Hird and Drugs

[kilbluff1985]

most people on here are pretty good mate

probably mainly facebook where it happens lol

had to remove my dads fiancee from my friends list cause i was sick of her posts/comments

[jamfrank]

So one thing I'm confused about is the status of AOD9604. Essendon have come out saying the AFL knew it wasn't banned and the fact that they kept quiet about it is "reprehensible". And apparently on AFL 360 Dr. Andrew Graham (now consultant to the Dons, former AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal member) said he was told in February by ASADA that AOD-9604 was not a banned substance.

However, a quick wiki search gives you a link to this: http://bodybuilder-weightlifting.com/aod9604 which states "the specific AOD9604 growth hormone fragment has not been evaluated by the FDA. It is not approved for human consumption. Testing is taking place to try to further the research of the peptides." (now I'm not 100% convinced on the legitimacy of this website, nor the wikipedia article referencing it).

In addition, the AFL have said today that ASADA chief Aurora Andruska (great name) has said "AOD-9604 is not approved for human use and that it has never advised any party that AOD-9604 was permitted in sport..."

So there appear to be two contradictory statements coming from the Bombers (whose source is a bloke who apparently asked ASADA in February if this shower was cool - no physical evidence by the way) and from the AFL via ASADA. Who's lying?


Edit: http://calzada.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/HeffernanUK.pdf found an interesting ppt presentation from 2003 on AOD-9604. Interestingly, no human trials had been conducted at this time, nor were they planned at least until 2005. I haven't been able to find anything more recent yet, unfortunately. Most interestingly, Mark Heffernen states:

Clinical studies in obese patients have resulted in
the following general observations:
- An average of 0.5kg/week fat loss
- Improvements in insulin-mediated glucose
disposal at low dose
- Enhanced energy expenditure
- Increased FFA levels
- Improved lipid profile (TAG, cholesterol)
- Improved cardiovascular profile

hmmmm....

[Grazz]

most people on here are pretty good mate

probably mainly facebook where it happens lol

had to remove my dads fiancee from my friends list cause i was sick of her posts/comments

I can imagine how supporters would be feeling and depending on how you feel about your club it gets through and can hurt. Im a Crows man wasn't long ago we filled the paper and various media it aint very enjoyable but I took solace in knowing I didn't do it none of this is on me, the club let me down to. Its of little comfort but can take the edge off when you feel your lid about to pop lol.

[kilbluff1985]

yeah it's weird i'm not one of those overly passionate supporter types like if we lose i'm usually like oh well move on to next week

but this is really getting to me just that it's gone on so long hearing about it every day

and probably what really annoys me the most is no matter the outcome we'll still be hearing about it for years to come from opposition supporters or the media or whoever, the clubs respect from the public is flowered 

[Grazz]

So one thing I'm confused about is the status of AOD9604. Essendon have come out saying the AFL knew it wasn't banned and the fact that they kept quiet about it is "reprehensible". And apparently on AFL 360 Dr. Andrew Graham (now consultant to the Dons, former AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal member) said he was told in February by ASADA that AOD-9604 was not a banned substance.

However, a quick wiki search gives you a link to this: http://bodybuilder-weightlifting.com/aod9604 which states "the specific AOD9604 growth hormone fragment has not been evaluated by the FDA. It is not approved for human consumption. Testing is taking place to try to further the research of the peptides." (now I'm not 100% convinced on the legitimacy of this website, nor the wikipedia article referencing it).

In addition, the AFL have said today that ASADA chief Aurora Andruska (great name) has said "AOD-9604 is not approved for human use and that it has never advised any party that AOD-9604 was permitted in sport..."

So there appear to be two contradictory statements coming from the Bombers (whose source is a bloke who apparently asked ASADA in February if this shower was cool - no physical evidence by the way) and from the AFL via ASADA. Who's lying?

So much contradiction which adds to the confusion. You really have to pick through it and pick out what is fact and what is interpretation or misinformation and even then we wont get it all right anyway. 

[Grazz]

yeah it's weird i'm not one of those overly passionate supporter types like if we lose i'm usually like oh well move on to next week

but this is really getting to me just that it's gone on so long hearing about it every day

and probably what really annoys me the most is no matter the outcome we'll still be hearing about it for years to come from opposition supporters or the media or whoever, the clubs respect from the public is flowered

Yeh I hear ya, the length of time has worn everyone down we are all just about over it. Wondering if its finally got the players after all they are living it everyday were as we are bystanders looking in and weve had a gutfull for weeks now.

[jamfrank]

So much contradiction which adds to the confusion. You really have to pick through it and pick out what is fact and what is interpretation or misinformation and even then we wont get it all right anyway.

But this is a pretty simple case of black or white. It was either banned or it wasn't. If ASADA weren't sure and someone from their organisation told Graham that it was fine, then that's their fault.

Doing a bit of research on the drug, I can't see how it could not be a banned substance...

[Capper]

I also think that the Cronulla Sharks are going to be much worse off than the Dons.

Has there been much in the media about the Sharks since the story broke at the start of the year?

Their situation seems to have been played out less in the media than Essendon's, but it may just seem like that to me as we get jack all NRL news in SA  ;)

I think it is a case of us being in SA mate, they've just had salary cap breaches come up aswell in the past coupla days, glad im a Bronco's fan haha.

Yeah alot. There coach was sacked, then re-appointed after the CEO was sacked. The NRL self-appointed a CEO and he quit (i think, anyway he's gone).

The other week they played in Auckland and on their way back though customs, the Sharks captain Paul Gallen, reportedly had his phone seized as part of the ASADA investigation. The wierd thing was the Gallen didnt play as he was injured, i think.

I then woke up this morning to find that the Sharks are under investigation for having a secret bank account. They do all their banking with a certain bank and yet had money in another account in another bank. The sharks have been putting all of their fund raising money in to this account. It has been reported that this money was used to fund their "high performance unit" aka their pepetide research, whilst the Sharks have said they used the money for their gym.

If ASADA take them on, the Sharks will fold. They have no money and didnt even have a major sponsor at the begining of the year. The week they got a major sponsor was the week that the drug enquiry started.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/nrl/nrl-to-probe-claim-of-secret-cronulla-sharks-bank-account/story-fnca0von-1226701246585

TLDR The Sharks are flowerED!!!!

[Grazz]

So much contradiction which adds to the confusion. You really have to pick through it and pick out what is fact and what is interpretation or misinformation and even then we wont get it all right anyway.

But this is a pretty simple case of black or white. It was either banned or it wasn't. If ASADA weren't sure and someone from their organisation told Graham that it was fine, then that's their fault.

Doing a bit of research on the drug, I can't see how it could not be a banned substance...

That's the contradictions im speaking of regarding AOD/9604's legality. Dr Andrew Grahams statement, the statement from ASADA that it has never cleared the use of the drug to anyone then the letter that Essendon allegedly have that says it is ok. As you have seen a 5 minute search on google tells you nope cant go here. This is where I fear ASADA/WADA will get the players under the clause ignorance is no excuse, wether said drug is supplied by a Doctor the onus is on the player/athlete to be certain he/she can take it.
I feel for the players and I think its a massive wake up call for the AFL and all the clubs/players in it that we are bound by the WADA anti drug code as much as any Olympian, I really feel all involved AFL/NRL have been very amateurish about the programs they may be running. Hard to explain it any other way.

[jamfrank]

That's the contradictions im speaking of regarding AOD/9604's legality. Dr Andrew Grahams statement, the statement from ASADA that it has never cleared the use of the drug to anyone then the letter that Essendon allegedly have that says it is ok. As you have seen a 5 minute search on google tells you nope cant go here. This is where I fear ASADA/WADA will get the players under the clause ignorance is no excuse, wether said drug is supplied by a Doctor the onus is on the player/athlete to be certain he/she can take it.
I feel for the players and I think its a massive wake up call for the AFL and all the clubs/players in it that we are bound by the WADA anti drug code as much as any Olympian, I really feel all involved AFL/NRL have been very amateurish about the programs they may be running. Hard to explain it any other way.

Yes, it seems completely insane to go anywhere near this kind of stuff. Would love for that letter that says "it's okay" to emerge. But somehow I don't think it exists, otherwise we'd probably have seen it already.

[Grazz]

I am starting to feel the same tbh. The other stuff that says the AFL knew in Feb could be incorrect also and the reason they've remained silent is they feel they've known all along that it is an unapproved drug who the hell knows. That's why it all must be transparent and open to the public as that's the only way any of us will be satisfied due process has taken place and the right findings have been found as true and impartial.

[BratPack]

To me now the problem isn't AOD...it's the Thymosin...there's NO doubt that's banned, if it's proved the players took that.....then prepare for the "Death Penalty"

[Bluke]

To me now the problem isn't AOD...it's the Thymosin...there's NO doubt that's banned, if it's proved the players took that.....then prepare for the "Death Penalty"

Exactly! And ASADA's burden of proof is not 'beyond reasonable doubt' it's to 'the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel.'

So strong circumstantial and any corroberating evidence may be enough. AOD9604 is the least of essendon's worries. Which is probably why the AFL/ASADA has been silent on it.

Feel for the players/partners/parents. This has become all about protecting Hird - who seems to be displaying psychopathic tendencies if you ask me. How many old friends will he walk over to save his own skin. Time to take it on the chin like a man.

[T Dog]

How can Hird look the bombers players in the eye and ask them to bust their guts for him on the field ?
Circling the wagons and defending the club is one thing,  but blatant self protection at expense of everything else is another....rant over.. :-X

[GCSkiwi]

It's a bugger I'm not in Vic at the moment, I've worked with Doc Garnham a few times and would love to quiz him on this - we spoke about this only a couple of months ago and he never gave even the slightest hint that he had been told AOD was not banned. Now, he could absolutely have been bound to secrecy but still I was surprised to read that he has apparently stated he contacted ASADA in Feb about it - the scandal hadn't started then had it? Why would he be investigating?

Other news, Bruce Reid's letter to Hirdy: http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-21/full-text-of-dr-bruce-reids-letter

Just interesting to see, if it's factual gives some insight into the multiple dealings and behin-the-back kind of activities going on... If you have no problem with the legality of something, why would you do it without informing the CMO?

I take everything with a grain of salt as it's all reported with a sweet media spin on it for a good story, but there's a lot of inconsistencies here. The way I see it, unless the bombers have documented evidence that ASADA approved AOD (they're saying they didn't), then the bombers are up shower creek. Their word against ASADA, with ASADA having no reason to have  said yes and now deny it, when the bombers have every reason in the world to claim they got the ok...

What will be REALLY interesting is what happens if they do have documented proof that ASADA gave it the all clear? Then there's a pickle - I don't think there's any way AOD is lgal, but if the bombers followed the right steps and were given bad info that surely has to let them off the hook? And what will WADA do, they're pretty adamant it's a no-no...