Banned drug contributed to charity London Marathon runner's death

An inquest into the death of Claire Squires has been told how a single dietary supplement taken during the London Marathon last year contributed to her death.

 

The drug 1,3-dimethylamyline (DMAA) is found in some nutritional products altho banned for elite athletes. A single scoop of 'Jack3D' containing the stimulant that increases heart rate was poured by Claire into the water bottle, to be taken if she felt that she had hit 'the wall' her boyfriend reported at the inquest. She collapsed and died near the end when she was attempting to run a sub 4 hour time.

DMAA up close

The coroner said that Claire had died of acute cardiac failure caused by extreme physical exertion complicated by DMAA toxicity 'on the balance of probabilities'. 

It is banned in sereral European countries, and the Food Standards Agency (FSA) was moved to advise people not to consume the stimulant in August of last year.

This sobering news today is from a BBC report (BBC news story on Claire Squires inquest), and the backstory on why it so affected the population is well described here: Public interest high in marathon runner's charity quest.

Aiming to raise £500 for the Samaritans, Claire's story raised the profile of her quest and donations topped £1 million.

It is the time of year when recreational runners are planning and training for the marathons of London and Edinburgh amongst others. Take advice people if planning on running marathons regarding supplements and exertion-here to help for any kind of running related issues!

What of Olympic Park & the legacy for London?

There were plenty of opinion pieces and blogs written during the Olympic Games about how great the Stadium and surrounding venues of the Plaza were: so far removed from the building site images we had grown accustomed to seeing in our media.

Remember how the area developed? Interactive London Graphic

Yet now there appears to be a return to the cones and hazard signage.

Diving Pool for Tom Daley & other divers

Eton Manor training pool-

now en route for Glasgow 2014

The BBC sport website has just produced an excellent piece showing what has happened just 6 months afterwards at the Velodrome, Aquatic Centre, Copper Box and Orbit: these being those parts of the area that survived the demolition following the Games. Olympic Park After all, there is no more Riverside  'Smurf Turf' hockey arena and changes to the Eton Manor & Basketball areas, whilst the Velodrome will be opened to the public along with a safer BMX area.

Scenes from Olympic Park, Summer 2012

But wasn't it good while it lasted...? The Copper Box that rocked

Whilst the legacy of the Olympic Stadium garners much media coverage, the entire £300 million refit to the area is a vast undertaking Olympic Park Refit plans, and seems so remote from the remarkable events of July & August in 2012. 

Here's hoping that the local legacy under Dennis Hone generates a lasting memory of the summer, and a future to look forward to.

Armstrong admits doping & will testify...but all too late for Nicole Cooke

The New York Times is running a story reporting that Lance Armstrong confesses to taking performance enhancing drugs AND will testify against officials whom knew about it!

Two people briefed on the Oprah Winfrey interview (Oprah Interview) recorded in Austin, Texas have suggested Armstrong refutes the claim made by the USA Drugs Agency (USADA) that he was "the kingpin in a sophisticated drugs programme" as alleged by Travis Tygart(USADA Chief Executive) in the 'Reasoned Decision' last autumn. Instead he appears to claim just to be doing what other riders were doing, but declines to name any.
NY Times 14/1/13 'Armstrong Confesses'

As Armstrong is also said to have met with Tygart in a bid to take steps to mitigate the lifetime ban, he appears to be keen to be able to participate in competitive sports such as triathlon again.

But a condition of this lifting of the ban is that Armstrong testifies under oath against those who helped him dope, which could include Pat McQuaid and Hein Verbruggen, Presidents current and past of the governing body of cycling, UCI.
This would be a significant prising open of a can of worms alluded to, but never fully exposed since the nineties when doping appears rife in cycling.

Spare a thought for the clean cyclists like Beijing Gold Medallist Nicole Cooke who used her statement on retiring in yesterday's press to firmly rail against Armstrong and the dopers.Nicole Cooke's Retirement Statement in full 

Her complains about womens' cycling being underfunded and poorly supported since a high of 2002 due to the UCI obsession with wasting time on pursuing Floyd Landis & covering up dopers such as Armstrong should be read when watching crocdile tears spill onto Oprah Winfrey's tissues.

Armstrong The Next Chapter...on tv but will it be as intense as the Kimmage Grilling 2009?

Scepticism surrounds news that Lance Armstrong will appear on Oprah Winfrey on January 17th for an 'exclusive no-holds-barred' interview. Perhaps she should look at what happens if a question is not deemed appropriate Youtube Kimmage/Armstrong link

Paul Kimmage questions Armstrong
at Tour of California, 2009

It will take place on his home turf in Austin, Texas.

It will not be 'Live' says Nicole Nichols of Winfrey's OWN cable TV network, and Armstrong is not getting paid.

He will have no editorial control we hear, with no question off-limits (including blood doping, EPO and doping possibly?). 

Oprah Pressroom re Armstrong Exclusive

Whilst there have been so many blogs, tweets and editorials condemning him to the point some people simply don't want Armstrong the privilege of oxygen of publicity, especially where there is no guarantee of confession and contrition for the damage done to the sport of cycling, there have been internet tails of the bigger donors of the cancer charity 'Livestrong' pressurising him for some form of statement.

Armstrong has spoken with Oprah previously, in November 2005 with then-fiancee Sheryl Crow Armstrong interview content on Oprah 2005, and she herself signalled the deal this time around on twitter with a comment about looking forward to conversing with Lance Armstrong which he then retweeted, even if his longtime lawyer Tim Herman denied any knowledge of imminent confessions just last week.

Is it important?

Have a read of three of our previous blog items, two of which have come in the wake of the detailed revelations in the 'Reasoned Decision' from USA Drugs Agency and the excellent David Walsh book 'Seven Deadly Sins'.

Why it matters to pursue Armstrong

Armstrong Blog I-'Don't spit in the soup'

Armstrong Blog II-'I'm sorry you can't dream big'

Walsh himself, Chief Sports Writer of the Sunday Times, is quoted in a BBC piece as saying "Maybe conditions will be set, but if there's going to be a confession worthy of the name it should be a complete confession. I don't believe he can do this interview and offer nothing, I believe he will make an admission to doping." BBC What will be the fallout of Interview?

David Millar, caught 'with his hand in the cookie jar' (quoting Armstrong himself regarding Millar's drugs bust) is now a fervent anti-drugs campaigner, and a member of the athletes commission for the World Anti-Doping Agency WADA) and fears it will be completely stage-mananged. "Only Lance would get to have his moment of truth, if that's what it will be, in front of Oprah Winfrey" he tells the Telegraph Millar fears for Interview. 

Will there be an immediate fallout with The Lawmen waiting outside should Armstrong reveal that there had actually been cases of perjury in the past when he is alleged to have lied under oath-rather than deciding to tell 'the truth' like he may be about to confess to 'Live on television'?

In the meantime, here's what happens if an interview turns bad...

Ex-disullusioned professional cyclist turned journalist & author speaks to Lance Armstrong at a Press Conference in February 2009 on Armstrong's return to the sport. He has fellow cyclists and admitted dopers George Hincapie and Levi Leipheimer at his side.

"You're not worth the chair you're sitting on..."

The interview airs worldwide on www.oprah.com as well as on her tv channel, January 17th.

Anyone watching?

Oops! Watch out on-field Physios! Two footed challenges NOT allowed!

The staff @SpaceClinics were agog yesterday when this youtube clip popped up from Welsh tv rugby programme ScrumV of a two footed challenge from the Italian Physio.

The key point for medical staff is to approach with care, and wear footwear appropriate to the field of play when entering so as not to make any rash challenges on players of either team.

This is already destined to become a classic outtake for presentations globally, and with 22,500 views in 24 hours the clip comfortably tops any recent crowds for Zebre, the Italian rugby team the physio works for. 

All the best for 2013 sir! You have gained significant airtime! 

SPACE staff be warned as we approach the 6Nations rugby championship!!!

Until Lance comes clean, Journalist of the Year has The Last Word...part 2..."I'm sorry you can't dream big"

This is the 2nd piece of our blog on David Walsh's excellent book 'Seven Deadly Sins' with the subtitle: 'My pursuit of Lance Armstrong' which truth be told, was relentless.

Sporting Greats have no need to be pleasant to be successful or to be legends. However, how bitterly sanctimonious now appear Armstrong's 2005 statements in Paris after winning 'another' TdF :"I'm sorry you can't dream big" and his repeated carping about hard work being the key as if everyone else was smoking cigars, drinking fine wine and kicking back in the off season riles sticks in the craw somewhat. The almost religious and pious manner of his interviews play to a bigger audience, such that the sporting and cycling viewing populations are feverish in their defences or attacks, and as British cycling commentator Gary Imlach says: "an argument about Lance Armstrong is almost a faith-based matter". 

In contemporary interviews just before his 2nd TdF in 1994: "It's harder to race this year, cycling is harder now. I hate to point fingers and I'm not going to do that. But there a lot of guys who are a lot better and a lot faster than last year." Then revealingly, in the 'From Lance to Landis book', Frankie Andreu described how Armstrong had been outraged  when he was getting beaten by those he did not think worthy: "This is bullshit...these guys are flying...I should be killing these guys." 

The text includes further evidence of cycling not being a level playing field beyond simply blood doping or the taking of drugs ('liquid gold' as Armstrong had called EPO). Armstrong is also noted making payments to conceal positive drug tests (a key detail in his oft-quoted defence of never having failed) or buying off other teams to prevent attacks in the race to ensure victories.

A page turner of a factual book, it is to Walsh's credit (amongst others-a very few in cycling media circles) that he has kept the story alive for so long despite the personal & systematic abuse-Armstrong can be read of ambiguously describing journalists in disease terms without irony should anyone ask about doping in cycling, even if not directly accusing Armstrong himself (but losing the plot when he was famously accused of being a 'cancer in remission' by Paul Kimmage in California on Armstrong's comeback in 2009). There are a band of others whom were key to the evidence whom have stories to tell:  Betsy+Frankie Andreau, Emma O'Reilly, Pierre Ballaster, Paul Kimmage, Stephen Swart, Greg LeMond ('discouraged' to give evidence by the bike manufacturer Armstrong & he shared-Trek), and the 1999 TdF cyclist who refused to dope, and was shunned by the peleton until he withdrew, Christophe Bassons.  

Armstrong's defiant tweet with him just layin' around with his 7 yellow jerseys

Walsh chronologically makes sense of the pharmaceutical jungle from amphetimines to steroids to blood doping such as EPO. He namechecks the earlier riders and their own stimulant drug choices, all the while managing to convey how dismayed this Irish passionate lover of cycling (who also describes how he lost a son to a bike accident) falls out of love with the sport and his idols, from Sean Kelly and Stephen Roche to those who have more recently shamed the sport, even when pleading for some kind of redemption as a result (unlike Armstrong it should be noted currently).

Whilst we can look forward to the 2013 Tour with Union Jack tinted-spectacles hoping for more Wiggo inspired riding (or from the less-heralded Chris Froome), those whom have followed the evidence since October 22nd or having read the book will no doubt cast more wearied eyes on an undoubtedly tainted spectacle. Here's to a new era of clean cycling, to Dave Brailsford and the Team Sky crew, but to a winning team we can all believe.

Until Lance comes clean, Journalist of the Year has The Last Word...part 1..."Don't spit in the soup"

A pariah for 13 years.
Everything changed in October for David Walsh.
Journalist of the Year 2012.
Sports Journalist of the Year 2012.
Yet nothing much had really changed on October 22nd.

The day the United States of America Doping Agency (USADA) published its 'reasoned decision' became a watershed for the house of cards built up over those 13 years by Lance Armstrong in particular, but behind a canopy of untruths and complicit deceit by any number of agencies involved in professional cycling. USADA Reasoned Decision full pdf

The book 'Seven Deadly Sins' encompasses many of the stories and methods by which various cyclists, soigneurs, management and administrators either incriminated themselves or others exposing methods of cheating remarkable by their complexity or simplicity. Not that Armstrong was in any way the only one: remember the graphic illustration from the New York Times on drug-influenced victors from the Tour de France (TdF)? NY Times TdF Dopers' Illustration

This book is written by David Walsh, that pariah, or 'troll' as he was repeatedly described and spoken down to by Armstrong. Their contact begins prior to the confirmation of cancer in Armstrong, and the two men appear to have enjoyed each other's company. This changes after a personal verbal & thinly veiled attack by Armstrong on Christophe Basson who declined team offers to dope during the 1999 'Tour of Redemption', and thus instead was seen to 'spit in the soup' by the other members of the peleton who shunned him.

After granting a personal interview to Walsh in 2001 which is perceived as being offensive to Armstrong, their relationship deteriorates to the point where other journalists are denied access to the US Postal Service Team (Armstrong's cycling outfit and a federal agency to boot!) if they sit by Walsh in Press Conferences, and ultimately force media colleagues to choose which man they wish to speak with, at the exclusion of the other...

Lance Armstrong comes across as one of the most driven and least likeable characters in sport, beyond playing a part of a pantomime villain in his single mindedness and ability to weave a spell over most media even if fear pervades his team from the end of the last century just as he returned from his testicular cancer.

It was the doctors dealing with the disease in an Indianapolis hospital whose enquiries to the stricken racer whom had not excelled at all in the TdF thus far (only finishing one, in 1995 finishing 35th) raised the first questions about his judgement and character. Among the questions asked was whether Lance Armstrong had ever used performance enhancing drugs-the response shocked all whom were present including his team mate and friend Frankie Andreu, and his fiancee Betsy. He admitted that he had taken EPO, testosterone, growth hormone, cortisone and steroids. This testimony proved emotionally and personally draining for anyone whom by chance was present that day, as Armstrong repeatedly instructed lawyers to intervene, deny and claim defamation suits against anyone testifying.

The element of the story that is possibly the most disturbing is actually not the cooly described pre-glory days drug taking, but the systematic and ultimately cynical abuse of those whom had cancer, or were dealing with the disease, and the fund raising which by the end appears more and more of a front rather than anything more altruistic. Armstrong comes across in the text as strong arming public opinion at the same time as his formidable legal team are restricting publication of anything that might be considered obstructive to him. His 2004 lawsuit against the Sunday Times eventually yielded £400,000 to Armstrong, although in the week before Christmas the paper announced it was to sue for up to £1 million Sunday Times to sue Armstrong. 

The other area that is seen as being controversially helpful to the drug cheats are the UK libel laws, an area in which we are so unclear about within sport, and as to how the law may be used 'against' the spirit of sport.

In the instances concerning doping, and the concealment and bullying of witnesses, the UK laws appear to have been used again and again to prevent key information coming to be rightfully published and therefore be open to challenge by the protagonists in the scandal. Not only do they confer a veil of silence on those 'accused', they also appears to offer little protection to those brave enough to come forward offering detail of cover ups and drug abuse. How can that be right?

More in the next blog on a natural follow up to the book that had to be published in france because of those laws, 'LA Confidential'(2004) and the 2007 book 'From Lance to Landis: Inside the American Doping Controversy at the tour de France'. Wonder at why it took so long? Not much had changed in the detail on October 22nd, just a failed federal investigation, but a proverbial baton passed from them to USADA...