LeMond and Trek Settle

[RTMcFadden]

I'm willing to bet Dollars to doughnuts that McFadden is one of those *** lawyers from Trust But Verify that gave Floyd terrible advice throughout his entire legal debacle that not only saw him lose his case but publicly humiliated him as well as the entire sport of cycling.

Cut your losses and move on McFadden; you've already had one of the most pathetic public ***-kickings in recent history. A smart person would re-evaluate the decisions they've made after such a drubbing but here you are, still trolling message boards grasping at straws trying to sow the seeds of doubt about Floyd's positive. You are a loser.

I don't remember that. Please, refresh my memory.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Is that honestly the best you can do. Epsecially in light of the withdrawl of the The Peltre-Thormann Report and the studies performed by Delanghe regarding Rutger. Of course, it was the Autrailian that found that Alfa1-ACT was homologous to exogenous EPO and reacted similarly in the urine EPO test. I believe that test was sponsored by WADA in response to Delanghe's work.

No - it's not.......

Here is Don Catlins take on the Beullens study you quoted.

The brief report by Beullens et al1 is misleading regarding the urine test that the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) uses to detect recombinant human erythropoietin (rhEpo).

 

[RTMcFadden]

No - it's not.......

Here is Don Catlins take on the Beullens study you quoted.

The brief report by Beullens et al1 is misleading regarding the urine test that the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) uses to detect recombinant human erythropoietin (rhEpo).

And here's the conclusion that Delanghe reached.

"In summary, the data provided by Lundby et al. demonstrate that an improvement in the current Epo test is necessary or that a different strategy to detect Epo use and blood doping should be considered. Blood-based indirect Epo tests offer an interesting alternative. The rapidly changing blood doping landscape will definitely encourage the use of indirect Epo/blood doping testing with a much broader application"

Testing for recombinant human erythropoietin, Joris R. Delanghe and Michael J. Joyner, Journal of Applied Physiology (http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/105/2/395)

 

[BikeCentric]

And here's the conclusion that Delanghe reached.

"In summary, the data provided by Lundby et al. demonstrate that an improvement in the current Epo test is necessary or that a different strategy to detect Epo use and blood doping should be considered. Blood-based indirect Epo tests offer an interesting alternative. The rapidly changing blood doping landscape will definitely encourage the use of indirect Epo/blood doping testing with a much broader application"

Testing for recombinant human erythropoietin, Joris R. Delanghe and Michael J. Joyner, Journal of Applied Physiology (http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/105/2/395)

You do realize that they are arguing for a stronger test in that study due to a perceived large number of false negatives? Why not quit while you're ahead:

The American WADA-accredited laboratory has performed the direct Epo test on more than 2,600 samples, only nine of them were found to be positive (3). The low numbers of athletes caught by the test are somewhat contradictory to the overall increase of mean hematocrit values since rHuEpo became available (12). Additionally, in some high profile legal cases in the United States, athletes who were clearly doping with a variety of compounds including Epo "passed" hundreds of individual drug tests.

Along these lines, Lundby et al. (11) convincingly demonstrated that the performance of the urinary Epo test is somewhat disappointing. Although the judgment process of "real" doping cases differs from the one applied in the present study, the high number of false-negative results imply a risk that athletes doping with Epo will avoid detection and damage the fundamental goal of fair competition. The earlier reported flaws of the test help to understand the relatively low efficiency of the direct Epo test and the current results emphasize the need for improving Epo testing.

LOL at McFadden.

 

[BikeCentric]

I think we can all agree that McFadden is using a "carpet-bombing" approach here: post a bunch of mumbo-jumbo crap in the hope that it sows the seeds of doubt in peoples minds about the efficacy of the current drug testing regime.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I think we can all agree that McFadden is using a "carpet-bombing" approach here: post a bunch of mumbo-jumbo crap in the hope that it sows the seeds of doubt in peoples minds about the efficacy of the current drug testing regime.

That apppears to be the strategy.

And why is all this in a "Lemond vs Trek" thread anyway?

 

[RTMcFadden]

You do realize that they are arguing for a stronger test in that study due to a perceived large number of false negatives? Why not quit while you're ahead:

Yes. What's your point?

 

[RTMcFadden]

That apppears to be the strategy.

And why is all this in a "Lemond vs Trek" thread anyway?

My original response was to the question below.

You appear to agree that a court wouldn't necessarily be restricted to the anti-doping criteria (ie 70% could (hypothetically) be considered positive by a court wheras 80% is required by the anti-doping protocol.

Where I noted that the 80% rule didn't make sense to me. That precipitated this discussion. The answer appears to "because there are interfering substances." The anti-body lacks specificity allowing it to bind to non-EPO molecules, at least one of which is Alfa1-ACT.

Also, it appears that the "80% Rule" is no longer the governing criteria for positive. Although, I haven't been able to identify what the new criteria is.

 

[frenchfry]

Here's interesting info on false positives. Still looking for the CAS info.

Excerpt (conclusion) taken from False-positive detection of recombinant human erythropoietin in urine following strenuous physical exercise (Blood, 15 June 2006, Vol. 107, No. 12, pp. 4711-471), Monique Beullens, Joris R Delanghe, and Mathieu Bollen

The athlete that we tested was only false-positive for epoetin-ß in two out of seven post-exercise urine samples (not illustrated). We also want to point out that the false-positive detection of epoetin-ß may be restricted to (very) few athletes, as it may be linked to the extent and type of proteinuria. The extent of proteinuria correlates more with the intensity than the duration of exercise and has a half-time decay of about 1h. The athlete that we tested showed a mixed glomerular-tubular proteinuria, which is characterized by a broad spectrum of urinary proteins. Some of these proteins show some structural homology with epoetin-ß, which possibly accounts for their cross-reactivity with the anti-Epo antibodies. In a WADA report, the possible existence of such analytical interferences was already predicted. The false-positive detection of epoetin-ß may be prevented by sampling before or at least one hour after exercise, which is particularly important for athletes that present with pronounced exercise-induced proteinuria. Additional tests can be performed to identify false-positive test results, such as two-dimensional electrophoresis, deglycosylation assays, as described in this study, or indirect assays.

Maybe the athlete referred to was Geneviève Jeanson, who said the following:

«De toute ma carrière, a-t-elle répété, je n'ai jamais pris d'EPO, ni aucune substance interdite. Depuis que la USADA m'a informée que j'avais été testée positive en juillet 2005, j'ai fait des recherches pour m'expliquer comment cela avait pu se produire. J'ai obtenu la collaboration du réputé Dr Joris Delanghe, professeur et chercheur à l'université de Gand, en Belgique. Je lui suis très reconnaissante d'avoir accepté gracieusement d'étudier mon cas.»

Geneviève adamantly denied any doping, and used studies by the good doctor Delanghe to prove that her positive EPO test was false.

Of course we now know that Jeanson was doped almost continually from the age of 16 until she was caught and talks about how she thought she would die in her sleep as her heart was pounding so hard due to the blood thickening caused by EPO.

The good doctor Delanghe's reputation with respect to doping matters is pretty much in the toilet.

here is a link to an article that goes into much more detail about Dr. Delanghe's scam:
http://www.ledevoir.com/sports/1237...e-reglement-de-l-agence-americaine-antidopage

 

[ravens]

dear lord, stop responding to him....50 pages!

 

[BikeCentric]

Yes. What's your point?

It's annoying that I have to spell this out. My point is that you started by talking about false positives and linked as supporting material a study that was actually worried about false NEGATIVES. But keep up the obfuscation, you're doing great work here.

 

[Race Radio]

Yes. What's your point?

If you would like to continue to embarrass yourself perhaps you can start a new thread instead of highjacking this one?

 

[RTMcFadden]

The good doctor Delanghe's reputation with respect to doping matters is pretty much in the toilet.

Yes, he certainly didn't do himself any favors there. That's why I don't focus on the individual. The best way to sum it up was given by Stephen Emerson, MD, PhD in a letter to the The Hematologist, dated September 1, 2006.

How objective, how factual are scientific results? Should the broader, non-scientific world community take scientific evidence as truth, or just one more opinion? Scientists and physicians are trained to read the scientific literature with a slightly jaundiced eye, always asking questions such as “how reliable is the assay, how valid are the inferences claimed by the authors?” etc. But the non-scientific public is not so trained, and relies heavily, if not exclusively, on the expertise of the scientific community to highlight the strengths and the limitations of scientific measurements and evidence in general.

I'm still tying to confirm the Alpha1-ACT inference info.

 

[Ferminal]

No - it's not.......

Here is Don Catlins take on the Beullens study you quoted.

The brief report by Beullens et al1 is misleading regarding the urine test that the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) uses to detect recombinant human erythropoietin (rhEpo).

So that's why Lance turfed him.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Perhaps you can start a new thread instead of highjacking this one?

I would like to strongly suggest the same thing. I was tempted to go along and delete all the off-topic posts here, but there were too many, and we're up to 51 pages.

If you have comments on the LeMond/Trek settlement, feel free to post them. If you'd like to discuss something else, be that false positives/negatives or anything else, so be it.

Future posts here not on topic will be deleted, and the poster making them directly warned.