Chris Froome has vowed to provide whatever information is required by the UCI about his use of medication for asthma during the 2017 Vuelta a Espana after a urine test revealed a concentration of Salbutamol double the WADA threshold.
Team Sky said in a statement that Froome experienced “acute asthma symptoms” during the final week of the Vuelta and increased his dosage of Salbutamol, within permissible limits, on doctor’s advice.
The four-time Tour de France winner conducted a urine test on September 7 which revealed a concentration of Salbutamol of 2,000 nanograms, twice the WADA threshold of 1,000.
The Team Sky statement said the “use of permissible dosages of Salbutamol can sometimes result in elevated urinary concentrations, which require explanation”.
Froome said: “The UCI is absolutely right to examine test results and, together with the team, I will provide whatever information it requires.”
The UCI released a statement detailing information about Froome’s failed drugs test.
“The Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) confirms that British rider Christopher Froome was notified of an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) of Salbutamol in excess of 1000ng/ml (*) in a sample collected during the Vuelta a Espana on 7 September 2017,” the statement read.
“The rider was notified of the AAF on 20 September 2017. The anti-doping control was planned and carried out by the Cycling Anti-Doping Foundation (CADF), the independent body mandated by the UCI, in charge of defining and implementing the anti-doping strategy in cycling.
“The analysis of the B sample has confirmed the results of the rider’s A sample and the proceedings are being conducted in line with the UCI Anti-Doping Rules.
“As a matter of principle, and whilst not required by the World Anti-Doping Code, the UCI systematically reports potential anti-doping rule violations via its website when a mandatory provisional suspension applies. Pursuant to Article 7.9.1. of the UCI Anti-Doping Rules, the presence of a Specified Substance such as Salbutamol in a sample does not result in the imposition of such mandatory provisional suspension against the rider.
“At this stage of the procedure, the UCI will not comment any further on this matter.”
