Contador and Spanish cycling - Page 59 - Cyclingnews Forum

Go Back   Cyclingnews Forum > Road > The Clinic

The Clinic The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #581  
Old 12-03-12, 01:23
Merckx index's Avatar
Merckx index Merckx index is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,043
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GJB123 View Post
You know very well that is at the least a gross over-exaggeration.
It really isnít. And to be fair to those who bought this story, for a long time it was difficult for any of us to assess how likely it was that the meat could have been contaminated. Experts both in support of and against the possibility were weighing in. It was only when the details of the inspection system were publicized that it became possible to rule out contamination as highly unlikely.

I donít see that Lopezí election should be regarded as more evidence of corruption of the Spanish system, though. Itís not like he knew in advance that Bert might test positive for CB, and so bought some meat that could be used as an excuse. Procuring the meat, of and by itself, is/was completely irrelevant to any actions Bert took to protest his innocence. Not unless one believes that the meat story was a total fabrication, and that Bert in fact never even ate meat that night. It was simply one of those facts that, once having occurred, could and predictably would be used by a rider desperate to wiggle out of a sanction. Lopez later tried to furnish details about where the meat was from, but given Bertís claim, this was the proper thing to do.

Iím not saying Lopez is a great guy for this position, or that he might not have aided and abetted Contador. But his having bought the meat, while it makes it sound like he masterminded the whole contamination excuse, really doesnít factor into this.
Reply With Quote
  #582  
Old 12-03-12, 06:03
DirtyWorks's Avatar
DirtyWorks DirtyWorks is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 6,506
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Merckx index View Post
But his having bought the meat, while it makes it sound like he masterminded the whole contamination excuse, really doesnít factor into this.
The point is the tainted meat story was another ridiculous anti-doping lie on the scale of ephemeral twins and a majority of the people that voted him in know it.

Had the guy actually brought this controversy to their TdF winner, he would have been out of Spanish cycling.
__________________
Wefunk Radio: funkify your life!
http://www.wefunkradio.com/radio/
Reply With Quote
  #583  
Old 12-03-12, 11:59
hrotha's Avatar
hrotha hrotha is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 12,385
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Merckx index View Post
I donít see that Lopezí election should be regarded as more evidence of corruption of the Spanish system, though. Itís not like he knew in advance that Bert might test positive for CB, and so bought some meat that could be used as an excuse. Procuring the meat, of and by itself, is/was completely irrelevant to any actions Bert took to protest his innocence. Not unless one believes that the meat story was a total fabrication, and that Bert in fact never even ate meat that night. It was simply one of those facts that, once having occurred, could and predictably would be used by a rider desperate to wiggle out of a sanction. Lopez later tried to furnish details about where the meat was from, but given Bertís claim, this was the proper thing to do.
I agree, the steak itself is a red herring. What matters here is that he's a personal friend of Contador and he's defended him publicly, but rest assured, so had the other candidates.
Reply With Quote
  #584  
Old 12-03-12, 12:44
sniper sniper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,167
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GJB123 View Post
You know very well that is at the least a gross over-exaggeration. Do you do that on purpose or what?



You shouldn't be taking sniper's summary if discussions that went on too seriously. He has a tendency to summarize people wrongly to suit his agenda.
it just struck me back then that I was ridiculed by, ehm, you for instance for suggesting the HUMO story was most likely correct. Then when guys such as Ashenden and RaceRadio reinforced that view as indeed being by far the most plausible scenario, you remained silent.
Reply With Quote
  #585  
Old 12-03-12, 14:38
GJB123's Avatar
GJB123 GJB123 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 769
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper View Post
it just struck me back then that I was ridiculed by, ehm, you for instance for suggesting the HUMO story was most likely correct. Then when guys such as Ashenden and RaceRadio reinforced that view as indeed being by far the most plausible scenario, you remained silent.
You insist on misrepresenting what I said. I have always allowed for the possibility that AC took Clen knowingly and even that he transfused. What I tried to establish, and what you consistently failed to understand, is the case that 50 picograms could be consistent with contamination and that therefore the zero tolerance-rule is technically and terminally flawed. The rule needs a threshold.

Look at Nielsen, look at the Mexican football players. They all had higher amounts of Clen than AC and we all accept that there positive was a result of food contamination. We had Hardy who was a victim of food supplement contamination. As long as athletes, be it AC, Nielsen, Mexican soccer players, Otcharov or Jessica Hardy can produce a positive for Clen by ingesting it unknowingly, the rule needs to change from zero tolerance to a threshold and/or abolish the shifting of he burden of proof on the athlete, since that burden of proof is impossible to meet.

Now I have gone on record right after the CAS-verdict that I can fully accept their verdict on AC and the punishment laid down therein. So stop acting like you were somehow victimized by some of the Clinic-visitors or they that you are some kind of lonely martyr for the good cause of anti-doping, because you are not. Quite the contrary really.

Regards
GJ
__________________
"Anyway, Sons of Anarchy, it's about a pack of hardcore bikers who live outside the law. Think Lance Armstrong but with less crime and drug dealing." - Craig Ferguson
Reply With Quote
  #586  
Old 12-03-12, 14:58
sniper sniper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,167
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GJB123 View Post
..snipped for brevity....
Your best guess back then was that Contador was innocent wrt the Clen positive (though you admitted he may well have doped). Your best guess was therefore that the HUMO story, which provided a straightforward account for the Clen positive, was incorrect.
All the evidence was out there written on the wall: the plasticizer positive, the clen positive, the correlation with the TdF restday.
We didn't even need to connect the dots, as the Humo insider did it for us!
It was a 1+1=2 story from the beginning, but you refused to see it.
Reply With Quote
  #587  
Old 12-03-12, 15:27
Nilsson Nilsson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 355
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper View Post
Your best guess back then was that Contador was innocent wrt the Clen positive (though you admitted he may well have doped). Your best guess was therefore that the HUMO story, which provided a straightforward account for the Clen positive, was incorrect.
All the evidence was out there written on the wall: the plasticizer positive, the clen positive, the correlation with the TdF restday.
We didn't even need to connect the dots, as the Humo insider did it for us!
It was a 1+1=2 story from the beginning, but you refused to see it.
If you try to make a point, try to make a whole point. The Humo story was found incorrect as well. At least in relation to the clenbuterol positive. Contador might have undergone a transfusion or not, he might have drawn blood or not at the Dauphiné, but there is simply nothing that constitutes the relation with clenbuterol.

As a matter of fact, if Contador transfused blood he drew after the Dauphiné (which in itself could be very well possible) it's an extra argument that connecting the dots doesn't add up this time. I can understand you like to connect dots, sometimes we all do, but the manner in which you sometimes present such superficial analyses as being 'the truth' isn't correct.
Reply With Quote
  #588  
Old 12-03-12, 15:36
sniper sniper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,167
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nilsson View Post
If you try to make a point, try to make a whole point. The Humo story was found incorrect as well. At least in relation to the clenbuterol positive. Contador might have undergone a transfusion or not, he might have drawn blood or not at the Dauphiné, but there is simply nothing that constitutes the relation with clenbuterol.

As a matter of fact, if Contador transfused blood he drew after the Dauphiné (which in itself could be very well possible) it's an extra argument that connecting the dots doesn't add up this time. I can understand you like to connect dots, sometimes we all do, but the manner in which you sometimes present such superficial analyses as being 'the truth' isn't correct.
iirc, the humo insider said contador had been on a clen program during or shortly after the dauphiné. that's quite a direct relation with clen, isn't it?
he said the clen positive in dirty's sample was a residue of clen left in the blood Contador had withdrawn while using clen and then re-infused during the TdF.
couldn't be more straightforward than that.
Reply With Quote
  #589  
Old 12-03-12, 15:55
GJB123's Avatar
GJB123 GJB123 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 769
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper View Post
iirc, the humo insider said contador had been on a clen program during or shortly after the dauphinť. that's quite a direct relation with clen, isn't it?
he said the clen positive in dirty's sample was a residue of clen left in the blood Contador had withdrawn while using clen and then re-infused during the TdF.
couldn't be more straightforward than that.
Yes, but as you may well remember the numbers didn't add up for that scenario as well. I will leave it to MI and python to go over it all again, but the Clen-positive stemming from a withdrawal after the DL was also deemed highly unlikely due to the pharmokinetics involved.
__________________
"Anyway, Sons of Anarchy, it's about a pack of hardcore bikers who live outside the law. Think Lance Armstrong but with less crime and drug dealing." - Craig Ferguson
Reply With Quote
  #590  
Old 12-03-12, 16:15
Nilsson Nilsson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 355
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper View Post
iirc, the humo insider said contador had been on a clen program during or shortly after the dauphiné. that's quite a direct relation with clen, isn't it?
he said the clen positive in dirty's sample was a residue of clen left in the blood Contador had withdrawn while using clen and then re-infused during the TdF.
couldn't be more straightforward than that.
Apart from the fact that it is close to impossible. I suppose you are aware of the implications of the pharmacokinetics involved and the contents of WADA-theory? Firstly, the plasma (because it's a plasma transfusion that, in that scenario, should have triggered the clen positive) couldn't have come from Contador himself. The amounts you have to take are way to high for an athlete, if not toxic (especially for a small guy like Contador), and combined with length of treatment he would have been a certain positive for over a month. It's therefore that the idea of a malicious or stupid plasma donor was brought assumed by WADA, to make the theory stick.

Secondly, withdrawing blood after dauphiné doesn't really favor separation of RBC and plasma (which is the theory in this case, and necessary to explain the separated findings of and clenbuterol, for example) but does favor whole blood transfusion - which is more convenient in cycling, like the use of saline instead of plasma.

Thirdly, the 1 pg/ml clen (blood sample) finding in the morning doesn't correspond with the 50 pg/ml urine finding later that day, and doesn't favor intravenous administration as the most likely cause of the clenbuterol positive. An eventual plasma transfusion, in this theory, would take place before the blood test (to manipulate - lower - Ht and Hb) and if it was the cause of the clenbuterol, you'd expect the finding to be much and much higher.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 17:16.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.