- Jun 19, 2009
- 13,250
- 1
- 0
If we remember back to this time last year Pat held an extraordinary press conference to explain that the UCI (or Verbruggen) could not hide a positive from 2001.
The UCI take seriously the accusation that the UCI took a bribe to hide the positive test of Lance Armstrong in 2001," McQuaid said.
Almost one year on and of course the "letters" never appeared on the UCI website....... anyone want to guess why?
The UCI take seriously the accusation that the UCI took a bribe to hide the positive test of Lance Armstrong in 2001," McQuaid said.
So, for 2001 its 2 + 6 = 8."We've contacted in recent days the labs involved for testing for EPO at that time. I have statement here from those labs that support what I am about to say. The letters will also soon be published on the UCI website in a sign of transparency.
"First the letter from the Paris lab, that is under the AFLD. They had three positives for EPO in the UCI account between 2001 and 2003. Two in 2001 and one in 2003. All the reports were sent to the UCI in 2001 and 2002 and 2003 were also sent CPLD and also sent to the International Olympic Committee. In relation to Lausanne, there were 18 positive tests for EPO for the UCI controlled by this lab between 2001 and 2003: six in 2001, four in 2002 and eight in 2003. All analysis were sent to IOC and Swiss Olympic.
Almost one year on and of course the "letters" never appeared on the UCI website....... anyone want to guess why?