Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 39 of 39
  1. #21  
    No....as they have to be kept under strict conditions of temp, sealing, storage, etc... that would make most samples useless.

    The questions I have are:

    If taken, how long do they stay in the system as he tested fine the day before and the day after.

    There are proven cases where higher levels of testosterone have been proven to be false or okay. He has proven to have a higher level than normal naturally. Can they tell the ratio between natural and syn? Or if it is a combination of both, is it just a yes and no if present answer and no way to tell the different levels?

    I know that historically because of all the millions of possibilities of testosterone positive results, no one has held up in court yet. So this will be interesting to see the process that follows.

    But even if they find that there was no doubt that he is innocent, i.e. proven and convicted that someone else tampered with samples, slipped him drugs prior to the race, etc.... There will always be that cloud over his head by many.
  2. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    No....as they have to be kept under strict conditions of temp, sealing, storage, etc... that would make most samples useless.
    How would they be useless, if stored right by the team?
  3. #23  
    I am not saying that they would be useless, just challenging to meet all the requirements of proper storage to keep them viable.

    Plus I don't know what legal issues has to be addressed and adhered to, to make self kept samples of your own specimens acceptable in court proceedings.
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    No....as they have to be kept under strict conditions of temp, sealing, storage, etc... that would make most samples useless.

    The questions I have are:

    If taken, how long do they stay in the system as he tested fine the day before and the day after.

    There are proven cases where higher levels of testosterone have been proven to be false or okay. He has proven to have a higher level than normal naturally. Can they tell the ratio between natural and syn? Or if it is a combination of both, is it just a yes and no if present answer and no way to tell the different levels?

    I know that historically because of all the millions of possibilities of testosterone positive results, no one has held up in court yet. So this will be interesting to see the process that follows.

    But even if they find that there was no doubt that he is innocent, i.e. proven and convicted that someone else tampered with samples, slipped him drugs prior to the race, etc.... There will always be that cloud over his head by many.
    I didnt know he tested fine the day before and after.

    That being said...didnt he make up like 5 minutes in the mountains (which is when he allegedly doped?)

    As far as the argument that his levels were higher than normal...I thought that his levels were recorded at 10x the regular amount?
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  5. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    I am not saying that they would be useless, just challenging to meet all the requirements of proper storage to keep them viable.

    Plus I don't know what legal issues has to be addressed and adhered to, to make self kept samples of your own specimens acceptable in court proceedings.
    Oh, ok.

    True, as far as legal concerns go. But, if I was a team manager, I would be lobbying for team kept samples at an agreed storage facility.
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    True, as far as legal concerns go. But, if I was a team manager, I would be lobbying for team kept samples at an agreed storage facility.
    Now that has been proposed several times due to drug testing orgs failure to follow testing procedures, proven cases of contamination of specimens, etc...
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    I am not saying that they would be useless, just challenging to meet all the requirements of proper storage to keep them viable.

    Plus I don't know what legal issues has to be addressed and adhered to, to make self kept samples of your own specimens acceptable in court proceedings.
    I think the team would hire their own lab to handle their samples.
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I didnt know he tested fine the day before and after.
    At least that is what I read.

    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    That being said...didnt he make up like 5 minutes in the mountains (which is when he allegedly doped?)
    Yup....actually between 5-8 minutes depending on who's numbers you are looking at.

    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    As far as the argument that his levels were higher than normal...I thought that his levels were recorded at 10x the regular amount?
    The end test was just under 4x the current acceptable level and under 2x the previous acceptable level. He does have higher levels than the average person or even the average rider, which is why I asked if they could tell how much is natural and how much is syn to see what the difference really is.
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    I think the team would hire their own lab to handle their samples.
    I am personally all for it myself as suggestions like this has been brought up over the last several years.

    Two big challenges with this.....strict regs within the Sport's powers that be.

    And second, this is a commercial sponsor supported sport, spending money plays a big part in this.

    EDIT: We have to drug test all employees at work. With our employees going to their location, no storage needed, etc... it costs us something like $300 per test.

    An average size team in a race is about 9 riders. A team could have 40 races in a season....more actually....with as much a low average of 3 days a race (some are 1 day some are 25 days). Drug testing is often done at the beginning/and or end of each race. Let's just count only one test at the end. At our cost that would be $324,000 a year. And that is not counting costs for storage or to have the remote location collection as the have to go to the race to collect.

    That starts to get the attention of the sponsor.

    I am sure there are members here that may be specialists in the field that could give a more accurate estimate for field specimen collection for sports, but that is probably enough to give an idea of the challenges.
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 08/07/2006 at 03:28 PM.
  10. #30  
    Well, while I think certain people are obviusly guilty of steroid use (ex. Barry Bonds), something about this does not right true.

    For some reason, I believe Landis.

    If seems very odd that this suddenly appears the day he wins the race, but not before or after....he's done a lot of races on the way to the Tour de France, and it's not shown up.

    My understanding is that synthetics takes a while to work (you need to use it for a while) and stay with you afterwards...a "one day doping" makes no logical sense.

    Bikers know all this...why risk it?

    The fact he has had approved cortisone shots in his hip if a flag...everyone knows when you inject a chemical into yourself, other things can get out of whack.

    But regardless, I wonder about the testing and the samples.

    Maybe he's lying, but something doesn't seem quite right....

    I also think samples A and B should have been tested at the same time....I think positive on A sample may have influenced the outcome of B sample (through nefarious means). I know it sounds conspiracy theorist, (which I normally dismiss), but you never know with these atheletic associatons and certain countries....the French (and Europeans) HATED that an American kept winning the Tour year after year when Lance raced.
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikec
    Well, while I think certain people are obviusly guilty of steroid use (ex. Barry Bonds), something about this does not right true.

    For some reason, I believe Landis.
    You believe Landis for no reason. His results are so clear that no competent person I've heard or read of has the slightest doubt about him being guilty. Landis was driving for the Swiss Phonak team, so there is no reason to make up some "anti-American" conspiracy theory. Testosterone doping is used to decrease recovery time from one day of the tour to the next. The most likely explanation for his obvious results is that they got the dosage wrong.
    If seems very odd that this suddenly appears the day he wins the race, but not before or after....
    No it's not surprising. The day before the positive tests, he had practically lost the tour. Then, he miraculously recovered and won on the next day by a winning margin of several minutes - only his epitestosterone levels were 10 times too high after the race. It's more than obvious that an athlete who is tested positive will try to find excuses, there is no need to fall for that.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    Landis was driving for the Swiss Phonak team, so there is no reason to make up some "anti-American" conspiracy theory.
    I know this is different with a positive test, but actually there is a historical precedence as the French have attack every year that an American won 11 of the last 20 years. Greg Lemond was not riding for an American team when they threw drug charges at him with no founding for each of the 3 years he won.
  13. #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    I know this is different with a positive test, but actually there is a historical precedence as the French have attack every year that an American won 11 of the last 20 years. Greg Lemond was not riding for an American team when they threw drug charges at him with no founding for each of the 3 years he won.
    Was he ever found guilty, had to "give back" his title, or was he ever sacked by his team becaue of doping like Landis? Big difference.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  14. #34  
    clulup,

    Please provide you expertise on steroids and doping...you seem very sure of this...are you an MD, biophysicist/chemist, or pharmacologist?

    I spoke with some "hard-core" bikers in my local club (I just bike for fun - they are do it for competition, etc.

    Of the 8 or so I spoke with, NONE thought he was guilty. I was surprised. They said it was impossible for him to just use it once for a one-time effect. The synth is used long term and shows up repeatedly. I mentioned "mis-dosing", and they laughed - if someone is doing this, they know EXACTLY the amount to use.

    I was a bit surprised, but they guys and gals know a lot more about biking than I do, and they say it's BS.
  15. #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikec
    clulup,

    Please provide you expertise on steroids and doping...you seem very sure of this...are you an MD, biophysicist/chemist, or pharmacologist?

    I spoke with some "hard-core" bikers in my local club (I just bike for fun - they are do it for competition, etc.

    Of the 8 or so I spoke with, NONE thought he was guilty. I was surprised. They said it was impossible for him to just use it once for a one-time effect. The synth is used long term and shows up repeatedly. I mentioned "mis-dosing", and they laughed - if someone is doing this, they know EXACTLY the amount to use.

    I was a bit surprised, but they guys and gals know a lot more about biking than I do, and they say it's BS.
    The first analysis found an exceptionally high testosterone/epitestosterone ratio. This is highly suspicious, but no final proof for doping. However, the second analysis showed that the source of the TESTOSTERONE was an ARTIFICIAL one. You can find some of the scientific background here: http://pipeline.corante.com/archives...oyd_landis.php

    The tests were performed by highly respected international laboratories following internationally accepted procedures. Of course you are free to believe "some hard-core bikers in your local club" more that the international doping agencies, though in my view, this is would not be a useful approach.

    Athletes doping with testoserone try to mask the extra testosterone by also applying epitestosterone (the isotope analysis which gives unambiguous results is highly expensive and not performed routinely, only following suspicious other test results). It is well possible that Landis has been using testosterone doping before being caught, but apparently, something went wrong the day prior to his first positive test result.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  16. #36  
    I'm with mikec on this one. For some reason, I think the guy is not guilty. Not sure why, but just a feeling.

    However, the tests seem pretty conclusive, unless there was a problem with the sample itself, or collusion, or insider activity.
    Palm V-->Visor Deluxe-->Visor Prism-->Visorphone-->Treo 180-->Treo 600-->Treo 650 on Sprint-->Treo 700p-->Centro-->Diamond-->Pre-->HTC EVO 4g???!
  17. #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    Was he ever found guilty, had to "give back" his title, or was he ever sacked by his team becaue of doping like Landis? Big difference.
    I know...I just said the same thing. I was only responding to your comment:
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    Landis was driving for the Swiss Phonak team, so there is no reason to make up some "anti-American" conspiracy theory.
    Look at Le'Monde newspaper and the L'Equipe french newspapers every year they have thrown out attack after attack each year that Greg Lemond (riding for a nonAmerican team) and Lance Armstrong won the tours with a combine 10 years since Benard Hinault, the last Frenchman to win, won 20 years ago.

    Theses papers have been taken to court, and each time their claims have failed and/or found to be basis on faulty or little evidence.

    .....................and again, this is not any justification for the Landis case.

    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    The first analysis found an exceptionally high testosterone/epitestosterone ratio. This is highly suspicious, but no final proof for doping. However, the second analysis showed that the source of the TESTOSTERONE was an ARTIFICIAL one.
    I have not seen a consistent or detailed answer on this question that I have asked above and one of the posters of the article asked.....Is it possible to show that it is IMPOSSIBLE for a human to have ingested as much testosterone as Landis would have to have taken and then 24 hours later have no trace of it left in his system?

    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    The tests were performed by highly respected international laboratories following internationally accepted procedures.
    As far as drug testing handling procedures, I guess the case against the World Anti-Doping Agency and the French newspaper, L'Equipe, breaking many international drug testing rules & regs, improper handling of samples, and looking up the identities of the anonymous donors, 10 months ago to try to prove Lance tested positive for EPO 7 years earlier still rings too loudly in my mind to not at least ask these questions.
    Vrijman said Wednesday his report ``exonerates Lance Armstrong completely with respect to alleged use of doping in the 1999 Tour de France.''

    -------------------------------

    The report said WADA and the LNDD may have ``behaved in ways that are completely inconsistent with the rules and regulations of international anti-doping control testing,'' and may also have been against the law.

    ------------------------------

    World Anti-Doping Agency chief **** Pound accused former ICU president Hein Verbruggen of leaking documents about the alleged positive tests to a reporter from L'Equipe. Pound also questioned the union's willingness to fully investigate the allegations.

    source
    Believe me, as far as Landis is concerned, I am not claiming innocence or guilt, conspiracy theory or unwise self indulgence, just asking legitimate questions that I don't feel we have full answers to yet.
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 08/14/2006 at 05:27 PM.
  18. #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    The first analysis found an exceptionally high testosterone/epitestosterone ratio. This is highly suspicious, but no final proof for doping. However, the second analysis showed that the source of the TESTOSTERONE was an ARTIFICIAL one. You can find some of the scientific background here: http://pipeline.corante.com/archives...oyd_landis.php

    The tests were performed by highly respected international laboratories following internationally accepted procedures. Of course you are free to believe "some hard-core bikers in your local club" more that the international doping agencies, though in my view, this is would not be a useful approach.

    Athletes doping with testoserone try to mask the extra testosterone by also applying epitestosterone (the isotope analysis which gives unambiguous results is highly expensive and not performed routinely, only following suspicious other test results). It is well possible that Landis has been using testosterone doping before being caught, but apparently, something went wrong the day prior to his first positive test result.
    Interesting article...can't say I follow all of it, but the guy makes his case.

    I pulled this from one of the comments, which looks at motivation/likely scenarios, which I thought was interesting:

    "I am glad to see that many of these posts are considering the possibility that Landis' urine sample was tampered with. Of all the possiblities this is the one that seems most likely to me.

    Assuming that the French lab did the carbon isotope ratio test correctly, i.e. there actually was synthetic testosterone in Landis' urine, then we can discard all the arguments about drinking alcohol, "naturally high levels of T", etc.

    (BTW, those who think that Landis "acts guilty" because of his multiple attempts at explaining the test results have not thought carefully about how an innocent man, especially one raised in a rural, religious society, would actually react if he were wrongly accused. Floyd is not "simple" or "stupid" in any way, but he may be a bit naive regarding the capacity for deceit and dishonesty present in much of humanity...)

    This leaves few possibilities: 1) Landis took a one-time dose of testosterone, 2) someone "dosed" him unknowingly with same, 3) the lab "inadvertantly" screwed up, somehow "contaminating" both the A and B sample, or 4) same as (3) except "purposely" and "tampered with" replacing the corresponding phrases.

    We can discount (1) because Landis and the Phonak team doctors & trainers are not stupid. Testosterone does nothing helpful for an athlete overnight, and they KNEW he would be tested if he won the stage and/or the yellow jersey. (2) seems vanishlingly unlikely since everything Landis consumes during a race is carefully controlled by the team - this scenario would require a "traitor" on Phonak. (3) is conceivable but just barely; how on earth would an "accredited" drug-testing lab make a mistake of such a gross nature, and ONLY on THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT TEST THEY WILL MAKE ALL YEAR?

    No my friends, (4) is the answer. Why use testosterone and not some other more plausible banned substance? (Testosterone is not "plausible" because everyone knows there is no benefit to using just once, overnight.) Here I am out of my league (I'm a physicist, not a chemist) but I know that many drug tests look not for the banned substance itself, but for the metabolic byproducts thereof. However all I have read about the test for testosterone seems to indicate that the testosterone molecule itself passes unaltered into the urine - can any of you chemists/biochemists/endochrinologists out there confirm or deny this supposition? It seems to me that it would be very difficult to "spike" a urine sample with just the right amounts of say amphetamine metabolic products, but very easy to do so with synthetic testosterone.

    It smacks very much of a not-well-thought-out-but-who-cares last minute attempt to discredit one of the greatest athletic performances in history. When it became apparent that Landis would win stage 17 and place himself clearly back in contention, it is not hard to imagine someone who could not abide Yet Another American winning the Tour de France for an 8th consecutive year. It would be sufficient to plant any convenient banned substance in Landis' urine sample - vastly easier than figuring out how to actually get it into his body. Whether or not the substance chosen "made sense" is immaterial. Since the "war on doping" is nothing more than bureacratic histrionics and posing, an athlete is presumed guilty until proven innocent. The anti-doping rules do not require "motive" for a conviction. In fact, conviction is automatic; it is exoneration that takes work.

    Landis' only possible defense at this point rests on the dynamics of how testosterone is eliminated from the body. Again, I am out of my league here but I think it might be possible to show that it is IMPOSSIBLE for a human to have ingested as much testosterone as Landis would have to have taken and then 48 hours later have no trace of it left in his system. I hope his lawyers are bright enough to think of this (their "dehydration theory" does not speak well for their knowledge in this realm) and that they can obtain expert testimony from the right sorts of medical authorities. What would really help would be to test the samples he gave 48 hours later, after the time trial, and establish an upper limit on the amount of synthetic testosterone in those samples; if this limit is lower than the calculated amount that would be left in his system had he actually ingested synthetic-T, it would argue powerfully that he never had same in his body, that it was added to the Stage 17 sample after the fact.

    Floyd Landis is innocent, and stripping him of his rightfully-won Tour title would be a travesty unmatched in the world of sport."
  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikec
    This leaves few possibilities: 1) Landis took a one-time dose of testosterone, 2) someone "dosed" him unknowingly with same, 3) the lab "inadvertantly" screwed up, somehow "contaminating" both the A and B sample, or 4) same as (3) except "purposely" and "tampered with" replacing the corresponding phrases.

    We can discount (1) because Landis and the Phonak team doctors & trainers are not stupid. Testosterone does nothing helpful for an athlete overnight, and they KNEW he would be tested if he won the stage and/or the yellow jersey.
    Discounting (1) is done based on ignorance. Here some more background:

    1. Testosterone is important for faster recovery of the body - a very important factor during an extreme effort like the Tour de France.

    2. Natural testosterone levels go down during prolonged efforts like Tour de France.

    3. Testosterone doping is used to counter effect (2)

    4. Standard testosterone doping tests check for the testosterone/epitestosterone ratio, which is 1:1 under standard conditions, but can go to like 4:1. Landis had 11:1 or so.

    5. Artificially adding not only testosterone, but also epitestosterone masks the artificially added testosterone, so that the ratio remains close to 1:1. This is what Landis has been doing (apparently), and he may have gotten away with it. But then, something seems to have gone wrong with the dosage.

    6. The 11:1 ratio found in one sample raised suspicion and led to the follow-up isotope test, which is very expensive.

    7. The isotope test showed that Landis had artificial testosterone in his body.

    Landis performance was not only based on doping, it was still a great job. Only he has (according to all we know, excluding gross errors and conspiracy theories, for which there is no indication) used illegal substances to boost his performance and tried to get an unfair advantage over those who don't use doping.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions