Tweet
Originally posted by Shape up
View Post
Why has WADA done this?
The manipulation WADA is targeting here is the use
of an IV infusion to
change blood test results (such as hematocrit where
EPO is being used),
urine tests results (by dilution), use in ‘weight s
ports’ where an infusion will
restore deliberately depleted hydration levels afte
r the ‘weight-in’ and as part
of blood doping.
How should doctors manage the circumstances where t
hey believe an
athlete requires intravenous fluids?
The WADA Code is clear; a retrospective TUE applica
tion should be made to
the appropriate TUE committee. The basis of the app
lication and the
deliberation of the TUEC will be on the interpretat
ion of whether there was an
acute medical situation and whether the infusion wa
s the reasonable
treatment. Therefore the information a doctor will
need to provide to the TUEC
must include the clinical circumstances that demons
trates urgency and the
appropriateness of an infusion.
Unfortunately WADA has deliberately not defined the
se circumstances.
What are examples where it would be reasonable to u
se an IV infusion?
WADA has not as yet given specific guidance.
ASDMAC has discussed the clinical circumstances whe
re the committee
would be comfortable approving a retrospective TUE.
These would include
the treatment of any acute medical condition where
an IV line was essential,
where there are significant acute changes to the vi
tal signs or where there has
been confirmation of the need for an IV by another
independent doctor.
Examples would be a severely dehydrated athlete wit
h signs of circulatory
compromise, the need for an IV line during a surgic
al procedure, an IV line in
the antibiotic treatment of an acute infection, etc
.
What are examples where it would not be reasonable
to use an infusion?
Circumstances where the condition was other than ac
ute and/or there was an
absence of significant change to the vital signs of
the individual.
Examples include the treatment of dehydration witho
ut significant signs of
circulatory stress (weight loss is not considered a
vital sign alone) or the use
of an IV infusion as a ‘recovery’ tool. It is worth
noting that the evidence is that
oral rehydration is superior to IV rehydration unle
ss there are circulatory signs
of collapse.
It goes without saying that any use of an IV infusi
on immediately prior to a
drug test (whether blood or urine) would be conside
red highly su****ious and
should be avoided unless absolutely necessary.
It is worth remembering that an inappropriate use o
f an IV infusion could
generate a doping violation charge against the doct
or-------------- here is a very good article, did floyd meet the criteria NOOOOOOO
The manipulation WADA is targeting here is the use
of an IV infusion to
change blood test results (such as hematocrit where
EPO is being used),
urine tests results (by dilution), use in ‘weight s
ports’ where an infusion will
restore deliberately depleted hydration levels afte
r the ‘weight-in’ and as part
of blood doping.
How should doctors manage the circumstances where t
hey believe an
athlete requires intravenous fluids?
The WADA Code is clear; a retrospective TUE applica
tion should be made to
the appropriate TUE committee. The basis of the app
lication and the
deliberation of the TUEC will be on the interpretat
ion of whether there was an
acute medical situation and whether the infusion wa
s the reasonable
treatment. Therefore the information a doctor will
need to provide to the TUEC
must include the clinical circumstances that demons
trates urgency and the
appropriateness of an infusion.
Unfortunately WADA has deliberately not defined the
se circumstances.
What are examples where it would be reasonable to u
se an IV infusion?
WADA has not as yet given specific guidance.
ASDMAC has discussed the clinical circumstances whe
re the committee
would be comfortable approving a retrospective TUE.
These would include
the treatment of any acute medical condition where
an IV line was essential,
where there are significant acute changes to the vi
tal signs or where there has
been confirmation of the need for an IV by another
independent doctor.
Examples would be a severely dehydrated athlete wit
h signs of circulatory
compromise, the need for an IV line during a surgic
al procedure, an IV line in
the antibiotic treatment of an acute infection, etc
.
What are examples where it would not be reasonable
to use an infusion?
Circumstances where the condition was other than ac
ute and/or there was an
absence of significant change to the vital signs of
the individual.
Examples include the treatment of dehydration witho
ut significant signs of
circulatory stress (weight loss is not considered a
vital sign alone) or the use
of an IV infusion as a ‘recovery’ tool. It is worth
noting that the evidence is that
oral rehydration is superior to IV rehydration unle
ss there are circulatory signs
of collapse.
It goes without saying that any use of an IV infusi
on immediately prior to a
drug test (whether blood or urine) would be conside
red highly su****ious and
should be avoided unless absolutely necessary.
It is worth remembering that an inappropriate use o
f an IV infusion could
generate a doping violation charge against the doct
or-------------- here is a very good article, did floyd meet the criteria NOOOOOOO
the truth keeps on chugging!
You make no sense.
Comment