Henao withdrawn from racing

RichN95.

ddraver wrote:

So does the heamoglobin of the Oromo or Andeans return to normal if an individual lives at sea level for a time? ie is the high heamoglobin level preferentially selected for..?

That would be interesting because it would suggest that Henao's blood values WOULD vary significantly and differently from a more "normal" endurance athlete

Yes, that seems to be the case.
It doesn't necessarily explain Henao (who seems less Andean than Quintana, but more than Uran and Betancur) - but it does show that there is something that needs further consideration.

Almost of all of what cycling considers 'normal' is based on white people of recent European descent. That's a dangerous notion. As Epstein points out, there is far more genetic diversity in sub Saharan Africa than the rest of the world put together.

Natnael Berhane at Europcar is a rider that will interesting. He may become the first genuine black cycling star. If he starts doing high wattages, will the usual suspects be so ready to shout their doubts?

No_Ta_Doctor

Some really good debate on this thread now, thanks. I'll be interested to see the cycling inquisitions take on this, and sports scientists, who when not getting dragged into power data debate is usually pretty good.

As to whether Sky conduct their own blood tests, there are a couple of points. Firstly, if they do then it's highly unlikely that even they can stretch to ooc testing all round the world. More likely they to testing during training. Secondly, if they do have their own tests then it's unlikely these are of much use to the bio passport bods, riders would be aware of when they were going to be tested and could get their values balanced beforehand. Lastly, in football it was actually banned for teams to take their own drug tests, as it was reckoned they would be able to cover up doping by monitoring their athletes.

It's also worth noting that the tests Sky reviewed wouldn't necessarily have been reviewed by any other human eye before Sky brought it up. If the results weren't strong enough to trigger the flagging software then they could have gone unnoticed otherwise.

argyllflyer

Macaloon wrote:

That the UCI was yet to speak on the test doesn't mean anything. Who knows how long it would take an anomalous result to trigger a passport chat? JTL Rode for a year after the dodgy result.

It makes sense that subsequently the team started reviewing the tests themselves to avoid a repeat.

JTL didn't post a 'dodgy' result. The test around he time the 2012 Worlds was not an off-the-scale reading. It was only when compared with blood drawn throughout the next year that it became clear it was not at a natural level in 2012.

With Henao, the biopassport data is already there therefore it would be more obvious if there was a problem. But the process of data being analysed by the UCI's own own experts is obviously not a speedy one.

frenchfighter

frenchfighter wrote:

Will be interested to see what will be written on cycling inquisition about this.

http://www.cyclinginquisition.com/2014/ ... ergio.html

He makes good points and echos a lot of what I have said and thought. Note how he also picks up on these msyerious new tests. I would really like to see the documentation from the anti-doping authority on these new tests. The first time I ever heard of these tests was from the press release.

r0bh

dougzz wrote:

If you had similar offers from Sky and say Movi or BMC would you sign for Sky? If Henao has done nothing wrong Sky's pretty much fingered him as at least suspicious. Regardless of what they've said, they knew how it would be interpreted, and what most people would think. I'm not sure I like the playing this out in public. I wonder why they didn't just play the 'injury' card the way football clubs do when players have off the pitch issues. Makes you wonder whether this would be a big negative for riders incentive to sign in terms of the offers they may make.

Edit: Just read that Gazzetta broke the story in Italy and then Sky responded. So I'll ignore myself.

Looking at the other side of it, if you were a clean rider might you think it would be better to have any blood profile irregularities examined in this context rather than wait for it to go to the Blood Passport Panel?

As usual Sky end up in a lose-lose situation. Cycling "fans" ask for transparency and additional in-house testing programs, but when they get them they (and the media) just hammer the team anyway. Very little (if any?) positive press for taking a progressive view and going the extra yard.

philbar72

Richmond Racer wrote:

philbar72 wrote:

Rayjay is one of the few that made it on to my foe's list. He's just not really worth listening to.

For what its worth it seems that quite a few of the colombians are getting test values similar to this guy ( throwaway statement i know), is it simply because they are training at altitude and the tests kick off because they get differing readings because of the thinner air and the bodies way of adjusting to it? or is there genuinely something more sinister? honest question... I genuinely don't know the answer.

There's been a spate of Colombians testing pos for banned substances. But that's a very different thing. Or do you mean something different?

ah, my wires in this instance were well and truly crossed!

Richmond Racer

frenchfighter wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

Will be interested to see what will be written on cycling inquisition about this.

http://www.cyclinginquisition.com/2014/ ... ergio.html

He makes good points and echos a lot of what I have said and thought. Note how he also picks up on these msyerious new tests. I would really like to see the documentation from the anti-doping authority on these new tests. The first time I ever heard of these tests was from the press release.

I'd also like to hear more about these new-sounding WADA tests.

Interesting Klaus has commented on 'Some British Sky fans seem to be of the "ah, those Colombians" mindset'. Personally I havent seen any of that, but if there is then those people need to wind their necks in pronto and learn a bit more about the sport.

However what I did see last night was Shane Stokes RT a link to a recent Cycling Inquisition blog on how easy it is to buy PEDs over the counter even in bike shops in Colombia - which I thought particularly crass of Stokes given the situation.

ddraver

Shane Stokes crass?

Never.... :roll:

tailwindhome

Richmond Racer wrote:

I'd also like to hear more about these new-sounding WADA tests..

One explanation for a lot of this is that WADA don't want you to know about them yet.

Let's say they've concerns about the increase in Columbian success in Europe and want to have a closer look at it. They arrange to test some riders out of competition. The boffins go away to look at the data and are baffled by Henao's data. Something about it doesn't fit. Now this is a new test and they haven't the confidence to set off any alarms yet. Rightly so. So they contact Sky to discuss the situation. Sky review the data themselves and say 'yeah we take your point but what should we do?' Sky speak to the UCI who aren't much use to man nor beast and don't seem to want to get involved. Sky agree to 'bench' the rider for further investigation. WADA however don't want Sky divulging anything to the press yet. They agree a vague PR statement.

Sound plausible?

ddraver

Is it really really so hard to believe what the Sky and UCI said?

mike6

ddraver wrote:

Is it really really so hard to believe what the Sky and UCI said?

Depends entirely on why the individual gets involved with this forum. If you are interested in racing then no, it is not so hard. Most who love cycling will see it as an up front reaction to an anomaly. The fallout of which we will have to wait and see.

If you come on this forum simply to look for threads that might have even the smallest hint of doping content, then yes, It will be almost impossible to believe what anyone says if wont reinforce your stance.

ocdupalais

When you consider that Sky is merely another puppet of 'The Krays of Global Media' - the Murdoch brothers Rupert and Lachlan - and that the UCI brought us convicted whistle-blowers Verbruggen and McQuaid... Lying is in their DNA, I don't care what you say.

Richmond Racer

TailWindHome wrote:

Richmond Racer wrote:

I'd also like to hear more about these new-sounding WADA tests..

One explanation for a lot of this is that WADA don't want you to know about them yet.

Let's say they've concerns about the increase in Columbian success in Europe and want to have a closer look at it. They arrange to test some riders out of competition. The boffins go away to look at the data and are baffled by Henao's data. Something about it doesn't fit. Now this is a new test and they haven't the confidence to set off any alarms yet. Rightly so. So they contact Sky to discuss the situation. Sky review the data themselves and say 'yeah we take your point but what should we do?' Sky speak to the UCI who aren't much use to man nor beast and don't seem to want to get involved. Sky agree to 'bench' the rider for further investigation. WADA however don't want Sky divulging anything to the press yet. They agree a vague PR statement.

Sound plausible?

Hmmm. Thing is that if you read David Walsh's twitter feed, he says that Sky confirmed to him that it was a UCI bio passport OOC test. Team have access to the bio test results as already stated, and saw something that couldnt readily be explained.

blazing_saddles

Richmond Racer wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

Will be interested to see what will be written on cycling inquisition about this.

http://www.cyclinginquisition.com/2014/ ... ergio.html

He makes good points and echos a lot of what I have said and thought. Note how he also picks up on these msyerious new tests. I would really like to see the documentation from the anti-doping authority on these new tests. The first time I ever heard of these tests was from the press release.

I'd also like to hear more about these new-sounding WADA tests.

Interesting Klaus has commented on 'Some British Sky fans seem to be of the "ah, those Colombians" mindset'. Personally I havent seen any of that, but if there is then those people need to wind their necks in pronto and learn a bit more about the sport.

However what I did see last night was Shane Stokes RT a link to a recent Cycling Inquisition blog on how easy it is to buy PEDs over the counter even in bike shops in Colombia - which I thought particularly crass of Stokes given the situation.

How about those Italian mindsets?

"Colombians always lead problems, in any sport."

One of the three comments underneath Gazzetta's piece, yesterday.

Richmond Racer

^probably Cipo

frenchfighter

Richmond Racer wrote:

Interesting Klaus has commented on 'Some British Sky fans seem to be of the "ah, those Colombians" mindset'. Personally I havent seen any of that, but if there is then those people need to wind their necks in pronto and learn a bit more about the sport.

I've not really seen it either.
Odd attitudes from Colombain's here:
http://www.cyclinginquisition.com/2014/ ... es-of.html

Macaloon

argyllflyer wrote:

JTL didn't post a 'dodgy' result. The test around he time the 2012 Worlds was not an off-the-scale reading. It was only when compared with blood drawn throughout the next year that it became clear it was not at a natural level in 2012.

With Henao, the biopassport data is already there therefore it would be more obvious if there was a problem. But the process of data being analysed by the UCI's own own experts is obviously not a speedy one.

I see the difference. Cheers. A few things about the testing in this case:

- There are no team quotes about internal testing - only compliance reviews of WADA/UCI OOC tests. It's quite possible that the team do no internal testing for WADA compliance. A fascinating state of affairs.

- It's possible that the "new winter OOC test" is new in the sense that this was the first time testers have visited remote Colombian mountain villages. In winter. It could well be a standard bio-pass test.

Richmond Racer

frenchfighter wrote:

Richmond Racer wrote:

Interesting Klaus has commented on 'Some British Sky fans seem to be of the "ah, those Colombians" mindset'. Personally I havent seen any of that, but if there is then those people need to wind their necks in pronto and learn a bit more about the sport.

I've not really seen it either.
Odd attitudes from Colombain's here:
http://www.cyclinginquisition.com/2014/ ... es-of.html

The attitudes of Colombian fans and media is a bit of a recurring theme for Klaus. There was a post of his last year where he referred to the '12 mens Olympic road race and Rigo Uran. Rigo found out the day before the race that he hadnt been entered and wasnt on the starters list and so wouldnt be able to compete. There was an almighty scramble involving Rigo and the Colombian Olympic Committee to ensure he was able to start, but many in the Colombian press chose to blame Sky for it. Nonsense of course - trade teams dont look after paperwork etc for their riders in Olympics, Worlds (except TTT) etc - it was an utter screw-up on the part of the Colombian Cycling Fed. But its all part of the desire of the Colombian press to look outside their own country to try to find blame rather than highlight problems within.

frenchfighter

Blazing Saddles wrote:

The usual interesting perspective:
http://inrng.com/2014/03/sergio-henao-s ... more-19040

Yeah it is good and touches on my points which most rational and sensible people will be thinking.

I like the photo he uses - good to see it again and remember that day. What a day. Racers were in full flow, Wiggins was struggling due to the wet and lack of motivation and team orders made Henao and Uran stay for Wiggins.

Mad_Malx

frenchfighter wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

Will be interested to see what will be written on cycling inquisition about this.

http://www.cyclinginquisition.com/2014/ ... ergio.html

He makes good points and echos a lot of what I have said and thought. Note how he also picks up on these msyerious new tests. I would really like to see the documentation from the anti-doping authority on these new tests. The first time I ever heard of these tests was from the press release.

Natural steroid (testosterone and similar molecule) profiles as markers of doping or medical abnormality have long been known about, but WADA only incorporated them formally in the biopassport in Jan 2014. I think there was also refinement in the blood (Hb, reticulocytes etc) profiles last autumn. They are working towards endocrinology profiles too - eg growth hormone.
The approach is based on a statistical interpretation of individuals compared with their previous readings. Some genetic factors are incorported in the statistical model, but I assume the data on genetic variation and trips home is a bit patchy.
Very good but technical explanation (with nice graphs) http://www.clinchem.org/content/57/7/969.long cited on the WADA 'science topics' http://www.wada-ama.org/en/Science-Medicine/Science-topics/.

I was at a very interesting talk by the head of the Olympic testing lab recently. He wasn't wild about passports, I think because they worked on statistical models rather than detection of naughties, but I guess he would say that.

frenchfighter

Thanks a lot for the info MM.

ddraver

Macaloon wrote:

- There are no team quotes about internal testing - only compliance reviews of WADA/UCI OOC tests. It's quite possible that the team do no internal testing for WADA compliance. A fascinating state of affairs.

- It's possible that the "new winter OOC test" is new in the sense that this was the first time testers have visited remote Colombian mountain villages. In winter. It could well be a standard bio-pass test.

- no they don't - maybe for training/monitoring/health purposes but not for WADA approved drug testing

- Yes it was

It's getting hard not to be facetious about your attitude here Maca. There are very few/no other teams that would have rescrutinised the biopassport tests like Sky have done here and even fewer that would have taken affirmative action in the event of a "Non-Compliance" as you seem to think it is. Again, a compliance review flagging up a non-compliance is the whole point of having the review in the first place no?

Very few, if any teams, do internal testing, that's the job of WADA, the national ADA and the UCI for reasons that have been discussed up thread. Would you rather Sky had bought a Sysmex machine for the UCI instead?

Richmond Racer

Friebe tweeted one a few days ago, but INRNG just tweeted a pic of the Colombian national team coach (since last year). One Dr Daniele Tarsi. Quite a career, Dr Tarsi.

As pointed out by anti-doping campaigners in Colombia, Klaus Bellon, Matt Rendell et al, the Colombian Cycling Fed really doesnt do itself or its riders any favours sometimes. Image-wise, at the very least.

Macaloon

ddraver wrote:

- no they don't - maybe for training/monitoring/health purposes but not for WADA approved drug testing

- Yes it was

It's getting hard not to be facetious about your attitude here Maca. There are very few/no other teams that would have rescrutinised the biopassport tests like Sky have done here and even fewer that would have taken affirmative action in the event of a "Non-Compliance" as you seem to think it is. Again, a compliance review flagging up a non-compliance is the whole point of having the review in the first place no?

Very few, if any teams, do internal testing, that's the job of WADA, the national ADA and the UCI for reasons that have been discussed up thread. Would you rather Sky had bought a Sysmex machine for the UCI instead?

Be facetious all you like. Will make a pleasant change from bombastic tribal pitchforking.

I'm not really interested in comparisons with other teams. I thought the idea of Sky was to take a fresh look at traditional practices. The discovery ( ) that the team does less internal testing than Garmin was a genuine surprise to me. And given the general assumption around (see above posts) that these tests could have been internal it appears I'm not alone.

That's all. I'm sure there's a very good reason that they don't internally test.

Try reading with an open mind.

r0bh

Macaloon wrote:

I'm not really interested in comparisons with other teams. I thought the idea of Sky was to take a fresh look at traditional practices. The discovery ( ) that the team does less internal testing than Garmin was a genuine surprise to me. And given the general assumption around (see above posts) that these tests could have been internal it appears I'm not alone.

Do you have a source for this? Do you know what internal testing Garmin do these days? Or what Sky do?

mike6

Quote) "Depends entirely on why the individual gets involved with this forum. If you are interested in racing then no, it is not so hard. Most who love cycling will see it as an up front reaction to an anomaly. The fallout of which we will have to wait and see.

If you come on this forum simply to look for threads that might have even the smallest hint of doping content, then yes, It will be almost impossible to believe what anyone says if wont reinforce your stance. " Quote)

OCDuPalais wrote:

When you consider that Sky is merely another puppet of 'The Krays of Global Media' - the Murdoch brothers Rupert and Lachlan - and that the UCI brought us convicted whistle-blowers Verbruggen and McQuaid... Lying is in their DNA, I don't care what you say.

Thank you for proving my point.

ddraver

Macaloon wrote:

ddraver wrote:

- no they don't - maybe for training/monitoring/health purposes but not for WADA approved drug testing

- Yes it was

It's getting hard not to be facetious about your attitude here Maca. There are very few/no other teams that would have rescrutinised the biopassport tests like Sky have done here and even fewer that would have taken affirmative action in the event of a "Non-Compliance" as you seem to think it is. Again, a compliance review flagging up a non-compliance is the whole point of having the review in the first place no?

Very few, if any teams, do internal testing, that's the job of WADA, the national ADA and the UCI for reasons that have been discussed up thread. Would you rather Sky had bought a Sysmex machine for the UCI instead?

Be facetious all you like. Will make a pleasant change from bombastic tribal pitchforking.

I'm not really interested in comparisons with other teams. I thought the idea of Sky was to take a fresh look at traditional practices. The discovery ( ) that the team does less internal testing than Garmin was a genuine surprise to me. And given the general assumption around (see above posts) that these tests could have been internal it appears I'm not alone.

That's all. I'm sure there's a very good reason that they don't internally test.

Try reading with an open mind.

Trouble is there's an open mind and then there are conspiracy theories. the fact the they re-examine and analyse the Passport data themselves is already a fresh look. When you Assume you make an as.....etc - it was clear from the first page that the test was an OOC test. What do Sky (but no other team) need to do to qualify as taking a fresh look?

(mike - i think OCU is joking- he usually is)

RichN95.

Macaloon wrote:

ddraver wrote:

- no they don't - maybe for training/monitoring/health purposes but not for WADA approved drug testing

- Yes it was

It's getting hard not to be facetious about your attitude here Maca. There are very few/no other teams that would have rescrutinised the biopassport tests like Sky have done here and even fewer that would have taken affirmative action in the event of a "Non-Compliance" as you seem to think it is. Again, a compliance review flagging up a non-compliance is the whole point of having the review in the first place no?

Very few, if any teams, do internal testing, that's the job of WADA, the national ADA and the UCI for reasons that have been discussed up thread. Would you rather Sky had bought a Sysmex machine for the UCI instead?

Be facetious all you like. Will make a pleasant change from bombastic tribal pitchforking.

I'm not really interested in comparisons with other teams. I thought the idea of Sky was to take a fresh look at traditional practices. The discovery ( ) that the team does less internal testing than Garmin was a genuine surprise to me. And given the general assumption around (see above posts) that these tests could have been internal it appears I'm not alone.

That's all. I'm sure there's a very good reason that they don't internally test.

Try reading with an open mind.

Teams don't tend to test internally as it just duplicates what the biological passport does already. It's an inefficient use of resources.

And as for you ascertation that there is a 'general assumption around' that these were internal tests, I can't see anyone saying that. It's been made clear for the start they were done by a third party.

Anonymous

Teams can't use needles as well, surely taking blood to do bio passport tests would be in breech of this rule.


http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-app ... dle-policy

Richmond Racer

Maca, no facetious comments coming up...

Just re internal testing and Garmin (as per your post). Dont know whether you took this from an earlier post of mine where I mentioned this in relation to tests done on JTL in 2012 before signing him? Garmin had blood tests done on him as part of the checks they did on him as a rider they were interested in signing. Conversely Sky - stupidly (I cannot overstate how stupidly) - did not do any of their own blood tests on him before signing him up. In terms of ongoing management and monitoring of riders, Garmin arent doing internal tests.

Sorry if my post was a bit misleading. Or if I've misinterpreted you. Its lunchtime, I'm on a diet and all I can have is a bowl of carrot soup for lunch. Its my only excuse.