• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

Steakgate latest: Contador positive for Clenbuterol in four different tests

Page 18 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Sep 25, 2009
6,983
0
0
with help i figured by now that we are talking about veal tenderloin (in fact, i suspected that long ago and tried to bring others attention to this).

but somehow behind the terminology everyone missed the main premise behind several of my posts - is contador's assertion that he and 4 of his teammates ate veal tenderloin purchased in irun rather that the steak eaten by the rest of the team ? is the story genuine ? how easy/difficult is it to verify ?

judging by my own experiences, and some other responses, it's either genuine or false and if it's false it's rather easy to verify.

this would be the first step at factually entertaining contamination probability.

sure even IF the story is genuine, it does not prove that the veal was contaminated but it would be the first step at rational analysis.
 
Jun 22, 2009
765
0
0
python said:
either way, contador would have to construct an enormously complicated scheme, to get everyman lie in his favour ?
python said:
let's see...the 4 dinner teammates, paco-the-cook and cerrón-the-buddy are all spaniards and could all conceivably be holding out for contador. But the seller, the non-spanish (bask) butcher store owner of the alleged veal tenderloin, who as i referred above is now under a suspicion of illegal trading, would he be willing to lie, (..forge the receipt etc) under oath and the risk of perjury on contador's behalf when his own head is likely to hang off the meat hook ?

i dont know spanish traditions but where i grew up it would definitely be highly unlikely.
huh? why does it appear so complicated or elaborate for contador to get cooperation from only a handful of close friends, teammates, and team employees? it sounds like he'd only have to make a small payment to someone with a checkered past at the butcher shop for their cooperation and a phony reciept. it also sounds like they can't even get that part of the story right as the steak/veal/whatever sizes don't match up properly.
 
Sep 25, 2009
6,983
0
0
lean said:
huh? why does it appear so complicated or elaborate for contador to get cooperation from only a handful of close friends, teammates, and team employees? it sounds like he'd only have to make a small payment to someone with a checkered past at the butcher shop for their cooperation and a phony reciept. it also sounds like they can't even get that part of the story right as the steak/veal/whatever sizes don't match up properly.
it sounds like you very selectively read the tread and repeated what has been already granted/assumed (his teammates and friends cooperation) without contributing a single rational answer to the posed questions. repeat for the 4th time for you specifically - why would a non- spanish (basque) butcher whose shop already suspected in illegal trading risk go to prison and lie for contador instead of telling the truth and sue contador for lying ?

repeat for you again, clen-contaminated veal is illegal: either contador is lying and there was never any veal (contaminated or not) and there was never cooking in the bus and there was never a receipt for veal or the farmer sold the butcher contaminated veal or the basque butcher shop acquired illegally contaminated veal - someone has to lie here and it's hard to imagine a basque butcher and a basque farm fabricated the story convenient for contador against their own interesrts and freedom for that matter.
 
Jun 22, 2009
765
0
0
python said:
it sounds like you very selectively read the tread and repeated what has been already granted/assumed (his teammates and friends cooperation) without contributing a single rational answer to the posed questions. repeat for the 4th time for you specifically - why would a non- spanish (basque) butcher whose shop already suspected in illegal trading risk go to prison and lie for contador instead of telling the truth and sue contador for lying ?

repeat for you again, clen-contaminated veal is illegal: either contador is lying and there was never any veal (contaminated or not) and there was never cooking in the bus and there was never a receipt for veal or the farmer sold the butcher contaminated veal or the basque butcher shop acquired illegally contaminated veal - someone has to lie here and it's hard to imagine a basque butcher and a basque farm fabricated the story convenient for contador against their own interesrts and freedom for that matter.
how's this for a rational answer sherlock? the butcher was approached for a reciept in the many weeks between contador being notified of the AAF and it being leaked to the public so he didn't fully understand the implications. he reprinted a reciept or totally manufactured one because he was bribed or someone needed it for what they told him was a typical reason like reimbursement for a business dinner or accounting purposes. it's not complicated. he'd now have to admit that he forged or fraudulently backdated a reciept. he'll be mum because they can't prove anything against him including contamination. truthfully, i don't know what happened but there are plenty of explanations and they aren't as "complicated" as you suggest. what's worse is your condescending tone that wrongly assumes you're two steps ahead when the opposite is often true.

none of this matters or is even worth arguing about. whether or not the "veal" was purchased and prepared as described, there's still ZERO evidence that it was contaminated and any sufficient evidence of it is long gone. don't tell me, i already know your fallback position, you're just playing devils's advocate. :rolleyes:
 
Sep 25, 2009
6,983
0
0
lean said:
how's this for a rational answer sherlock?
here's what 'sherlock' has for the meany-greeny.. you are not offering rational answers. you are offering conspiracy theories based on your own desired outcome and zero evidence in support or any investigative attempts.

none of us know what happened but at least i and several other posters contributed translations and attempted to sift through the facts with open minds. something you appear incapable of.

again, you wanting a basque butcher being stupid and risking his freedom and livelihood with a forged and backdated receipt in return for a 'small bribe' does not make sense. it shows you have not followed the case and are ignorant of the many nuances. your assumptions that 'nothing can be proven anyway' are also a sign of how entranced and incapable of wider thought you have shown yourself.

again, to repeat specifically for you - an allegedly illegal activity took place - a sale of a contaminated beef. if a conspiracy took place, many parties and people would have been involved and are liable.

right now, because the farmer denied everything,the onus is on the butcher. if the butcher forged and backdated the receipt it had to be taking place the earliest five weeks after cerrón claimed he gave the receipt to astana officials. so we now have another willing participant to the conspiracy - astana management - who supposedly are ready to lie for a rider who already moved to riis and who clearly angered them (contador actually complained how uncooperative astana was)

on the top of it, all these easy musings also assume that the spanisn and basque regulatory authorities are disinterested in investigating the illegality and are also complicit. to top it off, the police should also be complicit because they are assumed either disinterested or incompetent ('nothing can be proven anyway').

i say, such simplistic thinking is to put it mildly wishful.
 
Jun 22, 2009
765
0
0
python said:
here's what 'sherlock' has for the meany-greeny.. you are not offering rational answers. you are offering conspiracy theories based on your own desired outcome and zero evidence in support or any investigative attempts.

none of us know what happened but at least i and several other posters contributed translations and attempted to sift through the facts with open minds. something you appear incapable of.

again, you wanting a basque butcher being stupid and risking his freedom and livelihood with a forged and backdated receipt in return for a 'small bribe' does not make sense. it shows you have not followed the case and are ignorant of the many nuances. your assumptions that 'nothing can be proven anyway' are also a sign of how entranced and incapable of wider thought you have shown yourself.

again, to repeat specifically for you - an allegedly illegal activity took place - a sale of a contaminated beef. if a conspiracy took place, many parties and people would have been involved and are liable.

right now, because the farmer denied everything,the onus is on the butcher. if the butcher forged and backdated the receipt it had to be taking place the earliest five weeks after cerrón claimed he gave the receipt to astana officials. so we now have another willing participant to the conspiracy - astana management - who supposedly are ready to lie for a rider who already moved to riis and who clearly angered them (contador actually complained how uncooperative astana was)

on the top of it, all these easy musings also assume that the spanisn and basque regulatory authorities are disinterested in investigating the illegality and are also complicit. to top it off, the police should also be complicit because they are assumed either disinterested or incompetent ('nothing can be proven anyway').

i say, such simplistic thinking is to put it mildly wishful.
you asked for a possible explanation and you got it, it's not my fault if you don't like it. i never said it's exactly what happened - nice strawman tho.

you missed the most important part of my post so here it is again:
none of this matters or is even worth arguing about. whether or not the "veal" was purchased and prepared as described, there's still ZERO evidence that it was contaminated and any sufficient evidence of it is long gone.
 
Jun 19, 2009
4,841
0
0
Porphyry said:
I've always been a bit perplexed at why the English-speaking press dropped the specific i.d. of the meat as veal, but for US sources it probably has to do with the fact that in the USA the public knows very little about veal and it is almost never eaten. They know even less about veal production.
We know how it is raised here and it is expensive. Ignorance has nothing to do with it.
 
Oldman said:
We know how it is raised here and it is expensive. Ignorance has nothing to do with it.
Glad someone finally pointed this out. If Bert did eat veal, contaminated or no, it doesn't speak well for him. I find it depressing that anyone in this day and age could not know how veal is raised/prepared, and even more depressing to think if someone does know, they eat it nonetheless.

none of this matters or is even worth arguing about. whether or not the "veal" was purchased and prepared as described, there's still ZERO evidence that it was contaminated and any sufficient evidence of it is long gone.
I think it's hard to argue with the last part of your statement. But the question of who is lying might still be relevant, if I understand this correctly. Let's say Bert and his associates are lying, and this could be proven. This would basically destroy his alibi completely, and very possibly set him up for a longer sentence than one year. The very fact of these potential consequences, it seems to me, is one more argument, in addition to those Python mentioned or seemed to imply, that Bert is probably not lying. If he's creating a story, he's had a long time to do it and to make sure it would be difficult to disprove.

On the other hand, if it could be proven that the farmer is lying (or the butcher if he denies involvement the way the farmer has), one would naturally suspect they would only do this to cover up the fact of clenbuterol use. LMG is still right in that no scientific proof in the form of a positive test of some meat sample is likely to be forthcoming, but proof that someone involved in the preparation of the meat was lying would certainly be strong circumstantial evidence of contamination, and might, under legal pressure lead to a full confession. At the least, I think it would ensure that under no circumstances would anyone ask for a longer sentence than he has already been given.

Still, the bottom line for me, as with LMG, is that the possibility of eating contaminated meat is very remote. I put this up against a situation where it does seem, as Python says, that someone must be lying, and I think...WTF is going on here?
 
Sep 25, 2009
6,983
0
0
Merckx index said:
snip

I put this up against a situation where it does seem, as Python says, that someone must be lying, and I think...WTF is going on here?
that’s the only explanation why im still digging…

i'm no naïve here. from the very beginning when a positive test occurred on the freaking rest day and considering the tainted teams and the dss contador was associated with, any explanation other than blood doping simply lacked weight. and i’ve been pretty consistent stating this

but it does not mean i should close my mind and NOT attempt to understand the facts and the new evidence as they become available bit by bit.

i do it, firstly, because it’s my intellectual fun. secondly, when evidence and logic line up nicely against liars and cheaters, I simply feel good, I feel like a winner. I can’t explain the feeling.

there are numerous examples all over this forum attesting to the fact that through my own research i corrected many false and inaccurate statements (both pro - ask the swordsman-and anti contador). i also several times did not hesitate to tell cn and other publication directly that they put up crap when they did and ‘here is why‘. normally, this drive for fact-checking is appreciated. But not always.

so, this story with the veal receipt is certainly one of the most intriguing and controversial. i am now fascinated by it. someone is definitely lying.

as I have shown, if contador invented his steak, he had to line up about 10 co-conspirators from several different countries and organizations and he had to make up a perfect time line about an illegal activity based on forged documents. this forgery, by definition, must be good enough to have withstood a criminal investigation.

as I have shown above, such loyalty (or the power of a bribe) would have to compel some co-conspirators to clearly act against their vital self interest and put at risk their livelihoods or even risk going to prison.

all i’m saying is that such a rather weird and artificial concoction imo should crumble as soon as any serious investigative body (such as cas an guardia civil ) sink their teeth in it.

i want to personally understand - will it happen…or not and why.
 
hrotha said:
Apparently this is Marca's front page for tomorrow:
http://estaticos01.marca.com/imagenes/2011/02/08/g0802.jpg

See the bit on the right? "Contador tested positive four days at the Tour"
Depending on how sensitive the CB test is, he might have tested positive on three additional days following the first positive, still as a result of a transfusion. This would be possible if clearance of CB from the body does not follow first order kinetics--in other words, there is a lag at some point so that the last traces of the drug are eliminated more slowly than the initial amount. But as noted, four days of positives was not the original report.

In any case, the originally reported CB levels are not consistent with his intentionally taking that drug. They still suggest either a transfusion or contamination. I'll be very curious to see more about this.
 
Jun 19, 2009
4,841
0
0
Merckx index said:
Depending on how sensitive the CB test is, he might have tested positive on three additional days following the first positive, still as a result of a transfusion. This would be possible if clearance of CB from the body does not follow first order kinetics--in other words, there is a lag at some point so that the last traces of the drug are eliminated more slowly than the initial amount. But as noted, four days of positives was not the original report.

In any case, the originally reported CB levels are not consistent with his intentionally taking that drug. They still suggest either a transfusion or contamination. I'll be very curious to see more about this.
He may have tested positive before he "ate the meat" so to speak. His race position would have him tested daily but results aren't instantaneous so the collective positives could have been earlier? Serious question. In which case Contador is not only lying but he's pretty f*cking stooopid about it. This may be part of UCI's problem...
 
Mar 11, 2009
4,043
0
0
If he tested positive prior to eating meat that takes care of that, why has that never been mentioned before though? Another leak from Germany?
 
Sep 25, 2009
6,983
0
0
hrotha said:
Apparently this is Marca's front page for tomorrow:
http://estaticos01.marca.com/imagenes/2011/02/08/g0802.jpg

See the bit on the right? "Contador tested positive four days at the Tour"
the electronic version of marca only referred to ‘2 new items’ that contador introduced in his defence. no specifics as to what they are. it is asserted that they contribute to his defence based on ‘no fault or negligence’.

re the 4 alleged positives…

actually, it’s been known for a long time that contador samples showed presence of clenbuterol on 2 separate occasions.

this falls into the interpretive area. iow, it's about how certain technical terms related to the test data are interpreted (LOD, LLOD, LOQ, LI etc). essentially, you are positive or not depending on how close is you magnifying glass...an old wasted argument about having no threshold for clen.

i would not be surprised if 2 more samples were either retested or the existing results were ‘put under a microscope’ to argue that his clenbuterol level on different test days was consistent only with contamination pharmacokinetics and nothing else.

Would love to see how they would exclude a transfusion.
 
http://www.youkioske.com/prensa-deportiva/diario-marca-08-febrero-2011/
Page 36

It's based on the RFEC's report that suggested the one-year suspension. To summarize:
- Contador tested positive for clenbuterol on the 21st (50 pg/ml), 22nd (16 pg/ml) and, the new info, 24th (7 pg/ml) and 25th (17 pg/ml). Some lab guy says that's within the confines of the margin of error and doesn't necessarily suggest a new microdose.
- The ban would end on August 26th 2011.
- The RFEC complains that WADA and above all UCI have said ******-all about the case, and they were left with contradictory scientific reports to judge by.
- No significant alterations in his biopassport.
- No previous recorded cases of clen use by the cattle raiser or at the butcher's.
- The ruling says Contador hasn't proved he ate the contaminated meat or that the meat was indeed contaminated, and notes that was impossible to prove since, well, he ate the evidence.
- The examining instructor or whatever it is wonders why Contador didn't sue, seeing as how using clen is forbidden.
- Some other stuff we've already discussed here regarding the probability of using clen then slaughtering the animal immediately afterwards and about there not being enough tests on meat for the official contamination figures in the EU and the Basque Country to be statistically significant.
 
Apr 28, 2010
1,584
0
0
So his Clen reading went up again between the 23rd and 24th? What was that then, a left-over beef sandwich for lunch? Margin for error my tail. :rolleyes:
 
Oct 16, 2010
13,578
1
0
It also says:

"For AC to have tested positive at a level of 50 picogramms, he must have eaten heavily contaminated meat, and, against all odds, have eaten the meat shortly after the cow was given its last dosis of Clen."
 
May 12, 2010
1,728
0
0
Roland Rat said:
So his Clen reading went up again between the 23rd and 24th? What was that then, a left-over beef sandwich for lunch? Margin for error my tail. :rolleyes:
I believe the Clenbuterol-test is not quantitative. I.e. when they say he had 50 picogram, that's more of an accurate guess, it could be 30 picogram, it could be 70 etc. The 'raise' in his clenbuterol level on the last day could very well be in the margin of error of the day before.
 
Jun 16, 2009
3,083
0
0
Correct

roundabout said:
I don't think that it fundamentally changes anything since it is still consistent with a one-time ingestion of clenbuterol on the 21.07

(50 pg/ml), (16 pg/ml), (7 pg/ml), (17 pg/ml) or whatever below (200pg/ml) reported is not in line with SOP and will not withstand the statistics of this test.
 
Ferminal said:
24th was the day of the TT, so maybe it was another contaminated bag - but I think attributing it to the error margin in the test sounds right.
It would be interesting to see the results of a plasticizers test on the 24th :D

But with the data we have right now it sure looks like the margin of error at work. What I don't know is why we didn't hear about the positives on these two days before - isn't clen one of the substances they look for by default? Were these samples initially sent to a different, less precise lab?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts