Principled WADA scientist resigns

[572cv]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17586597

Some thoughtful comments included in the article.

[thwart]

Yeah, when I read an article in which he was interviewed a couple of yrs ago after Landis came out about doping, I wondered how long he'd have that kind of freedom to talk...

[Nooch]

Big interview on NYVelocity.com, too:

http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2012/behind-scenes-contador-cas-hearing-michael-ashenden

[Charles M]

The counter argument to this is simple an no place near as bad as is being hyped (or bitched about by this guy)...


Think battle strategy.

You don't want your nerds talking testing any more than you would want your top generals talking about how you're planning and fighting a war.


That's it...


This guy saying that he should be allowed to talk because he asks cyclists to talk is damn foolish.

And it's for the same reasons you want to get info from captured enemies or spies, but don't want your own people talking....



This is common sense, not muzzling and if this guy really wants to fight doping he should think about the fact that the cheaters are also listening to every detail he will give...

[Fixed]

book coming soon
cheers

[dnades]

nyvelocity article is good. thanks for the link.

[dumbod]

This sums up my problem with WADA et al. I don't trust anyone who believes that s/he is on a "mission from God", even if that mission is well intended. By and large, zealots fail to see that the ends seldom, if ever, justify the means and wind up doing anything to further the cause regardless of the other consequences.

[Joachim]

Just to be clear, he did not "resign" from WADA, he will not serve on the Lausanne's Athlete Passport Management Unit anymore. He is still on the WADA expert panel. And on a side note, I would really like to know how many people here actually know how the anti-doping system and testing works? Most/all (other) scientists I know are definitely not on a "mission from god" in their anti-doping efforts. This is usally the reason why I try to restrain myself from commenting on anti-doping testing and procedures on forums. It usually turns into a cyclingnews.com discussion over hidden agenda's, the French etc...

[benb]

I think it's in everyone's interests for the scientists/labs not to be talking to the media, so good riddance if he thinks it's important for him to be able to talk about stuff that ought to be confidential.

It's people like him that lead to the press knowing about an athlete's positive "A" test before the athlete knows and before the "B" sample has been tested.. which causes a lot of media circus and is a big part of cycling's bad reputation IMO.

I would imagine there is some ego incentive for him to want to talk about stuff as well, if not a financial incentive to talk to the press. I'm sure it must be a nice boost to see yourself mentioned in the press.

Note: Not saying he is the one who has leaked tests in the past, it just makes sense that confidentiality agreements would be put in place to try and control the leaks.

[Charles M]

But in this case it's a scientist who is directly involved and does know all the details Who is suggesting a hidden agenda is the reason he's being asked not to leak details...

[Black Dog]

Come on. Do you really think that he is going to give up detailed technical info that can be used to circumvent controls? This is a muzzle being put on the scientists.

There are no great secrets about the testing because the procedures are all peer reviewed and fully disclosed during any court challenge to a negative result.

The counter argument to this is simple an no place near as bad as is being hyped (or bitched about by this guy)...


Think battle strategy.

You don't want your nerds talking testing any more than you would want your top generals talking about how you're planning and fighting a war.


That's it...


This guy saying that he should be allowed to talk because he asks cyclists to talk is damn foolish.

And it's for the same reasons you want to get info from captured enemies or spies, but don't want your own people talking....



This is common sense, not muzzling and if this guy really wants to fight doping he should think about the fact that the cheaters are also listening to every detail he will give...

[bobswire]

Just to be clear, he did not "resign" from WADA, he will not serve on the Lausanne's Athlete Passport Management Unit anymore. He is still on the WADA expert panel. And on a side note, I would really like to know how many people here actually know how the anti-doping system and testing works? Most/all (other) scientists I know are definitely not on a "mission from god" in their anti-doping efforts. This is usally the reason why I try to restrain myself from commenting on anti-doping testing and procedures on forums. It usually turns into a cyclingnews.com discussion over hidden agenda's, the French etc...

Pretty much sums up my feeling on the whole thing. Zealots crave a soapbox ,a scientist needs to stick to facts not preach.

[Black Dog]

Leaked results do not come with a signed card. How can you say that it is people like him that are leaking results? What evidence are you basing this statement on? Too bad Contador's results were leaked; how inconvenient for the UCI which tried to suppress it. Cycling's bad reputation is a results of the cheaters and not those that try and catch them.

I agree that no one should be told of test results by the media and leaks are very bad form unless the truth is being suppressed. What ought to be confidential is the question at hand and the answer to that should always be as little as possible. Secrecy breeds corruption and suppresses criticism. Nice of you to accuse him of finical conflict of interest and excessive ego. Again what evidence to do you have to make such scathing comments and accusations?

By the way, all leaks of results ahead of scheduled release are a breach of contract by the person making them, be it the janitor or the head of the lab or WADA.

I think it's in everyone's interests for the scientists/labs not to be talking to the media, so good riddance if he thinks it's important for him to be able to talk about stuff that ought to be confidential.

It's people like him that lead to the press knowing about an athlete's positive "A" test before the athlete knows and before the "B" sample has been tested.. which causes a lot of media circus and is a big part of cycling's bad reputation IMO.

I would imagine there is some ego incentive for him to want to talk about stuff as well, if not a financial incentive to talk to the press. I'm sure it must be a nice boost to see yourself mentioned in the press.

Note: Not saying he is the one who has leaked tests in the past, it just makes sense that confidentiality agreements would be put in place to try and control the leaks.

[benb]

Well someone from these organizations is leaking in so many of the famous cases. I am forgetting the name of that French newspaper but they seemingly manage to get a leak in practically ever big case.

Doesn't matter who is doing it within the organization, they all need to respect confidentiality. If that means the lab techs and scientists don't get to be minor media celebrities tough luck.

Even if you're not talking about leaking, what he is doing is the equivalent of giving an interview as an employee and you're constantly throwing management under the bus & revealing internal corporate dirty laundry and company secrets.

You think the guy who wrote the scathing article in the NY Times about Morgan Stanley Smith Barney would have kept his job if he had done that while still employed? Same thing is going on here in my opinion. I don't think a confidentiality agreement/NDA/whatever is unreasonable for these guys.

Now if I want to be amused & titillated by the cycling press as a cycling fan is this a good thing? Hell no.. it is way more amusing to read articles involving leaks out of WADA labs and WADA scientists throwing UCI/WADA/whatever under the bus every day.

[Black Dog]

WADA and the UCI are not private companies. The labs are. Transparency is everything. If there is stuff going on that should not be going on then people in the organization should speak out. Leaks are not stopped by contracts, the person leaking is very much anonymous. How would any more censorship at WADA or the UCI stop an anonymous leak from a private lab to the media?

[CunegoFan]

WADA and the UCI are not private companies. The labs are. Transparency is everything. If there is stuff going on that should not be gaining on then people in the organization should speak out. Leaks are not stopped by contracts, the person leaking is very much anonymous. How would any more censorship at WADA or the UCI stop an anonymous leak from a private lab to the media?
Dont' confuse them with mundane things like common sense.

As long as we are making baseless accusations against the guy then why not roll out the big guns? Let's accuse him of diddling children, ripping off senior citizens with dementia, or anything else that we can just make up. It will give similar scientists second thoughts before they decide not to knuckle under to the corrupt UCI. For those upset with people working against doping in cycling it apears that there is no low low enough. Ghandi could resign out of principle and these guys would by accusing him of fist fights during late nights of bar hopping.

[benb]

The contracts should stop the leaks by providing a penalty if they get caught leaking. If the lab is private put something in the contract with the lab.. lab leak = no more business for the lab.

But that's not the point.. UCI & WADA are constantly saying one thing in public, and then having their members/scientists/labs/whatever contradicting the organization and making things into a media circus.

It's what makes them look like amateurs. Lance or Berto can get their entire PR crew marching to the beat of the same drum but the doping agencies look like children and can't even agree on anything.

I want to see things cleaned up, but the agencies look just as bad as the riders right now. I am not sure how these contracts make the agency look worse unless you believe this guy at face value that it is best for him to be able to say whatever he wants to whomever he wants whenever he feels like it.

[goonster]

it's for the same reasons you want to get info from captured enemies or spies, but don't want your own people talking....

Worst. Analogy. Ever.

[CunegoFan]

I am not sure how these contracts make the agency look worse unless you believe this guy at face value that it is best for him to be able to say whatever he wants to whomever he wants whenever he feels like it.
When he did he say that? Link, please.

What he actually said:

"Of course, I am willing to sign confidentiality clauses which preclude me from sharing any information I encounter in my role as an expert, and that is precisely the clause and contract I signed to be on WADA's Expert Panel. However I am not willing to go further and allow the APMU to censor the expression of my personal opinions about non-confidential matters.

In my opinion, that clause can only serve one purpose, which is to muzzle us experts from giving interviews to the media. I think it's important to have transparency and accountability in all facets of sport and antidoping. As meagre as our role might be, we experts are an independent entity within the Passport program which means we can serve as a canary in the mineshaft, a crosscheck.

As I said earlier, I consider the media's role to be pivotal to maintain antidoping vigilance, and unless the media has access to expert interviews that vein of information will be strangled and eventually expire. We understand the Passport, how it works, and what it can and cannot do. Our opinion and contribution to media is vital. I cannot condone that role being snuffed out, thus I have refused Lausanne's offer to be a part of their expert panel."

[Black Dog]

The contracts are there already! They will loose there job if the get caught. They still leak.

UCI and WADA make their own circus with their official comments and communications! What should the people do when the organization makes ridiculous statements and contradictions? Tow the line and agree with the utter nonsense?


The contracts should stop the leaks by providing a penalty if they get caught leaking. If the lab is private put something in the contract with the lab.. lab leak = no more business for the lab.

But that's not the point.. UCI & WADA are constantly saying one thing in public, and then having their members/scientists/labs/whatever contradicting the organization and making things into a media circus.

It's what makes them look like amateurs. Lance or Berto can get their entire PR crew marching to the beat of the same drum but the doping agencies look like children and can't even agree on anything.

I want to see things cleaned up, but the agencies look just as bad as the riders right now. I am not sure how these contracts make the agency look worse unless you believe this guy at face value that it is best for him to be able to say whatever he wants to whomever he wants whenever he feels like it.