Should Chris Froome race?

Last November, the British paper, the Guardian and the French paper, Le Monde, reported that 4-time Tour de France winner Chris Froome had tested for a “specified” substance salbutamol. Every cycling fan knows about this positive outcome is crystal-clear as it is, however, it still is coke-bottle clear for most.

The reason is the word, “specified”. According to the World Anti-doping Agency (WADA) a specified substance is, “a substance which potentially allows, under defined conditions, for a greater reduction of a sanction when an athlete tests positive for that particular substance.”

The substance, salbutamol, is a drug used for asthmatics. Under WADA rules, the use of salbutamol as an “inhaler” is allowed but the legal amount should be not more than 1000 ng/mL. Chris Froome’s value was double than that. WADA says, “the presence in urine of salbutamol in excess of 1000 ng/mL or formoterol in excess of 40 ng/mL is presumed not to be an intended therapeutic use of the substance and will be considered as an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) unless the Athlete proves, through a controlled pharmacokinetic study, that the abnormal result was the consequence of the use of the therapeutic dose (by inhalation) up to the maximum dose indicated above.”

I’m not going to delve more into the science but I’ll explain what salbutamol does to the body. If you want to be a successful endurance athlete, like cyclists, you need too have a a good power to weight-ratio. In other words, the lesser your body weight while not losing muscle mass, the more efficient you will be. Salbutamol, allows your body to lose weight without losing muscle mass. Injectable and oral salbutamol are illegal but inhaled salbutamol is not under a certain amount.

That Froome’s salbutamol level was twice the normal limit is a fact, but he said that he never took it as a PED since he is a life long asthma sufferer. Now, UCI rules allows Froome to race but some quarters are concerned that if Froome wins a race while the case is being heard and he is found guilty later, then it would put the race and professional cycling in a bad light.

So the conundrum is this: “Should Froome be allowed to race with the sword of Damocles hanging over the sports’ head or should he and his team took the high road and wait for the investigation to be concluded?” The letter of the law is very clear, Froome can race, but what about the spirit of the law?

In my opinion, Froome should race and people should stop talking about him not racing. If they want Froome to stop racing, then there should be no ambiguity about the rules of the use of salbutamol or any drug. WADA should say, legal or illegal. No purgatory, no fence sitting.

Team SKY has invested a lot of money on Froome and it would be a business loss to the company if its biggest asset is siting down. Besides, Froome might think that keeping a low profile would be interpreted as being guilty.

In the end, there are no winners here. The only way for this problem to resolved is to make a fine print: legal or illegal.