Dekker's Positive

Page 5 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Mar 10, 2009
7,269
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Maybe I have missed something here I dont think this is to do with WADA. Was it not through the UCI bio-passport that the UCI asked for retesting of Dekkers sample?
You are correct! The blood values remained irregular in 2008, and WADA was asked to retest the sample.

But does that mean that anyone who displays irregular values, has a chance to have past samples retested? And till what date will they go back?
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
0
0
Bala Verde said:
You are correct! The blood values remained irregular in 2008, and WADA was asked to retest the sample.
Thanks - is it WADA that have the lab in Cologne?
Bala Verde said:
But does that mean that anyone who displays irregular values, has a chance to have past samples retested? And till what date will they go back?
It does look that way!
Interesting question on the date!
 
May 12, 2009
207
0
0
Many athletes of all sorts have official residences in Monaco for tax purposes. Boonen's another example. Whether they actually live there is a different matter.

As to this, I'd say it's actually good news. Even if some people are getting by the bio-passport as Kohl implied, some are getting caught. Any progress in that direction is good as far as I'm concerned. I just wish it were faster.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mongol_Waaijer said:
a lot of people here in NL are going to be very disappointed.

He was seen as a great talent.

It's funny I saw him get dropped with a group of amateurs off the back of the peloton halfway through the national championship on sunday and I thought to myself that he is 10% of the rider he used to be.

Now it all makes sense. The story about throwing up 7 times due to rotten eggs is nonsense - he knew he was f^&*ed and was mentally elsewhere.
No, no, the fanboys swear that EPO couldn't have that great of an effect.......
 
May 12, 2009
207
0
0
Well, I'm not sure if I fall into the fanboy group, but I'm fairly sure that dropping off EPO couldn't take 90% of your ability away.

If that were true, I could take EPO and win the TdF:)
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
slcbiker said:
Well, I'm not sure if I fall into the fanboy group, but I'm fairly sure that dropping off EPO couldn't take 90% of your ability away.

If that were true, I could take EPO and win the TdF:)
Um, I took the statement as what it was, an overstatement meant to reflect an opinion. He didn't actually measure Dekker's fitness and come up with the number.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
frankdstrack said:
Anyone have any insight to why these guys are doping during the off-season?
Not until you have more posts and I am more sure you are not just another sock puppet.
 
Mar 18, 2009
4,186
0
0
Talk about being friendly, eh? :D

EDIT: Oh you deleted your post, eh? That makes my comment look out of place :p [/EDIT]

frankdstrack said:
Anyone have any insight to why these guys are doping during the off-season?
Two reasons:

1. Allows you to train harder, reaping the benefits for the entire year.

2. According to Jesús Manzano, ever since the EPO test came into effect, riders mostly use large doses of EPO during the off-season when they aren't tested as much for which they reap long term benefits, then micro-dose during the year. This achieves the same performance as full-dosing during the year and minimizes risk of being caught.
 
Mar 18, 2009
4,186
0
0
Archibald said:
can you really store a sample for that long and keep it in perfect condition so that it is completely the same as what it was nearly 2 years ago??
Despite what Armstrong would have you believe, you can store samples for a tremendously long time in perfect conditions
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
issoisso said:
Despite what Armstrong would have you believe, you can store samples for a tremendously long time in perfect conditions
He would also have you believe that the labs are places with lax protocol and where stuff is just left out and cast about like a college fraternity house. Funny, but I am guessing he is incorrect.
 
Jun 30, 2009
41
0
0
issoisso said:
Two reasons:

1. Allows you to train harder, reaping the benefits for the entire year.

2. According to Jesús Manzano, ever since the EPO test came into effect, riders mostly use large doses of EPO during the off-season when they aren't tested as much for which they reap long term benefits, then micro-dose during the year. This achieves the same performance as full-dosing during the year and minimizes risk of being caught.
issoisso,
is it also possible that an unwanted side effect of the bio passport is that the riders have to show consistent blood parameters year-round, so if they want to dope in the summer, they must also dope in the winter?
 
Mar 18, 2009
4,186
0
0
DavidT said:
issoisso,
is it also possible that an unwanted side effect of the bio passport is that the riders have to show consistent blood parameters year-round, so if they want to dope in the summer, they must also dope in the winter?
It would make sense, but that was already the case much before the blood passport, therefore there's no change in that respect.
 
Apr 9, 2009
976
0
0
issoisso said:
It would make sense, but that was already the case much before the blood passport, therefore there's no change in that respect.
But variations in your hematocrit would not draw attention from UCI before, as long as you didn't go above 50. It may have drawn attention from the team, but would only result in re-education on the dosing.

The other disconcerting thing about this story is that it sound like the epo test in and up to 2007 was semi-worthless. It's only through a new and improved test that a positive test resulted on the same sample. Don't know if this has to do with sensitivity of the test (being able to detect very small doses of synthetic epo) or what.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
0
0
Kennf1 said:
But variations in your hematocrit would not draw attention from UCI before, as long as you didn't go above 50. It may have drawn attention from the team, but would only result in re-education on the dosing.

The other disconcerting thing about this story is that it sound like the epo test in and up to 2007 was semi-worthless. It's only through a new and improved test that a positive test resulted on the same sample. Don't know if this has to do with sensitivity of the test (being able to detect very small doses of synthetic epo) or what.
The UCI communique said it was Dynepo - which was believed to be undetectable!
 
Kennf1 said:
The other disconcerting thing about this story is that it sound like the epo test in and up to 2007 was semi-worthless. It's only through a new and improved test that a positive test resulted on the same sample. Don't know if this has to do with sensitivity of the test (being able to detect very small doses of synthetic epo) or what.
And even testing differences from lab to lab. Remember Mayo's case. Makes you wonder how many riders are off the hook for this reason.
:confused:
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
0
0
Escarabajo said:
And even testing differences from lab to lab. Remember Mayo's case. Makes you wonder how many riders are off the hook for this reason.
:confused:
It certainly is a problem - Vinokourov got caught that way.
They knew that the samples for the 2007 Tour were to be done in France which they believed had not yet devised a test for homologous transfusions. However the lab in Lausanne could and they shared there testing procedure with the other lab in time for the Tour.
 
Heras has a similar situation as Mayo, before Mayo, only didn't get as far in his appeals.

Dr. Maserati said:
The UCI communique said it was Dynepo - which was believed to be undetectable!
Partly, yes, as it's human identical EPO. But like Rasmussen, it can throw the parameters far enough out of whack that it leaves only one direction to point: Dynepo doping. My understanding is that you have to be pretty jacked on the stuff though to have it do this. So it's pretty likely that Dekker, like Rasmussen, wasn't microdosing at the time, but working with the assumption that there was no way the Dynepo could be detected, period, and that by using plasma expanders and diluting, they could keep their hct's under 50 and no one would know.

Back in 2008 I said that if Astana was kicked out of the Tour, that Rabobank probably should be as well, as Rasmussen couldn't have been an isolated case. Not because of his lack of whereabouts, but because of his connections to first Biopure (bovine EPO) and then Dynepo. A lot of people didn't agree with me, but I think time is showing that while that Astana team was mega doped, Rabo and many other teams likely weren't that far behind. The issue then of damage to the sport being the root of exemption from racing was the same to me, as long as someone opened their eyes and saw what was really going on with Rasmussen and his team.

Keep in mind people: No one who dopes on this level does it alone. We can throw Rasmussen and Dekker under the bus for doping, but let's all keep an eye on the bigger picture. That of Rabobank, and of the sport in it's entirety.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY