A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Racing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old August 5th 04, 05:32 PM
Andy Coggan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...

"Stewart Fleming" wrote in message
...

Bob Schwartz wrote:

One would imagine that steriods are the most abused performance drug
but the testing does not support that. Out of those 6890 tests only
18 came up positive under 'Anabolic Agents'. Four of those were from
the Balco THG crowd, another 6 were Nandrolone-Oh-my-God-I-took-a-


Forgot to mention, the only revelation in Swart's TV interview that was
news to me was that THG was specifically designed to disintegrate during
the testing process. Anyone got confirmation on that? (I hadn't heard
that claimed before, is all)


I hadn't heard that, but it is theoretically possible, at least if the
steriod testing is done using electron impact gas chromatography mass
spectrometry (the most common method for identifying drugs and/or their
metabolites in biological fluids). If so, you'd build into the molecule some
particularly weak structure/bonds, most likely away from the active part of
the compound. That would result in greater fragmentation in the EI source,
yielding ions of lower mass than those being scanned for.

Andy Coggan


Ads
  #22  
Old August 5th 04, 05:33 PM
Andy Coggan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...

"Sam" wrote in message
ink.net...

You people have no clue.


I agree.

Andy Coggan


  #23  
Old August 5th 04, 05:34 PM
Badger_South
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...

On 4 Aug 2004 23:52:49 -0700, (WooGoogle) wrote:

Ewoud Dronkert wrote in message ...
On Wednesday 04 August 2004 23:13, Bob Schwartz wrote:
There are testing statistics in the USADA annual report. From
http://www.usantidoping.org/files/ac...eport_2003.pdf
Page 36

Out of 6890 total tests only one came up positive for EPO. By that
I think one can conclude that either EPO doping is very, very rare
or that the test is ****. One or the other.


Or the window between using and testing positive is very small.


From published studies, EPO is effective for several weeks after the
last dose. The urine test is only good for three to four days. Only
high level riders ( Lance, Tyler ) are "on call" for a random test out
of competition any time, any where IIRC. Other riders with suspicious
hemocrit levels, get more attention with out of competition tests.
Any one else who wants to try to dope can just stop usage before they
attend an event that USADA will likely show up for, and never test
positive and reap the benefits of EPO.


The new tests reportedly show use in ~ one week. Not sure if its a urine
test or not.

You can read more if you follow this article in MTB Mag:

http://www.mountainbike.com/communit...01_621,00.html

There's some really specific stuff on testing if you follow the links in
the article.

-B


  #24  
Old August 5th 04, 07:19 PM
scott
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...

(crit pro) wrote in message . com...
wrote
Rumors have surrounded this guy for a while now. I personally do not
know him, but have ended up on the podium with him several times and
honestly have no ill feelings toward him. I tended to chalk up the
rumors to guys that were a little jealous of his results. In my naivety,
I thought that "Local" guys just didn't dope.

The bigger question I have after reading this is: Why the F@#$ is he
being allowed to race after this positive test?!! Positive 4 months ago
and still racing. What is to dispute? Is there anyway this could
reasonably be a false positive? At Superweek he was flying and in
hindsight taking $ out of clean riders pockets. What message does this
send?
The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) has announced that Californian Dave
Fuentes is currently involved in the USADA adjudication process after
returning a positive test for oxymetholone metabolites at the Redlands
Classic on March 25, 2004.


The bigger question is when will Dave refund the stolen prize money he
cheated his fellow bike racers out of at Superweek in July?

Go to
www.internationalcycling.com for the skinny.

He won the Sprinters Jersey. That is a $5000 competition divided by
top 5. So conservatively $2000.
He won at least one stage of the 16 race long series. The daily list
is for $2800, and the winner probably nets around $600.
He placed 11th in the overall classification. That probably means a
few more hundred dollars. So we'll say $3000 so far in the cheat's
pocket.
He placed highly in many of those races, as evidenced by his 11th
overall. So I'll guess another $1000 in stage money. $4000 so far.
He probably took some rich primes. Eddie Van Guys can answer this one.
They have a star * legend for Super Prime days. One thru Five stars.
Schlitz Park was a 5 star day. That means $15,000 in primes in that
100k criterium. I'll guess about $1000 in primes. I bet it is more
like $2000-3000 for Dave the drug Slave Fuentes. So that makes $5000.

$5000 CASH. No taxes. Maybe more. minus the pharmacy fee. minus a few
friends in the races. Still BIG money. Who knows how much he split
back, helping the comeback kid McCook to his best racing in 10 years.

That is money from honest hard working souls who gave their all. This
guy is despicable. He rode like a ****ing ROCKET in July. Busted
earlier for drugs, was still his dirty little secret with each dollar
made. He was sprinting like a madman. It was unreal. He was
making/driving breaks. Like a motorcycle.

This should be a police matter. The Milwaukee Police should
investigate the THEFT of over $5000 from the competitors at Superweek
2004.

Hope your dad reads this, Dave. He must be real proud of what you
have become. A 31 year old bum, who steals to support an illegal drug
habit. A true role model for the hundreds of children who cheered for
you in July. Go away.


Crit Pro


FWIW, Fuentes has been crushing fields in NorCal for years. Just sayin'.
  #25  
Old August 5th 04, 08:07 PM
Bill Laudien
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...

So $4.4 million to conduct 6890 tests - that's about $650 per test,
which is
pretty steep in the medical realm but may not be unreasonable
considering
all the ancillary costs. In any case, though, I can't help but wonder
where
the people who call for a huge increase in testing expect the money to
come
from...for example, would they be willing to pay an extra $50 for
their
annual license to help support expanded testing? I bet that most would
not.

Andy Coggan


well US PRO charges US domestic teams almost $10,000 for UCI

registration and provides virtually no service for that fee. It would
be nice to see some of that money allocated for testing. Beyond that,
I'd be willing to pay an additional $1000-$2000 to that team fee if I
could be assured that the money would go directly to the testing of
cyclists in and out of competition. With a dozen teams or so, that
would be 20-40 additional cycling tests.

I also think it reasonsable to make some in competition testing as a
requirement for events of a certain threshold. Perhaps category A and
or B races must either provide for testing or pay into a pool for
random unannounced testing at a certain number of cat A and or B
events.

I would also suggest increasing the number of athletes in the testing
pool to include all US Pro license holders. This would probably be
outside of who the USADA needs to test but there is no reason that the
funding mechanisms above could be used to allocate supplimental
testing.

People are doping...regularly. And I don't mean ephedrine. The
Fuentes, Bergman, and DeCanio revelations are sad. And even sadder is
that as long as this continues, the clean but successful athletes will
always be suspected and their efforts doubted.

Bill Laudien
Sportsbook.com
(Sponsor of the Sportsbook.com Sprinter's jersey (temporarily)won by
Fuentes and who's team was cheated out of the gold medal round of the
team pursuit by Adham Sbeih)
  #26  
Old August 5th 04, 08:52 PM
Mike Murray
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...


"Curtis L. Russell" wrote:
Just a question - are the USADA rules for testing more stringent (i.e.
more expensive) than that done 'locally'? If I want an employee
tested, I can run the bill anywhere from $ 15 to about $ 150, and this
is just from the smorgasbord of employee hiring tests, and of course
is largely based on urine tests, pricing based on the range of
substances tested for. Blood tests are a lot more expensive retail.


The testing panels done for employers look only for the "recreational"
drugs; cocaine, meth, pot, etc. They also use cheaper, easier methods for
testing, some of which have questionable reliability. We had a triage test
for "drugs of abuse" that was used at our hospital which was then backed up
further testing which took a much longer time to produce results. We found
the estimated accuracy, based on agreement with the back up testing, was
only around 60%, i.e only slightly better than flipping a coin. We have now
quit using that test.

For athlete testing it is necessary to look at a much greater range of
substances. Steroids, sympathomimetics, hormones, masking agents, etc. are
not tested for in the panels sold to employers. The increased size of the
market, lower number of agents tested for, lower accuracy methods used all
combine to make employment test much less expensive than athletic testing.
In addition, the testing done on athletes has really limited availability.
I found this out several years ago when a team I was involved with wished to
do testing on the members of the team for various reasons. At that point I
thought that it would be possible to just get a "IOC panel" of tested done.
Turns out that such an item is not available commercially. It would be
possible to get a commercial test done for a list of possible agents but
most are not group together into a panel of tests so each substance would
require order a separate test, each test costing in the range of $100 or so.
Even if we limited the testing to just the more common anabolics the price
got out of hand very quickly.

Mike Murray


  #27  
Old August 5th 04, 09:05 PM
Bob Schwartz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...

Andy Coggan wrote:
In any case, though, I can't help but wonder where
the people who call for a huge increase in testing expect the money to come
from...for example, would they be willing to pay an extra $50 for their
annual license to help support expanded testing? I bet that most would not.


Currently two thirds of the budget comes from the federal government.
Nothing comes from the participants or governing bodies.

At the risk of launching tangential threads on the role of government
and taxation I suggest that the money come from the same place it
comes from now, just more of it.

Bob Schwartz

  #28  
Old August 6th 04, 02:42 AM
Ken Papai
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...


"crit pro" wrote in message
om...
wrote
Rumors have surrounded this guy for a while now. I personally do not
know him, but have ended up on the podium with him several times and
honestly have no ill feelings toward him. I tended to chalk up the
rumors to guys that were a little jealous of his results. In my naivety,
I thought that "Local" guys just didn't dope.

The bigger question I have after reading this is: Why the F@#$ is he
being allowed to race after this positive test?!! Positive 4 months ago
and still racing. What is to dispute? Is there anyway this could
reasonably be a false positive? At Superweek he was flying and in
hindsight taking $ out of clean riders pockets. What message does this
send?
The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) has announced that Californian Dave
Fuentes is currently involved in the USADA adjudication process after
returning a positive test for oxymetholone metabolites at the Redlands
Classic on March 25, 2004.


The bigger question is when will Dave refund the stolen prize money he
cheated his fellow bike racers out of at Superweek in July?

Go to
www.internationalcycling.com for the skinny.

He won the Sprinters Jersey. That is a $5000 competition divided by
top 5. So conservatively $2000.
He won at least one stage of the 16 race long series. The daily list
is for $2800, and the winner probably nets around $600.
He placed 11th in the overall classification. That probably means a
few more hundred dollars. So we'll say $3000 so far in the cheat's
pocket.
He placed highly in many of those races, as evidenced by his 11th
overall. So I'll guess another $1000 in stage money. $4000 so far.
He probably took some rich primes. Eddie Van Guys can answer this one.
They have a star * legend for Super Prime days. One thru Five stars.
Schlitz Park was a 5 star day. That means $15,000 in primes in that
100k criterium. I'll guess about $1000 in primes. I bet it is more
like $2000-3000 for Dave the drug Slave Fuentes. So that makes $5000.

$5000 CASH. No taxes. Maybe more. minus the pharmacy fee. minus a few
friends in the races. Still BIG money. Who knows how much he split
back, helping the comeback kid McCook to his best racing in 10 years.

That is money from honest hard working souls who gave their all. This
guy is despicable. He rode like a ****ing ROCKET in July. Busted
earlier for drugs, was still his dirty little secret with each dollar
made. He was sprinting like a madman. It was unreal. He was
making/driving breaks. Like a motorcycle.

This should be a police matter. The Milwaukee Police should
investigate the THEFT of over $5000 from the competitors at Superweek
2004.

Hope your dad reads this, Dave. He must be real proud of what you
have become. A 31 year old bum, who steals to support an illegal drug
habit. A true role model for the hundreds of children who cheered for
you in July. Go away.


Crit Pro



  #29  
Old August 6th 04, 02:43 AM
Ken Papai
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...


"crit pro" wrote in message
om...
wrote
Rumors have surrounded this guy for a while now. I personally do not
know him, but have ended up on the podium with him several times and
honestly have no ill feelings toward him. I tended to chalk up the
rumors to guys that were a little jealous of his results. In my naivety,
I thought that "Local" guys just didn't dope.

The bigger question I have after reading this is: Why the F@#$ is he
being allowed to race after this positive test?!! Positive 4 months ago
and still racing. What is to dispute? Is there anyway this could
reasonably be a false positive? At Superweek he was flying and in
hindsight taking $ out of clean riders pockets. What message does this
send?
The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) has announced that Californian Dave
Fuentes is currently involved in the USADA adjudication process after
returning a positive test for oxymetholone metabolites at the Redlands
Classic on March 25, 2004.


The bigger question is when will Dave refund the stolen prize money he
cheated his fellow bike racers out of at Superweek in July?

Go to
www.internationalcycling.com for the skinny.

He won the Sprinters Jersey. That is a $5000 competition divided by
top 5. So conservatively $2000.
He won at least one stage of the 16 race long series. The daily list
is for $2800, and the winner probably nets around $600.
He placed 11th in the overall classification. That probably means a
few more hundred dollars. So we'll say $3000 so far in the cheat's
pocket.


WHAT HAVE "YOU" EVER WON??

He placed highly in many of those races, as evidenced by his 11th
overall. So I'll guess another $1000 in stage money. $4000 so far.
He probably took some rich primes. Eddie Van Guys can answer this one.
They have a star * legend for Super Prime days. One thru Five stars.
Schlitz Park was a 5 star day. That means $15,000 in primes in that
100k criterium. I'll guess about $1000 in primes. I bet it is more
like $2000-3000 for Dave the drug Slave Fuentes. So that makes $5000.

$5000 CASH. No taxes. Maybe more. minus the pharmacy fee. minus a few
friends in the races. Still BIG money. Who knows how much he split
back, helping the comeback kid McCook to his best racing in 10 years.

That is money from honest hard working souls who gave their all. This
guy is despicable. He rode like a ****ing ROCKET in July. Busted
earlier for drugs, was still his dirty little secret with each dollar
made. He was sprinting like a madman. It was unreal. He was
making/driving breaks. Like a motorcycle.

This should be a police matter. The Milwaukee Police should
investigate the THEFT of over $5000 from the competitors at Superweek
2004.

Hope your dad reads this, Dave. He must be real proud of what you
have become. A 31 year old bum, who steals to support an illegal drug
habit. A true role model for the hundreds of children who cheered for
you in July. Go away.


Crit Pro



  #30  
Old August 6th 04, 10:20 AM
Donald Munro
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...

Andy Coggan wrote:
So $4.4 million to conduct 6890 tests - that's about $650 per test,
which is
pretty steep in the medical realm but may not be unreasonable
considering
all the ancillary costs.


Bill Laudien wrote:
well US PRO charges US domestic teams almost $10,000 for UCI

registration and provides virtually no service for that fee. It would
be nice to see some of that money allocated for testing. Beyond that,
I'd be willing to pay an additional $1000-$2000 to that team fee if I
could be assured that the money would go directly to the testing of
cyclists in and out of competition. With a dozen teams or so, that
would be 20-40 additional cycling tests.


Unlike Andy I'm no expert on the subject, but I wonder if increasing the
number of tests would also decrease the cost per test ie a kind of mass
production effect ?

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Doping or not? Read this: never_doped Racing 0 August 4th 03 01:46 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.