UCI Transfers Anti Doping Operation to International Testing Agency

Feb 3, 2020
by James Smurthwaite  
n a

The UCI has transferred its anti-doping operation over from the Cycling Anti Doping Federation (CADF) to the International Testing Agency (ITA).

The UCI had worked with the CADF for more than a decade but has now made the switch for a more independent, cross-disciplinary approach. ITA was set up by the Olympic Movement with the support of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and is separate from any sporting governing body. It acts as an umbrella unit and currently manages programmes for more than 40 organisations. The change was sparked after Operation Aderlass, which started in cross country skiing but grew to include cycling atheltes too.

In a statement, the UCI said: "The decision was taken in a context (the Aderlass affair for example) where it has become clear that doping is part of an environment that knows no barriers, neither between sports, nor between countries, and where, in parallel with testing, information (intelligence) has become the central element of any efficient anti-doping programme. By joining the ITA, the UCI, a pioneer in the domain, again demonstrates that it can take decisions necessary to be constantly at the forefront of the fight against doping."

bigquotesThe UCI has been one of the leading federations in the domain of anti-doping for a long time. The collaboration with the ITA will enable us to be stronger than ever in this sector and to thus bolster our defence of clean riders and the credibility of our competitions and all of our sport’s stakeholders.

By joining the ITA, the UCI, a pioneer in the domain, again demonstrates that it can take decisions necessary to be constantly at the forefront of the fight against doping.
David Lappartient

The UCI has stipulated that the ITA must create a dedicated cycling unit and offer all CADF employees to join this unit so that its expertise are preserved within the new structure. CADF will continue to implement its anti-doping programme in 2020 and the switchover should be made from January 1 2020.

Posted In:
Industry News Uci



51 Comments

  • 92 10
 How Rude.
  • 53 8
 This could cause grave changes for some riders.
  • 18 5
 @Larkey1: gotta keep a strong arm against doping!!!
  • 5 1
 I wouldn't rush in to conclusions.
  • 29 3
 @Larkey1: that maes cause problems
  • 7 6
 Always drink from someone else's bottle.
  • 7 1
 the comment section is really juiced up today.
  • 2 3
 Who pissed on there cornflakes
  • 5 1
 Looks like a session
  • 3 2
 Pretty grave pun
  • 2 0
 "The UCI has been one of the leading federations in the domain of anti-doping for a long time."

Is that why it took about a decade, a team mate to come out on television and the person himself to admit to Oprah on live television to catch Lance Armstrong?
  • 22 1
 This should inject a healthy dose of confidence to the screening process.
  • 14 1
 I think it's dope they're taking this seriously !
  • 13 1
 @Luis-Sc: no more pissing about, just in the cup
  • 12 1
 @Luis-Sc: we'll have to wait to see if this is a positive or a negative.
  • 3 3
 Don't lose your bottle, it makes it much harder to share...
  • 3 1
 Hopefully make it hard AAF to cheat. A new era, nay, EPOch in anti-doping
  • 19 1
 Last paragraph: "We're switching to a new agency but they have to create a subunit comprised of all the people from the old agency." So... What?
  • 14 2
 So everyone currently allowing doping to take place can continue to do their very pioneering work. It's the forefront of the fight against the up and comers doping.
  • 1 1
 @Rudy2455: Where does it say that the CADF or its employees were responsible for allowing doping to take place?
  • 3 0
 I think the uci didnt want to be the target of frustrations over policy enforcement any longer. This creates some distance between them and the people who are mad or potentially bringing legal actions. I am guessing the stake holders in uci genuinely feared for the outcomes of legal action and the negative PR association. It sounds like a scapegoat is all it creates though, as the unit will be much the same.
  • 12 0
 Does this give the UCI an out where they can cite plausible deniability on test performed by a 3rd party?
  • 2 0
 ding ding ding....
  • 9 1
 What the spectators want is ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY. If someone is found doping, are there clear rules for how they will be dealt with? Will they publish the decision making process? Will there be specific schedules for investigations and end dates?

At least in MTB, both the decisions for Rude/Graves and Martin Maes took seemingly forever, and were as clear as mud. Whoever in charge of doping needs to show HOW they will get to the final decision, and WHEN they will make it.
  • 7 0
 You know it’s bad when you walk into a pharmacy in Belarus and there’s a poster of the Tour de France peloton on the wall, and a sign that says: 25% off Zumo today!
  • 1 0
 @SirWonky what is Zumo? (from a 1/2 swiss-Canadian)
  • 3 0
 @dr-airtime: its Spanish for “juice” and a common slang term for doping drugs, esp in the 90’s
  • 7 1
 soooooo, all of this will be finalized a month ago???
  • 1 0
 This has to be a good thing. Despite best efforts there is no way that CADF was independent of the UCI when if you visit below I bet the UCI accounts for 80% of CADF's funding. UCI also pissed that someone at CADF leaked the report this week on Jakob Fugslang doping with Ferrari. Jakob had a break out year at 34 years old!

"The funding of the CADF is agreed by a Funding Committee including the key stakeholders, namely the UCI, Association Internationale des Groupes Cyclistes Professionnels (AIGCP), Association internationale des organisateurs de courses cyclistes (AIOCC) and theCyclistes Professionnels Associés(CPA)."

(See full link)

www.cadf.ch/stakeholders-contributions
  • 2 0
 @jamessmurthwaite is this a typo, 2020 twice

CADF will continue to implement its anti-doping programme in 2020 and the switchover should be made from January 1 2020.
  • 5 1
 Dope.
  • 2 0
 So oxymoronic, how baked I’d need to be to read about all these drug testing related initialisms
  • 2 0
 So what's gonna happen now to UCI International Commissaires who had to let go of their role to be Doping Control Officers?
  • 3 2
 Very good, gotta keep a strong no-tolerance policy against those cheating bastards.
Oh excuse me, was that a Rude thing to say?
  • 2 1
 Maes have been
  • 2 0
 So I guess the EWS doesn't need UCI anymore...
  • 1 0
 Here's a thought: give the dope to amateurs so they don't need to buy expensive e-bikes.
  • 1 0
 I'm sorry, did the UCI to be a pioneer in the field of anti doping?
  • 1 0
 Looks like a Reverb bleed kit and a packet of Ibuprofen! And a session!
  • 1 1
 I honestly don't care if enduro riders dope. I am really only interested in what tires they run and how many fork tokens.
  • 1 0
 In summation: Same Animal, Different Fur.
  • 3 3
 I still say there should be DH biking in the summer Olympics
  • 2 1
 I disagree. Cite: The shitshow that is olympic bmx racing.
  • 1 2
 Cocaine is still the preferred drug on the racing scene, doesn’t stay in your system and offer a quick boost!
  • 3 0
 That stuff is straight garbage nowadays. The narco bar-mix is full of shit and leads to soul-crushing depression after about 10 minutes of babbling about the past. No way that will enhance an athletic performance. US drug consumers needs to stop fueling the brutal violence ravaging everywhere south of our border. F'ing sicarios.

www.borderlandbeat.com

www.borderlandbeat.com/2020/02/whats-drug-used-to-deworm-livestock.html#more
  • 3 4
 @endlessblockades: yeah many Americans don't realize that the weed they smoke and the cocaine their favorite presidents/singers/actors/models consume are the major cause of violence and corruption in central and south America, which in turns, causes immigration.
  • 1 1
 @zede: most weed in the states is homegrown ie grown in the states rather than imported
  • 3 0
 @CrispyNuggs: That's right. We don't that ditchweed when some of the world's finest is grown in the US and Canada.

@zede: True.
  • 1 1
 @CrispyNuggs: I'd like to see solid stats on this ? But I any case this wasn't the case pre legalization.

All estimations indicate that Mexican cartels make dozen of billions of dollars each year selling drugs to US. Without this business, there would hardly be so many guns, so much violence and corruption in Mexico
  • 1 0
 Not denying that it also comes across the border with coke and all the problems this causes, but more comes from within the states and across the border with Canada @zede:
  • 2 0
 @CrispyNuggs: I live just below the Emerald Triangle and have had large-scale grower friends. There were a few years where they had to fight off the Mexican cartels who were trying to grow weed here.Imported Mexican weed is a tiny fraction of what gets sold here. - Pre and Post 'legalization' It's still a federal offense to grow here. It's the Mexican meth and the Chinese Fentanyl that is destroying lives.

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2020. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.013635
Mobile Version of Website