Froomster;1525905]This is not a true representation of what happened, nor what the authorities sought to argue. In fact
The quote you cite of Steven Neese @ in the article you site
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...ests-cyclists/ is quoted by you in isolation to other aspects of the article and thus out of context.
1. You ignore for example the words of Neese himself where he says,
"Although
you can not directly know of the source of DEHP in the system, ....
What this means is what Neese says. It is not possible to know that any phthalates (DEHP) found in a sample came from a blood bag.
2. You neglected to quote that portion of the article where the author Brett Israel says,
"
Experts — and Contador — say that these chemical residues are so widespread that there is too much doubt about how they got into an athlete's body."
This indicates there is a plethora of expert opinion that residues from plasticizers are so ubiquitous that they come from a vast array of sources other than blood bags. For example water bottles as just one of many other potential sources for a plasticizer.
3. You further neglected to cite Dr. Joe Braun from Mr. Israel's article you referenced the following,
"DEHP is the primary plasticizer in many medical supplies such as IV blood bags, which are about 40 percent DEHP.
But it's also in food, and diet is the largest source of DEHP exposure, said Joe Braun, an epidemiologist at Harvard University. It apparently gets into food from use of some plastic food wraps and containers.
4. You neglect to mention the plasticizer test used in Contador's case was so suspect WADA cancelled its use.
" Due to the controversy, funding for the test to detect these chemicals was discontinued in November 2011."
5. You further neglect to cite that portion of the article where it states,
"The World Anti-Doping Agency funded research to develop a plasticizer test that would catch cheating cyclists, but so far it's
not the smoking gun that many have hoped for.
Plasticizers known as phthalates are used in everyday products, with possible toxic effects.
6. The article you cite states as follows,
"The WADA and the International Cycling Union said that the drug most likely came from an illegal blood transfusion, because the plasticizer spike was detected the day before he tested positive for clenbuterol. The Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne, Switzerland,
agreed, overturning an earlier ruling by the Spanish cycling federation."
This is in fact NOT what the CAS agreed or even remotely decided in Contador's case. On the issue of the plasticizer theory of WADA and the UCI the CAS found as follows at paragraph 454 of its judgment, the following,
454. To sum up, for the above reasons, the Panel finds that although the blood transfusion theory is a possible explanation for the adverse analytical finding,
in light of all the evidence adduced and as explained above, it is very unlikely to have occurred
Therefore like many posters in the Clinic your research is incomplete, distorted and a reckless misrepresentation of the actual facts and outcome in the Contador case.
Dear Wiggo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Froomster View Post
Nicely smacked down. Thank you.
Once again Dear Wiggo where your ceaseless ineptitude continues to manifest itself - double smack down. Do your research. And by the way - your welcome.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram