Now Ricco gets busted for EPO

skavanagh.bikeradar

Not to mention unfortunate 'crashes' and such like.

It's disappointing to be in this circle yet again at a Tour, but it shows that ASO are taking anti doping more seriously than most, in fact than anyone. Also informative that the UCI knew who was on this 'new' EPO at the Giro because they can see the evidence, but because there is no test they couldn't do anything....ASO going it alone aren't so cautious and I think we are all the better for it in the long run. Just goes to show how ingrained the culture of turning a blind eye is in the peloton - we know the UCI can tell who is doing what, but there isn't a test so two fingers to you and everyone else. Not now though eh? Cheating gits.

squired

So, the test for this isn't verified. However, the authorities know who is using it and saw a number of "positives" during the Giro. One would imagine team management was informed of these tests, even if bans couldn't be dished out. What I would like to know now is how many people have showed up as having this in their system so far in 2008.

If the test isn't verified the UCI can't hand out bans I'd imagine. Of course, if I were the ASO I would now be on the phone to the UCI demanding the names of the people who were "positive" for this product in previous races, then give them "random" tests this evening.

DaveyL

I wonder if they knew for a while that they were going to bust Ricco. It would explain his 4 or 5 "random tests" - they're building up a longitudinal profile to use as evidence. Possible.

skavanagh.bikeradar

We could have a spread bet on number of crashes, illnesses, stomach bugs, morale problems, death's in families etc that keep riders from the start line in the next day or two...............

cougie

If I was an italian riders pet dog - I'd be worried I may not make it through the tour......

skavanagh.bikeradar

Fido?

bipedal

Barloworld riders have certainly been dropping like flies since their day with the Gendarmerie

cougie

Whats italian for 'tugboat' ?

blazing_saddles

DaveyL wrote:

I'd find it very hard to believe they'd be getting stuff that was still in clinical trials.

Wasn't Frigo caught with something that was at a similar stage of development, in the San Remo, 2001 raid?

Good to see Eurosport hammering away on this subject, whilst advertising Festina watches at each break.

skavanagh.bikeradar

I'm always worried that Festina watches might go too fast for me and I'll always miss the bus.

donrhummy

This actually makes me want to cry. I love this sport and the bad press it gets from actually catching dopers is killing it. It really won't take much more to reduce this sport to where there's nothing left to watch.

I am also a little worried that they do not yet have a scientifically valid test for that EPO-like drug, yet they're willing to call someone "positive" for it. He may be, but until the test is scientifically acceptable, it's not right to declare someone positive.

bipedal

The test is OK... they are just waiting for the rubber stamp:

DF: You talked about the differences between EPO and Micera, and also the fact that the latter is visible in tests, even if it, until now, it couldn't lead to a positive test. Could you talk a little more about that?

MA: Well, you see synthetic EPO in urine the form of bars on an electrophoregram. If a rider's taken Micera, the bars are located in a different place to those you see in a simple containing synthetic EPO.

from: http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2008/to ... icera_st12

skavanagh.bikeradar

Yeahbut the question is "Did he take something that is detectable?". The answer is yes. Morally he's caught out, and as ASO can define their own rules on their own terms then it is now considered a positive by them for this race. What happens after this is up to the team and the UCI - test or no, they won't be able to hide from this particular spotlight.

DaveyL

That's true, but riders tend to hop from one method to another, depending on how likely it is that they're going to get caught. They moved from epo to blood transfusions as the epo test took hold, then moved away from blood transfusions to "undetectable" variants of epo as the test for homologous transfusions came in, and the practicalities and logistics of autologous transfusions made it less attractive in the more "doping-aware" climate of recent years. So, the CERA-epo may in theory have been available for a few years, but perhaps there was no real need to go to it until the last year or two.

Anecdotally there has been talk of products like Dynepo for a few years, but this one is fairly new.

kourou

Dubious number of crashes in the Barloworld team since Duenas... Are they just bad bike handlers? Mind you Froome said that was the case for Soler.

@ whoever asked how long this Cera stuff stays in the bloodstream:

http://bp3.blogger.com/_v_pO8qasdjE/SH8 ... h/cera.gif

A lot longer than previous generations, and hence you only need once dose to last several days, so you don't need to bring a boot load over the Belgian border. A little more risky I guess as targetting a stage means being positive for days after.

If this sort of half life can be measured like radiation half life, then it should be possible to use any sample to determine when it was injected and hence which stages were affected... Though of course we have to assume all. Plus the Giro and the rest of his career - sounds as though he has been on this since childhood given that is when he says his high haematocrit dates from. Perhaps Ricco's career is entirely artificial - was there a mastermind coach or tennis parent behind the creation of a 'super-athlete'?

What a surprise this wasn't. I'm tempted to say that those who put money on Ricco were fools to do so, but that's a little unfair and even I would have wanted to believe if he wasn't such an odious character. Its he and his mate Piepoli and all the other cheats out there that that deserve the ridicule.

For my money this also makes it more likely that Contador was AC in Puerto, was still on it at the Tour last year and the Giro this, and is extremely lucky not to have been invited to the Tour this year... I never bought what they said about excluding Astana and not him - I think they excluded him just as much as Bruyneel.

For Saunier Duval's manager to claim he only heard of this drug this morning is also disturbing, given many of us heard about it some time ago and its his job to know about this stuff.

I wonder if this is what Armstrong used to get away with it whilst others got caught with old technology?

skavanagh.bikeradar

It's a crowbar in the door for anti doping types though isn't it? This will be a wake up call to everyone. Hopefully what they move on to next will be dealt with similarly. The key is testing for it when the riders/teams think you can't. A new sneak tactic that appears to work nicely.

DaveyL

donrhummy wrote:

This actually makes me want to cry. I love this sport and the bad press it gets from actually catching dopers is killing it. It really won't take much more to reduce this sport to where there's nothing left to watch.

I am also a little worried that they do not yet have a scientifically valid test for that EPO-like drug, yet they're willing to call someone "positive" for it. He may be, but until the test is scientifically acceptable, it's not right to declare someone positive.

This is a very good point. I'd love to know how they've detected it.

iainf72

DaveyL wrote:

This is a very good point. I'd love to know how they've detected it.

Marketing? Perhaps they've just detected a good old flavour of EPO but have spread the world they've detected a 3'rd Gen version. FUD takes hold and people aren't sure what they can and can't take. So they stop for a while. And cycling becomes that bit cleaner for a couple of months.

donrhummy

kourou wrote:

I wonder if this is what Armstrong used to get away with it whilst others got caught with old technology?

Given that THIS YEAR (2008) is the first time the drug's ever been available, probably not. :roll:

skavanagh.bikeradar

There's a difference though between a RATIFIED test and a working, good test for something. The test works, it just hasn't been adopted yet.

cougie

donrhummy wrote:

This actually makes me want to cry. I love this sport and the bad press it gets from actually catching dopers is killing it. It really won't take much more to reduce this sport to where there's nothing left to watch.

I am also a little worried that they do not yet have a scientifically valid test for that EPO-like drug, yet they're willing to call someone "positive" for it. He may be, but until the test is scientifically acceptable, it's not right to declare someone positive.

Well theres been three new sponsors coming into the tour this year that I can think of - so thats looking pretty healthy - and as someone else has pointed out - Festina are still advertising - I think i heard that their sales actually went up after 98 ?

What about the spying/kinky S&M with Formula One ? I dont see anyone abandoning their Ferraris ?

I'm sure the sport will weather the storm. And its a storm that had to come.

oily sailor

donrhummy wrote:

kourou wrote:

I wonder if this is what Armstrong used to get away with it whilst others got caught with old technology?

Given that THIS YEAR (2008) is the first time the drug's ever been available, probably not. :roll:

Been available for years - only COMMERCIALLY available this year. Armstrong has very few contacts in the medical industry though so very unlikely.

skavanagh.bikeradar

I've never seen so many logged in users....

oily sailor

Bikeradar planted the EPO in the Saunier hotel. Hits going through the roof.

leguape

andyp wrote:

knedlicky wrote:

Roche are a Swiss company but their main research centres are in the US.

Isn't Switzerland the documented place to go to find the drugs you need if you're a pro cyclist, i.e. there are a few dodgy pharmacies? I wonder if the two are linked?

Does anyone recall the incident with Mauro Gianetti in the Tour de Suisse in the mid to late 1990s too? He crashed due to some kind of bad reaction to a drug he took, a drug which hadn't undergone clinical trials at the time.

Mauretti was PFCs: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h ... A96E958260 which hadn't even cleared clinical trial at that point.

If it's CERA that they've been hauled for (which is according to AFP) as well as standard synthetic EPO then they are as stupid as they look. My assumption is that they've been using Roche's SERA in the belief that the WADA tests only show markers for Amgen's Epogen.

Given that in any medical trial which is done blind you are going to need to be able to identify which patients have been given the test dose and who has been given the placebo, I'd imagine that there's pretty solid science behind being able to identify the use of not of a synthetic substance, or distinct markers left by it's use.

iainf72

skavanagh.bikeradar wrote:

There's a difference though between a RATIFIED test and a working, good test for something. The test works, it just hasn't been adopted yet.

I can't imagine the AFLD doing something not WADA certified. Experimentally yes, but not to boot someone from a race.

graeme_s-2

cougie wrote:

What about the spying/kinky S&M with Formula One ? I dont see anyone abandoning their Ferraris ?

Interesting you should say that. The car manufacturers (especially Mercedes and BMW for obvious reasons) are pretty unhappy about the situation. Today there's a story in the news that the world's big motoring associations may split away from the FIA and form a rival governing body because they're so unhappy about the Mosley situation, so it's not exactly all rosy in F1.

iainf72

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/CER ... 63709.html

skavanagh.bikeradar

Either way nobody has yet cried foul on the grounds that there isn't a test for it yet. They might be surprised but they haven't started leaping to the old standard "the test is flawed" yet. Mind you early days. That will come in the court case later.

kourou

donrhummy wrote:

kourou wrote:

I wonder if this is what Armstrong used to get away with it whilst others got caught with old technology?

Given that THIS YEAR (2008) is the first time the drug's ever been available, probably not. :roll:

2007 actually - check your facts before deploying rolling eyes emoticons :
http://sec.edgar-online.com/2008/02/25/ ... ction3.asp

I didn't know that it was that recent either though so thanks for bringing it to my attention.

However, being publicly available and being available to rich pro cyclists are two different things so I'd still say its possible. The same principle could apply to some earlier EPO anyway. I've spoken to someone involved in making the stuff who expressed surprise that the DynEPO found in Rasmussen's blood (should I be saying alledgedly? can't remember if that is cast iron) was there, given their company hadn't started selling it...

I'm just a layman, but where Armstrong's concerned I'm just waiting for the proof ;-) You may disagree but I think it has to be there somewhere... (all the dodgy riders he beat by a country mile, and the Andreu allegations amongst other things are a little too much for me)