JV hits a new low

Mar 4, 2010
1,826
0
0
Vaughters just gets more and more ridiculous.

RT @skibby_tbk Wiggins has been "strongly advised" not to release his biological passport data by the team doctors.
Jonathan Vaughters ‏@Vaughters
@charliegirl2008 yes, because the last time he released it, it was criticized by some Danish fellow that is not an anti doping expert.
http://twitter.com/Vaughters/status/224197320454057984

The Bispebjerg Hospital anti-doping researcher has worked on many scientific studies, including a 2008 paper co-written with Belhage and Damsgaard entitled Changes in Blood Profiles during Tour de France 2007, and stated that expected trends over a three week race were not seen in the Texan’s data.

"What we know from our research is that during periods of hard activity, like in the Tour de France, we normally see a drop in these blood values. We don't see this with Armstrong," he told DR Sport.

He elaborated on this when speaking to Cyclingnews. “His blood profile contradicts what we see and what we know from international studies during the last few decades,” he said in a phone interview. “His blood values are not acting as we would expect, so that is highly unusual.” (see sidebar)

Mørkeberg has just finished a Ph. D. dissertation entitled Detection of Autologous Blood Transfusions via Analyses of Peripheral Blood Samples, and is working on a method to trace this method of doping.

His aforementioned Tour de France study catalogued seven riders in the 2007 race, revealing lower hemoglobin and lower hematocrit (percentage of red blood cells in whole blood) on day 19 when compared to their pre-Tour reading. On average hemoglobin dropped 11.5% and hematocrit fell by 12.1%, keeping in line with physiological expectations.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/analysis-armstrongs-tour-blood-levels-debated

AS: Can you tell me about your background?

JM: I'm an exercise physiologist, Copenhagen University graduating 2006, and I have just written up my PhD and submitted it one week ago, the PhD is about detecting autologous blood transfusions in an anti-doping context.

AS: And you have published with Damsgaard and Ashenden.

JM: Yes.
http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2009/armstrongs-bio-passport-critic-speaks

Some danish fellow who is not an anti-doping expert? :rolleyes:
**** off!
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
perception is reality

Tyler'sTwin said:
+1

JV and Millar pretending to be the conscience of new and clean cycling is pretty sad.

Learning how to effectively lie is becoming more of an art these days.
Two cases in point:
1. Wiggins' open letter in yesterday's Guardian (referring to family, children, etc.)
2. Contador' lie-detector test.

You can't make this stuff up. What money does to these guys is plain crazy.

Lance has set new standards.
 
Tyler'sTwin said:
Vaughters just gets more and more ridiculous.

...

Some danish fellow who is not an anti-doping expert? :rolleyes:
**** off!
JV talks too much for his own good.

If he next tells us that some Dutch lawyer named Vrijman is a doping expert then he is off my Christmas list.

Dave.
 
Apr 17, 2009
308
0
0
I don't understand why we need to see Brad's biopassport. Millar said he was clean. That's good enough for me.. ;-)
 
Mike Kaltoft Jensen ‏@CrueTrue
. @Vaughters is criticizing Mørkeberg, but what he said isn't as controversial as it was laid out by international news media.

Shri Jensen is a danish journalist.
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
0
0
Everyone needs to trust the secret cabal that is cleaning up cycling even though it has Fat McQuaid as its head and its public face, JV, does not want any information released to the public that might not match the official talking points.

Dr. Ferrari probably "strongly advised" Armstrong not to release his test numbers.
 
Apr 19, 2010
1,845
0
0
Tyler'sTwin said:
The "expert" graduated uni 2 years earlier.
His comments were also not backed up by the main contributors of the paper he helped on

F### off is right.
 
Apr 28, 2010
72
0
0
It is pretty funny. When Wiggins says that "certain people" looked at his data and said he doped, the lay person would assume it was just people in the Clinic, but actually he's worried the lead author of "Changes in red blood cell volume, plasma volume, and total blood volume after autologous blood collections." Transfusion 2008 will scrutinize it. Slightly different kettle of fish.

The problem for them is that they can work to the limits set down under the current biological passport regime. However, if down the line a new generation passport, based on the same markers but with more sophisticated statistical analysis, is validated then if the data are public domain it will be easy to retrospectively demonstrate doping. If the data stay private it's doubtful the UCI/WADA would be doing any retrospectives on it.
 
Dec 27, 2010
6,674
0
0
Bradley has very little to gain from releasing his data, don't get too excited boys.
 
Jun 18, 2012
165
0
0
andy1234 said:
The "expert" graduated uni 2 years earlier.
His comments were also not backed up by the main contributors of the paper he helped on

F### off is right.
Uh...not tracking there homeboy. Cite the disagreement specifically and a PHD dissertation does not lend one non-expert....
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Skibby the bush kangaroo said:
It is pretty funny. When Wiggins says that "certain people" looked at his data and said he doped, the lay person would assume it was just people in the Clinic, but actually he's worried the lead author of "Changes in red blood cell volume, plasma volume, and total blood volume after autologous blood collections." Transfusion 2008 will scrutinize it. Slightly different kettle of fish.
:D
true story

Skibby the bush kangaroo said:
The problem for them is that they can work to the limits set down under the current biological passport regime. However, if down the line a new generation passport, based on the same markers but with more sophisticated statistical analysis, is validated then if the data are public domain it will be easy to retrospectively demonstrate doping. If the data stay private it's doubtful the UCI/WADA would be doing any retrospectives on it.
+1

will10 said:
Bradley has very little to gain from releasing his data
that's rather obvious wouldn't you say?
 
Apr 28, 2010
72
0
0
JV is now claiming he isn't an expert because he doesn't work for an anti-doping agency and hence lacks "front line" experience.

Some of Morkeberg's publications on Web of Science:

Effects of blood withdrawal and reinfusion on biomarkers of erythropoiesis in humans: Implications for anti-doping strategies, HAEMATOLOGICA-THE HEMATOLOGY JOURNAL 2006

Screening for Autologous Blood Transfusions INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE 2009

Detecting autologous blood transfusions: a comparison of three passport approaches and four blood markers SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE & SCIENCE IN SPORTS 2011

Changes in Blood Values in Elite Cyclist INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE 2009

Blood profiles in elite cross-country skiers: a 6-year follow-up SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE & SCIENCE IN SPORTS 2009

Detection of darbepoetin alfa misuse in urine and blood: A preliminary investigation MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE 2007

Changes in red blood cell volume, plasma volume, and total blood volume after autologous blood collections TRANSFUSION 2008

Strategies to combat doping in cycling INTERNATIONAL SPORTMED JOURNAL 2008

THE IMPORTANCE OF A STRONG COLLABORATION BETWEEN PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES AND WADA-ACCREDITED LABORATORIES JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY 2008
 
Apr 8, 2010
329
0
0
will10 said:
Bradley has very little to gain from releasing his data, don't get too excited boys.
If he is clean, he has everything to gain from releasing his data.

It has taken me a long time from when I started following cycling in the late 90s, and believed that very few athletes doped, to gradually accept that the reverse is much nearer the truth. Just as I thought my scepticism had caught up with how bad the situation actually is, I find I'm still behind the curve. JV supporting Wiggins in not releasing data is just another body blow to the little that's left of my belief in professional sports.
 
Jul 23, 2009
2,891
0
0
How was Morkeberg's dissertation received and in what kind of regard is he held in the scientific community? His resume sounds impressive to a layman, does anyone know if he is acknowledged as an expert or if his work is criticized?

(serious non-trolling questions here)
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
pedaling squares said:
How was Morkeberg's dissertation received and in what kind of regard is he held in the scientific community? His resume sounds impressive to a layman, does anyone know if he is acknowledged as an expert or if his work is criticized?

(serious non-trolling questions here)
the fact that he publishes in major international journals -- I haven't looked up the journal rankings but they all sound quite decent, and he publishes in multiple journals, not just in one, which is a good sign also -- means his research results are being accepted at least by specialized peer-reviewers and editors.
 
Square-pedaller said:
If he is clean, he has everything to gain from releasing his data.

It has taken me a long time from when I started following cycling in the late 90s, and believed that very few athletes doped, to gradually accept that the reverse is much nearer the truth. Just as I thought my scepticism had caught up with how bad the situation actually is, I find I'm still behind the curve. JV supporting Wiggins in not releasing data is just another body blow to the little that's left of my belief in professional sports.
For it to be relevant for analysis one would have to see a sample of completely clean riders' blood values during the TDF for comparison. Else, all we can do is speculate on how we think the blood values should look like.

I'm fairly confident that the blood values of those clean riders wouldn't be as predictable as one might think.
 
Apr 28, 2010
72
0
0
pedaling squares said:
How was Morkeberg's dissertation received and in what kind of regard is he held in the scientific community? His resume sounds impressive to a layman, does anyone know if he is acknowledged as an expert or if his work is criticized?

(serious non-trolling questions here)
I don't really know. But he doesn't seem to be a fringe maverick because a couple of his papers are co-authored with Ashenden. Moreover, the funding sources listed for several of the papers is the WADA so it is not as if he is developing tests at odds with them. He's been cited 75 times which isn't bad for someone relatively early in their career. The journals do seem pretty decent eg. Haematologica has an impact factor of 6.4 and is the 6th highest ranked Hematology journal (of 68 in the category).
 
Nov 24, 2009
1,158
0
0
sniper said:
the fact that he publishes in major international journals -- I haven't looked up the journal rankings but they all sound quite decent, and he publishes in multiple journals, not just in one, which is a good sign also -- means his research results are being accepted at least by specialized peer-reviewers and editors.
I suppose what would be acceptable for Vaughters would be the following: A well respected and accomplished member of the peloton, lets say Jens Voigt, quits cycling in order to pursue a doctorate in science that specializes in blood data analysis. This way, having both the practical experience of being a cyclist and the necessary scientific knowledge, he would be best qualified to examine a cyclist's passport.

But this would be nonsense. One of the aims of science is to take away as much as possible the subjective view and aim for an objective analysis of the facts. Besides, I never knew Vaughters was qualified to critique scientific data.

Funny, Vaughters critised Landis for opening his mouth too much. Maybe he should follow his own advice.
 
Mar 4, 2010
1,826
0
0
@bambula @DanKalbacher please enlighten me on any anti doping agency he has ever worked for? As I know: none.

@RueFournier @CrueTrue again, please show me where he has worked for any anti doping authority?

@CrueTrue I'm not criticizing anyone. Merely stating that he doesn't work in anti doping.

@RueFournier @CrueTrue ... Sorry, but without "in the field" frontline anti doping experience, I do not consider him an expert. My opinion.

@bambula @DanKalbacher No, I said he wasn't an anti doping expert. A researcher, for sure, but not an expert.
What a clown.

Now, tell us again about how clean the peloton was in 2005, JV.
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
0
0
There is something funny about JV considering himself an expert qualified to analyze the blood data of riders but not considering someone with a Ph.D. and a slew of papers on the subject to be worthy.

I feel better knowing that Dr. Vaughters, honorary Ph.D. in riding fast but not finishing the TdF, is on the job, analyzing blood data, detecting the dopers.
 
Jul 3, 2011
199
0
0
This guy isn't an expert. Dozens of practical years work and experience within a field make a person an expert. Morkeberg is a graduate student researcher whom is at a very junior stage in his career and many of his views conflict with even those whom have collaborated with him on studies.
His comments in the past were simply words that he made to gain a reputation and that were seized upon by a hungry press pack, nothing more and nothing less.
The fact that even real experts with decades of knowledge can strongly disagree with one another on fundamental issues should tell people that sound bites from one researcher should always be taken with a liberal sprinkling of salt.

Vaughter's frankness on twitter is a breath of fresh air.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY