TechPowered By

More tech

Schleck doping use of Xipamid unlikely, expert says

By:
Cycling News
Published:
January 16, 2013, 18:52,
Updated:
January 16, 2013, 18:52
Edition:
First Edition Cycling News, Thursday, January 17, 2013
An unhappy Frank Schleck during the Giro d'Italia

An unhappy Frank Schleck during the Giro d'Italia

  • An unhappy Frank Schleck during the Giro d'Italia
  • Fränk Schleck was looking serious at the presentation of the Tour de France in Liège
  • Frank Schleck pores over the map with Philippe Maertens.

view thumbnail gallery

Cannot rule out the possibility of “manipulation” though

It is unlikely that Fränk Schleck used Xipamide for doping purposes or to cover up the use of some other product or doping method, according to the expert opinion submitted to the Luxembourg National Anti-Doping Agency. However, the report did not exclude the possibility.

The five page report was prepared by Dr. Hans Geyer, deputy director of the WADA-approved laboratory in Cologne. Tageblatt.lu obtained and released the report. The ALAD has indicated it will release its final decision on the Schleck case on January 30 .

Schleck tested positive during the Tour de France for the diuretic Xipamide, which can be used to conceal other doping products. He has denied doping.

Geyer concluded that “it cannot be excluded that an effective dose of Xipamide has been administrered for manipulation purposes between the 6th of July and the 14th of July.

“Several aspects of plausibility should be taken into consideration: 1. the application of a diuretic during a stage race leads to a decrease of performance by dehydration. 2. during the Tour de France many doping controls can be expected, where diuretics can be detected and 3. the use of a diuretic for weight loss reason makes no sense during a stage race.

“Therefore the scenario of an application of a low, non-effective dose of Xipamide is more likely that the manipulation scenario with an effective does of Xipamide.”

Schleck's urine test showed a concentration of about 100 pg/ml which  is “an extremely low concentration,” Geyer noted. He said that he is not aware of any studies done on the possible effects of such a low dosage.

It was also not possible to exclude the possibility of the use of another prohibited product or method, he said. “The prohibited substance might have been already eliminated when the diuretic is administrered or 2. the diuretic is detectable for a longer time period as the other doping substance or the effects of a prohibited method (eg atypical blood values).”

Geyer also noted that it was possible that a contaminated food supplement had contained the banned product.

The drug is classified in the World Anti-Doping Agency code as a "specified substance". Under the code, if an athlete can prove unintended ingestion of specified substances, the required two-year ban can be reduced to anything between a warning and a one-year ban.

 

mgmecham More than 1 year ago
This is not that hard to figure out. He took Xipamide during the season to lose weight and then donated blood for a transfusion that was transfused during the Tour. Duh.
Tommy Nickels More than 1 year ago
There's no doubt he took it, but it's not likely that it was to lose weight. Losing water weight to increase performance is counterproductive (i.e. it's dehydration and very different from losing fat) and if he did it for weight loss early in the season he'd have gained back all the water weight within a day or two.
mgmecham More than 1 year ago
Alright, I will give you that weight loss may not have been the goal. Perhaps he used it as a masking agent. The point is that it is in his sample in low quantities because of blood doping and this hypothesis is making it into the news as almost a footnote. This is very similar to Contador's situation. The real story was not clenbuterol from the alleged, tainted Spanish steak, but rather the presence of plasticizers in his sample (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/segura-says-contador-plasticizer-levels-are-indicative-of-transfusion). But that got swept under the rug and nobody pressed the issue. Probably because Contador's brother said he didn't do it. (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/contadors-brother-refutes-transfusion-claims). And you gotta take his word for it because, hey... it's his brother, and brothers don't lie. :) So Andy?
Sarcastic Wet Trout More than 1 year ago
He should have ordered the fish.
Marino Gallo More than 1 year ago
there was something about another rider, last year or the year before? a Spaniard, i think? something about experts saying he would never have taken anything like … oh what was it? … Clambutinol? Clantruminil? Clenbuter “something …
Chemainiac More than 1 year ago
mgmecham, you have nailed. How do the Schleck's compete and beat proven dopers.....doh.........
reubenr More than 1 year ago
This is hilarious. Why would anyone assume level headed thinking? Schleck was desperate.
zecarioca More than 1 year ago
he will walk free, blame Bruyneel or Amstrong and for the second time Frank Schleck will have just a warning
erader More than 1 year ago
i doubt it. contador didn't get just a warning.
smac16 More than 1 year ago
Lets hope Armstrong is as honest as his teammates were about him....that will be true justice to name all names, so far he has been made a scape goat for extensive doping yet there are dozens of names in the USADA report blacked out....I have agreed with punishing anyone who has cheated, but to sting one person with the whole blame is childish and short sighted. Just remember if Amstrong had come clean to USADA when they released their reasoned decision he would of lost only 2 TDF titles?? That in itself shows the system is similar to speed cameras, catching people but not fixing the problem. If, and only if, Amstrong tells all and names names, Contador etc... then this circus will continue to drag cycling down.
doperhopper More than 1 year ago
Lucky Franck not to eat more of that shit - if he loses any more weight he may easily disappear (that could actually be quite effective anti-antidoping technique).
thebikeandnothingbut.... More than 1 year ago
Alberto, if you're listening, go nuts suing people!!! Concentrations so low they have no effect...... Sound familiar? If Frank Schleck gets off on this, go the jugular. I think consistency need to be applied here and either Schleck gets banned or you get re-instated. But then, McQuaid's in charge so anything could happen. Depends on what he pulls out of the hat this time.....
Pignone Fisso More than 1 year ago
Just got a call from Alberto. He read your comment!