Study shows problems with EPO test

[Phil Holman]

"Fred Fredburger" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Phil Holman wrote:
>
>> The test was unreliable and hence everyone (especially Lance) was
>> doping......give me a break. That conclusion is as flawed as the EPO
>> test (if the study is a true reflection).
>
> The test being unreliable was the subplot of a subplot in the "LANCE
> IS A DOPER!!!" story that Lafferty told.
>
> I read Ryan's statement as intentionally ironic. I was just going with
> it.

OK, we're all aware of the plot and the Lafferty hypothesis. Reasonable
people expect a higher standard of proof than that previously discussed
in this forum. Reasonable people may have their suspicions but they do
not allow these to cloud their judgment. The cloud of suspicion will
always loom over Lance's head but that is a far cry from a
scientifically proven or indisputably determined fact.

Some mistake rigorous adherence to the scientific method or a high level
of proof as hero worship of LA. Reasonable people have required these
standards of proof before, during and after LA's era.

Phil H

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <[email protected]>,
Fred Fredburger <[email protected]> wrote:

> Phil Holman wrote:
>
> > The test was unreliable and hence everyone (especially Lance) was
> > doping......give me a break. That conclusion is as flawed as the EPO
> > test (if the study is a true reflection).
>
> The test being unreliable was the subplot of a subplot in the "LANCE IS
> A DOPER!!!" story that Lafferty told.
>
> I read Ryan's statement as intentionally ironic. I was just going with it.

The trick with being funny is that when you're being serious but stupid,
it covers that too.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

 

[Kyle Legate]

Robert Chung wrote:
> On Jun 25, 11:20 pm, Kyle Legate <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> The study involving the lab testing of the subjects used in this paper
>> is not yet on Pubmed.
>
> The abstract is here:
>
> http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/abstract/90529.2008v1

Thanks.

 

[[email protected]]

> i don't see a false positive. what i see are patients that took epo
> tested positive or didn't. one patient for some reason kept testing
> positive beyond the expected window after taking the drug.
>
> i don't see a control that suggests patients who did not take epo
> would test positive.


Thanks, I was starting to think I had reading comprehension problems.
I agree, you can't have a false positive if everyone is taking the
drug. Much ado about nothing. We've always known the test yielded
lots of false negatives, which is exactly what this study shows.