So Landis was tested 8 times during the tour.

[JS80]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Text

Apparently Team Phonak has had TEN doping incidents in the past 3 years, TEN. Guilty as charged in my book, birds of a feather...

Why not take the American approach of dealing with things and apply it here?

lol mofukas tired of us always making fun of france, here's their chance

 

[oogabooga]

Originally posted by: Soccer55

Originally posted by: DonVito
As I posted above, Dr. David Black disagrees, and he's tried it:

Dr. Black, author of the book "Drug Testing in Sports,'' states,

"I have injected myself with testosterone in doing research, and I can tell you from personal experience that within hours, you feel a profound psychological change, a sense of well-being, aggression and energy," Black said.

"You feel strong and powerful. And your endurance is definitely improved. So, it's not peculiar to me that a cyclist would take testosterone after a bad day. What does seem peculiar is that an athlete of that caliber would put himself at such great risk, knowing that they test for testosterone."

I'd be more impressed with this Dr. Black's findings if he had undergone multiple injections in some sort of blind study involving a placebo. Since he injected himself with testosterone, could it have been that he experienced these changes because he was expecting to see them? Maybe.....maybe not.

-Tom

I have an anecdote. I injected myself with testoterone and I felt strong and powerful. My endurance...

Seriously though - It seemed really odd at first that he 'doped' with only one positive (now two) tests. I was under the impression that to be effective the drugs needed to be more of a regiment kinda thing. But I guess not - Both tests came out bad.

I do wonder though - The french acused Lance of cheating so many years. And now they have a conviniently timed miracle comeback-by-drugs to pin on Landis. I wonder if the french are just bad sports and hate losing their own name-sake tour to americans.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
He was tested 4 times before stage 17 and 3 times after and only the one sample was positive.

Does this not sound kind of suspicious.

Very.

On top of that, his epi-to-test ratio was messed up because his epi was LOW. His test was within normal ranges.

Lots that doesn't add up.

Nobody cares about the epi ratio (even though that is bad enough), it's the synthetic found in the sample. That test has a 100% success ratio, there was no doubt he had synth in his blood before his miraculous "comeback".

 

[Stuxnet]

When told that Landis claimed he had a beer after the race...

I've avoided the whole Landis thing, but this made me LMAO. What fscking cyclist is going to injest alcohol during an endurance race?

Give me a break. To me, that just screams "I did it and I'm desperately trying to come up with an explanation".

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: sash1
All of his other tests were negative, I don't see why on one day his testosterone would be so different.

Here, let me help you crack that nut:

HE CHEATED

 

[Soccer55]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Nobody cares about the epi ratio (even though that is bad enough), it's the synthetic found in the sample. That test has a 100% success ratio, there was no doubt he had synth in his blood before his miraculous "comeback".

Ever since the test results were announced, I've wondered about this detection of synthetic testosterone. How can they (scientists) differentiate between normal and synthetic testosterone? I would think that whether it's normally produced or synthetic, testosterone is testosterone. Are there some sort of markers on synthetic testosterone that aren't present in normally produced testosterone which makes it detectable?

-Tom

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: ballmode
hes ugly

Lance Armstong = FTW

he even dated sheryl crow

landis = fugly

QFT. That's all the proof I need. All this "testing" sh*t just muddies the waters.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: Soccer55

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Nobody cares about the epi ratio (even though that is bad enough), it's the synthetic found in the sample. That test has a 100% success ratio, there was no doubt he had synth in his blood before his miraculous "comeback".

Ever since the test results were announced, I've wondered about this detection of synthetic testosterone. How can they (scientists) differentiate between normal and synthetic testosterone? I would think that whether it's normally produced or synthetic, testosterone is testosterone. Are there some sort of markers on synthetic testosterone that aren't present in normally produced testosterone which makes it detectable?

-Tom

They use a carbon isotope to detect synth:
Jacques De Ceaurriz, the head of the Chatenay-Malabray lab, said Saturday the isotope testing procedure involving a mass spectrometer is totally reliable.

"It's foolproof. This analysis tells the difference between endogenous and exogenous," he told the AP. "No error is possible in isotopic readings."
Text