Slide Show 2.1 first look

The Slide Show that Dr. Baker presented in Tucson has been uploaded to his site, and mirrored into archive.org for easy download here.

Update: Video from FloydLandis.com and box.net is mirrored for easy access in various formats at archive.org.

I haven't had time to do an extensive review, but the new material seems to be:

• Extensive discussion of positivity criteria, comparing what was apparently done at LNDD with what is done at the Australian lab and Catlin's UCLA lab, and note that one of the control samples in Catlin's research would have been a "positive" under what appear to be the LNDD standards.
  
• A review of some of the "hack" documents, which Baker calls the "whistleblower" documents. He doesn't make particular claims for their veracity, except that it ought to be possible to determine from either LNDD or the ostensible recipients.

The "whistleblower" documents shown include

• A request to the Alpine Climbing Federation to destroy an LDP that had a wrong date.
• Letters to two swimming federations retracting LDPs that have wrong sample numbers.
• Letter to the Squash Federation retracting an LDP that assigned an AAF to the wrong athlete.
• A letter to FINA (swimming) retracting a declared AAF because they discovered it had cross-contaminated its control urine on July 4th 2006, during the Tour.
  

Further, they indicate that

• WADA knew of the cross-contamination on Jul 4, and questioned LNDD about it;
• LNDD made excuses
• WADA appears to have taken no further action.

This pattern of errors leads Baker to believe WADA should have rescinded LNDD's accreditation before the report of Landis' AAF.

Elsewhere...

The useful discussion at DPF narrows into the IRMS CIR positivity criteria as the key argument, and thinks the references in the SS are muddled, and the references unclear.
Floyd appears and asks some leading questions that rattle around.

Rant looks at the show, and thinks the case is being made, but thinks the other side will come out swinging too.

[end]