|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Comment on the Equipe accusation
I have L'Equipe from last Tuesday. I'll try to have a complete translation
up in a few days. Montesquiou wrote in message ... "Tom Kunich" a écrit dans le message de news: t... Montesquiou wrote in message ... "DepartFictif" a écrit dans le message de news: ... besides.. using the same sample to do a B test is insane.. if it has been tampered with, then what the **** is the point of having an A and B test? It isn't only against possible errors by the lab that there are A and B test, but also due to mix-ups, sabotage etc etc.. how on earth can you claim that you can use the same sample to do both and A and B test!!! (it's not a question) The question is the following : Did Lance used drog for to win the 1999 TDF ? If according the result of the Lab he used EPO, no doubt about it : he is a liar and a dishonest. Maybe you ought to look at those results a little closer. I believe that Lance was tested every day after the Seistrierre stage (9th is memory serves). Why would he test positive on stages 9 and 10 and not 11? then 12 and 13 and no others after that? I am not competent for to do a correct and clear analyse of the results as published by L 'Equipe. My impression is that we note a climax (Level 96.6 stage 9) then a decrease on the following day (Level 88.7 stage 10). What the level of EPO who can be detected ? I don't know. Had the Lab done a test on a all the Lance's sample or just in some by randomic choice ? I don't know. Important to remember that the Lab had just as reference an arcane Nber ( 185 557 for the stage 9) and the focus was not to analyse Lance Armstrong. I don't know if you have a copy of the l'Equipe; There is in the edition 3 copy picture of the lab document. Do you know if there is a reproduction of l"Equipe page 2 ? Because if you have not this picture it will be difficult to explain. There was also the critical TT at Futuroscope for the 19th stage. Why, of course there is that latest study which demonstrated that the test for EPO isn't selective enough. It shows several different proteins that aren't connected to EPO and are generated in the body during exercise stress. Then of course there is the other point - EPO doesn't cause the body to instantly make more blood cells. It works over time. Taking EPO DURING the Tour probably wouldn't be a particularly good idea completely aside the fact that he could have overshot and been caught with high hc. . |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Comment on the Equipe accusation
Exactly my point. Lance wnet on Larry King Live and said: "So why did
my other 11 EPO tests in 1999 not produce a positiive?" Why? Because you probably only juiced it 6 times. Once before each crucial stage of the race. It actually makes even MORE sense that you only tested positive 6 times. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Comment on the Equipe accusation
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Comment on the Equipe accusation
"B. Lafferty" a écrit dans le message de news: et... I have L'Equipe from last Tuesday. I'll try to have a complete translation up in a few days. Montesquiou wrote in message ... "Tom Kunich" a écrit dans le message de news: t... Montesquiou wrote in message ... "DepartFictif" a écrit dans le message de news: ... besides.. using the same sample to do a B test is insane.. if it has been tampered with, then what the **** is the point of having an A and B test? It isn't only against possible errors by the lab that there are A and B test, but also due to mix-ups, sabotage etc etc.. how on earth can you claim that you can use the same sample to do both and A and B test!!! (it's not a question) The question is the following : Did Lance used drog for to win the 1999 TDF ? If according the result of the Lab he used EPO, no doubt about it : he is a liar and a dishonest. Maybe you ought to look at those results a little closer. I believe that Lance was tested every day after the Seistrierre stage (9th is memory serves). Why would he test positive on stages 9 and 10 and not 11? then 12 and 13 and no others after that? I am not competent for to do a correct and clear analyse of the results as published by L 'Equipe. My impression is that we note a climax (Level 96.6 stage 9) then a decrease on the following day (Level 88.7 stage 10). What the level of EPO who can be detected ? I don't know. Had the Lab done a test on a all the Lance's sample or just in some by randomic choice ? I don't know. Important to remember that the Lab had just as reference an arcane Nber ( 185 557 for the stage 9) and the focus was not to analyse Lance Armstrong. I don't know if you have a copy of the l'Equipe; There is in the edition 3 copy picture of the lab document. Do you know if there is a reproduction of l"Equipe page 2 ? Because if you have not this picture it will be difficult to explain. There was also the critical TT at Futuroscope for the 19th stage. Why, of course there is that latest study which demonstrated that the test for EPO isn't selective enough. It shows several different proteins that aren't connected to EPO and are generated in the body during exercise stress. Then of course there is the other point - EPO doesn't cause the body to instantly make more blood cells. It works over time. Taking EPO DURING the Tour probably wouldn't be a particularly good idea completely aside the fact that he could have overshot and been caught with high hc. . Merci, I am thinking to do a scan of the more important : Pge N° 2 with the Lab result and the minutes, in few hours. The translation will be your, of course |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Comment on the Equipe accusation
Of course they said that. They had to cover their ass.
Ken "Benjamin Werner" wrote in message ... IMKen a écrit : Clearly this is a "Witch Hunt". If the tests were performed for research then they would have used models injected with EPO, taken their urine and then tested it. To perform research we have to have some known values. To do it in a "Random Manor" would leave the research meaningless. Sigh. It was already said that WADA wanted the research done to learn to what extent the riders had changed their behavior. The research was not about the testing technique but about human behavior. You can believe this or not, but it sure is rational. B |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Comment on the Equipe accusation
One reason for A and B samples is to protect the riders from the
unintentional sample contamination and intentional tampering. Quality assurance practice would require separate handling of the samples, storage in separate venues under separate custodians. This separation of the samples protects against contaminating, tampering with both samples. Of course, double sampling from the same bottle provides none of these protections. The riders would be exposed. Ray |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Comment on the Equipe accusation
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Comment on the Equipe accusation
I stand corrected ...
In his Associated Press sports column, Jim Litke wrote that, "The original 'A' samples were used for testing in 1999, before EPO could be detected in urine. Their absence not only makes confirmation impossible - and likely any sanctions - it means there is no scientific control." I take issue with this line of reasoning, simply because, as reported, testing at LNDD involved three parameters: visual interpretation; a percentage of EPO isoforms greater than 80 percent; and mathematical modeling. Only samples positive in all three parameters were interpreted as positive, while samples meeting only two of the criteria were found inconclusive. According to L'Equipe, Armstrong's 17 urine tests at the 1999 Tour de France yielded six absolute positives, which means that 18 individual parameters were met. On Larry King Thursday night, Armstrong said he submitted 17 test samples in 1999 and wants to know what happened to the other 11. It's entirely possible the other 11 didn't test positive for all three parameters. Sir Topham Hatt wrote: Who says the lab tested every one of Lance's sample? Lance use this same argument on Larry King Live, "What about the other 17 samples I gave during that tour?", blah, blah, blah... "why didn't those samples come up positive?" Hey Lance u dumbass, its because the lab did not test all of your samples? I stand corrected if someone can point out if every sample on file was tested during the so called research... BTW Who is less useful than Larry King ? "Tom Kunich" wrote: Montesquiou wrote in message . .. "DepartFictif" a écrit dans le message de news: ... besides.. using the same sample to do a B test is insane.. if it has been tampered with, then what the **** is the point of having an A and B test? It isn't only against possible errors by the lab that there are A and B test, but also due to mix-ups, sabotage etc etc.. how on earth can you claim that you can use the same sample to do both and A and B test!!! (it's not a question) The question is the following : Did Lance used drog for to win the 1999 TDF ? If according the result of the Lab he used EPO, no doubt about it : he is a liar and a dishonest. Maybe you ought to look at those results a little closer. I believe that Lance was tested every day after the Seistrierre stage (9th is memory serves). Why would he test positive on stages 9 and 10 and not 11? then 12 and 13 and no others after that? There was also the critical TT at Futuroscope for the 19th stage. Why, of course there is that latest study which demonstrated that the test for EPO isn't selective enough. It shows several different proteins that aren't connected to EPO and are generated in the body during exercise stress. Then of course there is the other point - EPO doesn't cause the body to instantly make more blood cells. It works over time. Taking EPO DURING the Tour probably wouldn't be a particularly good idea completely aside the fact that he could have overshot and been caught with high hc. . |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Comment on the Equipe accusation
Sir Topham Hatt wrote:
It's entirely possible the other 11 didn't test positive for all three parameters. Look at http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/rbr/equipe23aug05.jpg Look at flasks 186585 and 186586 on what appears to be stage 2. Neither of them are listed as "positive" under the three-test criterion, but if one of them happened to be Armstrong's I wouldn't go around saying that they proved his innocence. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What stem for Easton EC90 Equipe bar? | GT | Techniques | 3 | May 17th 05 01:58 PM |
Time Equipe Cleats (pre-Impacy models) | Philip W. Moore, Jr. | Marketplace | 0 | October 26th 04 10:06 PM |
Need some Time Equipe Profil Shoes | Philip W. Moore, Jr. | Racing | 1 | October 11th 04 01:05 PM |
FS: Time Equipe Pro CX road shoes, 42.5 | Eric Harvey | Marketplace | 0 | December 30th 03 07:43 PM |
FS: Time Equipe Pro CX shoes, 42.5 | Eric Harvey | Marketplace | 0 | December 27th 03 12:05 AM |