"Technical probs" with Heras B sample tests

let's just see if the three labs conclude same thing shall we.

now what kind of fun would that be? waiting until the results are in reduces the amount of conjecture. sheesh. you're new to this aren't you? 😕

:p

bobke said:

This whole thing stinks!!!!!!!!

Once again, blaming the test and not the riders who dope. Would you prefer that we just stop testing for drugs?

If Heras comes back positive for dope, I'll feel sorry for him, but I think it will be good for the sport. Maybe seeing a major rider lose his entire career and be stripped of a Grand Tour win will finally send a message the riders will listen to. It is important for the sport to show that it is serious about stopping doping.

tcklyde said:

Once again, blaming the test and not the riders who dope. Would you prefer that we just stop testing for drugs?

If Heras comes back positive for dope, I'll feel sorry for him, but I think it will be good for the sport. Maybe seeing a major rider lose his entire career and be stripped of a Grand Tour win will finally send a message the riders will listen to. It is important for the sport to show that it is serious about stopping doping.

OK guys, put this into perspective.
You have a medical problem say.
You go to the doctor. He says I think it may be cancer or some life-altering disease.

He draws blood for a test, a very important test.
A test the results of which will have life altering consequences.
He draws the blood for the test Monday and tells you that it will take until Wednseday to get the results back.

You call Wednesday and he says, ummm...I am not sure what the issue is but the lab says they are having technical issues and have to retest the blood again. Call back in two days.

Clearly unacceptable. No patient could accept this. No doctor would accept that. The lab would immediately go out of business and also face both civil lawsuits and governmental regulatory investigation and penalties. I KNOW this to be the case.

So why is it OK to do to Heras (and Lance)

THIS THING STINKS.
Its not that there shouldnt be testing, just good testing.

This sooo wrong.

Free Roberto!!!!!!!!!
Free Tyler!!!!!!!!!!!!!

bobke said:

OK guys, put this into perspective.
You have a medical problem say.
You go to the doctor. He says I think it may be cancer or some life-altering disease.

He draws blood for a test, a very important test.
A test the results of which will have life altering consequences.
He draws the blood for the test Monday and tells you that it will take until Wednseday to get the results back.

You call Wednesday and he says, ummm...I am not sure what the issue is but the lab says they are having technical issues and have to retest the blood again. Call back in two days.

Clearly unacceptable. No patient could accept this. No doctor would accept that. The lab would immediately go out of business and also face both civil lawsuits and governmental regulatory investigation and penalties. I KNOW this to be the case.

So why is it OK to do to Heras (and Lance)

THIS THING STINKS.
Its not that there shouldnt be testing, just good testing.

This sooo wrong.

Free Roberto!!!!!!!!!
Free Tyler!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh for goodness sake - enough with the melodrama. We're talking about cheats - it's not life or death, just highly paid athletes doing anything to get ahead.

I notice it's the Heras camp who are claiming there have been technical difficulties - the lab director is simply saying that it's a complicated procedure and will take longer than expected.

Still, you would expect Heras to have learnt more than simply microdosing procedures from the master....

bobke said:

OK guys, put this into perspective.
You have a medical problem say.<snip>

Actually that happens quite a bit in medical practice. It is fairly common for samples to be misplaced or a batch of tests not work out and thus delaying results. Nobody goes out of business. You just tell the patient initially that the result will be several days (unspecified).

tcklyde said:

Once again, blaming the test and not the riders who dope. Would you prefer that we just stop testing for drugs?

If Heras comes back positive for dope, I'll feel sorry for him, but I think it will be good for the sport. Maybe seeing a major rider lose his entire career and be stripped of a Grand Tour win will finally send a message the riders will listen to. It is important for the sport to show that it is serious about stopping doping.

Good for the sport?? It's my understanding that the test was completed, that it was inconcusive. They need to explain why it was inconclusive. If the sample proves to be neg/inconclusive then 'That" will send a message all right. I am not defending dopers, but they need to get their act together at the labs.

from Velo News
Complete and utter BullSh#t:

During a press conference Wednesday, Heras told the Reuters news agency that the lab was "unable to reach a conclusion."

"I expected a negative test, but what has happened is that they could not confirm anything," the 31-year-old Spaniard said. "I want to reiterate once again that I've never taken a doping substance in my life. I've got a completely clear conscience and I insist I've never taken EPO or anything else in my career."

Laboratory spokesman Francisco Rodriguez said the testing process "is not quite finished," adding, "There's been a delay only because we had to take more measures."

Heras's lawyer, Jose Maria Buxeda, told Reuters the delay "provides clear evidence that the method is flawed. It doesn't offer any guarantees."

"The image of the test could not be read," he continued. "So the result should be that EPO has not been detected. The director of the laboratory has decided to repeat the analysis again and in principle the result will be announced on Friday, but what guarantees will that give us?"

Dude, this is just wrong.
They should get just ONE chance to do the B test and they screw it up.
Roberto should walk.
HE doesnt get the chance of several urines to submit.
If the first test was unreadable, he WALKS!!!
This is just f'in WRONG people.

What is wrong with this world folks?!?!?

bobke said:

from Velo News
Complete and utter BullSh#t:

During a press conference Wednesday, Heras told the Reuters news agency that the lab was "unable to reach a conclusion."

"I expected a negative test, but what has happened is that they could not confirm anything," the 31-year-old Spaniard said. "I want to reiterate once again that I've never taken a doping substance in my life. I've got a completely clear conscience and I insist I've never taken EPO or anything else in my career."

Laboratory spokesman Francisco Rodriguez said the testing process "is not quite finished," adding, "There's been a delay only because we had to take more measures."

Heras's lawyer, Jose Maria Buxeda, told Reuters the delay "provides clear evidence that the method is flawed. It doesn't offer any guarantees."

"The image of the test could not be read," he continued. "So the result should be that EPO has not been detected. The director of the laboratory has decided to repeat the analysis again and in principle the result will be announced on Friday, but what guarantees will that give us?"

hombredesubaru said:

Dude, this is just wrong.
They should get just ONE chance to do the B test and they screw it up.

Until you have worked in a lab and done tests like this, you're probably not in a position to comment.

Things aren't as simple as you'd like them to be.

patch70 said:

Until you have worked in a lab and done tests like this, you're probably not in a position to comment.

Things aren't as simple as you'd like them to be.

So the lab can actually make a mistake? I thought they were infallable.

This is very similar to the Tyler case. They can't reproduce the A test results. In other words they do not get the pre-determined results they expect, so they call it inconclusive. They then test it again to see if they can produce the test they expect to see. Does anyone on this forum who even remotely thinks themselves invovled in the scientific field not have a major probelm with this line of reasoning.

As Homebred has stated if the B sample is inconclusive, end of story, period. And if the test is this flaky it should be thrown out, period.

davidbod said:

So the lab can actually make a mistake? I thought they were infallable.

This is very similar to the Tyler case. They can't reproduce the A test results. In other words they do not get the pre-determined results they expect, so they call it inconclusive. They then test it again to see if they can produce the test they expect to see. Does anyone on this forum who even remotely thinks themselves invovled in the scientific field not have a major probelm with this line of reasoning.

As Homebred has stated if the B sample is inconclusive, end of story, period. And if the test is this flaky it should be thrown out, period.

It's actually nothing like the Tyler case.
In the Tyler case, the first lab in Greece did not know what they were doing - as evidenced by the fact that they (a) couldn't read the test; and (b) froze the B sample. No such difficulties when he tested positive at the Vuelta. No such difficulties for his room mate who has accepted his guilt.

In this case, we have minimal information available. We have no idea yet what the "technical difficulties" were. Did the specimen leak? Was there damage to the test kits? Had their fridge broken down? Had they run out of the right sized pipette tips?

Until we have this information - which we the public may never hear - any comments are just conjecture.

You don't just put urine into an "EPO testing machine" and wait for the results. As patch70 points out, the test is complicated.

It's absolutely insane to think the CSD lab -- IN MADRID -- is trying to frame a Spanish national for doping. Much more likely, the lab is performing a thorough analysis.

tcklyde said:

You don't just put urine into an "EPO testing machine" and wait for the results. As patch70 points out, the test is complicated.

It's absolutely insane to think the CSD lab -- IN MADRID -- is trying to frame a Spanish national for doping. Much more likely, the lab is performing a thorough analysis.

And whose word do we have for it that there are technical problems? Heras's lawyer - who obviously is entirely impartial and not being paid to clear his client's name...

micron said:

And whose word do we have for it that there are technical problems? Heras's lawyer - who obviously is entirely impartial and not being paid to clear his client's name...

In answer to all of the above:

1. It is NOT common for a very important lab test in medicine to have technical problems. Tests exist for a reason. To give a result. If the results are even occasionally uninterpretable, the test is worthless. (Oh, sorry, your HIV test had some problems, we'll run it again and get back to you in a few days, Oh I'm sorry Lance, your MRI scan in not readable, so we dont know if you are really in remission or not, lets run it a few more times till we get it right...oh that blood smear didnt work out so we dont know if its leukemia or a virus lets do another and we'll call you next week)

2. The entire nation of Spain, the press, and the cycling media expected the results Wednesday. That's because they were told the results would be out Wednesday. There has obviously been a problem with the tests and the running of it and the results. Either someone screwed up the running of the test or the test itself is screwed up. In either case, same difference, Roberto walks. If the test is this unreliable, or fragile, or whatever...

3. Melbourne, how do you know I havent worked in a lab and run similar tests. Please share with us your background in electrophoresis and protein chemistry.

Dont make me spell this out for you guys any more. The test is [censored].
No one least of all me is suggesting, at least based on the evidence, that anyone tried to set Roberto up. But this is [censored] all the same.

patch70 said:

It's actually nothing like the Tyler case.
In the Tyler case, the first lab in Greece did not know what they were doing - as evidenced by the fact that they (a) couldn't read the test; and (b) froze the B sample. No such difficulties when he tested positive at the Vuelta. No such difficulties for his room mate who has accepted his guilt.

In this case, we have minimal information available. We have no idea yet what the "technical difficulties" were. Did the specimen leak? Was there damage to the test kits? Had their fridge broken down? Had they run out of the right sized pipette tips?

Until we have this information - which we the public may never hear - any comments are just conjecture.

The Greek lab labelled the test basically inconclusive and yes the B sample was not usable. It then took a panel of scientists to declare that the A sample was positive. Then going into the Vuelta they targetted him and found the samples positive. The two biggest problems from a scientific point are:

1) Based on the minimum standard in the only published peer review for the test, all of the tested samples would have been negative. Only after a panel was formed did the tests become positive.

2) Even though it was only a short time between the Olympics and Vuelta, the blood antigen markers that indicate the positive results are not the same in both tests. The marker in the first Olympics test does not show up in the Vuelta tests.

Here is the statement from the lab on the Herras situation.
Laboratory spokesman Francisco Rodriguez said the testing process "is not quite finished," adding, "There's been a delay only because we had to take more measures."

Had to take more measures. Like what, forming a panel to declare the test positive? Apply some further process to try and get the answer you want?

When you have to form a panel or take further measures to determine whether a test is positive or negative doesn't the test become suspect at some point.

I'm all for getting at the drug users, but at the same time we have to do it in a reasonable manner.

davidbod said:

The Greek lab labelled the test basically inconclusive and yes the B sample was not usable. It then took a panel of scientists to declare that the A sample was positive. Then going into the Vuelta they targetted him and found the samples positive. The two biggest problems from a scientific point are:

1) Based on the minimum standard in the only published peer review for the test, all of the tested samples would have been negative. Only after a panel was formed did the tests become positive.

2) Even though it was only a short time between the Olympics and Vuelta, the blood antigen markers that indicate the positive results are not the same in both tests. The marker in the first Olympics test does not show up in the Vuelta tests.

Here is the statement from the lab on the Herras situation.
Laboratory spokesman Francisco Rodriguez said the testing process "is not quite finished," adding, "There's been a delay only because we had to take more measures."

Had to take more measures. Like what, forming a panel to declare the test positive? Apply some further process to try and get the answer you want?

When you have to form a panel or take further measures to determine whether a test is positive or negative doesn't the test become suspect at some point.

I'm all for getting at the drug users, but at the same time we have to do it in a reasonable manner.

Exactly!
Why would different markers show up in Athens and Vuelta doesnt make sense.

And the Heras stuff is scandalous.

bobke said:

In answer to all of the above:

1. It is NOT common for a very important lab test in medicine to have technical problems. Tests exist for a reason. To give a result. If the results are even occasionally uninterpretable, the test is worthless. (Oh, sorry, your HIV test had some problems, we'll run it again and get back to you in a few days, Oh I'm sorry Lance, your MRI scan in not readable, so we dont know if you are really in remission or not, lets run it a few more times till we get it right...oh that blood smear didnt work out so we dont know if its leukemia or a virus lets do another and we'll call you next week)

2. The entire nation of Spain, the press, and the cycling media expected the results Wednesday. That's because they were told the results would be out Wednesday. There has obviously been a problem with the tests and the running of it and the results. Either someone screwed up the running of the test or the test itself is screwed up. In either case, same difference, Roberto walks. If the test is this unreliable, or fragile, or whatever...

3. Melbourne, how do you know I havent worked in a lab and run similar tests. Please share with us your background in electrophoresis and protein chemistry.

Dont make me spell this out for you guys any more. The test is [censored].
No one least of all me is suggesting, at least based on the evidence, that anyone tried to set Roberto up. But this is [censored] all the same.

You're very inclined to rely on the word of Heras' lawyer, aren't you Bobke? Oh, there's a delay in the test therefore it must be faulty. Turn that around and put yourself in the shoes of the director of the lab - a Spaniard, who is being asked to prove or disprove the innocence of one of Spain's top sportsmen - wouldn't you want to make damn sure that you had crossed every t and dotted every i, because I certainly would.

micron said:

You're very inclined to rely on the word of Heras' lawyer, aren't you Bobke? Oh, there's a delay in the test therefore it must be faulty. Turn that around and put yourself in the shoes of the director of the lab - a Spaniard, who is being asked to prove or disprove the innocence of one of Spain's top sportsmen - wouldn't you want to make damn sure that you had crossed every t and dotted every i, because I certainly would.

It looks like the second test could not be read so they are doing a third test. Sound fair to anyone?

Here's from procycling:

Heras and his team spent Wednesday evening building their case for rejection of the test. His lawyer, José Maria Buxeda, who attended the testing procedure, said: “The image of the test could not be read. So the result should be that EPO has not been detected. This provides clear evidence that the method is flawed. The director of the laboratory has decided to repeat the analysis again and in principle the result will be announced on Friday, but what guarantees will that give us?”

Meanwhile Heras, speaking at a press conference in Madrid, commented: “I expected a negative test, but what has happened is that they could not confirm anything… I’ve got a completely clear conscience and I insist I’ve never taken EPO or anything else. It is right there are controls but this method is clearly unreliable.”

He added that it would have been “madness” and “incomprehensible” for him to have taken any doping products on the penultimate stage of a race that he was already leading by well over four minutes.

Late on Wednesday evening, the CSD lab put out a statement of their own, denying reports that the initial testing had been inconclusive. “The remaining quantity of the sample and the perfect method of storage are allowing the analytical process to continue, a decision that the doping control laboratory has taken in conjunction with the scientific expert from the International Cycling Union.”

The lab made clear in comments to the Spanish press that it is not unusual to restart the testing procedure in cases like this in order to guarantee that the correct result in what is recognised as a complex test is achieved. WADA itself backs this strategy.

What is unusual is the degree of outside interest at this stage of the testing process, and the announcement to the press by Heras’s lawyer that the test was inconclusive and was “surprisingly” set to be repeated. He has already asked the lab and the UCI to nullify the second test of the counter-analysis on the basis that it is a new test; in effect, a third test.