Log in:  

Register

Andre Cardoso positive for EPO

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

Moderators: Eshnar, King Boonen, Red Rick, Pricey_sky

Re: Re:

28 Sep 2017 12:45

Catwhoorg wrote:
GraftPunk wrote:
Tim Booth wrote:
GuyIncognito wrote:I'm guessing the B sample really did come back negative and the UCI are panicking, not knowing what to do.

I don't see another explanation for the delay


linked ?
WADA provisionally suspends Chatenay-Malabry laboratory
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wada-provisionally-suspends-chatenay-malabry-laboratory/


Who knows? I'm curious about the sample that contained so much steroids that it contaminated all the equipment....


Its entirely possible that someone messed up their dilutions of a lab reference material.

Maybe instead of being diluted 1000 fold it was only diluted 100 fold or something.


That is the most plausible explanation for a super spike of material, rather than an athlete's urine.
It's also wrong. AFP reported - it's mentioned in the labs thread - that the contamination came from some dodgy urine samples from bodybuilders.
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,663
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

28 Sep 2017 12:45

That reply may have been better suited for the laboratories thread in hindsight.
User avatar Catwhoorg
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,990
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 11:00
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Re:

28 Sep 2017 12:48

fmk_RoI wrote:It's also wrong. AFP reported - it's mentioned in the labs thread - that the contamination came from some dodgy urine samples from bodybuilders.


Thanks

I stand corrected then.
User avatar Catwhoorg
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,990
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 11:00
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re:

28 Sep 2017 16:19

GuyIncognito wrote:I'm guessing the B sample really did come back negative and the UCI are panicking, not knowing what to do.

I don't see another explanation for the delay


When it takes this long to hear from the UCI it usually results in a statement that the B sample result was inconclusive and the B sample will be re-tested (at another lab of their choosing) and that (surprise, surprise) the B sample is also positive.
Such is life, André
Tim Booth
Junior Member
 
Posts: 116
Joined: 18 Aug 2017 08:13

Re: Re:

29 Sep 2017 12:19

Tim Booth wrote:
GuyIncognito wrote:I'm guessing the B sample really did come back negative and the UCI are panicking, not knowing what to do.

I don't see another explanation for the delay


When it takes this long to hear from the UCI it usually results in a statement that the B sample result was inconclusive and the B sample will be re-tested (at another lab of their choosing) and that (surprise, surprise) the B sample is also positive.
Such is life, André
Could you provide recent examples of this? TIA.
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,663
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

Re: Re:

11 Oct 2017 14:31

fmk_RoI wrote:
Tim Booth wrote:
GuyIncognito wrote:I'm guessing the B sample really did come back negative and the UCI are panicking, not knowing what to do.

I don't see another explanation for the delay


When it takes this long to hear from the UCI it usually results in a statement that the B sample result was inconclusive and the B sample will be re-tested (at another lab of their choosing) and that (surprise, surprise) the B sample is also positive.
Such is life, André
Could you provide recent examples of this? TIA.


there was some confusion about Rabottini's b-sample back then. An early press report said that it was sent to Lausanne, but in the end the result came back from Cologne - so either the report was wrong, or the test in Lausanne didn't deliver the desired result
User avatar search
Member
 
Posts: 1,970
Joined: 29 Aug 2009 10:43

Re: Re:

11 Oct 2017 14:34

search wrote:
fmk_RoI wrote:
Tim Booth wrote:
GuyIncognito wrote:I'm guessing the B sample really did come back negative and the UCI are panicking, not knowing what to do.

I don't see another explanation for the delay


When it takes this long to hear from the UCI it usually results in a statement that the B sample result was inconclusive and the B sample will be re-tested (at another lab of their choosing) and that (surprise, surprise) the B sample is also positive.
Such is life, André
Could you provide recent examples of this? TIA.


there was some confusion about Rabottini's b-sample back then. An early press report said that it was sent to Lausanne, but in the end the result came back from Cologne - so either the report was wrong, or the test in Lausanne didn't deliver the desired result
So, examples, and you come back with one rumour.

One.

Rumour.

Way. To. Go.

Where's the UCI statement you said is usual?
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,663
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

11 Oct 2017 17:44

it wasn't me who made that statement
User avatar search
Member
 
Posts: 1,970
Joined: 29 Aug 2009 10:43

Re: Re:

11 Oct 2017 17:49

fmk_RoI wrote:
search wrote:
fmk_RoI wrote:
Tim Booth wrote:
GuyIncognito wrote:I'm guessing the B sample really did come back negative and the UCI are panicking, not knowing what to do.

I don't see another explanation for the delay


When it takes this long to hear from the UCI it usually results in a statement that the B sample result was inconclusive and the B sample will be re-tested (at another lab of their choosing) and that (surprise, surprise) the B sample is also positive.
Such is life, André
Could you provide recent examples of this? TIA.


there was some confusion about Rabottini's b-sample back then. An early press report said that it was sent to Lausanne, but in the end the result came back from Cologne - so either the report was wrong, or the test in Lausanne didn't deliver the desired result
So, examples, and you come back with one rumour.

One.

Rumour.

Way. To. Go.

Where's the UCI statement you said is usual?

What about Pellizotti getting banned without a positive test and without legit evidence & indication either?
User avatar staubsauger
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,067
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 18:14

13 Dec 2017 21:45

Is Andre seriously still awaiting notification of his B sample results? Or have I missed an announcement?
Zinoviev Letter
Veteran
 
Posts: 5,912
Joined: 18 Aug 2010 13:18

Re:

13 Dec 2017 22:50

Zinoviev Letter wrote:Is Andre seriously still awaiting notification of his B sample results? Or have I missed an announcement?

B sample result isn't always announced if it confirms the A sample.
User avatar LaFlorecita
Veteran
 
Posts: 30,223
Joined: 15 May 2011 09:53
Location: Utrecht, The Netherlands

Re: Re:

14 Dec 2017 03:35

LaFlorecita wrote:
Zinoviev Letter wrote:Is Andre seriously still awaiting notification of his B sample results? Or have I missed an announcement?

B sample result isn't always announced if it confirms the A sample.


In that case have I missed a ban announcement?
Zinoviev Letter
Veteran
 
Posts: 5,912
Joined: 18 Aug 2010 13:18

Re: Re:

14 Dec 2017 14:34

Zinoviev Letter wrote:
LaFlorecita wrote:
Zinoviev Letter wrote:Is Andre seriously still awaiting notification of his B sample results? Or have I missed an announcement?

B sample result isn't always announced if it confirms the A sample.


In that case have I missed a ban announcement?

Only today we've heard Ruffoni's ban announced. It takes some time.
User avatar LaFlorecita
Veteran
 
Posts: 30,223
Joined: 15 May 2011 09:53
Location: Utrecht, The Netherlands

Re: Re:

15 Dec 2017 16:37

search wrote:
fmk_RoI wrote:
Tim Booth wrote:
GuyIncognito wrote:I'm guessing the B sample really did come back negative and the UCI are panicking, not knowing what to do.

I don't see another explanation for the delay


When it takes this long to hear from the UCI it usually results in a statement that the B sample result was inconclusive and the B sample will be re-tested (at another lab of their choosing) and that (surprise, surprise) the B sample is also positive.
Such is life, André
Could you provide recent examples of this? TIA.


there was some confusion about Rabottini's b-sample back then. An early press report said that it was sent to Lausanne, but in the end the result came back from Cologne - so either the report was wrong, or the test in Lausanne didn't deliver the desired result

The way the Pellizotti & Rabottini cases were handled ain't got nothing to do with justice. Not that I believe both ain't no dopers, but if the prosecutor can't show up valid evidence they're unguilty on all charges. You can't just make up facts and stretch law to convinct them. That's not how justice works. Rasmussen never got fairly sentenced based on any plausible law & order as well.
User avatar staubsauger
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,067
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 18:14

15 Dec 2017 20:12

There were rumors about the B sample being negative, but nothing was officially confirmed.
carolina
Member
 
Posts: 893
Joined: 29 Sep 2013 18:07

Re:

15 Dec 2017 20:14

carolina wrote:There were rumors about the B sample being negative, but nothing was officially confirmed.
There were rumours that the anti-Christ would be walking among us by now, but nothing has been officially confirmed.
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,663
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

Re: Re:

15 Dec 2017 23:01

fmk_RoI wrote:
carolina wrote:There were rumors about the B sample being negative, but nothing was officially confirmed.
There were rumours that the anti-Christ would be walking among us by now, but nothing has been officially confirmed.


He's turned to rowing now
User avatar GuyIncognito
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,910
Joined: 27 Jun 2013 21:19

24 Dec 2017 19:41

"Don't judge immediately... This is our Christmas message!" by André Cardoso

Image
rei_da_montanha
Junior Member
 
Posts: 126
Joined: 16 Mar 2015 14:32
Location: Porto, Portugal

Re:

25 Dec 2017 19:09

rei_da_montanha wrote:"Don't judge immediately... This is our Christmas message!" by André Cardoso

Image

I noticed... but if B-sample were negative, wouldn't he have announced it himself? I know I would have.
User avatar LaFlorecita
Veteran
 
Posts: 30,223
Joined: 15 May 2011 09:53
Location: Utrecht, The Netherlands

Re: Andre Cardoso positive for EPO

27 Dec 2017 06:15

What's up with this? Why does it take so long to test the "B" sample and proceed with a CAS hearing? It seems like it was ages ago that the announcement was made of the positive test. Any idea if it was micro-doses or therapeutic amounts of rEPO that were detected in the samples? Also, any idea if his ABP was flagged and consequently he was target tested? (we never seem to get any of the good details on these doping cases anymore).

This would be a big one, right? Maybe career ending? I'm assuming a nasty 4 yr ban unless there's evidence presented to support a tainted supplement, spiked water bottle, contaminated IV drip, etc. Lol.
Nomad
Member
 
Posts: 351
Joined: 20 Apr 2016 01:39

PreviousNext

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests

Back to top