The Froome Files, test data only thread

The tests were carried out at the GlaxoSmithKline Human Performance Lab in London in August, since when the Kenyan-born cyclist is understood to have obtained the results of tests carried out when he first joined the UCI’s World Cycling Centre as a young rider out of Africa in 2007.
Can someone translate this into English?
 
Re:

Merckx index said:
The tests were carried out at the GlaxoSmithKline Human Performance Lab in London in August, since when the Kenyan-born cyclist is understood to have obtained the results of tests carried out when he first joined the UCI’s World Cycling Centre as a young rider out of Africa in 2007.
Can someone translate this into English?
Makes absolutely no sense. Perhaps the journalist read from the Sky issued press release incorrectly? :)

I'm going to keep an open mind at this point but picked up that Brailford said "independent" then went on to say he knows the GSK guys from the English Institue of Sport and they are "good guys", thus not actually independent! :confused:

Chris felt he wanted to do the physiological testing and of course the important thing about that was that it was going to be independently done. They did it with the GSK guys. I know the [GSK] guys from the EIS [English Institute of Sport], they’re a good bunch of guys.
 
Feb 18, 2013
389
0
0
Re: Re:

Chris felt he wanted to do the physiological testing and of course the important thing about that was that it was going to be independently done. They did it with the GSK guys. I know the [GSK] guys from the EIS [English Institute of Sport], they’re a good bunch of guys.
There's a chance that quote there wins the Internet irony award for today.
 
Mar 27, 2015
252
0
0
Maybe he referred to Ken van Someren, Matt Furber and Phil Bell, a good bunch of senior scientists.
 
Re:

Merckx index said:
The tests were carried out at the GlaxoSmithKline Human Performance Lab in London in August, since when the Kenyan-born cyclist is understood to have obtained the results of tests carried out when he first joined the UCI’s World Cycling Centre as a young rider out of Africa in 2007.
Can someone translate this into English?
Add an "also" and it makes perfect sense. : "have also obtained" (but the meaning seems obvious even without that)
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
Merckx index said:
The tests were carried out at the GlaxoSmithKline Human Performance Lab in London in August, since when the Kenyan-born cyclist is understood to have obtained the results of tests carried out when he first joined the UCI’s World Cycling Centre as a young rider out of Africa in 2007.
Can someone translate this into English?
Add an "also" and it makes perfect sense. : "have also obtained" (but the meaning seems obvious even without that)
it infers that he did not have sight of the (2007) test results until after he did the recent tests...of side interest but hardly believable that either he, sky or his management team haven't had them for a while.

"Sir dave, Froome has just come second in Vuelta and could have won it"
"But he's crap..we were going to sack him......Has he ever shown any potential?"
"Well we have his test results from a few years ago at the UCI...but, he did do some races in sand shoes"
"Sand shoes you say..................."
The End
 
Re: Re:

gillan1969 said:
it infers that he did not have sight of the (2007) test results until after he did the recent tests...of side interest but hardly believable that either he, sky or his management team haven't had them for a while.
No it doesn't. It infers he obtained from UCI results of his 2007 tests, nothing more, Maybe he had them, but the geeks wouldn't accept his copies and wanted them direct from UCI (as any sensible auditor would do). Maybe he was shown them in 2007 but never given copies. How you can infer he never had sight of the 2007 test results is beyond me - they've been spoken about often enough.
 
Sep 29, 2012
8,087
0
0
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
gillan1969 said:
it infers that he did not have sight of the (2007) test results until after he did the recent tests...of side interest but hardly believable that either he, sky or his management team haven't had them for a while.
No it doesn't. It infers he obtained from UCI results of his 2007 tests, nothing more, Maybe he had them, but the geeks wouldn't accept his copies and wanted them direct from UCI (as any sensible auditor would do). Maybe he was shown them in 2007 but never given copies. How you can infer he never had sight of the 2007 test results is beyond me - they've been spoken about often enough.
But never in detail. The best we had was a French coach saying "like Hinault" MDR.

It stinks like Sunday's fish on a Thursday.
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
gillan1969 said:
it infers that he did not have sight of the (2007) test results until after he did the recent tests...of side interest but hardly believable that either he, sky or his management team haven't had them for a while.
No it doesn't. It infers he obtained from UCI results of his 2007 tests, nothing more, Maybe he had them, but the geeks wouldn't accept his copies and wanted them direct from UCI (as any sensible auditor would do). Maybe he was shown them in 2007 but never given copies. How you can infer he never had sight of the 2007 test results is beyond me - they've been spoken about often enough.
the article infers it not me...it states:

"since when the Kenyan-born cyclist is understood to have obtained the results of tests carried out"

the 'since when' refers to the recent tests and ' understood to have obtained' infers the understanding was that he never had them before.....

In terms of news management it fits with the sky narrative....if he had them before why didn't he just release them...which is of course the question everyuone has been asking....

of course he had them...I still have my lab results...and I'm crap :)
 
I think fmk-Rol is spot on. 'Obtained' seems to mean something very different than 'saw for the first time'. As a scientist, it would suggest that the complete data set was collected for the purpose of the study. Those 2007 numbers wouldn't be publishable otherwise.

I think the 'when' is a typo. I think it should read..... 'since then, the kenyan born cyclist is understood to also have obtained....'
 
Re:

djpbaltimore said:
I think fmk-Rol is spot on. 'Obtained' seems to mean something very different than 'saw for the first time'. As a scientist, it would suggest that the complete data set was collected for the purpose of the study. Those 2007 numbers wouldn't be publishable otherwise.

I think the 'when' is a typo. I think it should read..... 'since then, the kenyan born cyclist is understood to also have obtained....'
bloomin 'eck...if you 'obtain' something...do you already have it?
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
thehog said:
Merckx index said:
I'm going to keep an open mind at this point but picked up that Brailford said "independent" then went on to say he knows the GSK guys from the English Institue of Sport and they are "good guys", thus not actually independent!
Independent of the team. Froome has already said this, distancing Sky from the decision to do it.
We've had this discussion prior. I agree the word 'independent' in general terms means what it means and as you state it.

In a regulatory, compliance context its very much different. Independent in this context would be a testing body which went through due diligence to ensure that there was no conflict of interests whether actual or perceived. If there are any 'perceived' conflicts then these would be declared up front so the final data could be viewed under that context.

The fact that GSK has a contract or 'had' a contract or still 'wants' a contract with EIS does raises a conflict. Its not a direct conflict but it is there. All those types of aspects can influence individuals. Peer review/audit may counter a conflict of this nature.
 
I can obtain my college transcript from the registrar's office, but that doesn't mean that I don't know what my grades were. I think the passage refers more towards intellectual property than your interpretation. It could've involved a MTA (material transfer agreement) with the UCI center.
 
Every journal has a section where conflicts of interest are declared. That is SOP. But perceived conflicts of interest are beyond the scope of publishing. Or, in other words, all scientists have perceived conflicts of interest. It is unavoidable.
 
Re:

djpbaltimore said:
I can obtain my college transcript from the registrar's office, but that doesn't mean that I don't know what my grades were. I think the passage refers more towards intellectual property than your interpretation. It could've involved a MTA (material transfer agreement) with the UCI center.
indeed...however for the average reader any nuance along these lines would not neccessarily be 'infered' (to use the term of the day)...this leaves the use of the word open to the interpretation that...he has only just obtained it. i.e. such that he needed to go through a formal process such as FOI to get it....

Again...this is not my interpretation...it is how it could be interpreted

Anyone with military knowledge (or an inquiring mind) might have been able to see through the 45 min claim by Bliar...however that didn't stop the 'inference' of some media reports that more than a Cypriot military base was at risk
 
Re:

djpbaltimore said:
I can obtain my college transcript from the registrar's office, but that doesn't mean that I don't know what my grades were. I think the passage refers more towards intellectual property than your interpretation. It could've involved a MTA (material transfer agreement) with the UCI center.
In the academic context the results need to be sent from the university in a sealed envelope to the employer or next intuition. You wouldn't see them. The results are the property of the university not the individual.

Per the testing, more often than not the testing center has provided its own funding for the tests so they will own the results and release them under payment or a larger anonymous study into the subjects.
 
Re: Re:

gillan1969 said:
for the average reader any nuance along these lines would not neccessarily be 'infered' (to use the term of the day)...this leaves the use of the word open to the interpretation that...he has only just obtained it. i.e. such that he needed to go through a formal process such as FOI to get it....
Waffle on like this long enough and even you will have forgotten what it was you originally said. So an aide-memoire for the average readers out there:

gillan1969 said:
it infers that he did not have sight of the (2007) test results until after he did the recent tests
One more time: it does no such thing.
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
gillan1969 said:
for the average reader any nuance along these lines would not neccessarily be 'infered' (to use the term of the day)...this leaves the use of the word open to the interpretation that...he has only just obtained it. i.e. such that he needed to go through a formal process such as FOI to get it....
Waffle on like this long enough and even you will have forgotten what it was you originally said. So an aide-memoire for the average readers out there:

gillan1969 said:
it infers that he did not have sight of the (2007) test results until after he did the recent tests
One more time: it does no such thing.
...so "since when" did he have sight of them?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS