If the B sample is positive, I can only think a minimum of one year ban. That's because LYD got a year ban for missing testing. Anybody with a positive drug sample can't get less than that. (Footballers can get away with more minor bans)
the other ex-world No 1 Zhou Mi got 2 years with the same offense. if LCW got anything less surely there is case for ZM to appeal retrospectively
LCW should get a fair and just sentence, anything more or less is a miscarriage of justice not only to himself but to all those before him and those to come in the future. Let's have faith in WADA.
Zhou Mi tested positive for a Class 1 anabolic agent. I am not a medical expert, but anabolic agent sounds like performance enhancing. Besides, Zhou Mi did not have any "corroborating evidence". All she had were her own words. LCW's case is very different. BAM and LCW can demonstrate how dexamethasone entered his body and why.
You sound absolutely delighted with LCW s temporary downfall. You know he did not just get tested for WC14. You know he was intensely dope tested during Beijing Olympics. He has also been randomly tested for other tournaments. You are not some naive kid. You have decent access to medical knowledge to know the difference between a PED and dexamethasone. This is such a great opportunity to tarnish LCW s image and you make sure to make full use of it. I wouldn't be surprised that in future, you will regularly remind all of this LCW episode. There must be something about LCW s achievements that irks you to such an extent it leads you to persist in trying to paint him as someone whose titles may have been drug assisted. Let me ask you one question: if a top 10 or 20 MS player were to ingest dexamethasone, can you guarantee he will beat LCW all the time. ( Do you agree that badminton is a more skill driven sport than cycling which is more endurance based?) I wouldn't be surprised if ZM s case had been set up. It s not difficult to dope a top athlete and end her career. Personally, I hope LCW gets banned for a few months because that is the only way to get him to play less. CHN MS has it too easy when LCW plays because he gets rid of all the non CHN MS and CHN MS only has to rote train for him. Now with LCW out of action, CHN MS rote training syllabi would probably have to cover at least 3 non CHN MS. That s a lot to cover! Time for new MS stars to shine.
all banned substances are performance enhancing in one way or the other, otherwise they wouldn't ban them, would they? Would WADA ban substances that can reduce as well as enhance performance? even if the banned substance just to help you to clear pain in the backside or a blocked nose quicker that will give you unfair advantages over the clean players that stay clear of the banned drugs.
According to the BWF rules that pcll99 attached, reduced sanction is 1 year minimum. Max is 2 years, this is for 1st offense
It's quite interesting for your statement. I just looked at the WADA list. Painkillers are not prohibited. Some of the blocked nose medication are not prohibited. I did a brief search about dexamethasone - eyedrops can give discernible levels of dexamethasone in the urine.. http://www5.biathlonworld.com/en/press_releases.html/do/detail?presse=24&print Also, dexamethasone is an area of controversy as stated in the following paper. Even back in 2010, there are proponents for steroids not to be on the list. Evidence on Ergogenic Action of Glucocorticoids as a Doping Agent Risk. Duclos M. The Physician and Sportsmedicine 2010, 38(3). This is a review but a very subjective one. And it does state that very low levels of steroids fail to have a performance enhancing effect. The author does recommend steroids be banned (but all that evidence was for high dose steroids and because of health risks). So there seems to be little evidence for a ban at very low levels of the drug. So the author seems to recommend a ban because of high dose (and disregarding the evidence of no performance enhancement at low levels) and health risks but not the third criteria (violating the "spirit" of sports). It would take a fuller scientific search and review but the articles I have briefly looked at on the internet use pretty large doses of dexamthasone. To be honest, they should also take urine levels daily to correlate effect with performance enhancing effect.
Well, that's the point of regulation 10.4. If the administration of dexamethasone was not intended to enhance performance, then LCW should have reduction in sanction. The funny thing about 10.4 is that it did not say anything on the relevance of whether the prohibited substance did in fact enhance performance. A number of experts have said it does not enhance performance for our sport, although it does so for other sports (eg, cycling). In my view, if dexamethasone did not in fact enhance LCW's performance in any meaningful way, LCW should just get a reprimand or at most just 3 months ban.
Sorry, my previous post was not clear enough. 10.4 is this: minimum reprimand, maximum 2 years. 10.5.2 is this: minimum 1 year, max 2 years.... Here's 10.5.2: Btw, a new WADA code will come into effect on 1 January 2015. This could get messy.
I was looking at the table after all the 10.4, 10.5 Personally I think it will be more than 6 months cos LYD got 6 months ban just for missing tests.
ONLY Lee Chong Wei and National Sports Institute (NSI) chief executive officer Datuk Dr Ramlan Aziz will be allowed into the lab at University of Oslo in Norway today for the testing of the World No 1’’s ‘B’ urine sample. The lab will convey the test result to the Badminton World Federation (BWF) tomorrow before the world body informs the BA of Malaysia (BAM) the next day of the outcome. BWF will not name the shuttler until its anti-doping committee sits and discusses the punishment for the shuttler. Chong Wei, if he fails his ‘B’ test, stands to be suspended for two years but the three-time All England champion could escape suspension or serve only six months due to technical or administrative issues (procedures conducted inefficiently by local authorities). It is learnt that the two-time Olympic silver medallist is bitter over the entire episode and will take action, including taking a hospital and NSI to court, if he is suspended. Sports Minister Khairy Jamaluddin disclosed recently that he had comprehensive details about the issue and knows that some procedures were not regulated. Chong Wei is also expected to appeal to the Court of Arbitration of Sports in Lausanne, Switzerland, to challenge the result if it comes up positive. Chong Wei, along with his wife, Wong Mew Choo, Ramlan and BAM general manager Kenny Goh flew to Norway on Monday. The visibly-shaken Kenny, who did not expect the media at the Kuala Lumpur International Airport on Monday, said the reason he will be in Oslo is to make sure all procedures to test the player’’s urine sample is followed. “Dr Ramlan will be there to undertake this responsibility, said Kenny. Despite having handled doping procedures for many years, Dr Ramlan was rather sarcastic when replying to questions from the media. ““I have nothing to say because you already know. We will do the best we can,” said Dr Ramlan. When a reporter asked Dr Ramlan to confirm the time and place of the testing, he replied: ““It is privileged information for the athlete and us to tackle. ” “I am also unsure what happens next after the testing of the ‘B’ sample,” ” added Ramlan before he dashed past the reporters to the immigration counter at KLIA. Yesterday, Khairy said if the result were positive, BWF will have to convene its Results Management Committee to make adjustments to the particular championships at which the urine sample was taken. “”That (announcement) could happen towards the end of this week or early next week, so we will not know by tomorrow but maybe in two or three days,” said Khairy. The minister also confirmed that the NSI has tested the traditional medicines that the shuttler has taken of late. “All were tested in a lab and none had traces of dexamethasone,” Khairy added http://www.nst.com.my/node/49734
In cycling, the performance benefits are due to altitude adaptation and therefore, are performance enhancing. But again, it's better to look at the scientific literature, doses administered etc for a critical review. I do know the IOC are moving to more evidenced based decision making with critical evaluation of the literature. Quite possibly, this would influence WADA.
LYD's case was based on 10.3.3. But I am only hoping that LCW can rely on 10.4, which is the most favourable to him.
