Landis nil; 12; nil;........WTF !!!!!!!!!

[E1A104]

E1A104 Lowwww blow...... the Kimberley I mean' date=' but damb!!!!!!he he he he he funny!!!!!!.....in my demented state I do see the hillarity!!!!!!!

 

I will only ask one rethorical question in return and that might explain my stand on Basso and Uhlrich, do you realy think Zuma was innocent..... this applies (do not tell anybody my secret!!!!) to all "possible" dope users!!!! That includes my "fan".

[/quote']

 

  Glad you liked it, I also thought it was quite funny. Must agree with you on your assumptions cause mine are pretty much the same - point I was trying to make is that in a situation like this, MOST (not all) fans automatically assume their hero is innocent and the rest guilty regardless of the outcome of the test(s).

 

Now I just have to get you to buy a real groupset and not those fishing-reel things masquerading as bike parts !!

[E1A104]

I have always thought money was fairly neutral and that the love of money was the root of all evil ???!!!!  

[widget]

So' date=' Widget, explain away the fact that tests two days on either side of the "positive" test were negative. And don't believe that commercial labs don't make mistakes - the incidence is low but ALL labs have spurious results.

 

[/quote']

 

Firstly, everyone is trying to hide behind a high and a low test - but as far as I can see this has not been the issue - the issue has been - where did the "synthetic" testosterone come from.??

 

Its easy to try and deflect attention from one cause to another, which is what is happening here.

 

Well, its easy to explain away - he took synthetic testosterone between the two tests - this is what the lab is saying, this is what the case is about.

 

By the same token explain away the fact that out of all the tests done on all the cyclists at the TDF - only 1 was errant and of course it was an American who happened to win - conspiracy, conspiracy.!!!

[Guest Big H]

Just a question, maybe a silly one. What stops a dark sinister unsavoury character like Monsiuer Le Blanc (or should he be called Le Babouin) or that infernal reporter McQuaid, to slip in at night, dressed in a black, wide brimmed hat and overcoat to place a few drops of Artificial Testosterone with a medicine dropper in mr Landis's peepee???????

E1A104 - fishing reel goodies work for me... Tiger Fish are biting now and the Tiagra spares works well on my Bantam and Alivio reels!!!!! Kempek cannot even handle MTB how in hell will they be as versatile as SHIMANO!!!!!!!

[E1A104]

Perhaps they hired to Chuck to do it for them, but doubt he would shag another yank - maybe it was the Ninja Turtles?!?!?!

 

I though a bantam was a bakkie??

 

True, not as versatile as ShimaNO, but just better!!

[widget]

Widget' date=' you will learn in time that money is the root of all evil. And believing that it is impossible that everyt teckie at the lab is completely incorruptible is naive.

 

Anyone that sticks to the premise that because they are WADA approved they cannot be at fault is naive.

 

I am guessing that FL has insistewd on the public hearing because they intend to expose a whole bunch of irregularities that have been kept hidden to now. Why else?? 

[/quote']

 

Well, windbreaker, I guess at my age I am fairly cynical, but I can assure you, that no young teckie with a nose ring and leopard skin pants will be testing any samples from any major tour event, especially when there are riders of the calibre of those at the TDF.

 

Believe me - that will be seriously out of the question.

 

Nobody has said "because they are approved by WADA they cant be at fault" - but the law of probabilities says that of all the hundreds of samples they test each and every day at lab of this status that the only mistakes they make is on American riders who usually win is just billions to 1!!

 

Cmon man - think about it.!Even if one knows absolutely NOTHING about tests - surely that would strike you as odd.???

 

Landis may have his own reasons for holding a public hearing - I dont presume to pre-empt that - I would like to hear he is innocent - I sort of liked him - but so far the evidence against him is overwhelming.

 

 

[linnega]

And if anyone else thinks that "The Lab" is squeeky clean and want to enlighten themselves then make the effort to read this

 

http://www.velonews.com/media/report1999.pdf#search=%22%22Emile%20Vrijman%22%22

 

Beware it's 132 pages long.

 

In my humble opinion it still leaves a whole bunch of questions unanswered about Lance (sorry Jason) but it makes me very suspicious of their motives and the fact is if they cannot follow their own and WADA's protocols then ... So I have to conclude that it is just as possible that someone in the lab set up Lance and Floyd as it is that they are guilty.

Good, then you would have understood that the basis of the report is flawed.  Vrijmen effectively audited the processes of the lab in the LA case on the basis that they were expected to follow a certain set of rules, processes and protocols when performing drug controls.  Sounds reasonable except that they were not performing a drug control.  They were studying the samples they had in order to understand the prevalence of EPO in the peloton in 1999 and to check the results in the days before riders had to mask EPO usage.  There was nothing wrong with the science of what they were doing, the processes simply did not meet the legal requirements necessary to prosecute offenders and declare the test positive.  Vrijmen also complains incessantly about certain evidence that was not provided to him.  Generally the reason the evidence was not provided because it did not because the process followed was not in line with WADA protocol for drug controls.

 

The UCI wasted a lot of money on this report as it simply proved what the lab could have told them from day 1.  Had they appointed someone with a scientific background, the science of what was being done by the lab could have been verified (or not) and, although Armstrong could not have been stripped of anything, we would have had a clearer picture of the validity of their findings.

[Windbreaker]

... Sounds reasonable except that they were not performing a drug control. 

... There was nothing wrong with the science of what they were doing

... the process followed was not in line with WADA protocol for drug controls.

 

Firstly WADA accredited agencies have strict guidelines over and above generally accepted codes of ethics which are in place to ensure that the one process is not used in pursuit of the other i.e. process refinement and control. They ignored these ethics and guidelines completely in this case

 

Secondly, the report shows that not only were processes not followed but that the scientific value of the tests were also completely undermined because the integrity of the samples were not maintained. Nor have the processes which they employed been verified by any one else or even properly explained by themselves.

 

So if a lab doesn't follow accepted codes (or just when it wants to) and the validity of the science that it conducts is under question then how can you state that there is NO possibility that it could be in the wrong??

 

This report is about the integrity of the lab - not the science behind the tests - that's it.

 

 

Windbreaker2006-10-05 07:25:39

[Windbreaker]

but the law of probabilities says that of all the hundreds of samples they test each and every day at lab of this status that the only mistakes they make is on American riders who usually win is just billions to 1!!

  

Cmon man - think about it.!Even if one knows absolutely NOTHING about tests - surely that would strike you as odd.???

 

 

Absolutely I think that the whole thing is odd! But if you are saying that the mistakes are so few and far between then you haven't read about the non-American tests done by that same lab that have been overturned recently??

 

And doesn't it strike you as odd that from one day to the next the testosterone appeared and then disappeared?

And doesn't it strike you as odd that there are inconsistencies between the A & B samples?

And last but not least why would someone take a single dose of testosterone?

 

It's easier to make statements that perpetuate the ignorance like "well his doctor screwed up" than to look for the answers. Nothing that I have read about this actually makes sense.

 

The point is that we will probably not know the answer to any of the above but it is naive to have such complete faith in "The Lab"

Windbreaker2006-10-05 07:18:06

[TNT1]

 

 

 

Nobody has said "because they are approved by WADA they cant be at fault" - but the law of probabilities says that of all the hundreds of samples they test each and every day at lab of this status that the only mistakes they make is on American riders who usually win is just billions to 1!!

 

Cmon man - think about it.!Even if one knows absolutely NOTHING about tests - surely that would strike you as odd.???

 

Ya, but if you want to talk about "law of probabilities" then a simple statistical analysis will surely tell you that every x amount of samples tested yields y amount of false positives - remember science isn't exact. So then my question is out of something in the region of 300 or so tests performed at the TDF, how come only one, and on a day after a ride like that comes back positicve? How come there are no others. The false positives?  The test used is only something like 98% accurate, so false readings must happen. If only 100 tests were done, then at minimum 2 results should be wrong/false/discounted.

 

Yet only one (or two if you count the a and b samples) came back positive. Floyd has been set up. Just like they tried to set up LA.

 

Oh, yes, and a lone gunman killed Kennedy.

 

[L'Bie]

One thing I don't read anywhere is the control tests at another lab. My wife has been a medical technologist working with blood and urine tests for medical reasons, but despite the quality and reliability of the specific tests, certain conditions are always double checked by sending a portion of the sample to another lab for analisys. that way a dr. can make an abolute decision/diagnosis for the benifit of the patient. With the doping tests there is a B sample, but it is tested at the same facilities!!!!?????

 

I thinks we are all just as guilty as those attention grabbing journous by discussing the posible guilt of a contender based on hearesay. wait for the facts and hearings, then we are free to comment on the facts.

 

[Icycling]

Here is my theory! Landis did not take testosterone, but he took a chemical (drug) which unfortunately for him altered his testosterone level. Probably something far better thatn EPO - the "new designer" drug for althetes. Unfortunately the designer did not realise that the drug would have this testosterone altering side efect!

 

 

 

So what Landis has said, he did not use testosterone or a band substance may well be 100% true. But he probably used a substance which WADA does not even know about and therefore how can they ban it! Unfortunately for Landis - the side effect on testosterone.

[widget]

Hmmm, maybe we can agree to disagree windbreaker  - but no, it dosnt strike me as odd that the testosterone levels changed back to normal two days later - the body is a remarkable machine, when functioning at peak condition like these fellows and if it detects a high level of a certain enzyme or hormone, perhaps it will slow down or stop natural production of that product until the levels return to normal - so a high level of testosterone is detected by the body on day 1 - body stops producing testosterone on day 2 and 3 but continues to use this hormone in natural functions and on day 4 it has returned to normal, and the body continues regular and normal production.??

 

Ask any cyclist who suffers with cholesterol for eg - the common drug limits the production of cholesterol to a point, however if cholesterol drops below a certain point, the body will detect this, and up the manufacture of this enzyme again.If we think about it, the body is always fighting to maintain a balance, it strikes me as normal that it would limit or stop production of a hormone if it sensed it had an abnormally high level at that time, the body will not know the testosterone is synthetic, it just knows there is a high level which is addressed.

 

Remember, testosterone is used up normally in the daily metabolic cycle and is replenished constantly, it makes sense to me that if someone was under massive stress or high energy outputs the body would use up this hormone quicker - hense the return to normal two days later?

 

I dont know - it just kinda makes sense to me. 

[Windbreaker]

Ja maybe lets agree to disagree. But I enjoy these sorts of discussions so lets disagree some more first ... 

 

Everyone accepts that testosterone is only physically beneficial over a long period - specifically to build muscle mass. So why take it for one day only? And why take it when the desire is to keep such a fine power/weight ratio. The TdF is not the 100m sprint.

 

There are people that say that the aggression or mental benefit was the desired effect. Others say that the aggression only occurs after prolonged usage.

 

But even if he took it for the benefit of "aggression" in mind to win back the time, he knew that he would have to win the stage to do that and therefore would be tested. Doesn't make sense.

 

Last night I read some stuff where tests were done which showed that alcohol has the effect of raising the ratio from -30% to 300% on different people. This doesn't answer the synthetic issue but it does explain why FL being completely unaware of the tests (unlike selected media) could have responded the way he did.

 

At the end of the day he was treated very unfairly by the UCI and WADA. I can understand that the public were demanding information but the correct thing would have been to furnish FL with anything that they were going to release a day or two before they did release it to the public. That would have placed them above recrimination and everyone would have had much more confidence in the process.

 

For McQuaid to come out and say "if we didn't release it then the lab would have leaked it anyway" is like saying if I don't loot this abandoned car now then someone else will steal it anyway.

 

He cast more doubt on the integrity of "The Lab".

Windbreaker2006-10-05 08:08:41

[montyzuma]

Widget, your posts show a complete lack of understanding as to what the testosterone test measures. I find it fascinating that so many people have such dogmatic opinions when they don't even understand the underlying physiology.

[bikemonster]

Hi Guys

 

There are 2 points worth highlighting about the Landis positive tests.

 

1.  The first test measures the ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone.  The threshold is 4:1.  Most people have a t/e ratio, I believe, of 1:1.  FL was at 10:1 or 11:1.

 

2. The ratio test is just used as a warning flag, and does not actually prove anything.  Once the ratio comes in as a red flag, the lab tests for synthetic testosterone.  If synthetic testosterone is detected nobody gives a rat's about the t/e ration anymore.  The test for synthetic testosterone is based on the fact that plant steroids are used as the basis of the manufacturing process, and plant steroids will contain different isotopes of carbon to those found in naturally produced testosterone.

 

As for the fact that FL only tested positive on one day, another two points:

 

1. Testosterone is metabolised very quickly, so there is no real surprise that the ratio of t/e (which is what would have been tested on other days) would revert to a normal level.

2. The suspicion is that FL would have been receiving epitestosterone as well as testosterone so as to keep the t/e ratio within acceptable limits.  If that suspicion is founded, then it seems likely that the epitestosterone dose was messed up on the day that FL tested positive.  But remember, the only test result that matters at this stage is that the lab found exogenous testosterone in FL's samples.

 

It may be that FL was not doping, but that somebody (who?) spiked a water bottle or otherwise found a way to introduce testosterone into FL's system.

 

The 'evil French lab' conspiracy is pretty limp, at best.

 

There may be scientific errors, but I find it implausible that test one (ratio test) indicates an abnormality and test two (isotope test) backs up test one with both tests returning false positives.

 

My own feeling is that we will never know - I expect that FL will get off on a technicality, which may be technically the right outcome, but it is not a real exoneration.