What The %$@% Is Meldonium??

Al Truscott

Apparently, WADA added this drug, one of Latvia's biggest exports, to its list of banned substances at the start of the year. Athletes seem to have been taking it for years; Maria Sharapova since 2006! I scouted around, and found this blog post which is very thorough:

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

Key quote: "...there is evidence to suggest that Meldonium could be ... beneficial under the low oxygen conditions induced by intense endurance exercise..."

Paul Hough

Obviously, a PED that flew under the nose of WADA for many years. ST posted a link in the past week of a triathlete searching for deets about it (and other PEDs) in a cheater's forum (the original post was late fall 2015 when it the forthcoming ban was announced). The perp wanted to know the half-life, when to quit taking before a race to avoid detection, how often to take it, where to get, etc. It was eye opening to see someone so straightforward about his open intent to cheat. No name of course, but he said he was M30-34 looking to improve performance in his races. I am not even shocked at how many pro athletes seem to have had a condition that required Melodium. It's just more of the same old news. You would have to be pretty naïve to think that all of the cheating in the pro ranks of other endurance sports has not filtered over into pro triathlon. And whatever amount of cheating people think is going on, I am sure it is 5 times that...including the Age Group ranks.

William Jenks

Thanks for looking that up.

To give her the benefit of the doubt, just because she's been taking it doesn't mean it's for nefarious purpose, but she should surely have known that it got added to the list. If I'm an image-based top pro athlete, I surely pay someone to let me know about the WADA changes... On the other hand, maybe she's been using it as a PED all along.

That article only briefly addresses the usage of it...is there a plausible use for someone who is a young elite athlete? She apparently said something about Mg deficiency and history of diabetes. I did a quick web search and didn't see it mentioned as a treatment for chronic Mg deficiency, but I could have just missed it. I presume ischemia is a consequence of diabetes, but it's not clear to me that a "family history" would justify chronic usage.

Paul Hough

Either all these athletes have the same medical condition and their doctors all prescribe the same medication, or their trainers/coaches are all aware of the performance enhancing effects and know where to get it for their athletes. Life experience tells us it is the latter. I'm going to guess that 1) she was not taking it for a medical condition, 2) she knew of the ban as did the others, and 3) incorrectly assumed that WADA would not start immediate testing. WADA jumped out hard and wham, bam, slam surprised the crap out of these athletes. Probably 10 or more for each one popped was still using and immediately went off them as they read about the others being nailed.

JeremyBehler

The company that makes the drug came out today and said the intended usage window is 4-6 weeks, so anyone taking it for 10+ years like Maria allegedly had been is clearly using it for a purpose other than its intended use.

I agree that PEDs are likely more prevalent than anyone would like to think...both in Pro and AG ranks. I also think that groups like the WADA are pushing water uphill as there are many more people working to find a way around or through the rules vs. those enforcing them. Meldonium is the perfect example...been around for decades and only recently banned.

Coach Rich

I read today on the Interwebs somewhere that the Russian military would give it to their troops, without their knowledge, in Afganistan to help them endure, etc. So...visions of Maria standing side by side with Rambo in Rambo Whatever, the one where he shoots down the Hind attack helo with an arrow.

Chris Oubre

It seems like a constant battle, albeit one with grey battle lines. We get bent out of shape over this drug or that, but dropping 4k on wheels and optimized bike chains are legit.

I'm not advocating the use of PEDs. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy. If two athletes weight the same, train the same, have the same W/kg, FTP, etc...execute the same and so on, the one with the P5 and Roka swim skin wins.

For me I guess the line is around things that harm your body and just accept that technology and $$ will provide one edge. That's why I'm drawn to hard courses. There the brain normalizes out the people that have more $$ and training bandwidth then me. I will out execute them. At least that's what I tell myself.

JeremyBehler

Chris - I disagree with your premise that it's hypocritical. While the gear you can buy isn't cheap, and as a result isn't available to everyone, it is legal. So it's not necessarily fair or an equal playing field the rules are clear on what is and isn't allowed.

I do agree that if you were taking Melodium prior to 2016 that wouldn't be illegal and that's where things get very grey. Is taking a legal drug/supplement that is intended for something other than performance enhancement ethical? That's for each person to decide but it clearly isn't illegal.

Chris Oubre

No disagreements with legality. And rules are rules. We all know them. Follow them. Regarding enhancers, we all take them

Whether it's caffeine or trying to up your ginger intake or some other food/supliment. My point was one of how we react to different performance enhancers.

A pro foot ball player gets banged up, takes a steroid shot and is back on the field at half time

A triathlete takes steroid shots and is a dopper.

Like I said, I agree with the line drawn at things that cause bodily harm. And I totally understand that expensive gear sells ads and leads to sponsorships and thus races. So it's a win even for those that can't afford the gear.

Paul Hough

@ Chris, I have to chime in with Jeremy. I don't think its hypocritical at all, and further, I think you vastly overestimate the impact of technology (thanks to marketing). Watch the pros change bike contracts every year like musical chairs. Granted they are going from top of the line brand X to top of the line brand Y, but they do it without hesitation unless a product becomes truly inferior (Orbea anyone?). Further, a well fitted mid brand wetsuit can be far superior to a top of the line wetsuit that doesn't fit right and can never fit right because the template it was built upon doesn't work for your body type. And even PEDs aren't equal in effect. Lance Armstrong referred to T, Steroids and HGH as "one percenters" and EPO as a "ten percenter". His argument is that you could dope yourself silly with the other stuff but EPO was such a game changer that it forced other tour riders to use that too.

Regardless, as you said, one path is legal and one path is against the rules. Following the rules of the sport is ethical, and skirting the rules is not. That's black and white enough for me. I'm also open to folks changing the rules.

robin sarner

never heard of this being used for heart conditions in this country.     

aside from the performance enhanced controversy:

the eastern European version of allopathic medicine is weird at times.     though countries like Cuba seem to produce good clinicians that make do with minimal technology and do a lot of good for third world medicine. 

William Jenks

The 4-6 weeks thing seems pretty convincing, unless evidence comes out to the contrary that there is a real long-term usage. And still, she should have known that it was hitting "the list" even if it was a legitimate chronic prescription.

Soccer (which I admit has its own ethical problems!) has a concept of things needing to follow the spirit of the game/rules. To that extent, there is a notion that there is an "ethic" that extends beyond the limited written rules. For example, a player is supposed to be carded for intentionally fouling at the last possible legal moment (the "professional foul") before it would turn into a PK or it would turn into a DOGSO foul that requires a red card. This is more or less the equivalent of intentionally fouling a basketball player to stop them from scoring on a breakaway...which in basketball is considered just part of the rules...trade a foul call for not making the basket.

I guess my point in bringing this up is that I think you can imagine unethical things that are not against the rules unless your only definition of ethics is following the written rules. The problem with the inverse is that it's so hard to police it appropriately. Presumably, TUEs and some allowance on certain drugs (caffeine, albuterol, etc) are flawed efforts to help deal with that.

Paul Hough

Melodium was on a watch list last year ... totally legal ... while WADA was assessing its impact on sport. Apparently there was either a medical epidemic of heart conditions for high profile athletes or the pros were all very aware of the performance enhancing aspects. As I noted above, life experience tells us that athletes were not using this for medical conditions. Meanwhile, Nike, Tag Heuer, and one other major sponsor have dropped Shapirova.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tennis/2016/03/09/meldonium-was-used-by-almost-500-athletes-at-european-games/

Robert Sabo

I just don't understand why she didn't stop. She was warned with plenty of time. Personality flaw?