A different kind of error from the LNDD
An emailer passes on the following developing story at the Paceline forum:
| ||||||
| VinoFan Starting Member  Posts: 57 Joined: 1/22/2008 Status: online  | it seems like a start of a big scandal around french lab Chatenay-Malabry in case of russian woman-rider Svetlana Bubnenkova. The lab made a probe A in August 2006 (non-negative), then a probe B in April 2007 (non-negative), but they didn't informed about this WADA, UCI and Russian cycling federation!!! Bubnenkova took a part in all races as well as in World Champ in Germany!!! And only now French cycling federation AFLD has informed about non-negative test other sides. There's only russian version, I didn't see any other http://allsport.ru/index.php?id=12349 | |||||
Google Translation of the referenced article says:
"Case Bubnenkovoy" could lead to the closure of the French anti-doping laboratory in Shateno-Malabri
[MORE]
Case velogonschitsy Russia, the world champion in command race in 1993 and 1994, the victorious mnogodnevki Dziro d'Italiya "" 2002, the participating Olympic Games 1996, 2000 and 2004, a candidate for the Olympic team Svetlana Bubnenkovoy-2008 (photo), which the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) accused in the use of Erythropoietin (EPO) may lead to the most unexpected consequences. In particular - to the closure of the scandalous well-known French anti-doping laboratory in Shateno-Malabri.It follows the investigation, which held a special correspondent for the Agency's sports information "All Sport".
Agency "All Sports" first reported by the French doping claims Svetlana Bubnenkovoy - see http://www.allsport.ru/index.php?id=12111, http://www.allsport.ru/index.php?id = 12114 and http://www.allsport.ru/index.php?id=12122. Since then found some details - in addition to previously published news.
According to the documents, which the Agency was able to find correspondents sports information "All Sport", the doping samples, which then declared positive, with Svetlana Bubnenkovoy took in August 2006, after the victory in one of the national races in France. The study sample "A", which conducted an accredited World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and International Olympic Committee (IOC), a French anti-doping laboratory in Shateno-Malabri were ready as early as September 2006. However, a controlling "B" sample was analyzed after only six months - in April 2007. And on June 11, 2007 AFLD made a decision - in line with the WADA anti-doping codes and the International Cyclists Union (UCI) to disqualify Bubnenkovu two years since the opening of a control sample "B". According to UCI rules, rendering verdicts on doping cases in the national races is the responsibility of the national anti-doping services, but extends to all countries.
Nevertheless, during the summer and autumn Boubnenkova continued to race around the world - both international and national. At the end of September at the world championships in Stuttgart took the offensive, but high fourth place in the group race. Surprisingly, in France, pomeshannoy to combat doping, Bubnenkovu also continued to prevent the start! Moreover, in no way informed of any positive "A" sample nor requested consent or refusal to hold a control sample "B", which in this case is not legitimate. What to say if AFLD UCI informed of the problems Bubnenkovoy only 15 2007 year! All of this suggests premeditation and alleged accusations of Russian racers.
But the matter may result Bubnenkovoy and totally unexpected consequences.
According to the World Anti-Doping Code, WADA, the results of the doping samples conducted in WADA and the IOC accredited laboratories, regardless of a positive or negative result, it automatically and immediately communicated to the three organizations. The first - zakazyvavshaya analyses (in the case of Bubnenkovoy - AFLD), the second - headache international federation, responsible for the development of a particular sport (in the case of Bubnenkovoy - UCI), the third - WADA c all its controlling system ADAMS. This headache international federation of the positive cases also automatically and immediately releasing information to the national level. Meanwhile, the UCI Bubnenkovoy learned of the charges a year later after analysis of sample "A" and six months later, after testing a control sample "B".The Federation of Sport cycling Russia - and later. WADA, WADA, it seems, through official channels, and not from the Agency's publications "All Sports" is not learned so far.
At the same time concealing information on the doping samples is one of the most serious breaches of the Code and is punishable by WADA very hard - up to the deprivation of accreditation. . Agency experts "All Sports" believe that the case Bubnenkovoy with adequate levels of investigation and principles can lead to the closure of an already scandalous famous French anti-doping laboratory in Shateno-Malabri. Standing plum "information", unproven accusations, the use nevalidirovannyh doping methods for detection of drugs, failures in the study of doping samples of world sports stars such as legkoatletka Russian Olga Yegorova and the American racing cyclist Floyd Landis already tired of the world order sporting community, which is trying to streamline the fight against doping .
14 comments:
A very rough translation, but it looks like LNDD screwed up again. It may be too much to hope that this episode, along with several prior ones, may be enough to convince the CAS arbitrators that the LNDD data and documents in the Landis have serious credibility problems.
oh boy. this is going to be interesting.
Going back to January, Cycling News noted that all of Bubnekova's results for June 2007 and thereafter were marked as "DQ". Cycling News said that "DQ" is not connected with a doping offense. They speculated that the problem had something to do with licensing. Cycling News On Bubnenkova.
There's more stuff out there on this, still researching ...
This gets stranger as one looks closer.
This story was reported on in Cyclismag on Novemer 13, 2007. See Cyclismag on Boubnenkova. This is my translation from the French, aided by Google:
"Svetlana Boubnenkova tested positive for r-EPO. In August. In August 2006.
The AFLD (French ADA) delivered a two-year suspension, only for French Cycling Federation (FFC) races, in April, 2007. Boubnekova did not contest the suspension because she did not request a "B" sample test.
Svetlana Boubnekova was notified of this decision by letter received on June 11, 2007. The decision was officially delivered to the FFC on October 8, 2007. It's only 15 km distance between the offices of the AFLD in Paris and the offices of FFC is Rosny Sous Bois.
In the four months between June and October, 2007, Svetlana Boubnenkova had the opportunity to win the Tour du Limousin in France."
The remainder of the article uses French idiomatic expressions that neither I nor google can parse. I'll ask my wife what they mean tonight.
How is it that Cyclismag knew this was a doping violation and a screw-up at AFLD, when two months later Cycling News thought it had something to do with licensing and UCI marked Boubnenkova's races as a non-doping disqualification?
Now didn't Mayo's B sample go to another lab b/c LNDD was on holiday in August '07? So who was there in August '06? Didn't they holiday in '06? And that this is in the same time frame was Floyd's testing, well ...
August 2006 was certainly a banner month for LNDD testing. Amazing that LNDD even had time to conduct Svetlana's test with the notoriety of a disqualified TDF winner.
But the other interesting tidbit is when her 2 year ban began:
And on June 11, 2007 AFLD made a decision - in line with the WADA anti-doping codes and the International Cyclists Union (UCI) to disqualify Bubnenkovu two years since the opening of a control sample "B".
This would cut Floyd's ban by six months!
TBV, I know this is not a democracy, but I vote for TBV being a Betsy-Andreu-free zone.
syi
We have never actively pursued anything to do with Lance. There are two reasons for this. One, we're about the Landis case and the specifics of the charges involved there; Two, this is a volunteer effort that creeps into our real lives, and we don't have the time to pursue everything. Keeping it focused provides natural limits. While we sometimes mention other things, when in doubt we fall back to "is it related to the S17 allegations, really?" as a policy standard.
Unless it's funny, or amuses us in some way.
We find nothing funny or amusing or even interesting about the that fued. Perhaps the most accurate word to describe our feelings is, "ick."
TBV
Sorry that feud was a little before my time but I thought it was intersting that it was taking place in blog comments.
Consider it banished!
Didn't McQ go ahead and request the S17 B sample be tested, not waiting to see if Landis would do so, specifically because he wanted to be sure it would get tested before LNDD shut down for the August holiday?
I predict an Officer Barbrady moment on the part of WADA, UCI, AFLD, et. al.
"Nothing to see here people, move along."
beeble, we don't mind comments or discussion, we're just not going to pursue it editorially in posts with anything but momentary and easily distracted interest. Eliza B continues to hold forth on the topic at DPF.
TBV
TBV, no harm no foul!
I still can't believe there's such a, um, *piddling* match with lawyers even on some blog comments!
Post a Comment