Experts perplexed over why Sharapova was taking banned drug

YabbaYabba wrote:

Curiouser and curiouser:

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0WB1GK?utm_source=twitter

Because when you are a cute blonde, it is easier to get away with cheating, perhaps?

Think about "grey areas" and athletes always looking for "legal" PEDs. Every well known PED - EPO, HGH, all steroids etc, etc, - has legitimate medical uses. They were not developed to aid sporting performance. But coaches, sports scientists, managers/agents search through medical journals where new drugs are peer reviewed to see if anything new is coming onto the market which could have applications to sport. If some new drug is found it will be used, and its use become widespread, because there will be a window of several years before WADA gets round to banning the drug. You can bet your life savings that the search for a replacement for Meldonium has already begun, probably began before it was banned, as soon as whispers were heard saying it might be.

For the great majority of elite performers in all sports there are no "grey areas" or "morally doubtful actions" ; if it ain't specifically forbidden it's legal and they will use it!

Read more:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=7098544#ixzz42VrKMBW8

The Overexplainer wrote:

Pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:

Pffft! Cocaine. Or how about the legal version? Adderal.

Red Bull contains caffeine, taurine, B vitamins (B3, B5, B6, B12), sucrose, and glucose.

I have never had any, but could you tell me what cocaine and Adderall have to do with Red Bull?

Both are broadly described as stimulants, like red bull, only better in some ways.

YabbaYabba wrote:

Curiouser and curiouser:

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0WB1GK?utm_source=twitter

I've been in the process of a literature search (scientific, not in the lay press) on this drug, have not really found much. Perhaps I'm way too impatient, but typically when I do a search I find reams of actual peer reviewed scientific papers to evaluate .There are reports that it aids in preventing ischemia in patients with heart failure, reduces angina symptoms however the mechanism of action appears unclear. Additionally, most drugs that are used for ischemia really have do significant effect on exercise capacity in normal healthy subjects because ischemia is a result of a disease process of some kind that does not manifest itself in a normal individual. For example..........Trental is a medication taken sometimes by patients with PVD, due to blood flow issues (usually due to atherosclerosis in the conductance vessels in the leg) and resultant ischemia in the lower extremities. It appears to lower viscosity, however the benefit to a PVD patient is variable, when one reviews the literature. Its unlikely that taking Trental would provide any benefit for an athlete, and has not been studied. Various other "experts" say that Meldonium also "may" aid recovery in athletes and enhance athletic performance, that appears to be based on one study that suggests this might be the case. Once I review the study I will make a determination however I am skeptical. Sounds to me that WADA banned this drug based on one study but primarily due to a large number of European athletes using it. I'm perplexed as well, not sure why she would be taking it, she clearly isn't in heart failure, likely also has no ischemia. And I highly doubt its a PED.

The "experts" are perplexed because the way she was using the drug had nothing to do with how it might be used to treat the only relevant medical issues she had ten years ago. So, the article is actually saying that it is pretty clear that the drug is for performance enhancement and not for medical treatment.

Sharapova grew up in the west and speaks perfect English, but her family and support crew are very Russian. She had access to the best doctors in the world to deal with health issues in 2006 when she was ranked no. 1. She did not need to take some Eastern European drug that was not approved by the FDA. She obviously took it because it gave her a boost.

Sharapova's game is 100% power. She hits every shot like a winner. She has always had trouble going three sets because she hits so hard and is a big girl at 6'2" (although she has a light frame for her size). A drug that aids with endurance and recovery is exactly what she needs to help her be competitive. She clearly took this drug because it helped her tennis.

Do you all really think that was the ONLY PED she's been taking over the last ten years??

With the possible exception of first time E.P.O users, most dopers try a whole pharmacy of drugs.

In her case, you can see obvious signs of steroid usage as well. Pretty much public knowledge on the circuit.

Junk Master wrote:

Do you all really think that was the ONLY PED she's been taking over the last ten years??

With the possible exception of first time E.P.O users, most dopers try a whole pharmacy of drugs.

In her case, you can see obvious signs of steroid usage as well. Pretty much public knowledge on the circuit.

I have no idea, as I don't follow tennis. One would think however that had she tested positive for any of the other banned drugs, it would have made headlines as this one did. Clearly she did not. I'm still skeptical that Meldonium can actually be considered a PED, based on the evidence I've seen to date. As I do further research, I can certainly change my mind if warranted by the data.

"Following Sharapova's announcement, Russian supplements website RUPharma told BBC Sport it is had sold 150 packets of the drug in 24 hours, compared with 850 in the past 12 months.

The website says it has increased the price of a packet of 40 250mg tablets from £15 to £27 and employ a new member of staff to deal with the demand.

'As a joke, we now call mildronate the Sharaponate,' said a spokesperson, who added that most of their sales are to UK and USA customers and the majority are for sport, rather than medicinal, use."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/35758901

It was not banned until this year...

YabbaYabba wrote:

Curiouser and curiouser:

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0WB1GK?utm_source=twitter

Read some weasel words about her meldonium bust.

A) Maria never took meldonium, she took mildronate. I’m in the process … I’ve yet to review those forms so I can’t answer that question. I simply do not know

Guppy wrote:

This is honestly a non-issue for me. She has been taking it for 10 years, but it was not banned. While it may be a PED, it WAS NOT BANNED. Therefore, she did NOT break the rules. It was just recently added to the banned list, something she obviously was genuinely unaware of as she'd have had to have been an idiot to keep taking it while knowing it was a banned substance. She unknowingly broke the rules shortly after the rules were changed, and she's been honest and upfront about it. I think everyone should go extremely lightly on her.

Ignorance is not an excuse. She should have known. The WADA banned list for 2016 was published in September of last year. A quick google search and you can fine the list and Melodnonium is on the list. Her story about not clicking a link in an E-mail does not compute and is clearly just a cover to try and win in the court of public opinion where people don't understand the doping controls process. Sharapova had every opportunity to know this drug was going to be banned months before 2016 began.

This drug also should have been banned long ago. It's clear that WADA just didn't realize athletes were using it. Given this is a prescription drug that is not easily attainable athletes using this as a performance enhance were cheating. I know it wasn't against the rules but still very unethical. The reality is WADA is always going to be a step behind the cheaters since what they do is reactionary.

Indeed she should have, she was at fault. I suppose that what's lost in all this hype is that from the scientific perspective, it does not, however, appear to be a PED.

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

I suppose that what's lost in all this hype is that from the scientific perspective, it does not, however, appear to be a PED.

Superficial arguments by a centi-millionaire accessory to a criminal conspiracy to evade US drug laws.

She's a semi-permanent resident of the US. How does she acquire the non-approved "prescription" medication? It is illegal to import an FDA non-approved drug into the US. Either she is violating the US law or she is going to great lengths to circumvent the law. If the latter is true she is certainly aware that she was legally in a grey area (for ten years!).

In either case she was undoubtedly aware of adverse consequences that could await her should her conduct be made public. That is, she had a provable guilty mind - which is key to the validity of showing her in violation of the doping rules once WADA banned the drug.

Beyond that is the certainty that a powerful drug like this would certainly have adverse side effects - no respectable physician would prescribe such a medication (even if legal inside the US or inside Russia) unless necessary to address an underlying medical condition. Given the unknown side effects, her history of injuries was as likely to have been aggravated by the drug as ameliorated by the drug. So she's an idiot as well ( in spite of her well spoken eloquence at her press conference). But this kind of idiocy, shared by a substantial portion of professional athletes, should not be a defense against a clear cut violation of the doping rules.

What about the tennis players better than her? What are they on?

Citizen Runner wrote:

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

I suppose that what's lost in all this hype is that from the scientific perspective, it does not, however, appear to be a PED.

https://jakegshelley.wordpress.com/2016/03/03/what-is-melodoniummildronate/

I reviewed 192 studies, did not find one that supports those claims in the article. Nor was I able to locate any (one was in Russian and I could only view the abstract) to review the experimental design, which is critical in the determination of study integrity. Physiological effects that "suggest" a PED function do not mean that there is an association. I stand by my previous assertion, unless convinced otherwise by being able to actually view the studies themselves, the design and the actual data.

Guppy wrote:

The only problems I do think might be significant are regarding WHY she was taking it and HOW she was getting it. From the little bit I've read, it sounds like this drug is unobtainable or nearly so in the US, and that she seems to have gone over to doctors in Eastern Europe to get this drug specifically and then transported it back to the US. I would imagine there are some issues involved with all of that.

Here in Latvia (btw where the drug was invented 30 years ago) you can buy Mildronats (meldonium) in any local pharmacy. You don't need a prescription for that. For around $6.50 you will get 20 blister pack with each tablet containing 250 mg meldonium. Now when you have bought the pack it's just that you need to put it in the bag and go wherever you like including USA. I don't see any problem with that.

Also the drug is was very popular here among athlete before banning. I think here in Latvia there is no athlete in any sport who hasn't taken Mildronats at some point in time. At least all the athletes I know has taken it at some point. When I was 15 or 16 our coach gave us Mildronats when we were on the training camps to support the higher training loads. Mostly it's prescribed for those who has overtrained.

Personally I have never experienced any difference but I used it rarely and for short period of times, a span of two weeks maybe. For a long time I was doubtful if it really works at all and compared it mostly to placebo. Few years ago my sports cardiologist suggested not to take it, instead to go with extra magnesium. He said that "you don't want to grow your heart any bigger, do you". Until banning Mildronats was also very popular among athletes from nearest neighboring countries - Estonia, Lithuania, Finland, Sweden, Russia, Belarus and perhaps more.

To be honest I don't see any real reason why it was banned. It wasn't something that would give you a free ticket to Rio, I would rather compare it to magnesium or any other dietary supplement. As I said I didn't felt any difference when I was using it few years ago. For me it seems that the reason is something else, perhaps pharmacy business interests.

alanson wrote:

Beyond that is the certainty that a powerful drug like this would certainly have adverse side effects - no respectable physician would prescribe such a medication (even if legal inside the US or inside Russia) unless necessary to address an underlying medical condition.

I haven't heard of any side effects whatsoever but there might be some. It might account for growing your heart bigger after long time usage (I mean months and years). At least that was what my sports cardiologist said to me once.

You have to do a search for the more popular name, mildronate.

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

I've been in the process of a literature search (scientific, not in the lay press) on this drug, have not really found much.