VDV's blood analysed by a guru

iainf72
iainf72 Posts: 15,784
edited July 2008 in Pro race
http://www.bicycling.com/tourdefrance/a ... -1,00.html

Page 4 - The most interesting thing is the explanation of whats being looked at etc etc.
Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.

Comments

  • Kléber
    Kléber Posts: 6,842
    It goes to show the lengths that riders have to go to prove they are clean. The Garmin team also has a "no syringe" culture, meaning no vitamin injections, no drips to rehydrate them.

    Why isn't every team doing this?
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    Because, to quot that fellow, most teams cannot concieve of cycling without doping.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • jimmythecuckoo
    jimmythecuckoo Posts: 4,718
    Well done VDV... I hope its true and I hope he finishes well up in Paris on Sunday.
    http://fendrieneu.home.blog
    My blog and pod...
    Beers of Belgium Cycling Club UK
  • graeme_s-2
    graeme_s-2 Posts: 3,382
    The performances of others relative to VDV yesterday make it look like there's a good chance most of the top riders are clean at the moment.

    It's amazing how complex the dope testing is. It's not something I'd ever given a lot of thought to before, but it's easy to imagine it's just like a sophisticated pregnancy test, you dip a special bit of paper in a urine sample and if it goes red you've doped :lol:;)
  • DaveyL
    DaveyL Posts: 5,167
    Computer says "doped" ?
    Le Blaireau (1)
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    DaveyL wrote:
    Computer says "doped" ?

    You can trust computers. They're not dodgy like people who work in labs and in the "science" field :P

    I expect many people do believe a big red light comes on after the pour the urine into a machine. Meanwhile there is some highly skilled guy looking at output and manually calling it...
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • DaveyL
    DaveyL Posts: 5,167
    No, you pour the urine into the machine when it's not working properly - and usually you could out the middleman (i.e. the bottle). "Scientists" - don't trust em, bunch of crooks! :D
    Le Blaireau (1)
  • feersumendjinn
    feersumendjinn Posts: 148
    iainf72 wrote:
    You can trust computers.

    Oh no you can't, they're stupid, a computer only knows what its told to know.
  • dave_1
    dave_1 Posts: 9,512
    Graeme_S wrote:
    The performances of others relative to VDV yesterday make it look like there's a good chance most of the top riders are clean at the moment.It's amazing how complex the dope testing is. It's not something I'd ever given a lot of thought to before, but it's easy to imagine it's just like a sophisticated pregnancy test, you dip a special bit of paper in a urine sample and if it goes red you've doped :lol:;)

    that's exactly my hypothesis on the Alpe times yesterday but had a few sneers from the usuals cause I actually stated what I thought could be done clean ...approx times...have not read VDV article but will
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKBacb2V ... ata_player
  • donrhummy
    donrhummy Posts: 2,329
    What's most interesting to me is how much of doping scientific analysis is interpretation. It's not black and white. A number of labs (UCLA vs LNDD for example) have different thresholds for what constitutes a positive result. So, I think even scientists cannot say definitively, "He's doping" or "he's not doping," but instead are essentially saying, "my interpretation of those numbers/levels are that it appears he's not doping (or is doping)." Even the test for exogeneous testosterone is that way.

    The only black and white test that it appears exists (and I'm going on the assumption that they're being honest about how easy it is to tell and that the molecule only exists in CERA) is the test to see whether the hidden element Roche put in CERA is there.

    BTW, there was also one real telling piece in the article with respect to Astana/ASO.
    Damsgaard also has results sent directly to the UCI and WADA before even he sees them, to avoid any appearance of conflict of interest.

    Astana uses Damsgaard to do their testing so ASO had no reason to doubt them this year (since WADA gets their results before even their independent tester). In fact, why let in Cofidis/Rabobank when neither team has added any such change to their internal structure while Astan has added not only a new management team, new riders and internal testing, but also transparency and given WADA first crack at their tests (straight from the labs)?
  • DaveyL
    DaveyL Posts: 5,167
    Where to start?

    The test for exogenous tesosterone is *exceptionally* "black and white".

    There is no "hidden element" from Roche.
    Le Blaireau (1)
  • donrhummy
    donrhummy Posts: 2,329
    DaveyL wrote:
    Where to start?

    The test for exogenous tesosterone is *exceptionally* "black and white".

    There is no "hidden element" from Roche.

    No, it is not "black and white". It still is based on levels of different items (carbon-13 for example) which can be in a person from different sources aside from steroids.

    http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~fine/opinio ... _d13C.html
    http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~fine/opinio ... again.html

    As for the hidden element, it exists. From this article:
    In that test, the metabolites for a drug like CERA show up in a different location on the electrophoregram and would be interesting, but not clearly a positive result. In fact, Ricco was caught only because CERA's maker, Roche, inserted a molecule in the formula specifically designed to be testable.
  • DaveyL
    DaveyL Posts: 5,167
    No they didn't.

    And I'm sorry, but those URLs are utterly ridiculous.
    Le Blaireau (1)
  • donrhummy
    donrhummy Posts: 2,329
    DaveyL wrote:
    No they didn't.

    And I'm sorry, but those URLs are utterly ridiculous.

    So you're saying WADA president John Fahey lied. OK, what's your evidence of that?
  • Kléber
    Kléber Posts: 6,842
    No, Fahey just made a mistake, as reported today on cyclingnews

    Riccò's positive not the result of secret molecule
    By Laura Weislo

    Contrary to earlier reports, Italian Riccardo Riccò's positive for EPO was not the result of a "secret molecule" being added to the drug to allow anti-doping authorities to more easily detect it. World Anti-doping Agency president John Fahey seemingly made the statement on an interview with the Australian Broadcasting Corporation on Wednesday, but the agency's spokesman said his words may have been misinterpreted.

    "No marker was inserted in the substance," the WADA spokesman said, clarifying that the tests which are being performed at the Tour de France are of a conventional nature. "Thanks to the fruitful cooperation of the manufacturer of this substance (Roche) and of WADA-accredited laboratories, which started in 2004, WADA received the molecule well in advance and was able to develop ways to detect it, including through the current EPO detection method."
  • donrhummy
    donrhummy Posts: 2,329
    Wow, did he ever mis-speak! That's a HUGE difference. Thanks for the clarification!
  • DaveyL
    DaveyL Posts: 5,167
    Pay attention, 007....
    Le Blaireau (1)
  • donrhummy
    donrhummy Posts: 2,329
    DaveyL wrote:
    Pay attention, 007....

    Nice. I admit when I made a mistake and you jump at the opportunity to add a snarky comment. Good to have you here.
  • DaveyL
    DaveyL Posts: 5,167
    Can't see the hunour in it? Sorry. It's just that this info has cropped up in a couple of other threads today already.
    Le Blaireau (1)
  • davidmiller
    davidmiller Posts: 320
    DaveyL wrote:
    No, you pour the urine into the machine when it's not working properly - and usually you could out the middleman (i.e. the bottle). "Scientists" - don't trust em, bunch of crooks! :D

    Wow!! I'm a scientist and I drive a 4x4. Guess I'm going to hell :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

    David
  • DaveyL
    DaveyL Posts: 5,167
    So am I :D I'm not going to hell though :D
    Le Blaireau (1)

Categories