Retroactive testing . The risks?

[flicker]

Among mine, "sheu sheu". Welcome, mine is yours.

I don't think either of us can win...

It's still fun to rip into eachother, though. And no bloody mess to clean up after...

why clean up brother, ours is a nomadic lifestyle. Must be why we like pro-cycling eh brother.

 

[richwagmn]

Theorize this: who do you want doing your next blood test or I.V. drip?

I will answer for myself a qualified professional, using sanitary equipment.

This is what confounds me about doing the blood bag thing. If you screw up and aren't completely sanitary, you risk a deadly infection. I'm astounded that cyclists consider themselves medical profressionals. But with all the crap they're taking, maybe that's not so far fetched after all.

As the OP's question, I'm not for retroactive testing except for statistical purposes.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

why clean up brother, ours is a nomadic lifestyle. Must be why we like pro-cycling eh brother.

Easy on the 'brother's or I'm gonna get cynical and want to make fun of you again...

 

[hfer07]

this is the short version of what I think of Retroactive testing:
I'm still waiting for the 08 Giro re-tested Samples to finally become public
having said that--the organizers will keep the samples, perhaps test some of them, and depending on the politics, the findings might become public as the UCI/GT director's discretion......

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

You're of course referring to the CERA test. I'd like to see the results of that too.

Kinda reminds me of that saying , " Those who can do, those who cant teach"

Thought up by some imbecile, I'm sure.

Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Confucius, Thomas Aquinas, Adam Smith, Hannah Arendt, John Adams, Saint Augustine, Albert Einstein, Neils Bohr, Enrico Fermi, J Robert Oppenheimer, Isaac Asimov, Oliver Wendell Holmes, William James, Woodrow Wilson, Stephen Hawking...

What's the old saying, and this one might fit, a picture is worth a thousand words:

 

[Mongol_Waaijer]

Is there even a need for brand new tests?

If they wanted to bust a lot of oldtimers all they need do is examine their own haematocrit data from the "no more than 50% era".

Teams (like USPS) had all their riders coming in at 49.5% HcT. We know that the chances of nine professional cyclists all having a pre Tour HcT of 49-50% (when the cutoff happens to be 50) is absolutely ridiculous.

If those riders who consistently had crits in the high 40's now have "regular" values in the low forties the only possible explanation can be EPO.

Or they were permanently dehydrated, diarrhoea etc for 4 years.

The UCI has this data - the riders should now be exposed. Maybe not to sanctions, (many have retired) but to get this information out.

This data would be especially helpful to the Novitsky inquiry, I imagine.

 

[Benotti69]

Is there even a need for brand new tests?

If they wanted to bust a lot of oldtimers all they need do is examine their own haematocrit data from the "no more than 50% era".

Teams (like USPS) had all their riders coming in at 49.5% HcT. We know that the chances of nine professional cyclists all having a pre Tour HcT of 49-50% (when the cutoff happens to be 50) is absolutely ridiculous.

If those riders who consistently had crits in the high 40's now have "regular" values in the low forties the only possible explanation can be EPO.

Or they were permanently dehydrated, diarrhoea etc for 4 years.

The UCI has this data - the riders should now be exposed. Maybe not to sanctions, (many have retired) but to get this information out.

This data would be especially helpful to the Novitsky inquiry, I imagine.

i would love to see that explained, the guys were nervous before each stage and had the runs as a consequence or some such 'crap'