Retroactive Testing

Jul 25, 2011
157
0
0
What's the deal with it at the moment? Since thomas dekker I've heard very little about it. To me it seems as a very powerful tool to combat doping.

It surely has a "scare factor" and knowledge/technology improves over time giving more chance to bust cheaters.

It's not the only measurement to combat doping, yet very high on my list to use. What other measurements could be taken?

The way I see it, there are so many tools to rule out doping or bare it to a minimum, yet it seems "they" don't want to use them OR use them without it's full potential.
 
Here is a really interesting insight from Python in the Olympic doping thread:

python said:
http://www.rt.com/sport/belarus-olympic-gold-doping-776/

this is really interesting...and weird.

the guy's 'clean' sample from 8 years ago was retested in london and deemed dirty NOW. he was withdrawn from the competition just hours ago.

the same guy tested positive in the previous olympics in beijing returned his medal, won his case in CAS and got his medal back

the glowing points through this weird story are two:
one, the improved testing finally caught up with the cheat
two, even CAS was powerless when masking beat the test.
He further noted that this was likely for steroids / anabolics.

What is also interesting is that presumably this retroactive test was done on the B sample only.

And, for anyone familiar with cycling, it is hard not to consider a well publicized situation with some other samples that are known to have EPO and possibly other PEDs.

Dave.
 
D-Queued said:
Here is a really interesting insight from Python in the Olympic doping thread:



He further noted that this was likely for steroids / anabolics.

What is also interesting is that presumably this retroactive test was done on the B sample only.

And, for anyone familiar with cycling, it is hard not to consider a well publicized situation with some other samples that are known to have EPO and possibly other PEDs.

Dave.
Why only the B sample? Don't they keep both?
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
wannab said:
What's the deal with it at the moment? Since thomas dekker I've heard very little about it. To me it seems as a very powerful tool to combat doping.

It surely has a "scare factor" and knowledge/technology improves over time giving more chance to bust cheaters.

It's not the only measurement to combat doping, yet very high on my list to use. What other measurements could be taken?

The way I see it, there are so many tools to rule out doping or bare it to a minimum, yet it seems "they" don't want to use them OR use them without it's full potential.
I guess all the shouting and pontificating about how clean the sport is now is probably part of a campaign of not looking back, but it says the opposite to me.

If it is clean now and that is a big IF, why dont we look back and catch thtose who cheated, like 2 years ago, 3 years ago, 4 years ago heck test them all that they still have?

All the monuments and GTs samples should be retest at least and i would add the classics.
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,321
0
0
Time to retest Bettini in time?

On Dekker. He had suspicious values and somehow the testers got lucky they had a sample of him in the freezer. Someone of the Rabo squad had to be held accountable for the Geert Leinders mess, why not the youngest?
 
Jul 25, 2011
157
0
0
On the above story

1) The retroactive test worked, nice to hear they're testing. Hopefully more of these tests are being performed.

2) He got caught in '08, appealed in '10 and won it, that's normal procedure, nothing to do with retroactive testing.

If it is clean now and that is a big IF, why dont we look back and catch thtose who cheated, like 2 years ago, 3 years ago, 4 years ago heck test them all that they still have?
Edit (misread): yes that's my point basically :D

For those who have been banned already, probably you'll find retroactive positives pre that initial positive. However, I think you should restart retroactive testing for samples after that suspension time otherwise you'd have no second chance what so ever.
 
Jul 25, 2011
157
0
0
King Boonen said:
Why only the B sample? Don't they keep both?
Based on the B test he finally got suspended

just as you can get cleared/confirmed from a B sample compared to the A, you could get cleared/confirmed on the retroactive <-> B
 
It looks to me like retrospective testing is ripe for abuse unless it is evenly applied.

Dekker p!ssed someone off. There is no reasonable explanation for why he is the only one caught by restrospective testing for CERA when the drug was in wide use in the 2007 and 2008 time frame. Dr. Fuentes was recommending it even before that time.
 
Jul 25, 2011
157
0
0
BroDeal said:
It looks to me like retrospective testing is ripe for abuse unless it is evenly applied.
Athletes shouldn't fear that abuse, well, clean athletes ..

another thing to add to the "scare factor" !

But really, anything could be abused, anti doping should be conducted in an honest way otherwise it has no purpose.
 
BroDeal said:
It looks to me like retrospective testing is ripe for abuse unless it is evenly applied.

Dekker p!ssed someone off. There is no reasonable explanation for why he is the only one caught by restrospective testing for CERA when the drug was in wide use in the 2007 and 2008 time frame. Dr. Fuentes was recommending it even before that time.
Was it definitely CERA or just normal EPO?

Does seem strange that he failed a retrotest and that others havent. Maybe his blood passport was such that they went back and target tested a sample with what i think was a more sensitive EPO test. His blood passport was dodgy according to him. I agree that unless it is a transparent process then we dont really know who they are retrotesting.
 
wannab said:
Athletes shouldn't fear that abuse, well, clean athletes ..

another thing to add to the "scare factor" !

But really, anything could be abused, anti doping should be conducted in an honest way otherwise it has no purpose.
Just adding the correct emphasis.

Dave.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
I would add the word "transparent". Something can be honest yet untransparent which only leads to trouble in the end.
 
Apr 21, 2012
411
0
9,280
Frosty said:
Was it definitely CERA or just normal EPO?

Does seem strange that he failed a retrotest and that others havent. Maybe his blood passport was such that they went back and target tested a sample with what i think was a more sensitive EPO test. His blood passport was dodgy according to him. I agree that unless it is a transparent process then we dont really know who they are retrotesting.
He was caught for Dynepo (just as Rasmussen in 2007 TdF) http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=3805
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS