UCI Donation

intothe12

Something that baffles me, and perhaps someone here has the answer to this fairly simple question.
Why does the UCI need a sysmex testing machine?
Don't they outsource all their testing?

fastercyclist

intothe12 wrote:

Something that baffles me, and perhaps someone here has the answer to this fairly simple question.
Why does the UCI need a sysmex testing machine?
Don't they outsource all their testing?

Because they can't control the results if they did that

Monty Dog

Apparently they use it to verify the identity of samples - they obviously forgot they had it when the Puerto samples were about, or perhaps Pat had it under his own lock and key?

iainf72

Monty Dog wrote:

Apparently they use it to verify the identity of samples - they obviously forgot they had it when the Puerto samples were about, or perhaps Pat had it under his own lock and key?

They UCI have never had access to the Puerto stuff. That's the whole issue. And they can't get access because they're not a legal body.

BikingBernie

Could be that the UCI wanted to do 'in house' tests so that they can have a 'friendly chat' with teams who have riders who go over the UCI's 'keep on doping lads, but don't go mad" 50% limit. This way the potential 'embarrassment' of having some third party pick up high heamocrit levels could be avoided.

Verbruggen is on record stating that the UCI was running such an 'in house', 'avoid any bad publicity' approach to testing for autologous blood doping, with riders simply being given a UCI 'red card' rather than being busted.

Verbruggen questions Pound's objectivity
By Agence France Presse
Posted Mar. 27, 2005

UCI president Hein Verbruggen has launched a scathing attack on World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) president Dick Pound over the extent to which they both perceive the problem of doping in cycling. And Verbruggen, also an International Olympic Committee (IOC) member, conceded that the UCI has taken to issuing "red card" warnings to cyclists whose blood test results appear suspect. Officials have confirmed, for example, that the governing body sent at least two warning letters to the Phonak team regarding suspicious testresults from Tyler Hamilton and other riders last spring.

Verbruggen said that the efforts made by the UCI over recent years to combat doping were now paying dividends. And he added that blood transfusion tests, which he claims are not fully legal, are being used by the UCI to warn riders' of potential misdemeanors."We know that most riders that are winning races are clean. The blood transfusion method is not validated yet, but we do the tests for our own use.

"Say we do 30 auto-transfusion tests - maybe two will not be clean. We have the information, but legally we can’t publicize it."Instead, Verbruggen said, teams and riders were contacted by the UCI."It's very effective - it’s almost a red card," said Verbruggen."

http://velonews.com/article/7753

DaveyL

Bit hard to bust riders when the test isn't legal though, isn't it?

Do you actually have any posts that don't contain tenuous speculation and conjecture?

BikingBernie

DaveyL wrote:

Bit hard to bust riders when the test isn't legal though, isn't it?

True enough, but Verbruggen's comments do show the attitude of the UCI, which is 'keep it in house unless you have no option'.

Why do YOU think they wanted a sysmex testing machine?

DaveyL

I'll answer you when you get around to telling me whether you think Schleck and Contador are clean.