UCI Waives the Rules? Yet again!!

[HeartAttack]

30 minutes is long enough to put on a whizzinator and warm up the clean pee.

LOL, yep seen them before, the down side of them is any medical person could spot the difference between that and the real thing a mile off, let alone a few inches away

Absolutely agree - it's the easiest way in the world to bring down your haematocrit

Drink (or even infuse) litres of water and your haematocrit goes down almost immediately. Then you'd piss most of it out and your haematocrit would gradually rise again.

30 mins would be about in the right window to lower your haematocrit before your kidneys peed it all out I'd guess

PS disclaimer - I'm not accusing Lance of anything - just being hypothetical

PPS - I do work as a doctor and see dehydrated sick people come in every day - give them lots of IV fluids and their haematocrits drop sharply. It's one of the pitfalls of trauma patients. You think they haven't lost blood as their haematocrit is OK but once they are rehydrated their haemoglobin levels fall

I would have to challenge you on this, if it were this simple to fool anti drug tests then many would not get caught. One of the options available at the likes of the Olympics is to choose between urine or blood samples, so by your account all they have to do is drink loads and pass a blood drug test. And in this case they took both blood and urine and tested them, both came back clean.

I'm not disputing your ability, I have full respect for the medical profession, but being a doctor does not give you all the knowledge especially when it comes to sports drug screening, testing etc. drug testing is a mile away from dehydration/rehydration as you know.

I'm not trying to wind anyone up here but I think its about time some opened their eyes and really looked at what WADA and the like actually do rather than sit there and come up with all these weird and wonderful dream ways of how someone can get away with supposidly taking drugs but still comes out clean.

But there again I guess they are also scared that he did actually win 7 TdF clean, now that would really be bad news as it would mean he was the best rider and supporting team without any chemical help

 

[mangaman]

I would have to challenge you on this, if it were this simple to fool anti drug tests then many would not get caught.

That's the point though heartattack.

People are very rarely caught. Generally it takes the police or special targetted testing to catch cheats

Endless dopers have passed dope tests - be they David Millar or Ulrich/Basso/Mayo etc etc who never failed a test

I would argue with the expertise of people like Dr Fuentes it's the norm to erroneously pass a doping test.

 

[Noodley]

But there again I guess they are also scared that he did actually win 7 TdF clean, now that would really be bad news as it would mean he was the best rider and supporting team without any chemical help

HeartAttack, you need a reality check.

Seriously. Look at all the evidence. Look beyond the 'no positives'.

Realise that pro cycling is not clean. There are clean pro cyclists but pro cycling is not clean.

 

[John the Monkey]

Michael Ashenden Interview is worth a read. (NYVelocity.com)

http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden

Going back to the original point, it is worth noting that this race was on the point of not going ahead at all this year - SRAM stepped in at the 11th hour to save it - for now. The UCI's application of the "no pro-tour/pro-continental" teams here has also hurt other teams (good piece about the effect on BMC on Velonews here;

Team BMC, America’s only Pro Continental team, suffered collateral damage due to Armstrong’s global popularity. The team was forced to send five riders home from Gila, and faces an uncertain 2009 North American schedule, due to the enforcement of a rarely used UCI rule prohibiting ProTour and Pro Continental teams from participating in non-UCI sanctioned events.

...

rule 2.1.009 has never been enforced here in the United States. Horner and Leipheimer both raced at the Cascade Classic last year, and Leipheimer raced at the Sea Otter Classic just 10 days ago ...

However much like the UCI’s under-28 rule for continental teams (intended to promote development), rule 2.1.009 is a “one size fits all” rule applied to nations with very different race and team structures. And as with many UCI rules, what makes sense in Europe, where these rules are written, shouldn’t necessarily be applied in the U.S.



In Europe, where there are countless UCI-sanctioned events and 20 Pro Continental teams, the UCI’s desire for stratification makes perfect sense — having Tour de France-caliber teams like Agritubel and Barloworld also competing at national races on a par with Redlands or Gila isn’t good for the continental teams, which tend to serve a similar function as the bigger developmental-oriented club teams here in the U.S.



...

It’s a different game in North America, however. With the Tour de Georgia canceled, followed by the Priority Health Tour de Leelanau, the U.S. Open of Cycling and the first two races of Philly Week, the number of UCI events in the U.S. has been reduced dramatically, to just nine. Even if all of those races had gone as scheduled, USA Cycling’s Professional Tour of UCI-sanctioned events would not have been enough for a 16-rider Professional Continental team to prepare for European racing.

I think the problem is that the USA is manifestly not France, Belgium &c where there's ample opportunity for these guys to race, and could be one place where the UCI might look the other way in a way that benefits the sport (mirabile dictu!).

 

[kyuss]

I'm not disputing your ability, I have full respect for the medical profession, but being a doctor does not give you all the knowledge especially when it comes to sports drug screening, testing etc. drug testing is a mile away from dehydration/rehydration as you know.

You're right, but I reckon it puts him in a better position than most people on here to pass judgement. What are your qualifications? At least he might have some understanding of the way drug tests work and the ways in which they can be beaten. I'm afraid the fact you've been tested in the past doesn't give you all the knowledge either. Mangaman's opinion is just as valid as yours if not more so.

To be honest I'm getting a bit sick of hearing about LA. I was never his biggest fan and I'm even less so now. I can't wait to see the back of him. I couldn't care less if he won doped out his eyeballs, I'm just tired of the way he's held up as being some kind of cycling god, as if the sport didn't exist before him and can't exist without him. He's nothing more than the cycling equivalent of Take That or the Spice Girls. Successful and popular in his prime but in the long run, hasn't really changed anything or moved the sport forwards (in fact, if anything, he's held it back).

 

[HeartAttack]

You're right, but I reckon it puts him in a better position than most people on here to pass judgement. What are your qualifications? At least he might have some understanding of the way drug tests work and the ways in which they can be beaten. I'm afraid the fact you've been tested in the past doesn't give you all the knowledge either. Mangaman's opinion is just as valid as yours if not more so.

You are totally right, all I have is 15 years representing GB at international events, being tested over 200 times over that period. Or the fact that as being a member of a GB squad you are asked to learn as much as possible about what is safe and isn't, methods used, plus have the weekly updates from the team and WADA, NADA and IOC drug committee as it used to be listing over 100,000 drugs etc.

Not to mention when I was ill and needed medical help, even on production of the lists (all 121 pages) my doctor and consultant at the hospital had to end up contacting the governing body medical department to ask for help/advice on what I was allowed to be given. So even doctors DO NOT know everything, NOR DO I, but I am very experienced in the test protocols, methods, requirements and guidelines. And its this I am fed up with as so many here who to be honest are armchair critics have no idea what they are rabbiting on about and think they know everything just because they are anti someone.

 

[rich p]

You are totally right, all I have is 15 years representing GB at international events, being tested over 200 times over that period. Or the fact that as being a member of a GB squad you are asked to learn as much as possible about what is safe and isn't, methods used, plus have the weekly updates from the team and WADA, NADA and IOC drug committee as it used to be listing over 100,000 drugs etc.

Not to mention when I was ill and needed medical help, even on production of the lists (all 121 pages) my doctor and consultant at the hospital had to end up contacting the governing body medical department to ask for help/advice on what I was allowed to be given. So even doctors DO NOT know everything, NOR DO I, but I am very experienced in the test protocols, methods, requirements and guidelines. And its this I am fed up with as so many here who to be honest are armchair critics have no idea what they are rabbiting on about and think they know everything just because they are anti someone.

Well if even you know so much then it's all the more surprising that LA didn't know that he shouldn't go and have a shower.
As for armchair critics then i presume you're also including the French Federation as they also questioned the testing protocol.

 

[HeartAttack]

Well if even you know so much then it's all the more surprising that LA didn't know that he shouldn't go and have a shower.
As for armchair critics then i presume you're also including the French Federation as they also questioned the testing protocol.

As I said it is within the testers remit to allow the test subject to leave their sight, but only if tester allows it and checks where they are going, I wasn't there so can't comment on this personally but I would guess if LA went for a shower then the tester would have done a quick inspection of shower area to make sure there wasn't a fully equipped medical centre behind the door, its not the norm but it is allowed under certain circumstances, its down to the tester at the time to make that call.

But the bottom line is as has been said many times, LA and those with him are entitled to check the testers credentials prior to any tests being done, and no athlete would allow an unknown person with a bit of paper who has just arrived at their door step without prior notice to take a needle to them without first double checking them out.

I know things have changed over the last 3 years, but the system used to be, a phone call from the local governing body/WADA/NADA advising of a home or training visit, the testers name and details of when they will arrive, giving a 2 hour window of visit, then on arrival they would have a card, letter of introduction and also a contact sheet giving you contact details of those at the GB/WADA etc so you can double check them if you are still not sure. Only after all of this is the test time frame started.

In competition you are approached by a tester and shadowed for upto 1 hour where upon you are required to attend the test station, at which point you are logged in, and are NOT allowed to leave till samples are taken, but for arguments sake if you need to have a dump you are allowed, door will be slightly ajar but you are there alone as they want urine not solids

Anyway this whole thread seems to have left what the OP started it about, partly my fault I know, but I'm just so fed up with so many and I'll say it again, armchair critics who think they know everything, have answers for everything and really don't know what is really happening, as I don't either but at least I'm willing to accept when I'm wrong and also give some input of some things that I do actually know something of. Its almost like being down the pub and listening to everyone say what was wrong with this or that football game, how it should have been played etc.

Still I guess thats the whole thing about a forum, 1000's of views all differing and all carry zero weight in the real world, except with the person who says it, so I think I'll just sit back and leave this to play out and have a laugh to myself, have a good one