Joey_J said:
This is from the official TdF communiqué in 99. I’m sure everybody saw the press conference which explained the same thing.
>Lance Armstrong, the yellow jersey holder in the 86th Tour de France was tested on July 4 at 17.00 after the first stage of the Tour between Montaigu and Challans. The test was done by the Laboratoire national de lutte contre le dopage (LNLD) at Châtenay-Malabry (Hauts-de-Seine), and they detected traces of triamcinolone acétonide, a synthetic corticoid in the urine. However, the analysis was not declared positive, the testosterone ratio for epitestosterone being too low to warrant a positive finding. It was 0.2, when the limit after which a positive test is returned is fixed at 6.<
Joey_J said:
This is from the official TdF communiqué in 99. I’m sure everybody saw the press conference which explained the same thing.
>Lance Armstrong, the yellow jersey holder in the 86th Tour de France was tested on July 4 at 17.00 after the first stage of the Tour between Montaigu and Challans. The test was done by the Laboratoire national de lutte contre le dopage (LNLD) at Châtenay-Malabry (Hauts-de-Seine), and they detected traces of triamcinolone acétonide, a synthetic corticoid in the urine. However, the analysis was not declared positive, the testosterone ratio for epitestosterone being too low to warrant a positive finding. It was 0.2, when the limit after which a positive test is returned is fixed at 6.<
is this really an official press release by the tour de france?
this text demonstrates some bad scientific understanding:
1 - the bit that goes "(... ) the testosterone ratio for epitestosterone (...)" should read "the testosterone to epitestosterone ratio".
i would assume that the tour de france use professional translators. a professional translator would not translate "rapport testostérone/épitestostérone" to this thing above.
2 - the text is implying that a testosterone/epitestosterone ratio of 0.2 is proof of a non-positive test for triamcinolone. this is plain wrong: from the point of view of a doping test, triamcinolone has nothing to do with testosterone, they are two very distinct molecules, that are detected in two very distinct, and completely different ways.
testosterone is an anabolic, produced naturally by the body. because it is naturally present in the body, the only (cheap) way to dope-test it is via indirect or relative parameters. and the relative parameter of choice is the testosterone/epitestosterone ratio.
triamcinolone is a glucocorticoid drug invented by chemists somewhere in the 1940's or 1950's. since it is not ever naturally present in the body, it can be detected by a straight test. and so the only proof that an athlete has taken triamcinolone is if triamcinolone is found in their sample.
and triamcinolone has absolutely no effect on T, on E or on the T/E ratio (that i've ever, ever read of).
for more information on detection methods, see the annual banned-substance reviews by Dr. Whilhelm Schaenzer.
i would assume that the tour de france more or less just cuts and pastes the scientific information that the AFLD sends them.
so, if this above is a genuine press release by the tour de france, the person who wrote it must have been on a very bad day (or on a mission to exonerate lance armstrong).
also, another thing: a testosterone/epitestosterone ratio of 0.2 makes lance armstrong a rather unusual person. caucasian athletes are generally known to have a T/E ratio of "less than 2" (Martial Saugy et al., Testosterone and Doping Control, Brit. J. Sports. Med. (40), 2006), and the non-athlete, caucasian population usually has a T/E ratio of 1.
the ratio can be lowered artificially, or one can be one of the few people to be born with it, or, why not, have had an illness that lowers it, i don't know. but it's interesting to note that it is at 0.2.