Winston Thomas’ take on TUEs: Try the system first, then complain
Winston at Sacramento General Assembly.
Winstonâs note to me continues:
I would suggest that athletes read the TUE Guidelines on the WMA Website, or ask their affiliates, try the system, then complain, rather than making blanket statements.
Much has changed for master in the anti-doping role and granting of TUEs, so that it is possible for athletes with genuine medical need to get a TUE, dependent on the medications, of course. It would also help that you give a balanced view of the reasons for anti-Doping and not make ânoisesâ about EuroVets.
WMA has been doing testing since 1995, so please do not give the impression that this has anything to do with Europe, it has to do with athletes cheating, think they are above the rules, think they will never be tested, or just cannot be bothered to fill out a TUE application.
One final point: USA is one of the affiliates that take time to inform their athletes, so there can be no excuses.
Try reading the TUE Regulations on the WMA website.
12 Responses
Former British Masters Athletics Federation (BMAF) Chairman and present WMA Secretary Winston Thomas is the man who pronounced that it was not against IAAF rules for his British team manager to smuggle a British athlete past the Call Room at 2006 WMA Linz and instead banned his loyal British masters athlete for complaining about it for one year, without hearing or appeal. That should have disqualified Winston Thomas from any position in athletics for life. Instead they made him Chairman WMA Law and Legislation Committee.
I had three different and unrelated physicians present reports, four lab tests showing almost 0 testosterone, three years of medical records, including MANY connective tissue injuries that required surgery, etc. I was rather quickly denied a TUE.
I’m a masters athlete for 5 years now, and have competed in many meets. As long as the drugs or medications are on the banned list for us to know about, there should’nt be a problem with testing. Stop complaining Masters Athletes. I want to know I’m competing against others that don’t have an advantage, best man or woman win. We all want to get better performances out of our bodies, but only the clean fair way. The ones that are on something banned, all have reasons, or say its not an advantage. Would they want all the athletes their competing against on something banned, and they get beat in a meet?
Bubba (no. 2): Thanks for this information. We have seen from Winston Thomas (see the main post) that “the TUE standards are different” for masters.
Bubba, I am guessing that you are 58 years old. You make almost no testosterone, and you supplied excellent documentation. It did not take long for you to be denied a TUE.
What we need at this time is much more of this kind of information, 500 times more. What are the approximate chances of getting a TUE for the different banned drugs? In the case of testosterone for a man of your age it appears that the percentages are very low indeed.
I have a special interest in diabetes, a disorder that is very common in older Americans. Insulin is a banned drug. If I have type 1 diabetes, what are my chances of getting a TUE for insulin? Are they 100%, 75%, 25%? This is information that would be useful. Now, what if I have type 2 diabetes? Are my odds the same?
If my physician prescribes a diuretic for my high blood pressure (let’s say she prefers diuretics to other drugs for cases like mine), what are my chances of receiving a TUE for this banned drug? Are they 100%,50%, 0%? I would like to know.
Of course, we can’t get exact percentages, but for people to believe fully in the system we need empirical data on the outcomes of the TUE process for the different banned drugs. You, Bubba, have started things by giving us some data.
Then let’s start with some basic data. At the 2011 Sacramento World Masters Championships how many athletes competed with TUEs and what was the distribution between men and women?
Thanks Peter. I think if you use testosterone you will never get a TUE. One WADA testing service VP told me that testosterone is and will never be legal in sport no matter how old you are or what your problems. “Slippery slope” to get started with he said. I agree.
I follow the rules and don’t use. I’m not upset with drug testing nor “unfair” standards or requirements. What I DO have a problem with is that the lack of testosterone causes me to constantly be injured, many times by doing things that most of you would consider a 60-70% tempo effort. I’ll accept that and continue on.
Yesterday, AGAIN, I had to stop during a competition (Texas vs. Louisiana) for another minor strain that would have blown up with one more jump. Fortunately I had won when I quit. The fact is that I RARELY complete my allotted jumps. Again, I live with that and I’m OK with it because we all have the same rules.
My other problem is occasionally being suspected of using, even though I make no testosterone. I just work my butt off. Like Kathy, appearance rarely tells the back story. Here is a photo of me the morning of National Senior Games. I had to withdraw tied for the lead. This is what a body looks like that eats its own muscle for fuel. Like bailing water out of a boat. http://www.bubbapv.com/preNSG.jpg
Again, Iâm fine with it. Just don’t like frequent injuries from lower level activities or being suspected of using because I work hard. THAT is why I have come out so vocal. It would be nice if they changed some rules but I expect they never will, yet you will continue to see me at the big meets. But at least now you may look at me a little differently. đ Bubba
As a follow up, I don’t even take a multivitamin. Just don’t believe in supplements. I did a big study/presentation once for the AAF and double blind studies showed no performance improvement, 87% of elite athletes listed their reason for taking them was , “Just in case they work”, and that most athletes are inconsistent with their supplements and mainly took them when they trained. I know we are different and need more but I just never started taking them again after I finished that research.
As far as I know for diuretics a TUE is easy to get. Diuretics are no PED themselves but are used by PED-users to mask certain chemical signs in the testing. (I personally am not on whatever medicine or supplement, excep B12 as I am vegan.)
Anthony, Get over it. No one cares, not back then and certainly not now. You’re the victim of your own obnoxious behavior.
You’re quite the pitiful sort as you turn every discussion back to you and your years old grievance, no matter the initial topic.
Shut your pie hole.
Pie??? Why yes, thank you for suggesting it.
I had an excellent run this afternoon and my lovely wife just happened to bake a fresh apple pie today, from scratch mind you. Think I’ll go have a third slice đ
Don. Actually, I am a polite and well-behaved English gentleman – someone you could learn much from. Let’s be friends.
Don Bailey again, with feeling: What I wrote is relevant to this topic. BMAF Chairman and WMA Secretary Winston Thomas disgracefully supported his own GBR team managerâs infringement of the IAAF Call Room rules. But breaking the Call Room rules has all sorts of ramifications, even extending to doping. What could have happened if British Team Manager Maurice Doogan had succeeded in smuggling that athlete past the Call Room at Linz?
I will explain for you. The name of the athlete actually running would not have tallied with the name on the Final Call Room List for the GBR M65 4x200m relay team. Identifying the athlete who actually competes goes to the essentials of the Call Room system; it is at the core of any sport. That is why I filed the complaint. And if you do not care about that central issue Don, then I have no hope for you.
Anyway, we had two possible scenarios – and enter the drug testers.
Scenario 1. The athlete ran who was officially passed by the Call Room.
Drug tester takes name from final Call Room List. So he gets hold of the right GBR runner, the man who ran. No problem.
Scenario 2. The athlete ran who was smuggled past the Call Room by GBR Team Manager Maurice Doogan. (Hypothetical thanks to me).
Drug tester takes name from Final Call Room List. So he gets hold of the wrong athlete, a man who did not run. Big problems – a lot of GBR explaining to do. Say (purely hypothetically) that athlete tests positive for drugs. What does that athlete say? Well naturally: âHey, hold on. Itâs not me. I did not actually run.â And alternatively how could the testers accuse a man of doping in a race that he did not formally run according to the Final Call Room List?
And how would his GBR team mates – who knew perfectly well who was who, explain all that, the switch and moreâŚ.. The repercussions would have extended far further than the simple disqualification of the GBR team that I feared at the time.
Scenario 2 did not happen only because I had the civic courage not to give in to British Team Manager Maurice Dooganâs obnoxious âTake a chance on nobody noticing. I will cover for you.â
On the other hand, that is what Winston Thomas has defended and that is what damages his credibility to pronounce on any masters athletics matters.
OK Now I have lost you all. The attention span of Internet mobbers is that of a two-year old. But Don Bailey and others. You must free yourself from your authoritarian, conservative straightjackets and start thinking for yourselves. It is not âobnoxious behaviourâ to file a complaint against a team manager and his athletics body. And any other âobnoxious behaviourâ I certainly was not guilty of. Or maybe you know something I do not? In which case, please have the decency to specify and in a context where I can defend myself.
Leave a Reply