AFLD offers to retest Lance's 1999 pee

From the article:
----------------------------------------------------------
The French Anti-Doping Authority (AFLD) has offered Lance Armstrong a
chance to retest his urine samples from the 1999 Tour de France to
prove he was innocent of doping.

AFLD boss Pierre Bordry told French newspaper L'Equipe that the seven-
time Tour champion would have the chance of clearing his name before
returning from retirement.

"Everybody can understand how someone like him would want to come back
to the Tour again. I would like that comeback to be in the best
possible conditions, so I would suggest that we do a complete analysis
of the six urine samples taken in the 1999 Tour," Bordry was quoted as
saying.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Read it at http://news.theage.com.au/sport/fren...1001-4s4g.html







J. Spaceman

More on the Sexy Pee Story:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bordry is now proposing that the samples be tested again - in another
WADA-accredited European lab outside of France if Armstrong prefers.

Bordry said he wants to be "a referee in this affair which sets the
investigation by L'Equipe against the version of Lance Armstrong."

"If he agrees, we'll launch the operation," Bordry said.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Read it at http://canadianpress.google.com/arti...rYGM8ndhWi9bqw






J. Spaceman

wrote:
From the article:
----------------------------------------------------------
The French Anti-Doping Authority (AFLD) has offered Lance Armstrong a
chance to retest his urine samples from the 1999 Tour de France to
prove he was innocent of doping.

AFLD boss Pierre Bordry told French newspaper L'Equipe that the seven-
time Tour champion would have the chance of clearing his name before
returning from retirement.

"Everybody can understand how someone like him would want to come back
to the Tour again. I would like that comeback to be in the best
possible conditions, so I would suggest that we do a complete analysis
of the six urine samples taken in the 1999 Tour," Bordry was quoted as
saying.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Read it at http://news.theage.com.au/sport/fren...1001-4s4g.html







J. Spaceman


The problem is there's supposedly not enough urine left to run any more
EPO tests. Now maybe they have something like the equivalent of PCR to
magnify the proteins, but I seriously doubt it.


Magilla

MagillaGorilla wrote:
wrote:

From the article:
----------------------------------------------------------
The French Anti-Doping Authority (AFLD) has offered Lance Armstrong a
chance to retest his urine samples from the 1999 Tour de France to
prove he was innocent of doping.

AFLD boss Pierre Bordry told French newspaper L'Equipe that the seven-
time Tour champion would have the chance of clearing his name before
returning from retirement.

"Everybody can understand how someone like him would want to come back
to the Tour again. I would like that comeback to be in the best
possible conditions, so I would suggest that we do a complete analysis
of the six urine samples taken in the 1999 Tour," Bordry was quoted as
saying.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Read it at
http://news.theage.com.au/sport/fren...1001-4s4g.html








J. Spaceman



The problem is there's supposedly not enough urine left to run any more
EPO tests. Now maybe they have something like the equivalent of PCR to
magnify the proteins, but I seriously doubt it.


Magilla



http://www.velonews.com/article/8391...-s--99-samples


Correction. Velonews is now reporting there is enough urine sample
aliquot to run EPO tests on at least 5 samples from '99.

I am 100% confident Lance will reject this offer because he knows they
would come up positive and this would ruin his legacy.


Magilla

Correction. Velonews is now reporting there is enough urine sample
aliquot to run EPO tests on at least 5 samples from '99.

I am 100% confident Lance will reject this offer because he knows they
would come up positive and this would ruin his legacy.


Magilla

I am 100% certain Lance will reject this "offer" because those samples
weren't subject to defined chain-of-custody and storage procedures that
one would require for proof that the results are accurate beyond
reasonable doubt. He'd be crazy to risk his reputation, regardless of
whether he's innocent or guilty.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA


"MagillaGorilla" wrote in message
...
MagillaGorilla wrote:
wrote:

From the article:
----------------------------------------------------------
The French Anti-Doping Authority (AFLD) has offered Lance Armstrong
a
chance to retest his urine samples from the 1999 Tour de France to
prove he was innocent of doping.

AFLD boss Pierre Bordry told French newspaper L'Equipe that the
seven-
time Tour champion would have the chance of clearing his name before
returning from retirement.

"Everybody can understand how someone like him would want to come
back
to the Tour again. I would like that comeback to be in the best
possible conditions, so I would suggest that we do a complete
analysis
of the six urine samples taken in the 1999 Tour," Bordry was quoted
as
saying.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Read it at
http://news.theage.com.au/sport/fren...1001-4s4g.html







J. Spaceman



The problem is there's supposedly not enough urine left to run any
more EPO tests. Now maybe they have something like the equivalent of
PCR to magnify the proteins, but I seriously doubt it.


Magilla



http://www.velonews.com/article/8391...-s--99-samples


Correction. Velonews is now reporting there is enough urine sample
aliquot to run EPO tests on at least 5 samples from '99.

I am 100% confident Lance will reject this offer because he knows they
would come up positive and this would ruin his legacy.


Magilla

On Oct 1, 2:06*pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote:

I am 100% confident Lance will reject this offer because he knows they
would come up positive and this would ruin his legacy.

Magilla

I am 100% certain Lance will reject this "offer" because those samples
weren't subject to defined chain-of-custody and storage procedures that
one would require for proof that the results are accurate beyond
reasonable doubt. He'd be crazy to risk his reputation, regardless of
whether he's innocent or guilty.

--Mike Jacoubowsky

I think you are both right.
DR

On Wed, 1 Oct 2008 13:06:44 -0700, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
wrote:

Correction. Velonews is now reporting there is enough urine sample
aliquot to run EPO tests on at least 5 samples from '99.

I am 100% confident Lance will reject this offer because he knows they
would come up positive and this would ruin his legacy.


Magilla

I am 100% certain Lance will reject this "offer" because those samples
weren't subject to defined chain-of-custody and storage procedures that
one would require for proof that the results are accurate beyond
reasonable doubt. He'd be crazy to risk his reputation, regardless of
whether he's innocent or guilty.

Who says they weren't stored properly ?

It would certainly look better if he took them up on their offer.

From a different article:
----------------------------------------------------------

The French Anti-Doping Authority (AFLD) has offered Lance Armstrong a
chance to spray his urine on AFLD boss Pierre Bordry.

Bordry told French newspaper L'Equipe, "We in France are quite
preoccupied with Lance's pee. And personally I've always had a golden
shower fantasy. Who better to give it to me than Lance Armstrong?"

Armstrong commented, "yeah, that would be a bold way to start my
comeback. I'm seriously thinking about it. My only concern is that
someone tries to collect it as it drips off Pierre then tries to test
it. I mean, I'm clean, but who knows what that guy is on?"

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:

Correction. Velonews is now reporting there is enough urine sample
aliquot to run EPO tests on at least 5 samples from '99.

I am 100% confident Lance will reject this offer because he knows they
would come up positive and this would ruin his legacy.


Magilla


I am 100% certain Lance will reject this "offer" because those samples
weren't subject to defined chain-of-custody and storage procedures that
one would require for proof that the results are accurate beyond
reasonable doubt. He'd be crazy to risk his reputation, regardless of
whether he's innocent or guilty.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA



If Lance is going to claim they are not his samples because a chain of
custody could not be proven, then he would have no jurisdiction in
saying whether or not they could be tested. It's also a lame excuse and
would be damning from a PR standpoint, but you are probably right in
that this will be his sole reason for declining the offer.

As for storage problems, degrading the sample could NOT cause an EPO
positive. Degrading a negative urine sample with no EPO in it would
simply still test negative for EPO.

In order for Lance to claim degradation as his reason, he would have to
argue that an EPO positive could arise out of an otherwise negative
urine sample - that is not scientifically possible.

It's like DNA - a degraded DNA sample will not degrade to match a
different person's genetic code. It will simply not match anything.

Magilla

On Oct 1, 11:39*pm, MagillaGorilla wrote:
Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
Correction. *Velonews is now reporting there is enough urine sample
aliquot to run EPO tests on at least 5 samples from '99.

I am 100% confident Lance will reject this offer because he knows they
would come up positive and this would ruin his legacy.

Magilla

I am 100% certain Lance will reject this "offer" because those samples
weren't subject to defined chain-of-custody and storage procedures that
one would require for proof that the results are accurate beyond
reasonable doubt. He'd be crazy to risk his reputation, regardless of
whether he's innocent or guilty.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

If Lance is going to claim they are not his samples because a chain of
custody could not be proven, then he would have no jurisdiction in
saying whether or not they could be tested. *It's also a lame excuse and
would be damning from a PR standpoint, but you are probably right in
that this will be his sole reason for declining the offer.

As for storage problems, degrading the sample could NOT cause an EPO
positive. *Degrading a negative urine sample with no EPO in it would
simply still test negative for EPO.

In order for Lance to claim degradation as his reason, he would have to
argue that an EPO positive could arise out of an otherwise negative
urine sample - that is not scientifically possible.

It's like DNA - a degraded DNA sample will not degrade to match a
different person's genetic code. *It will simply not match anything.

Magilla- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


so, in other words it could be a way to trap him- by adding someone
elses EPO laden urine and say it was his from 99