Conclusions and solutions! (+Premium-NewsPaper)Posted on 24/01/2017, Author: Pitts
IAnyone who has made the effort to read the Duivenkrant or the LVC will agree with me that it is one big burlesque. Scientists that are contradictory, truths that are kept behind, doubts everywhere. Once more, the pigeon sport was negatively in the news! And , according to the KBDB, that is as always due to the press ...! When will this story end? Anyone who knows us knows what our position should is, criticizing is allowed but only if you also have an alternative.
-First of all, the procudure for the doping checks must be amended. We need a good standard procedure, executed by independent vets in order to prevent discussions once and for all.
-checks need to be carried out at other times. By preference during the basketing.
- the list of prohibited products must be fully subject to a new evaluation. On this list, only products that are effectively performance enhancing, should occur. Limit values should be established for ALL products. Limits where all the specialists should agree upon and for which there is never discussion over whatever form of contamination. If there is uncertainty about certain products or their limits, a scientific study must be carried out first. The product can only be put on the doping list if there is 100% clarity.
-The laboratory results must first be evaluated by the specialists of the WAC. Only when this committee states that doping is concerned then the pigeon fancier should be informed who then can apply for a second opinion.
-The fancier must be able to choose from a list of labs where he can have a counter-analysis conducted. There are plenty of labs available.
-the time frame in which the fancier is informed needs to be much shorter or similar to the equestian sport. A negative case will never receive news. Only when the result is positive, the fancier will be advised, whithin the month, by registered letter, after the case was reviewed by the WAC first.
-Lists with negative results should never be published, this to prevent mistakes and speculations. This is not done in other sports either.
-The composition of the WQC needs to be reviewed. Practice Veterinarians should not be allowed. Not that we want to blame people but purely because of ethical reasons and to avoid insinuations. It can not be that vets judge their own customers, never ever.
-The fines should be reasonable and defined in advance by product, not at the randomness of board members.
- The commitment to inspections should be done according to in advance defined criteria. This should not only be the first in the results but fixed in advance. This should not happen on the basis of arbitrariness.
-In cases of doubt, the benefit of the doubt should be given. It’s better that 5 slip through the cracks of the system than one that is falsely accused. Those five will for sure be caught in the future.
Finally, I would like to say that I assume that nobody wanted this malaise. Those responsible have thought to assign the best price-quality lab and the WAC originated from the FV who judged it was better to install also a few veterinarians within this committee. High penalties were imposed because an example needed to be set. But things were done too fast. That all those who have worked on the project have put a lot of time and effort in it, we for sure want to believe, but everyone has to learn from his mistakes. We must dare to set our own principles aside, close the ranks and think together how we can do our sport a favour. Please take the above concerns into consideration. Rome was not built in a day that we all know but you have to start from a foundation and not build on sand. Once the house will collapse anyway. Do it for the sport and not for your ego, we all want a fair sport and a proper doping policy. How else would you ever be able to sleep with the thought that perhaps you might have accused someone falsely.
To overview of news
Om te reageren dient u aangemeld