Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

news

Four-year doping ban for Swiss cyclist who tested positive for three banned substances

Time trial specialist Kevin Winter blamed contaminated supplement – but anti-doping body was having none of it

A Swiss cyclist who tested positive for three banned substances has been handed a three-year ban after anti-doping authorities rejected his excuse that a contaminated supplement was to blame.

Time trial specialist Kevin Winter tested positive for metenolone, stanozolol and testosterone following an out of competition test in January last year, reports Inside The Games.

The 29-year-old, provisionally suspended since May 2019, claimed he had “never knowingly doped” and that a contaminated dietary supplement was the cause of the positive test.

However, that excuse did not wash with the disciplinary committee of the Swiss National Olympic Committee, which said that Winter “could not or did not want to provide any exculpatory evidence” to back that up.

He has been banned until May 2023 and was also fined CHF3,927.10 (£3,300).

The country’s national anti-doping agency said in a statement: “Antidoping Switzerland reminds all athletes that the anti-doping regulations are based on the principle of strict liability.

“This means that every athlete bears sole responsibility for the substances found in his or her doping samples.”

Winter has twice finished in the top 20 of the French time trial event, the Chrono Champenois, won in the past by reigning world time trial champion Rohan Dennis and by the Italian national time trial champion Filippo Ganna, both now at Team Ineos. 

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

15 comments

Avatar
Rick_Rude | 3 years ago
3 likes

Wish I could buy some contaminated supplements. Seems only athletes are unlucky enough to ever buy them.

Avatar
mdavidford replied to Rick_Rude | 3 years ago
2 likes

But how do you know you, and many others, aren't buying contaminated supplements? I assume your local anti-doping agency aren't regularly turning up at your house demanding blood and urine samples?

Avatar
Compact Corned Beef replied to mdavidford | 3 years ago
0 likes

A colleague's husband is an elite runner and he buys more expensive dietary supplements that are all batch tested to ensure purity. Worth a few extra quid if you know you're going to be giving someone your wee in the near future!

Avatar
Sriracha replied to mdavidford | 3 years ago
0 likes
mdavidford wrote:

But how do you know you, and many others, aren't buying contaminated supplements? I assume your local anti-doping agency aren't regularly turning up at your house demanding blood and urine samples?

I think the implied subtext is that Mr Rude is not noticing much up-tick in his performance despite the supplements.

Avatar
Rick_Rude replied to mdavidford | 3 years ago
1 like

Because only CHEATING BASTARDS end up with contaminated supplements. You really think the supplement industry is putting oral steroids, etc in supplements when the reality is they're making it as cheaply as possible. 

The motogp rider Andrea Iannone tried the contaminated food one recently but the steroid was pretty designer and not the stuff farmers would use if they were even going to do that. Once again CHEATING BASTARDS. That's what I'm getting at. I'm astounded anyone would believe there are expensive PEDs in suppplements. 

As has also been mentioned, if in doubt stick to a WADA or whatever approved list. 

Avatar
mdavidford replied to Rick_Rude | 3 years ago
1 like

So your evidence that there are no contaminated supplements is that only cheats end up consuming PEDs, and your evidence that only cheats end up consuming PEDs is that there are no contaminated supplements.

Seems a little circular.

Avatar
Sriracha replied to mdavidford | 3 years ago
0 likes

To be fair, Rude's 'evidence' ('arguments really) that there are no contaminated supplements is that the alleged contamination being more expensive and esoteric than the supplement makes it unlikely - you don't tend to find a cheap product 'contaminated' by significant amounts of a more expensive product.

So the people who end up claiming they innocently used a "contaminated supplement" must be cheats, because the supplements didn't contaminate themselves.

Avatar
mdavidford replied to Sriracha | 3 years ago
0 likes

Not sure that washes though - nuts are (relatively speaking) quite expensive, and you find all sorts of cheaper foods coming with warnings that they could be contaminated with them. Trying to make things as cheaply as possible is exactly when I would expect the potential for contamination, if the two things are being manufactured in the same location.

Avatar
Sriracha replied to mdavidford | 3 years ago
0 likes

Performance enhancing nuts? Clutching at straws now.

Avatar
mdavidford replied to Sriracha | 3 years ago
1 like

Hmm - I think you know that's not what I wrote.

Avatar
Sriracha replied to mdavidford | 3 years ago
0 likes

OK, you rumbled me.

But, you see, for your food industry example of a nut-free food being contaminated with nuts to be illuminating here, we would have to assume a manufacturer of legal dietary supplements also packages illegal performance enhancing drugs alongside (with a warning on the label - may contain illegal performance enhancing drugs). In your example the nuts are the analogue of the PEDs. Hence performance enhancing nuts. Unlikely.

Avatar
mdavidford replied to Sriracha | 3 years ago
0 likes

Hence the 'if' clause in my comment. I'm assuming that's how the people involved are claiming that the contamination has occurred. How likely that is I don't know - I'd leave that up to the relevant authorities to decide. It doesn't seem entirely out of the question to me though - a lot of these PEDs are only 'illegal' in the sporting sense, and a pharmaceutical company could conceivably be producing both sports supplements and therapeutic drugs.

Avatar
Sriracha replied to mdavidford | 3 years ago
0 likes

then I'd expect a warning on the label at the very least. It's sounding like a non-starter to me: Wizzo-whey-protein...may contain banned substances.

Avatar
Velovoyeur | 3 years ago
0 likes

No doubt, he considered them as supplements until he failed a test when they became contaminated supplements. As it says on all drugs - always read the label.

Avatar
Sriracha | 3 years ago
0 likes

Dope!

Latest Comments