In today's L'Equipe: Armstrong took EPO

wrote

In any case, it seems that the French press has not jumped on the
anti Lance band wagon. This article in Liberation seems to accuse
L'Equipe as much as Armstrong:
http://www.liberation.fr/page.php?Article=318805

??? where does this article accuses L'equipe of anything?

"Van Hoorebeeck Bart" wrote in
message ...
Meanwhile the usual suspects line up for comments:

Voet : "I knew him before and after the disease. It was a different
person. He
should explain how he rides up Alpe d'Huez at 25 kmh"

The irony being that this is not even the fastest time/speed up Alpe d'Huez!
If I remember correctly, Pantani holds this distinction, and he was indeed
suspended due to the use of illegal substances.

Sad conclusion, for me anyways, is that most everyone in the peloton use
some sort of enhancement, which should level the playing field a bit.

And whether I like it or not, Lance was still the best TdF rider (given this
supposedly leveled playing field).

Basjan

"Van Hoorebeeck Bart" wrote in
message ...
Meanwhile the usual suspects line up for comments:

Merckx: "I take Lance's word over any journalist's."
Leblanc : "Shocked!"
Simeoni: "Now see."
Voet : "I knew him before and after the disease. It was a different
person. He
should explain how he rides up Alpe d'Huez at 25 kmh"

Lafferty: "The smoking gun!"
Kunich: "The sponge bath!"

If this turns out to have substance to it, I will not be surprised.
Armstrong already amply demonstrated that he is ethically-challenged by
the way he behaved in his marriage.

Mike Owens wrote:

[snip]

Thanks. That's very clear.

Bob a écrit :

wrote

In any case, it seems that the French press has not jumped on the
anti Lance band wagon. This article in Liberation seems to accuse
L'Equipe as much as Armstrong:
http://www.liberation.fr/page.php?Article=318805

??? where does this article accuses L'equipe of anything?

At the end, it states that L'Equipe belongs to ASO, and they waited
till Armstrong's Tour career was over before turning over the
"incriminating" information.

-ilan

Tim Campbell a écrit :

If this turns out to have substance to it, I will not be surprised.
Armstrong already amply demonstrated that he is ethically-challenged by
the way he behaved in his marriage.

So far, the best response I've seen! POTM!!

-ilan

Mike Owens wrote:

From the very beginning of the urine EPO test, it was made clear that
the test looked for the presence of EPO (or perhaps EPO fragments) that
migrated differently during gel electrophoresis (can separate proteins
by size and electrical charge). Natural EPO tendend to have
significantly less of what are termed "basic" fragments (as in acidic
and basic). I am not certain but I seem to remember that natural EPO
was substantially less than 40% basic. The recombinant EPO is produced
by cell lines that are different than the human kidney from which
natural human EPO is produced and although the protein is identical, or
nearly so, the cell lines make "post-translational modifications" to
the protein that make it more "basic" compared to natural EPO. Column
B clearly shows this.

Column A almost certainly means Yes/No as to whether it looks like
bands are migrating to the "basic" part of the gel more so than
normally expected. Column B is just a numerical verification of A using
some type of densitometry.

Kyle can add more details but the technique they use has been made
public previously.
-Mike

It also makes clearer something that I hadn't understood from the original
article: these are results from the current EPO test as applied to the old
urine samples. The article said that they had used the old urine samples
to calibrate a new test so I was confused about which test results these
were.

Thanks again for the explanation.

a écrit :

In any case, it seems that the French press has not jumped on the
anti Lance band wagon. This article in Liberation seems to accuse
L'Equipe as much as Armstrong:
http://www.liberation.fr/page.php?Article=318805

Except, of course, for Le Monde, which devotes its editorial to
Armstrong's guilt, with plenty of "we told you so"s to boot.
http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,...-636140,0.html

I wonder if Le Monde was around during "La Terreur". In any case,
they don't seem to believe that there is any defence against
accusations which have been recognised as not being up to a legal
standard.

-ilan

Tim Campbell wrote:
If this turns out to have substance to it, I will not be surprised.
Armstrong already amply demonstrated that he is ethically-challenged
by the way he behaved in his marriage.

Go pick up another "Globe" in the checkout line, moron.