Thursday, May 08, 2008

Thursday Roundup

News
The VeloNews brief report on Patxi Vila starts to make sense of the case:

Vila has asked for a "B" sample to be analyzed since his testosterone/epitestosterone ratio was close to the four-to-one limit, the paper said, citing sources close to the cyclist.



Still no word if there was a CIR result.


The Boulder Report's Joe Lindsey is sorry all over the place today. After all it is the hardest word, ask Astana, ask WADA.

CyclingNews' Letters column features a few notes expressing outrage at the "confusing" CAS Alessandro Petacchi decision.

The VeloNews
has letters too, lots of them about the absurdity of the CAS decision that went against Alessandro Petacchi.

Blogs
Rant notes that "strange" things are brewing over at the UCI where the names of cyclists caught by "bio passport" irregularities are still unknown, strange indeed. But, even stranger may by the positive for testosterone found in an out of competition sample from Patxi Vila, at this point the questions about the test far outnumber the answers. And how about Ivan Basso becoming the UCI's newest anti-doping poster boy? Well, a least he has the face for it.

Racjunkie agrees that Basso has a face fit for a "poster boy"/UCI shill too, as well as the brown nose. Aw shucks, geniuses, us? Naaaah.

Velo Vortmax
in an earlier post which inexplicably missed our attention, wonders how WADA can continue to ignore the research that shows the definite possibility of false positives in testosterone detection from anti-doping controls:

Are we expecting too much for WADA to admit to the reality that scientific research is proceeding at such a fast pace that it is almost impossible to keep pace with the new discoveries in PEDs and the methods to detect them? Yes WADA does recognize the threat of Victor Conte and BALCO, designer steroids, masking agents, techniques of blood doping, and the possibility of genetic engineering of future athletes to enhance performance. But what WADA refuses to adknowledge is that they make mistakes too, based on outdated information and outdated criteria for testing. If one athletic career is destroyed because of a WADA mistake which results in a "false positive" test result whether based on incompetent lab testing or by ignorance; then the whole system is failing. Pretending that the problem does not exist will not make it go away. Better is to address the issue with an open mind and formulate a plan to deal with the problem. Only then will the anti-doping crusade work ensuring fairness for everyon


He also points a skeptical eye at one of St. Millar's claims:

Millar expects us to believe that WADA has simplified the approach to doping and he blames the athletic federations for complicating the issues. Right. WADA has simplified the process of banning athletes from competition by writing an incoherent code which denies athletes' due process rights and by using antiquated science expressed in vague WADA Technical Documents.



Andy G writes his Cohutta report, albeit a little late, for good reason. Landis gets cursory mention, being at the other end of the pack.

3 comments:

bk said...

I think it is time that a few of the readers and contributers find a way to become part of the CAS, WADA, UCI, etc.

jrdbutcher said...

Closed clubs.

Thomas A. Fine said...

I just wanted to expand on the importance of false positives on anti-doping policy.

The entire premise of a strict anti-doping policy with big punishments is that when the punishments can destroy your career, athletes wouldn't risk the dope.

But there's a hidden assumption in that approach - that staying clean protects you. If athletes think that false positives occur with any regularity, then staying clean does not provide that protection, so they might as well dope anyway (if you're gonna do the time...).

So, policy-wise, having false positives running around effectively pulls the teeth that a hard-line anti-doping policy is supposed to have.

"Anti-doping policy should be designed around the science you have, not the science you hoped for."

tom