Contador said...

Contador said he passed "a blood control in the morning on day 21 and one of
urine "three hours after eating" the flesh on this date. The UCI understands
what happened and that is a clear case of food contamination, incomparable
with any other case of clenbuterol. Because I was leading the race, and this
is in my favor, I passed controls every day and after day 21, the level
dropped and the next day did not appear..."

"...The amount detected was so low that it is impossible to provide unless
there is food contamination and this amount doesn't enhance the performance,
it is not good for anything, any expert can confirm"


Can we believe this? I'm confused...

l.a.

On Sep 30, 8:16*am, "leeanderson"
wrote:
Contador said he passed "a blood control in the morning on day 21 and one of
urine "three hours after eating" the flesh on this date. The UCI understands
what happened and that is a clear case of food contamination, incomparable
with any other case of clenbuterol. Because I was leading the race, and this
is in my favor, I passed controls every day and after day 21, the level
dropped and the next day did not appear..."

"...The amount detected was so low that it is impossible to provide unless
there is food contamination and this amount doesn't enhance the performance,
it is not good for anything, any expert can confirm"

Can we believe this? I'm confused...

Without hearing from the UCI, this is virtually no information at all:
I simply say that out of a cynical observation that many positive
testees initially make plausible-sounding excuses, and most of them
turn out to be hogwash.

There have been a few cases where riders had their excuses upheld to
some extent: a reversed sanction here or there, Petacchi getting only
6 months (and Wikipedia says primarly for protesting his innocense)
instead of the usual 2 years, but with no other info than Contador's
positive and his subsequent excuse, I'd bet a modest sum (at even
odds) on him getting sanctioned rather than cleared.

Again, this is without reference to any theories about Contador's
character. I didn't even know this was asthma medication (with an off-
label weight-loss effect!) until I looked it up, and I haven't even
read a news report about the positive result yet. I'm proposing a
blind bet.

leeanderson wrote:
Contador said he passed "a blood control in the morning on day 21 and
one of urine "three hours after eating" the flesh on this date. The
UCI understands what happened and that is a clear case of food
contamination, incomparable with any other case of clenbuterol.
Because I was leading the race, and this is in my favor, I passed
controls every day and after day 21, the level dropped and the next
day did not appear..."
"...The amount detected was so low that it is impossible to provide
unless there is food contamination and this amount doesn't enhance
the performance, it is not good for anything, any expert can confirm"


Can we believe this? I'm confused...

l.a.

Further reading about clen says it's widely used in Europe in animals to
increase muscle, effectively increasing the amount of meat that can be
sold. A food-born contamination doesn't seem totally unlikely.

It'd be interesting to test the general population for clen and see what
shows up - if Contador's numbers are common, then food is believable as
a likely source. Let's exclude bodybuilders from this test, though.

-S-

On Sep 30, 12:58*pm, Ryan Cousineau wrote:
On Sep 30, 8:16*am, "leeanderson"
wrote:

Contador said he passed "a blood control in the morning on day 21 and one of
urine "three hours after eating" the flesh on this date. The UCI understands
what happened and that is a clear case of food contamination, incomparable
with any other case of clenbuterol. Because I was leading the race, and this
is in my favor, I passed controls every day and after day 21, the level
dropped and the next day did not appear..."

"...The amount detected was so low that it is impossible to provide unless
there is food contamination and this amount doesn't enhance the performance,
it is not good for anything, any expert can confirm"

Can we believe this? I'm confused...

Without hearing from the UCI, this is virtually no information at all:
I simply say that out of a cynical observation that many positive
testees initially make plausible-sounding excuses, and most of them
turn out to be hogwash.

There have been a few cases where riders had their excuses upheld to
some extent: a reversed sanction here or there, Petacchi getting only
6 months (and Wikipedia says primarly for protesting his innocense)
instead of the usual 2 years, but with no other info than Contador's
positive and his subsequent excuse, I'd bet a modest sum (at even
odds) on him getting sanctioned rather than cleared.

Again, this is without reference to any theories about Contador's
character. I didn't even know this was asthma medication (with an off-
label weight-loss effect!) until I looked it up, and I haven't even
read a news report about the positive result yet. I'm proposing a
blind bet.

if it is such a small amount, why should it be an issue ? I seem to
recall that most east europeans and scandanavians have traces of
fallout from chernobyl but it is such miniscule quantity that it can
really only be seen in a slightly higher statistical rate for cancer
amongst the population- the point being that if they really look for
something they might find it in the environment but it in no way would
suggest the person gained any benefit. if the quantity is below a
threshold level ( I think I read ACs was 400 times below) then it
shouldn't mean anything at all.

"leeanderson" wrote in message
...
Contador said he passed "a blood control in the morning on day 21 and one
of urine "three hours after eating" the flesh on this date. The UCI
understands what happened and that is a clear case of food contamination,
incomparable with any other case of clenbuterol. Because I was leading the
race, and this is in my favor, I passed controls every day and after day
21, the level dropped and the next day did not appear..."

"...The amount detected was so low that it is impossible to provide unless
there is food contamination and this amount doesn't enhance the
performance, it is not good for anything, any expert can confirm"


Can we believe this? I'm confused...

l.a.

Contador's team is doing its best to put words in the UCI's mouth, and
gently paint them into a corner. Good strategy.

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

On Sep 30, 11:58*am, Ryan Cousineau wrote:
On Sep 30, 8:16*am, "leeanderson"
wrote:

Contador said he passed "a blood control in the morning on day 21 and one of
urine "three hours after eating" the flesh on this date. The UCI understands
what happened and that is a clear case of food contamination, incomparable
with any other case of clenbuterol. Because I was leading the race, and this
is in my favor, I passed controls every day and after day 21, the level
dropped and the next day did not appear..."

"...The amount detected was so low that it is impossible to provide unless
there is food contamination and this amount doesn't enhance the performance,
it is not good for anything, any expert can confirm"

Can we believe this? I'm confused...

Without hearing from the UCI, this is virtually no information at all:
I simply say that out of a cynical observation that many positive
testees initially make plausible-sounding excuses, and most of them
turn out to be hogwash.

There have been a few cases where riders had their excuses upheld to
some extent: a reversed sanction here or there, Petacchi getting only
6 months (and Wikipedia says primarly for protesting his innocense)
instead of the usual 2 years, but with no other info than Contador's
positive and his subsequent excuse, I'd bet a modest sum (at even
odds) on him getting sanctioned rather than cleared.

Again, this is without reference to any theories about Contador's
character. I didn't even know this was asthma medication (with an off-
label weight-loss effect!) until I looked it up, and I haven't even
read a news report about the positive result yet. I'm proposing a
blind bet.

Daniel Plaza, race walker
Drug: Nandrolone
Explanation: The Olympic gold medal winner provoked prurient giggles
around the world with his explanation for a failed test at the 1996
Spanish championships. He insisted that small amounts of the steroid
entered his body as he performed oral sex on his pregnant wife.
Result: Pregnant women do produce nandrolone naturally and Plaza did
eventually clear his name – albeit 10 years after testing positive.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/oth...-inhalers.html

On Sep 30, 8:16*am, "leeanderson"
wrote:

Can we believe this? I'm confused...

How many stories have we heard over the past decade that turned out to
be utter bull****? Furthermore, there have been dozens of examples
where people have tested positive, have come up with credible,
supported explanations on the why/how, yet have still be sanctioned
because the code doesn't differentiate between intentional and
unintentional use of doping products. I don't see how Contador's
mythical "dope steak" is going to save him, unless the powers-that-be
decide to cut a deal to prevent this debacle from proceeding.

Brad Anders

On 9/30/2010 3:28 PM, Brad Anders wrote:
On Sep 30, 8:16 am,
wrote:

Can we believe this? I'm confused...

How many stories have we heard over the past decade that turned out to
be utter bull****? Furthermore, there have been dozens of examples
where people have tested positive, have come up with credible,
supported explanations on the why/how, yet have still be sanctioned
because the code doesn't differentiate between intentional and
unintentional use of doping products. I don't see how Contador's
mythical "dope steak" is going to save him, unless the powers-that-be
decide to cut a deal to prevent this debacle from proceeding.

What would be totally cool is if they docked him 10 minutes and
let it go at that. Clenbuterol is a retro drug, they should assess
a retro penalty.

Fred Flintstein

On Sep 30, 1:34*pm, Fred Flintstein
wrote:
On 9/30/2010 3:28 PM, Brad Anders wrote:

On Sep 30, 8:16 am,
wrote:

Can we believe this? I'm confused...

How many stories have we heard over the past decade that turned out to
be utter bull****? Furthermore, there have been dozens of examples
where people have tested positive, have come up with credible,
supported explanations on the why/how, yet have still be sanctioned
because the code doesn't differentiate between intentional and
unintentional use of doping products. I don't see how Contador's
mythical "dope steak" is going to save him, unless the powers-that-be
decide to cut a deal to prevent this debacle from proceeding.

What would be totally cool is if they docked him 10 minutes and
let it go at that. Clenbuterol is a retro drug, they should assess
a retro penalty.

Fred Flintstein

Hey, I have no problem with the concept of making up sanctions on-the-
fly. IMO, Contador should have to knock his chain off on a major climb
in next year's TdF and stand there for at least 36 seconds before
doing anything.

Brad Anders

On Sep 30, 4:28*pm, Brad Anders wrote:
On Sep 30, 8:16*am, "leeanderson"
wrote:

Can we believe this? I'm confused...

How many stories have we heard over the past decade that turned out to
be utter bull****? Furthermore, there have been dozens of examples
where people have tested positive, have come up with credible,
supported explanations on the why/how, yet have still be sanctioned
because the code doesn't differentiate between intentional and
unintentional use of doping products. I don't see how Contador's
mythical "dope steak" is going to save him, unless the powers-that-be
decide to cut a deal to prevent this debacle from proceeding.

Brad Anders

I hereby nominate this as POTM for 'mythical dope steak' ... i rarely
lol ... but this got me ...