Doesn't 7 minus 1 equal 6 Lance Armstrong?

Philip Holman wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

I know there is much debate about his initial 'win', but it is sounding
more and more like the 1999 win WAS tainted after all. Dick Pound,
head of WADA - the anti-doping agency, has even gone so far to say
that
if 1 of the 6 samples taken had EPO that would be one thing but if all
6 of the 6 taken did then there would have to be some explaining done.


With tampering, the number is immaterial. Is it reasonable to believe
that someone who would leak information in violation of the rules would
also tamper with the samples? Declaring a positive without the
recognized protocol of an A and B sample is an indication of either
ignorance or bias.


As far as I understood, the laboratory wouldn't have been able to leak
the identifying information, it was already in the archives of L'Equipe
and leaked by someone else.
OTOH, only the laboratory or people with access to it would be able to
tamper with the the samples.

Concerning the A&B samples, the fact that this procedure isn't following
regulations of sporting agencies has nothing to do with it's validity.
I've never heard of field sobriety test mandating A&B samples in a
similar way, for instance.

That said, independend on the doping issue, all this is a serious breach
of privacy of an individual and should be investigated.