WIGGINS DID TAKE DRUG TO WIN TOUR
Explosive report accuses cycling star of Tour de France doping shame Brailsford slammed as ‘unethical’ and could lose job Olympic rider issues strong denial
THE reputations of Sir Bradley Wiggins and Sir David Brailsford are in ruins after an explosive parliamentary report accused them of cheating to win the 2012 Tour de France.
Published today, the Digital Culture Media and Sport committee’s 54-page ‘combating doping in sport’ report states that Wiggins used the controversial drug triamcinolone to enhance his performance and not for medical reasons. Team Sky leader Brailsford is also eviscerated for the team’s ‘unethical’ use of the drug, raising the question of whether his position is untenable.
The astonishing admission that the use of triamcinolone by Wiggins and Team Sky was
unethical was made by Shane Sutton, who coached Wiggins to that first British victory in France and Olympic gold in London nine days later. He was also Brailsford’s right-hand man at both Sky and British Cycling. Sutton’s statement alone is hugely damaging to Wiggins, Brailsford and Team Sky.
Wiggins has been under intense scrutiny since Russian hackers revealed in 2016 that he had obtained a medical exemption to use triamcinolone — a powerful corticosteroid that has a history of abuse in cycling because it reduces a rider’s weight without decreasing power — before the 2012 Tour and two other major races.
And Sportsmail’s revelations about a medical package ordered by Team Sky for Wiggins in June 2011 — a Jiffy bag that allegedly contained triamcinolone — led to an investigation by UK AntiDoping and formed a significant part of the DCMS inquiry into the abuse of performance-enhancing drugs in sport.
Last night Wiggins said: ‘I find it so sad that accusations can be made, where people can be accused of things they have never done which are then regarded as facts. I strongly refute the claim that any drug was used without medical need. I hope to have my say in the next few days and put my side across.’
The UKAD investigation exposed a lack of medical record-keeping at Team Sky. They have never been able to provide evidence of the medication administered to Wiggins despite claiming the package contained a legal decongestant. The doctor at the centre of the riddle, Dr Richard Freeman, resigned from the position he still held at British Cycling before facing disciplinary action and is now the subject of an investigation by the General Medical Council.
That investigation is focused on the mysterious delivery of testosterone patches to the headquarters of Team Sky and British Cycling in Manchester. It places the team under yet more scrutiny at a time when their star rider, Chris Froome, is facing a possible doping ban for a failed drugs test.
But the DCMS report, which noted Brailsford’s attempts to persuade this newspaper not to run the Jiffy bag story, is hugely damning, saying:
Wiggins used triamcinolone ‘not to treat medical need, but to improve his power-to-weight ratio ahead of the race’.
Team Sky did ‘cross the ethical line that David Brailsford says he himself drew for Team Sky’.
Wiggins admitted to the committee in written evidence that he had also used triamcinolone out of competition when a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) was not required.
Wiggins possibly used triamcinolone as many as nine times over four years.
A source told the committee that Wiggins and a ‘small group’ of key support riders were ‘all using corticosteroids out of competition to lean down in preparation for the major races’.
The committee were shown ‘ further information’ that the substance requested by Dr Freeman for Wiggins in 2011 ‘was triamcinolone’.
The committee believe Team Sky and British Cycling should pay compensation to UK AntiDoping to cover the cost of their investigation into the Jiffy bag.
It is the conclusion to the section on cycling that is most bruising for Wiggins, Brailsford and Team Sky. ‘From the evidence regarding the use of triamcinolone at Team Sky during the period under investigation, and particularly in 2012, we believe this powerful corticosteroid was being used to prepare Bradley Wiggins, and possibly other riders supporting him, for the Tour de France,’ it reads. ‘The purpose of this was not to treat medical need, but to improve his power-toweight ratio ahead of the race.
‘The application for the TUE for the triamcinolone for Bradley Wiggins, ahead of the 2012 Tour de France, also meant he benefited from the performance-enhancing properties of this drug during the race. This does not constitute a violation of the WADA code, but it does cross the ethical line that David Brailsford says he himself drew for Team Sky. In this case, and contrary to the testimony of David Brailsford in front of the committee, we believe drugs were being used by Team Sky, within the WADA rules, to enhance the performance of riders, and not just to treat medical need.’
The report also says: ‘The committee is not in a position to state what was in the package delivered to Team Sky by Simon Cope at La Toussuire on 12 June 2011.
‘Dr Freeman has stated that it was Fluimucil, and an allegation was made to UKAD, and has been seen by the committee, that says it was triamcinolone. We do not believe there is reliable evidence that it was Fluimucil as Dr Freeman will not now confirm it was and, previously, he was the only reported source of this information.
‘The mystery surrounding the delivery of the package, and the extraordinary lengths to which Team Sky went to obtain an easily available drug delivered to them, have also fuelled speculation as to what the package might have contained. There remains no documented evidence as to what was in the package. If the package contained triamcinolone, which we know Bradley Wiggins, or his team, wanted him to take around 30 May 2011, and it was indeed taken, then the impacts and consequences on all concerned would have been profound.
‘Team Sky’s statements that coaches and team managers are largely unaware of the methods used by the medical staff to prepare pro-cyclists for major races seem incredible, and inconsistent with their original aim of “winning clean”, and maintaining the highest ethical standards within their sport. How can David Brailsford ensure that his team is performing to his requirements, if he does not know and cannot tell, what drugs the doctors are giving the riders? David Brailsford must take responsibility for these failures.’
Wiggins admitted in writing that he had also used triamcinolone out of competition. This contradicts what Brailsford told a parliamentary hearing when asked if Wiggins had used triamcinolone beyond the three occasions when he had a medical exemption. ‘Not to my knowledge,’ he replied.
The report said that ‘ from the evidence presented to the committee it might appear that Bradley Wiggins may have been treated with triamcinolone on up to nine occasions, in and out of competition, during a four-year period. It would be hard to know what possible medical need could have required such a seemingly excessive use of this drug.’
Just as extraordinary is a reference to ‘confidential material from a well- placed and respected source’ about ‘ Bradley Wiggins and a smaller group of riders who trained separately from the rest of the team’. The report says: ‘ The source said they were all using corticosteroids out of competition to lean down in preparation for the major races that season.’ Brailsford previously told the committee such a drug would also be administered for medical reasons.
Sutton explained to the committee that Freeman had informed him in advance that a TUE was ‘in place’ when Wiggins won the Criterium du Dauphine on June 12, 2011. The application for the TUE was actually made on May 30 but
did not start until June 26. As Sutton said when he appeared before the committee, Freeman told him Wiggins had been ‘sorted’ at the end of the race with the medication in the package.
In written evidence Sutton told the committee: ‘[Dr Freeman] told me virtually the minute he got the TUE and I think it was end of May [2011] [but I] can’t be 100 per cent. That’s why I thought everything was above board.’ Fluimucil, the decongestant Freeman claims was in the package, does not require a TUE.
Freeman never appeared before committee, citing ill-heath, but the DCMS asked him to respond after receiving further information that the package contained triamcinolone. Freeman declined to comment.
It emerged during the course of the UKAD investigation into the package that there was no record of what it contained, partly because Freeman did not follow Sky’s own medical protocols and partly because he claims to have had a laptop stolen while on holiday in Greece in 2014.
The committee report said ‘responsibility for the continued doubt on this matter rests on British Cycling, Team Sky and the individuals concerned, all of whom have failed to keep simple records. Such failure was unprofessional and inexcusable.’
It also said ‘both David Brailsford and Dr (Steve) Peters (medical director at the time) must share some of the responsibility.’
The committee said that ‘UK Sport should determine an amount of compensation that should be due to UKAD from British Cycling and Team Sky, to cover the costs of an investigation that was made longer and harder by their failure to keep proper records.’
A statement from Team Sky said they ‘take full responsibility for mistakes that were made’.
They added: ‘However, the report also makes the serious claim that medication has been used by the Team to enhance performance. We strongly refute this. The report also includes an allegation of widespread triamcinolone use by Team Sky riders ahead of the 2012 Tour de France. Again, we strongly refute this allegation. We are surprised and disappointed that the committee has chosen to present an anonymous and potentially malicious claim in this way, without presenting any evidence or giving us an opportunity to respond.’
A statement from British Cycling said: ‘This enquiry had a catalytic effect on our organisation. This report is important, thorough and timely.’
An IAAF statement said: ‘ We thank the DCMS select committee for acknowledging the work that has been done by the IAAF in the last year. In addition, we will write to them to explain some of the more complex aspects of anti- doping that have been misunderstood.’