New Lance positives in 2004 and 2005

[LauraLyn]

Btw didn't the original USADA charging letter imply directly that they had samples that were new indicating positive use?
I thought this was stated early on...

The USADA charging letter was vague enough to leave this open.

 

[LauraLyn]

CERA was in Phase I and II clinical trials in 2003. It would have been very hard to get, but if anyone could do it it would have been Armstrong with his winning personality and strong connections throughout the medical community. The upside would have been tremendous -- undetectable EPO that no other rider could get his hands on.

There have been suspicions before that Lance was using something still (perhaps CERA) in the clinical development phase. I will look for the reference.

 

[Race Radio]

man, i can't wait to read this book.

if those '04-'05 samples are positive for CERA then that is a big, big deal.

I doubt it is CERA, but it would be a big deal.

If these are USADA re-test then they would be from 2004-05 or 2009-10. If they are from 09-10 then a larger question is does USADA have a new test for something and did they use it on Armstrong's 09-10 samples?

That would be huge

 

[ToreBear]

If Armstrong had access to trial drugs I would think Amgen would be the perfect supplier. But perhaps Ferrari had special contacts he used in Roche?

 

[KayLow]

Btw didn't the original USADA charging letter imply directly that they had samples that were new indicating positive use?
I thought this was stated early on...

Nothing more than "data" "from blood collections" from 2009 and 2010 that were "fully consistent with blood manipulation including EPO use and/or blood transfusions." If USADA had positive tests from 2003, 2004 or 2005, it did not mention it in the charging letter.

 

[Race Radio]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report-usada-in-possession-of-positive-armstrong-samples

blood samples taken earlier during Armstrong's career had been retested under the authority of USADA and "finally came back positive"

.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Nothing more than "data" "from blood collections" from 2009 and 2010 that were "fully consistent with blood manipulation including EPO use and/or blood transfusions." If USADA had positive tests from 2003, 2004 or 2005, it did not mention it in the charging letter.

that's about as close as you can get to saying 'positive' without actually saying it.

 

[KayLow]

I doubt it is CERA, but it would be a big deal.

If these are USADA re-test then they would be from 2004-05 or 2009-10. If they are from 09-10 then a larger question is does USADA have a new test for something and did they use it on Armstrong's 09-10 samples?

That would be huge

If so, would this be an analytical case? The only reason I can think that USADA would not mention a positive test (other than the 1999 and 2001 positive tests) in the charging letter is that the positive test violated the testing protocols. By 2009 and 2010, storing samples for later testing of substances for which no test existed at the time the samples were collected was not a violation of WADA's testing protocols. Not sure if the same is true about 2004 and 2005.

 

[Big Doopie]

He found it tough in 2003 though. He looked haggard and sunken eyed on the Col de Ramaz which was the first major climb.

that was because they crossed the border during that stage and hadn't risked their refill. all the usp team was dropped and armstrong had a tough time. lots of questions at the time. armstrong said he would have to kick some teammates a$$. after the rest day, they were super good again as a team.

 

[KayLow]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report-usada-in-possession-of-positive-armstrong-samples

.

Sounds like "hot off the presses" positive tests whose results were not known at the time of the charging letter. The evidence against the guilty never gets better. It only ever gets worse.

 

[LauraLyn]

If Armstrong had access to trial drugs I would think Amgen would be the perfect supplier. But perhaps Ferrari had special contacts he used in Roche?

If Armstrong had been using a drug off-license then it would not have been with the support of Amgen or Roche.

It could be interesting to know if Ferrari (or another of Lance's doctors) was ever involved in clinical trials.

 

[LauraLyn]

Sounds like "hot off the presses" positive tests whose results were not known at the time of the charging letter. The evidence against the guilty never gets better. It only ever gets worse.

Evidence begets evidence.

 

[mewmewmew13]

that was because they crossed the border during that stage and hadn't risked their refill. all the usp team was dropped and armstrong had a tough time. lots of questions at the time. armstrong said he would have to kick some teammates a$$. after the rest day, they were super good again as a team.

Did he not claim dehydration etc?...I remember how p.o.'d he was at his teammates...wish we had some insight into the convo on the bus that night!

 

[KayLow]

that's about as close as you can get to saying 'positive' without actually saying it.

Agreed. This made me think that USADA was either relying on positive tests that were not generated consistent with the WADA code's testing protocols or hematocrit trend data combined with rider testimony about the timing of transfusions. Today's news seems to refer to positive tests conducted after the issuance of the charging letter.

 

[hrotha]

Sounds like "hot off the presses" positive tests whose results were not known at the time of the charging letter. The evidence against the guilty never gets better. It only ever gets worse.

If that's the case, it's weird. Wasn't USADA/the feds said to be in possession of LA's French samples long ago?

 

[Anonymous]

Now made official via this site.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report-usada-in-possession-of-positive-armstrong-samples

 

[LauraLyn]

If that's the case, it's weird. Wasn't USADA/the feds said to be in possession of LA's French samples long ago?

I'm not sure. But I would doubt that. There are very strong privacy and confidentiality procedures in France with regard to the storage and transfer of tissue samples. They are even stronger regarding this issue when crossing international borders.

It would be easier for the US to go to France to test or have the tests done there than to ship the samples.

This tends to support that: "had been retested under the authority of USADA and "finally came back positive".

I just cannot link to the Stade 2 report where I am now to see exactly what was said. If someone can that would be great.

 

[thehog]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report-usada-in-possession-of-positive-armstrong-samples

.

Are you OK with blood being stored for future testing?

Absolutely

Are you in favour of retroactive testing?

Yes. They give you the option when you are tested – can we use your specimen in the future for experiments? I always check ‘yes’.


http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/345599/lance-armstrong-exclusive-interview.html

 

[roundabout]

that was because they crossed the border during that stage and hadn't risked their refill. all the usp team was dropped and armstrong had a tough time. lots of questions at the time. armstrong said he would have to kick some teammates a$$. after the rest day, they were super good again as a team.

?

Lyon-Morzine doesn't cross any borders.

The rest day must have been after Alpe d'Huez? Maybe later.

IIRC the only time the team was impressive that year was Chechu on Luz-Ardiden.

 

[sniper]

...They even destroyed his Biopassport samples

I suppose the UCI didn't just tell them "Sorry Tygart, we destroyed the samples".
Is there perhaps a leak within the UCI? Otherwise how does USADA know?

 

[thehog]

It's 2005 after the stage Vaughters refers to in his IM. The stage where Vino attacked and Disco were dropped bar Lance. First mountain stage after rest day Vino/Ullrich et al were dropped hard. Popo & Il Falco did crazy work to kill the field. Piti won the stage.

 

[Race Radio]

I suppose the UCI didn't just tell them "Sorry Tygart, we destroyed the samples".
Is there perhaps a leak within the UCI? Otherwise how does USADA know?

Tim Herman told them (No Joke)

 

[roundabout]

2005 makes sense. The year of Beltran collapsing.

 

[thehog]

To keep everyone warm & fuzzy the UCI sent all major cycling news outlets a memo that if they suggest The UCI covered up results they will sue.

 

[ToreBear]

If Armstrong had been using a drug off-license then it would not have been with the support of Amgen or Roche.

It could be interesting to know if Ferrari (or another of Lance's doctors) was ever involved in clinical trials.

Big organizations have many people who in turn know many people. There are many possible scenarios.

Perhaps we will find out more in a few months.