Freezing Blood Samples and the Real Chance of them Showing Positive in the Future

[tockit]

I was listening to LA's press conference at Interbike and the doctor who was there with him talked of freezing the riders' blood samples for new technologies that might develop down the road to detect EPO and blood doping.

Anyone have any idea what the reality of this situation actually happening would be?

If this were to happen, for instance, and say they determine that during all 7 of LA's Tour wins, he was on EPO, what do you think would transpire from that?

More denial, denial, test the B sample, try to discredit the lab/procedure, etc, etc, file suit and continue to deny, appeal?

I'm just trying to imagine what would happen to LA's career, the Livestrong Campaign, etc, if he got popped on a drug test?

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

If this were to happen, for instance, and say they determine that during all 7 of LA's Tour wins, he was on EPO, what do you think would transpire from that?

I'm just trying to imagine what would happen to LA's career, the Livestrong Campaign, etc, if he got popped on a drug test?

About the same after his 1999 re-test samples showed EPO. As you said yourself:

More denial, denial, test the B sample, try to discredit the lab/procedure, etc, etc, file suit and continue to deny, appeal?

Exactly.

 

[Oldnell]

This is my first and probably last post as I am appalled and disgusted by what I have read here. I find it very sad that so many apparently literate people so hate excellence that they spend their time trying to tear down anyone who has achieved it. Lance is a favourite target because he does not take **** from anyone, including the media, and is willing and able to fight back.

I strongly suggest that you read the Vrijman report (prepared at the request of the UCI by a Dutch Lawyer who is a recognized expert on athletic doping issues) before making any more false accusations regarding the "retesting" of 1999 TDF urine sample. The following link is to a "Velo News" summary article which also gives a link to the full report: http://velonews.com/article/9932
The full report should be read in order to fully understand the issue, but I doubt seriously if any of you bashers would be willing to do so. Your minds are made up and you do not want to be confused by facts.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

We're all aware of it.

As a matter of fact, we've seen about 20 posts just like yours. Disgusted by us haters, etc. etc.

 

[issoisso]

We're all aware of it.

As a matter of fact, we've seen about 20 posts just like yours. Disgusted by us haters, etc. etc.

Quite. None of those posts has ever countered any of the "haters" arguments. None. They just posted that it's a shame, it's disgusting, bla bla bla, etc etc, conveniently leaving out any counter-argumentation of facts.

When one of them actually wants to have a rational discussion to try and prove their point, I'll be surprised.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

To be fair the Vrijman report did confirm that Dick Pound is an idiot.

 

[elapid]

This is what is wrong with some of these threads. They degenerate because some posters do not read the OP and pick little bits of irrelevant information from that post. Tockit asks two good questions: can you use frozen samples and what would the implications be if one of these samples tested positive? He then has the misfortune to use Lance Armstrong as an example. If Oldnell had read other posts from Tockit, he would have also realized that Tockit admits he is new to this and is gathering knowledge.

Oldnell - you can be as appalled and disgusted as you like, but this is no way to respond to a thread. If you have a point of view, then discuss it reasonably rather than running away like a child throwing a tantrum. Many of us have read the l'Equipe article, Vrijman report, the Ashenden interviews, and criticisms of the Vrijman report. Our opinions are based on reading all of this information, whether it be Lance doped or not. Regardless, these opinions are well-informed opinions that critically thinking adults are able to form and argue. We do not have to agree, but we should be able to debate these opinions rationally without throwing hissy fits.

Back to Tockit's questions: The UCI will now keep samples for 8 years to back test, and this is already being done with 2008 Giro and TdF samples with new EPO tests. From memory, the UCI cannot sanction a rider if the positive is more than 8 years ago (hence why Riis keeps his 1996 TdF win despite confessing to doping). In regards to if Lance tested positive, I think his law suit days are over after the SCA Promotions case (plus, he could only fight it through the USADA and CSA anyway) and I would imagine that his foundation would take an initial hit, but it would bounce back as people realize that his foundation does good work.

 

[Cobblestones]

This is my first and probably last post as I am appalled and disgusted by what I have read here. I find it very sad that so many apparently literate people so hate excellence that they spend their time trying to tear down anyone who has achieved it. Lance is a favourite target because he does not take **** from anyone, including the media, and is willing and able to fight back.

I strongly suggest that you read the Vrijman report (prepared at the request of the UCI by a Dutch Lawyer who is a recognized expert on athletic doping issues) before making any more false accusations regarding the "retesting" of 1999 TDF urine sample. The following link is to a "Velo News" summary article which also gives a link to the full report: http://velonews.com/article/9932
The full report should be read in order to fully understand the issue, but I doubt seriously if any of you bashers would be willing to do so. Your minds are made up and you do not want to be confused by facts.

I stopped reading after that. If someone doesn't want to contribute to the forum it's not worth reading the posts.

Crawl back under the rock where you came from.

 

[Cobber]

I was listening to LA's press conference at Interbike and the doctor who was there with him talked of freezing the riders' blood samples for new technologies that might develop down the road to detect EPO and blood doping.

Anyone have any idea what the reality of this situation actually happening would be?

If this were to happen, for instance, and say they determine that during all 7 of LA's Tour wins, he was on EPO, what do you think would transpire from that?

More denial, denial, test the B sample, try to discredit the lab/procedure, etc, etc, file suit and continue to deny, appeal?

I'm just trying to imagine what would happen to LA's career, the Livestrong Campaign, etc, if he got popped on a drug test?

I don't know if it will happen, but scientifically I don't see any reason why it couldn't happen. The only possible problems are detecting proteins/compounds that would become insoluble when frozen. I think a combination of freezing, refrigerating and freeze-drying could be used for "targeted" athletes samples for future testing.

I think the big test that needs to come out is for autologous blood transfusions (ie. transfusions using an athlete's own blood). Apparently there is a test in the works, but it relies on comaping relative amounts of an enzyme that is unstable in refrigerated samples. Not sure how different sample storage methods would affect this yet-to-be described test.