 Poster: A snowHead
|
A Czech skier who was suspended from competition has successfully sued the maker of a nutritional supplement which contained the banned steroid norandrosteron.
Petr Novak, a one-time member member of the Czech republic's junior national cross-country skiing team, tested positive for norandrosteron three years ago and was suspended from the sport for two years.
His victory against Aminostar, the maker of the supplement, is thought to be "groundbreaking". His financial compensation has yet to be determined.
This report from Prague Daily Monitor.
Any comments?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Interesting story. I wonder did Petr Novak's ski federation give prior approval to this nutritional supplement when he was using it. I would have thought that the prudent think for Novak to do was check the content of the supplement with his national team before consuming it; the stakes are very high with regard to anti-doping regulations and athletes at his level should take all care with anything labelled as a 'supplement'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Yes, "taking care" is all very well, but if a product is incorrectly labelled then the manufacturer could be held to have sold it under fraudulent pretences. This decision will have implications for the Hans Knauss case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
As to "taking care", is there more recent data on dehydration/allowable supplement combinations than the Aberdeen study mentioned here?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
I don't know, but I had to smile at the Lenny Paul "spaghetti bolognese" story! Lenny was one of the real characters that I remember from British Winter Olympic teams in the 80s / early 90s.
If this really is a testing failure, it's sad to recall how many sporting careers were destroyed...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Martin Bell,
Hey Martin how's lif down in New Mexico, are you coming over to sigb test this year
ski hard
colin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Colin,
Terrible start to the season here in NM, hardly any natural snow, just a few runs open on icy man-made. Frustrating, because the locals keep telling me about how epic last season was!
I will be at Pila again in May. See you there?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Martin Bell, i hope you will be there in March rather than May!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
I remember the Lenny Paul story too  It shows just how rediculous the whole drug taking/testing situation can be. While I would imagine that there are some perfectly legitimate reasons why somebody might have a banned substance in their system, I can only see 2 reasons for not banning the, namely they had something deliberately spiked so as to get the person banned (difficult to prove but possible) or it was naturally produced by their body. The excuse of "I didn't know it was in there" is, IMO, totally invalid.
An international sportsman needs to take full responsibility for everything in their own system.It leaves too amny loopholes any other way. This is an absolute offense by which I mean either a banned substance is in your body or it is not.
There are too many drugs cheats out there not being caught to allow people to get off on the grounds that Paul, Christie and others have got off with. This is one time when I say guilty until proven innocent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CEM, of course!
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
SimonN, surely the whole point of the legal requirement to disclose all the ingredients in a food product is to ensure consumer choice is respected, that the consumer can identify any of the content that he/she may wish to avoid. If that ingredient isn't listed then the customer is to an extent being defrauded. Could be dangerous too, for example in the case of someone with an allergy to gluten, peanuts, etc.
Many sportspeople taking additives. They rely on the honesty of the manufacturers. If they stand to lose their livelihoods through the dishonesty or inefficiency of a food supplier, then that has to be legitimate reason no. 3 if it is later proved that the contents of a food/additive product taken were not fully listed and contained a banned substance that the athlete unknowingly ingested.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
Sorry, PG, but I cannot agree with you. If you take that attitude you end up with even more drugs cheats. How can you tell the difference between the following
1. A drugs cheat who gets the supplier to add illegal ingredients but claims he didn't know and was trusting the supplier.
2. Somebody who has heard that a certain supliment has steroids in it so takes that supliment but says he was only going on the "stated" ingredients.
3. Somebody who really doesn't know that there is something "extra" in a supliment.
The only way is to make the athlete responsible for what is in his/her own body. If you want to take a supliment, get it tested.
Look at what has happened in the US where one of the most high profile supliment providers has been making "spiked" supliments. Various athletes were taking these supliments and if they had been caught, would have claimed they didn't know the supliment had "extras" in. The only way this came out was because the company was subject to a criminal investigation and therefore documents were seized. Sports authorities do not have the right to seize those types of documents so this type of thing might be widespread.
As far as sport is concerned, it doesn't matter how performance enhancing drugs get into an athlete. The drug doesn't know whether it got there through deception or because the athlete knew what he was taking. It still acts in the same way. Therefore, the athlete has had his performance enhanced and this is unfair on those who haven't got the drug in their system.
The athlete has a recourse to the supplier for damages due to having a spiked supliment but it doesn't change the fact that their performance was enhanced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SimonN, essentially you're right. And so is PG. This thread concerns an athlete who paid the price of ingesting an illegal drug - either knowingly or unknowingly. I can't see that he could have won his case without convincing the court that he knew nothing, so we have to assume it was unknowingly. Maybe the supplement had been passed by his sports authority - we don't that either.
We don't know what the judge said in this case, but the court is clearly holding the supplement producer accountable - and presumably partly for the reason that they didn't disclose what was in it.
But this is an dazzlingly murky business, with some very shady operators involved. Check the above linked report from Prague Daily Monitor. The supplement maker is strongly denying it put the drug in the product. Is Aminostar a recognised and respectable company?
Did someone else put the steroid there? Someone who might have had an interest in Petr Novak's performance? Have batches of the same product been tested and indicated presence of the same drug?
This is an area where very comprehensive factual information is needed before definitive judgements are made. Ultimately bodies like the FIS and IOC hold the athlete absolutely responsible for what's in their bodies, irrespective of the circumstances - Alain Baxter being the clearest example of this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
