forced before we are absolutely ready."

But the decision to inform Thorpe on Saturday has raised suspicions ASADA was forced to act because of intense international scrutiny from world swimming governing body FINA after the publication of Thorpe's name over the weekend.

Ings admitted that ASADA had intended to send the letter of notification to Thorpe - advising him they required more information about an adverse analytical sample - later this week. He said that particular notification was fast-tracked in light of the international media reports.

But Ings strongly denied ASADA had closed the file on Thorpe or that his agency had ruled Thorpe had no case to answer - even though FINA thought that was ASADA's position. Indeed, the publication of Thorpe's name arose because FINA challenged ASADA's position.

"Based on the FINA doping control review board's professional expertise and recommendation, and according to FINA rules, an appeal has been lodged to CAS [Court of Arbitration for Sport] with the aim of clarifying the issues surrounding this case," FINA executive director Cornel Marculescu said in a statement.

However, several hours after FINA's press conference, ASADA announced it had started procedures by which an athlete has to explain an adverse finding - the first step of a process before declaring a positive drug test.

This means that both ASADA and FINA medical and scientific experts had separately come to the consensus that the case should proceed.

"As required in the WADA code, the next step in the process is ascertaining whether there may be a pathological or physiological explanation for these unusual readings of naturally occurring hormones," Ings said.

The Herald understands that, behind the scenes, scientists and medical experts have been trying to make sense of the test result. Normally, a high testosterone result is accompanied by a low LH result. In Thorpe's sample, levels of both were elevated.

Thorpe said the length of time "was strange, but this is a pretty serious business … this is my sample and I definitely want it to take a long time to be tested. I don't want people cutting corners just to have a faster result … but when I look at that timeframe, I am shocked it has taken a lot longer than what we would all suspect."

Thorpe said he understood ASADA initially thought nothing of the sample, then decided it was going to be further investigated. He said he believed he had received a letter from ASADA after the test, saying it was clear.

"I did get a letter," Thorpe said. "I am confident I got a letter saying that this is not a special sample. So, as soon as I opened the letter, I would have thrown it away."

And this is a story in the SMH about the French reporter Damien Ressiot, a journalist with L'Equipe, and his surprise that Thorpe didn't know about his drug test findings.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/swimming/how-did-he-not-know/2007/04/01/1175366083986.html

How did he not know?
Daniella Miletic
April 2, 2007

THE French journalist who broke the story about Ian Thorpe's adverse drug test was "completely shocked" to learn that the Olympic champion was unaware of the findings until his newspaper made them public.

Damien Ressiot, a journalist with L'Equipe, reported that Thorpe was being investigated for an "adverse analytical result" from a doping test last May.

The journalist has not revealed the source of his information. Thorpe said he was considering legal action over the report. "This is a serious issue … to know that information can be leaked, is a serious breach of what we sign up for," he said. "I don't know what the motivation is of anybody who leaked it … you have to question the personality of someone who would do this."

Ressiot, who is in Melbourne for the world swimming championships, declined an interview. But through a fellow journalist at L'Equipe he expressed dismay at Thorpe's ignorance of the findings before they became public.

Jean Baptiste Renet said: "When he [Ressiot] breaks a story like that, he always thinks about the athlete. He was completely shocked yesterday to learn that Thorpe wasn't aware of the story before reading the newspaper. He thinks that is unbelievable.

"He doesn't feel any fun or pleasure to break a story like that … he has nothing against Thorpe or anything like that," he said. "He doesn't feel any emotion, it is like a routine. This is his job."

In 2005 Ressiot reported that the Tour de France cycling champion Lance Armstrong had taken the banned blood-boosting drug erythropoietin (EPO) during the 1999 race. Armstrong has strenuously denied the claim.

Renet said Ressiot was disgusted by the Australian media's simplification of the story. "He wants it to be known … that he feels some dismay. He doesn't understand the shortcuts made by some Australian media. He never talked about positive drug tests, it is not as easy as that."

L'Equipe reported Thorpe had returned an inconclusive test with abnormally high readings for testosterone and luteinising hormone, both banned substances.

 

[Macca19]

Nah, cant see him being guilty.

 

[*PAF]

He also got tested a few times after May with no adverse findings, so nah not guilty IMO.
However I'd like to know why swimmers nowadays, including Thorpe, have exaggerated features such as big lips or big noses etc.
They must be fed on a high diet of non organically farmed chickens from a young age I reckon.

 

[morell]

However I'd like to know why swimmers nowadays, including Thorpe, have exaggerated features such as big lips or big noses etc.

Yet are strangely lacking in the budgie smuggler department