Question for Kohl/UCI based on his bribery claims...

donrhummy

So my question to Kohl is: if you knew exactly what micro-doses to use, why were you caught?

And to the UCI: knowing that some athletes can now get lab testing done to determine "safe" micro-doses, how can you combat this?

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kohl-co ... oping-labs

Matschiner "had samples analysed so that we knew how far we could go and still not be caught,“ Kohl told Austrian newspaper Kurier.

Kohl said he had two samples tested, one for EPO and one for testosterone. "Then I knew: I can inject so-and-so much of each substance."

Kléber

err, because he was using CERA and there was no test until one was developed "in secret" and caught several riders in one go.

donrhummy

Kléber wrote:

there was no test until one was developed "in secret" and caught several riders in one go.

You're right although a number of riders had already been outed by the CERA test prior to Kohl's outing, so it makes no sense on his part that he wouldn't have either switched to something else or tried to get new eval tests done.

Pokerface

Kléber wrote:

err, because he was using CERA and there was no test until one was developed "in secret" and caught several riders in one go.

He makes a valid point (possibly) in that – if they were bribing people in the labs - surely they would have gotten the 'inside scoop' on the upcoming test for CERA? The UCI would have needed to develop the test somehow - most likely in cooperation with the labs. Maybe?

bipedal

Pokerface wrote:

Kléber wrote:

err, because he was using CERA and there was no test until one was developed "in secret" and caught several riders in one go.

He makes a valid point (possibly) in that – if they were bribing people in the labs - surely they would have gotten the 'inside scoop' on the upcoming test for CERA? The UCI would have needed to develop the test somehow - most likely in cooperation with the labs. Maybe?

Maybe they just weren't paying enough for that kind of information? Or they were bribing lab techs who maybe aren't told about forthcoming tests... 150 euro is a pretty paltry amount to put your job on the line for unless [1] you don't get paid much in the first place, as would be the case with lab techs or [2] you were doing loads and loads of these illegitimate tests

GeorgeShaw

Wasn't the CERA test developed on the quiet with the manufacturer's (Roche's?) cooperation? So restricted to one or a very small number of labs.

stagehopper

The CERA test was developed in one lab - the French LNDD. Other labs, even groups sections within the LNDD, would have been entirely unaware of it.

iainf72

stagehopper wrote:

The CERA test was developed in one lab - the French LNDD. Other labs, even groups sections within the LNDD, would have been entirely unaware of it.

Not true. The first CERA positives came out of a Swiss lab. The test was developed by WADA.

donrhummy

GeorgeShaw wrote:

Wasn't the CERA test developed on the quiet with the manufacturer's (Roche's?) cooperation? So restricted to one or a very small number of labs.

No. McQuaid had originally implied this but Roche's spokesperson came out and denied this, saying that they hadn't worked with anyone on a test and that there was no "molecule" that could be detected.

Cumulonimbus

Kohl wasnt done in the first round of tests though. The new test was developed, or was finalised after the tour. Therefore the boundaries may not have been known.

stagehopper

iainf72 wrote:

stagehopper wrote:

The CERA test was developed in one lab - the French LNDD. Other labs, even groups sections within the LNDD, would have been entirely unaware of it.

Not true. The first CERA positives came out of a Swiss lab. The test was developed by WADA.

They must have changed their story later - the initial info given was the test had been developed by the LNDD - I did look this up before posting, honest!

iainf72

stagehopper wrote:

They must have changed their story later - the initial info given was the test had been developed by the LNDD - I did look this up before posting, honest!

It's a mixture - You're not entirely wrong. The first CERA postives were from the lab in Lausanne which was used by the AFLD for testing last year in the Tour. After the Tour the LNDD were working on a blood test which eventually snared Kohl / Mekon etc. However, these tests are done under a WADA guise otherwise you'd have problems defending them.

DaveyL

donrhummy wrote:

GeorgeShaw wrote:

Wasn't the CERA test developed on the quiet with the manufacturer's (Roche's?) cooperation? So restricted to one or a very small number of labs.

No. McQuaid had originally implied this but Roche's spokesperson came out and denied this, saying that they hadn't worked with anyone on a test and that there was no "molecule" that could be detected.

That doesn't sound right! Of course it's a molecule!

iainf72

Looks like it's got legs

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/austria ... estigation

dulldave

I hope he's dealt with pretty severly. Otherwise what's to stop others doing the same?

dulldave

severely even

donrhummy

DaveyL wrote:

donrhummy wrote:

GeorgeShaw wrote:

Wasn't the CERA test developed on the quiet with the manufacturer's (Roche's?) cooperation? So restricted to one or a very small number of labs.

No. McQuaid had originally implied this but Roche's spokesperson came out and denied this, saying that they hadn't worked with anyone on a test and that there was no "molecule" that could be detected.

That doesn't sound right! Of course it's a molecule!

From Bike Radar:

Tour update: No 'secret molecule' in CERA

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.

A Roche spokesperson confirmed to Cyclingnews that the WADA president misspoke, and that there was nothing added to the drug to help its detection.

DaveyL

donrhummy wrote:

DaveyL wrote:

donrhummy wrote:

GeorgeShaw wrote:

Wasn't the CERA test developed on the quiet with the manufacturer's (Roche's?) cooperation? So restricted to one or a very small number of labs.

No. McQuaid had originally implied this but Roche's spokesperson came out and denied this, saying that they hadn't worked with anyone on a test and that there was no "molecule" that could be detected.

That doesn't sound right! Of course it's a molecule!

From Bike Radar:

Tour update: No 'secret molecule' in CERA

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.

A Roche spokesperson confirmed to Cyclingnews that the WADA president misspoke, and that there was nothing added to the drug to help its detection.

There was no "molecule" that could be detected - of course there was - Mircera (or CERA if you like). The clarification you post refers to a "secret" molecule or tag - that is not implied by just saying a "molecule".

And the denial was not that Roche collaborated with testers - it is a denial that Roche put a molecular tag in their drug. Or at least that is how the above snippet reads.

knedlicky

donrhummy wrote:

So my question to Kohl is: if you knew exactly what micro-doses to use, why were you caught?

Matschiner "had samples analysed so that we knew how far we could go and still not be caught,“ Kohl told Austrian newspaper Kurier.
Kohl said he had two samples tested, one for EPO and one for testosterone. "Then I knew: I can inject so-and-so much of each substance."

Kléber wrote:

err, because he was using CERA and there was no test until one was developed "in secret" and caught several riders in one go.

I think Matschiner was mostly dealing in steroids and Dynepo when determining doses. Dynepo can’t be detected by the same test which finds Cera. Nor can Hematide.
Matschiner criticised Kohl for being naïve, firstly for handing on doping products to others without dosage recommendations (which resulted in one unnamed being caught, believed to be Schumacher) and secondly for himself not always abiding by Matschiner’s dose recommendations.
Maybe the second criticism also included Kohl naively taking Cera off his own bat, since Matschiner used Dynepo, not Cera.

Had Kohl followed Matschiner's directives and not used Cera, maybe he would never have been caught.

cswebbo

Is Matschiner still the 'agent' for some African runners, and are they in Berlin at the moment?
Anyone know?

Finbar Saunders

DaveyL wrote:

donrhummy wrote:

DaveyL wrote:

donrhummy wrote:

GeorgeShaw wrote:

Wasn't the CERA test developed on the quiet with the manufacturer's (Roche's?) cooperation? So restricted to one or a very small number of labs.

No. McQuaid had originally implied this but Roche's spokesperson came out and denied this, saying that they hadn't worked with anyone on a test and that there was no "molecule" that could be detected.

That doesn't sound right! Of course it's a molecule!

From Bike Radar:

Tour update: No 'secret molecule' in CERA

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.

A Roche spokesperson confirmed to Cyclingnews that the WADA president misspoke, and that there was nothing added to the drug to help its detection.

There was no "molecule" that could be detected - of course there was - Mircera (or CERA if you like). The clarification you post refers to a "secret" molecule or tag - that is not implied by just saying a "molecule".

And the denial was not that Roche collaborated with testers - it is a denial that Roche put a molecular tag in their drug. Or at least that is how the above snippet reads.

I agree with Davey....a drug manufacturer cannot get a drug to market without an assay to detect it. They may not have added anything to make detection easier (a nightmare for drug development as you have to characterise the effect of the tag on the drugs action) but they could quite easily have shared their methods for standard detection used in clinical trials. You can't get a drug approved without knowledge of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, and you can't know that if you have no way to not only detect the drug, but also accurately quantify it.