The 'B' Test is irrelevant.

Niall Wallace said:

Which leads to the question, has any one ever studdied how Sport affects
testosterone levels, and if so does it include 3 weeks of cycling?

There was Dutch cyclist some years ago who was caught with high
testosterone levels (GertJan Theunnise) and always maintained it was
natural and he was just an outlier on the far end of the curve - don't
think I've ever seen a follow-up about proper research into this.

Roos

david lloyd said:

IMHO, Landis's 'B' test is irrelevant. Nobody has suggested that the testing
method was in error, which would be the only thing shown if the second test
came back negative. It also does nothing to prove or disprove Landis's
assertion that the high testosterone level was natural. The 'B' test is
therefore a total non sequitur.

I know it will take time, but the issue of Landis's guilt for using
performance enhancing drugs and only be settled with a proper investigation.

(Belga) L'échantillon B du coureur Floyd Landis (Phonak), 30 ans, vainqueur
de l'édition 2006 du Tour de France, est également "anormal", a annoncé
l'Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) samedi dans un communiqué.

Landis avait fait l'objet d'un premier résultat positif (à la testostérone)
après sa victoire le 20 juillet dans la 17-ème étape du Tour à Morzine, au
lendemain d'une grosse défaillance. L'Américain, coéquipier d'Axel Merckx,
devrait être suspendu deux ans, et perdre le bénéfice de sa victoire au
profit de l'Espagnol Oscar Pereiro (Caisse d'Epargne - Illes Balears).
Conformément au règlement antidopage, la Commission Antidopage de l'UCI va
demander à la Fédération américaine de cyclisme d'ouvrir une procédure
disciplinaire contre le coureur, précise le communiqué.- (CER).

It's positive - banned for two years

Roos Eisma said:

Niall Wallace said:

Which leads to the question, has any one ever studdied how Sport affects
testosterone levels, and if so does it include 3 weeks of cycling?

There was Dutch cyclist some years ago who was caught with high
testosterone levels (GertJan Theunnise) and always maintained it was
natural and he was just an outlier on the far end of the curve - don't
think I've ever seen a follow-up about proper research into this.

Roos

Gert has since admitted he was on a charge

Dan Gregory said:

Landis avait fait l'objet d'un premier résultat positif (à la testostérone)
après sa victoire le 20 juillet dans la 17-ème étape du Tour à Morzine, au
lendemain d'une grosse défaillance. L'Américain, coéquipier d'Axel Merckx,
devrait être suspendu deux ans, et perdre le bénéfice de sa victoire au
profit de l'Espagnol Oscar Pereiro (Caisse d'Epargne - Illes Balears).
Conformément au règlement antidopage, la Commission Antidopage de l'UCI va
demander à la Fédération américaine de cyclisme d'ouvrir une procédure
disciplinaire contre le coureur, précise le communiqué.- (CER).

It's positive - banned for two years

.... and disqualifed from victory in the Tour in favour of Oscar
Pereiro.

It goes on: "In accordance with anti-doping regulations the Anti-Doping
Commission of the UCI will ask the American Cycling Federation to open
a disciplinary process against the competitor, states the communiqué."

--
Dave...

"Niall Wallace" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Which leads to the question, has any one ever studdied how Sport affects
testosterone levels, and if so does it include 3 weeks of cycling?

Landis was tested on other days and, one assumes, found negative. What was
Landis found positive for? Was it a high testoserone level (absolute) or a
high ratio of testosterone WRT another hormone, as had been reported? If it
was the later, as I belive it was, any study would have to involve not only
why testosterone would be high, but also what could cause the second hormone
to be low.

Remembering that Landis was riding with a painfully dodgy hip, is body would
be fighting like crazy to repare damage. Does this not cause a raising of
the testosterone level? I think there is still plenty of scope for doubt in
what test results may mean.

--
Dave Lloyd
So open minded, my brains dribbled out.

"dkahn400" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Dan Gregory said:

Landis avait fait l'objet d'un premier résultat positif (à la
testostérone)
après sa victoire le 20 juillet dans la 17-ème étape du Tour à Morzine, au
lendemain d'une grosse défaillance. L'Américain, coéquipier d'Axel Merckx,
devrait être suspendu deux ans, et perdre le bénéfice de sa victoire au
profit de l'Espagnol Oscar Pereiro (Caisse d'Epargne - Illes Balears).
Conformément au règlement antidopage, la Commission Antidopage de l'UCI va
demander à la Fédération américaine de cyclisme d'ouvrir une procédure
disciplinaire contre le coureur, précise le communiqué.- (CER).

It's positive - banned for two years

.... and disqualifed from victory in the Tour in favour of Oscar
Pereiro.

It goes on: "In accordance with anti-doping regulations the Anti-Doping
Commission of the UCI will ask the American Cycling Federation to open
a disciplinary process against the competitor, states the communiqué."

Is he banned fro two years yet? Has the yellow jersey been removed yet?
Cycling News says:-

""In accordance to the Anti-doping rules, the Anti-doping Commission of the
UCI will request that the USA Cycling Federation open a disciplinary
procedure against the rider," said the UCI in a statement. If found guilty
of taking performance enhancing drugs, Landis faces up to a two year ban
from the sport and the stripping of his Tour de France title, which would go
to Oscar Pereiro. Landis has also been fired by his Phonak team, which will
comment on the case in the next few days."

see http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2006/aug06/aug05news2

One would expect a ban and the removal of the maillot jaune, but as far as I
can tell, it hasn't officially happened *yet*

Cheers, helen s

wafflycat said:

Quoted message said:

It's positive - banned for two years

... and disqualifed from victory in the Tour in favour of Oscar
Pereiro.

Oh s**t!

This does not bode well for next year's London start being a runaway
success ;-(

david lloyd schreef:

Quoted message said:

Landis was tested on other days and, one assumes, found negative. What was
Landis found positive for? Was it a high testoserone level (absolute) or a
high ratio of testosterone WRT another hormone, as had been reported? If it
was the later, as I belive it was, any study would have to involve not only
why testosterone would be high, but also what could cause the second hormone
to be low.

That does not follow. A high ratio between testosteron and
epitestosteron does not imply a 'low level' of epi. A high ratio of
11:1 even allows for a *high* epi level (and an exceptionally high
testosteron level) in absolute terms.

Quoted message said:

Remembering that Landis was riding with a painfully dodgy hip, is body would
be fighting like crazy to repare damage. Does this not cause a raising of
the testosterone level?

Well, does it? I've never heard of it, maybe you can help Landis gather
the proof for such hypothesis. As far as I am concerned, the burder of
proof is now on Landis cum suis.

Quoted message said:

I think there is still plenty of scope for doubt in what test results may mean.

Yes? So we shouldn't believe any tests? Or only if they are positive?
Or only if they are positive with Landis? It seems that Landis cum suis
won't accept the result of tests only if they don't like the outcome.

Maybe the Tour de France is no valid test to assess who is the best
cyclist. Too many false negatives.

Michel

david lloyd schreef:

Quoted message said:

Nobody has suggested that the testing method was in error, which would be the
only thing shown if the second test came back negative.

No test is perfect. A very good tests still yields false positives and
false negatives, even though the percentages of 'true positives' and
'true negatives' may be 99%. It is hard to raise the reliability of a
single-shot test (one sample) above 99%. A much easier method is to
test two samples. In that way, the chance of making a mistake *again*
is extremely low: 1% x 1% = 0,01%. (BTW this is just a numerical
example).

There is no reasonable doubt about the outcome of Landis' drugs test.
He *had* a ratio of testosteron : epitestosteron of 11 : 1. This
'beyond reasonable doubt' quality of the assessment is due to the test
on the second sample. That's why it is *very* relevant.

Michel

Quoted message said:

david lloyd schreef:

Quoted message said:

Nobody has suggested that the testing method was in error, which would be the
only thing shown if the second test came back negative.

No test is perfect. A very good tests still yields false positives and
false negatives,

in the days when breathalysers were not admissable and a blood test was
required someone told me that the 80 mg limit was there because it was
possible to have a false positive below that having drunk nothing.

david lloyd said:

IMHO, Landis's 'B' test is irrelevant. Nobody has suggested that the testing
method was in error, which would be the only thing shown if the second test
came back negative. It also does nothing to prove or disprove Landis's
assertion that the high testosterone level was natural. The 'B' test is
therefore a total non sequitur.

I know it will take time, but the issue of Landis's guilt for using
performance enhancing drugs and only be settled with a proper investigation.

My understanding is very limited, but what I do know is the issue is if
the test was externally sourced. Supposedly, this is a something which
can be readily evaluated, but I can't say how.

What I'd be interested in knowing is why we don't have more than one lab
doing these evaluations. The consequences of Landis' DQ here would be
enormous.

-paul

MartinM said:

wafflycat said:

Quoted message said:

It's positive - banned for two years

... and disqualifed from victory in the Tour in favour of Oscar
Pereiro.

Oh s**t!

This does not bode well for next year's London start being a runaway
success ;-(

it would be interesting to know what the subsequent samples are like
after these from Stage 17.

would the levels fall fast enough to be in 'spec'.

pete whelan said:

it would be interesting to know what the subsequent samples are like
after these from Stage 17.

would the levels fall fast enough to be in 'spec'.

After all that water it's amazing he was caught at the test - his
behaviour was the main giveaway. We all thought he was charged up
straight away - although when I said that to somebody on the ferry home
he didn't seem to want to believe that was possible..
DG

in message <[email hidden]>, david lloyd

(') said:

IMHO, Landis's 'B' test is irrelevant. Nobody has suggested that the
testing method was in error,

Au contraire, that's exactly what Landis' legal team /do/ claim.

Quoted message said:

which would be the only thing shown if the
second test came back negative. It also does nothing to prove or
disprove Landis's assertion that the high testosterone level was
natural.

He didn't have a high testosterone level. That, too, is smokescreen
poured out by his defence. When tested, he had a /low/ testosterone
level - but a much lower epitestosterone level.

Quoted message said:

I know it will take time, but the issue of Landis's guilt for using
performance enhancing drugs and only be settled with a proper
investigation.

It's settled now. I just wish he'd say 'it's a fair cop, guv, you've got
me bang to rights. I'll do my bird quietly.'

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
; ... of course nothing said here will be taken notice of by
; the W3C. The official place to be ignored is on www-style or
; www-html. -- George Lund

in message <[email hidden]>, Dan Gregory

(') said:

pete whelan said:

it would be interesting to know what the subsequent samples are like
after these from Stage 17.

would the levels fall fast enough to be in 'spec'.

After all that water it's amazing he was caught at the test - his
behaviour was the main giveaway.

Since what is tested is a ratio not a level, the amount of water he drank
is irrelevant.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Hobbit ringleader gives Sauron One in the Eye.

in message <[email hidden]>, david lloyd

(') said:

"Niall Wallace" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Which leads to the question, has any one ever studdied how Sport
affects testosterone levels, and if so does it include 3 weeks of
cycling?

Landis was tested on other days and, one assumes, found negative. What
was Landis found positive for? Was it a high testoserone level
(absolute) or a high ratio of testosterone WRT another hormone, as had
been reported? If it was the later, as I belive it was, any study would
have to involve not only why testosterone would be high, but also what
could cause the second hormone to be low.

Oh, do read the news. This has been everywhere.

It's a ratio: the ratio between testosterone and epitestosterone. Healthy
people normally produce the two roughly equally; under stress (e.g. in
the third week of a stage race) a normal person's testosterone will be
lower than normal, and they epitestosterone possibly slightly higher.

If testosterone is higher than epitestosterone, that is taken to be
evidence of tampering, and a ratio of 4:1 is the break point to be
considered to be cheating. On the Thursday of the third week, Landis
ratio is reported to have been 11:1, although his absolute testosterone
level was slightly reportedly lower than normal (possibly as a result of
all the water he'd drunk diluting his urine).

All this 'reported' refers to articles in l'Equipe, which appears to have
a mole in the lab; these figures may not be trustworthy.

Quoted message said:

Remembering that Landis was riding with a painfully dodgy hip, is body
would be fighting like crazy to repare damage. Does this not cause a
raising of the testosterone level?

No, a lowering.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; killing [afghan|iraqi] civilians is not 'justice'

Simon Brooke wrote on 05/08/2006 22:14 +0100:

Quoted message said:

All this 'reported' refers to articles in l'Equipe, which appears to have
a mole in the lab; these figures may not be trustworthy.

The same lab, magazine and mole as the now discredited Armstrong 1999
allegations. The question arises as to why the lab continues to feed
the magazine in this way and raises serious issues for me about their
motives and therefore the credibility of their results.

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

Dan Gregory wrote on 05/08/2006 19:04 +0100:

Quoted message said:

After all that water it's amazing he was caught at the test - his
behaviour was the main giveaway. We all thought he was charged up
straight away - although when I said that to somebody on the ferry home
he didn't seem to want to believe that was possible..
DG

That seems to be the current interpretation but on the day all the
commentators were saying the peleton made a big mistake in letting him
get away with it so easily rather than he did anything particularly heroic.

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

Tony Raven said:

Simon Brooke wrote on 05/08/2006 22:14 +0100:

Quoted message said:

All this 'reported' refers to articles in l'Equipe, which appears to have
a mole in the lab; these figures may not be trustworthy.

The same lab, magazine and mole as the now discredited Armstrong 1999
allegations. The question arises as to why the lab continues to feed
the magazine in this way and raises serious issues for me about their
motives and therefore the credibility of their results.

Indeed. I would have assumed as a matter of course that the B sample
would have been tested by a different laboratory acceptable to both the
competitor and the UCI, but apparently not.

--
Dave...