Retroactive Testing

[Patty123]

G'day

Just wondering if anyone has an idea of how far back the UCI can test blood/urine samples if a new test is developed? I understand that the UCI tested 1999 samples after the EPO test was developed in 2000 for the olympics, but the positive results were never enforced (Armstrong and others).
Along those lines if they had found his 1999 samples to contain EPO in 2002, would he have lost his 1999 TDF title and had a 2 year ban from 2002-2004? Or lost all his titles from 1999 - 2002 plus the 2 year ban from 2002-2004?

I have also heard that the UCI is going to be re-testing samples from the 2008 tour (supposedly for CERA) which I assume that if they come back positive will result in doping violations and 2 year bans.

If the UCI is able to develop a test for Autologous blood doping or any other currently undetectable substance (say in 2010), can they retro-actively test all 2007, 2008 and 2009 samples for this and enforce 2 year bans.

Cheers

 

[Eva Maria]

G'day

Just wondering if anyone has an idea of how far back the UCI can test blood/urine samples if a new test is developed? I understand that the UCI tested 1999 samples after the EPO test was developed in 2000 for the olympics, but the positive results were never enforced (Armstrong and others).
Along those lines if they had found his 1999 samples to contain EPO in 2002, would he have lost his 1999 TDF title and had a 2 year ban from 2002-2004? Or lost all his titles from 1999 - 2002 plus the 2 year ban from 2002-2004?

I have also heard that the UCI is going to be re-testing samples from the 2008 tour (supposedly for CERA) which I assume that if they come back positive will result in doping violations and 2 year bans.

If the UCI is able to develop a test for Autologous blood doping or any other currently undetectable substance (say in 2010), can they retro-actively test all 2007, 2008 and 2009 samples for this and enforce 2 year bans.

Cheers

The most recent WADA rules allow for a window of 8 years for retesting. Prior to 2004 WADA was not in charge and the rules were a bit more fluid as the UCI was in charge. As would be expected retro testing was never part of their plan.

Contrast the CERA test with the EPO test. Once the CERA test was perfected samples from the Olympics and Tour were retested and sanctions handed out. What did the UCI do when they finally got the EPO test? Nothing. No retesting and they set the bar so high only an idiot would fail

 

[Patty123]

So going along these lines, there would be very little chance of any rider that was doping getting away with it in the long term unless a test could not be developed within 8 years that would detect the drug.

So from reading between the lines of other posts on this forum, within 1-2 years tests for HGH and Autologous blood doping would be available to re-test blood samples from the 2007-2009 TDF's. This would give final proof about whether any of the current riders are doping with any currently known products.

Seems that Armstrong has a lot to lose by coming back into the Pro peleton doped, but being the competitive and driven person that he is, is there a chance he'd still be doing something that could cost him everything?

 

[Patty123]

Does anyone else find it ironic that Polar is advertising a power meter using Alejandro Valverde and the phrase 'what's his secret'?

I probably would have taken that ad down a few months ago.

 

[elapid]

Lance was never going to be sanctioned for the 1999 TdF EPO samples. Firstly, those samples were handled for a research project and not according to the guidelines established for doping purposes. Secondly, the only reason we know that these samples belonged to Lance was some good investigative journalism by an l'Equipe reporter.

So for retrospective testing, the samples will be handled in the appropriate manner and, if positive on both A and B samples, then the appropriate sanctions will be imposed.

If, for argument's sake, Lance tested positive in 2002 then his sanction would take effect from now rather than 2002. He would likely be stripped of at least his 2002 TdF win, but I am not sure if they could strip him of any other wins if he did not test positive in any other TdFs. Rebellin tested positive to CERA in the 2008 Olympics but this was not announced until after he won the 2009 Fleche Wallone and hence he gets to keep his Fleche Wallone title because it was not proven he was doping at the time of this win. Riis was not stripped of his 1996 TdF because he confessed more than 8 years after he won.

 

[elapid]

So going along these lines, there would be very little chance of any rider that was doping getting away with it in the long term unless a test could not be developed within 8 years that would detect the drug.

So from reading between the lines of other posts on this forum, within 1-2 years tests for HGH and Autologous blood doping would be available to re-test blood samples from the 2007-2009 TDF's. This would give final proof about whether any of the current riders are doping with any currently known products.

Seems that Armstrong has a lot to lose by coming back into the Pro peleton doped, but being the competitive and driven person that he is, is there a chance he'd still be doing something that could cost him everything?

No test is fool proof. There are standards of deviation which try to account for false positives and negatives. Because the implications of a positive test are so profound for the athlete, the bar is set very high so when an athlete tests positive the authorities are certain it is a positive. This means that there are many athletes who are or have doped that will never be caught because their results are in the grey area. There is no reason to believe the HGH and autologous blood transfusion testing will be any different, so don't expect the introduction of these tests to be the panacea that antidopers are hoping for.

I'll leave your last question alone, because many of us have been on that particular unending merry-go-round in previous threads.

 

[Eva Maria]

So going along these lines, there would be very little chance of any rider that was doping getting away with it in the long term unless a test could not be developed within 8 years that would detect the drug.

So from reading between the lines of other posts on this forum, within 1-2 years tests for HGH and Autologous blood doping would be available to re-test blood samples from the 2007-2009 TDF's. This would give final proof about whether any of the current riders are doping with any currently known products.

Not exactly.

Urine can be stored for years and remains very stable. Blood is another story. Tyler Hamilton still has his Gold Medal because they froze his blood sample.

One of the more promising tests for blood doping looks for signs of damage the freezing of blood does to the cells. This means that freezing and storing blood samples is not an option.

 

[Krebs cycle]

The most recent WADA rules allow for a window of 8 years for retesting. Prior to 2004 WADA was not in charge and the rules were a bit more fluid as the UCI was in charge. As would be expected retro testing was never part of their plan.

Contrast the CERA test with the EPO test. Once the CERA test was perfected samples from the Olympics and Tour were retested and sanctions handed out. What did the UCI do when they finally got the EPO test? Nothing. No retesting and they set the bar so high only an idiot would fail

Part of the reason the bar was set so high for the EPO test is that it was suspected 2 samples from the "normative" data pool (of 1000s of samples collected from athletes all over the world) were actually abnormal ie: they were actually on EPO. That was it, 2 samples out of 1000s. Since it had to be assumed that all samples were from clean athletes, it only took those 2 abnormal samples to alter the statistical analysis such that the chance of letting positives through (ie: false negatives) was greatly increased.

Not sure if I wrote this on this forum already, but 8 samples from the Sydney 2000 Olympics tested positive on the EPO "off" model. The IOC didn't sanction the off model test however, so those athletes all got away with it

 

[beroepsrenner]

Of course if retro testing is developed too well it could prove embaressing all round. 90% of everyone who has won anything of note since samples were collected could be discredited.

 

[Bala Verde]

Of course if retro testing is developed too well it could prove embaressing all round. 90% of everyone who has won anything of note since samples were collected could be discredited.

And that could be a reason to start with a 'clean slate' ie to pass something the equivalent of Amnesty with preconditions. For example, if you publicly admit you doped, you'll get to keep your victories. If you don't and get caught through a retro investigation, you'd be stripped of your wins...

But then again, could such an important operation be left at the hands of UCI...

 

[Franklin]

And that could be a reason to start with a 'clean slate' ie to pass something the equivalent of Amnesty with preconditions. For example, if you publicly admit you doped, you'll get to keep your victories. If you don't and get caught through a retro investigation, you'd be stripped of your wins...

But then again, could such an important operation be left at the hands of UCI...

It wouldn't work as it would kill of big sponsors. Chances are Rabobank and others would fire riders if they had been doping when in their team, even if they are being pardoned by the UCI. And how about bonusses? Wouldn't teams try to collect them from the dopers?

This would be enough reasons to keep the Omerta going even without the UCI sanctioning riders.

 

[Bala Verde]

According to the Sueddeutsche Zeitung, we can expect a storm in Autumn, as it is reported that 2008 TdF samples of (the) top (15) cyclists will be (re)tested for CERA, with the latest and most accurate test available.

"Im September", sagt AFLD-Sprecherin Delphine Saint-Laurent, "werden etwa 15 Proben der Tour 2008 auf das Epo-Mittel Cera nachuntersucht." Die 2008-Proben gehören der AFLD, im Verdacht stehen Topfahrer - zu erwarten ist der Erdrutsch, der vergangenen Herbst noch ausgeblieben war

In addition, Le Soir is referenced which, in Fall 2008, already reported, based on 'serious sources' that a number of CSC riders were involved (F Schleck, Spartacus, Sastre and O'Grady)

In September 2008, Bordry already indicated that there would be 14 more implicated riders, who 'would not sleep well' in the lead up to Varese. But then, nothing happened...

It's also said, and therewith vindicating Kohl again, that some were picked as scapegoats, or in less indicting language, that the identity of the tested were known prior to testing, and that only those positives were released.

This is also one of the strategies for Schumacher's (the only one - Ricco, Kohl, Piepoli - who never admitted) defense, to argue that testing hadn't taken place according to 'just protocols'.

In conclusion:

Es ist einiges krumm gelaufen mit den Cera-Tests von 2008. Wenigstens aber bedeutet das nichts Gutes für die 15 Nachtests, welche die AFLD nun ankündigt. Denn jetzt ist der Test wasserdicht. Und die AFLD hat gute Gründe, sich selbst, die Wada und das IOC mit einer Reihe neuer, unanfechtbarer Befunde aus der Schusslinie zu bringen.

PS> Translation was quick and could possibly contain errors. Read the text for yourself as well.

 

[workingclasshero]

Does anyone else find it ironic that Polar is advertising a power meter using Alejandro Valverde and the phrase 'what's his secret'?

I probably would have taken that ad down a few months ago.

that big ship is going to crash with those icebergs over there

 

[fatandfast]

All the big feds have their reasons for being so slow to test the riders. Each has their own methods but if every rider can be tested from many years previous, it would seem to be a vendetta on some and a free pass to others.The problem is they should have a sample of very rider with a pro license.period. The TDF should have tested @15 or 20 guys a day,top 10 min. and had the results back in a couple of days no matter what the cost.Waiting years or even months calls the chain of custody issues and is a rider being favored.5 years for a first offense would be a good place to start,and a provisional license(tested weekly at your own expense)when and if you return.There should be a high level of probation after your return.I am often just as disappointed in the old fat guy trying to hold on to his golden goose as I am with the riders they test that come up positive.You have to stop the corp,cycling politics and greed before you can stop doping.1 only needs to look at MLB and their greed,100+ of guy who came up positive and only 5 names leaked to the press.