CyclingForums
A community for cyclists, gear, training and racing.
Road Cycling · Public discussion
This thread is locked and is currently read-only.
Thread details
The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.
The scary part of this whole thing is that many of these responses all
assume it was a technical error for the lab, and he was guilty anyway. If
the lab had not "identified" this guy, he would never have been under
suspicion. These lab check and safeguards were put in for a reason. Whether
he took drugs or not, we can not have the attitude that innocents are
acceptable collateral damage.
That's easy to say sitting in the computer room.
mal said:The scary part of this whole thing is that many of these responses all
assume it was a technical error for the lab, and he was guilty anyway. If
the lab had not "identified" this guy, he would never have been under
suspicion. These lab check and safeguards were put in for a reason. Whether
he took drugs or not, we can not have the attitude that innocents are
acceptable collateral damage.That's easy to say sitting in the computer room.
What's more scary to me is that folks are buying the story that is put
out in the perfidious ruling. They managed to duck all of the
scientific arguments that said the test results were wrong without
addressing them; acquit him on a technicality, and then smear him on
the way out.
More about this in
http://trustbut.blogspot.com/2006/12/landaluze-decision-tbv-rant.html
-dB
Active in the last 60 minutes
0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total
No signed-in users are active right now.
No known search crawlers active right now.