| Author |
 Topic  |
|
CrossRacer
National Champion
USA
322 Posts |
 Posted - 03/09/2009 : 22:13:19
|
| After reviewing the numbers, it looks odd on July 11 the result is negative for EPO and the hemoglobin and hematocrit were 13.7 and 40.7. Then on July 14 a test for EPO was not used, but the blood values went up to 14.4 and 43.1, which were the highest levels during the Tour. |
 |
|
|
KD teammate
Hors Categorie
Denmark
5683 Posts |
Posted - 04/09/2009 : 09:37:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by CrossRacer
After reviewing the numbers, it looks odd on July 11 the result is negative for EPO and the hemoglobin and hematocrit were 13.7 and 40.7. Then on July 14 a test for EPO was not used, but the blood values went up to 14.4 and 43.1, which were the highest levels during the Tour.
Its not as odd as it looks. At the day you refer to (July 14), Armstrong only submitted a blood sample. And the truth is, that UCI normaly limit their EPO test only to be carried out for Urine samples. Only if they highly suspect a rider, they will cary out the more expensive test based upon a blood sample. If we look through Armstrongs dataset it looks like none of his blood samples in 2009 was ever tested for EPO. Instead he had 22 Urine samples testing negative for EPO, and 3 Urine samples where they didnt bother to test for EPO again.
So the reason why they didnt test Armstrong's July 14 sample for EPO, was because it was a blood sample and not a urine sample.
But once again I would like to state, that the uploaded values from Armstrong only reveal a small part of the story. We dont know the remaining part of the story, and as such his data cant be used to draw any conclusions. The biological passport and new advanced test methods from AFLD will make sure that his samples will be tested one level more closely compared to the "health values" he has uploaded. To be honest it is more those tests being interesting to have a look at, rather than his "health values" in 2009. In example we already know that its almost impossible to detect CERA in urine samples, and that UCI/AFLD has to check for that substance in your blood sample.
Finaly we should also remember, that even if we have a rider who didnt in any way manipulate his blood capacity, then this is only a part of the doping field to check for. Viagra is known to boost your performance at high temperatures, Testosterone and IGF well help your recovery, Growth hormones will help build up the muscles, and other doping products can help against cramps, pain, lactosis, etc.
€ Winner of the Golden League Fantasy Game 2008 |
|
|
|
KD teammate
Hors Categorie
Denmark
5683 Posts |
Posted - 04/09/2009 : 12:21:13
|
Austrian Blood Doping Scandal (part 4)
Today I feel its appropriate to sum up the news from the ongoing investigation, in a new part 4. If you havent been reading the previous part 1-3, I can recommend to visit the links below, to get fully updated about all details so far published about this scandal:
1.part (Jan.2008) about the investigation: http://forum.teamcsc-saxobank.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=5013&whichpage=5
2.part (March 2008) naming the athletes alleged to be implicated: http://forum.teamcsc-saxobank.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=5013&whichpage=7
3.part (April 2009) with findings of the police and Kohl's admission: http://forum.teamcsc-saxobank.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=5013&whichpage=11
The big investigation more or less came to a stand still in 2008, because none of the implicated athletes would collaborate to shed light at the entire affair. And they all refused to confess and give a testimony to actualy proof, that the circumstantial evidense of a big doping network, was correct. The first part of the scandal was therefor "just" about convicting the 4 Austrian biathlon athletes, 2 skiiers and 2 trainers, who were caught red handed in Torino 2006.
Only when the Austrian authoraties recieved a full confession and collaboratorion from the triathlon athlete Lisa Hütthaler (who tested positive for EPO in 2008), and Bernhard Kohl (who was positive for CERA in Tour de France 2008), the investigation started to roll again. Leading to the developments covered by part 3 of my coverage above, where several key persons in the doping network got arrested in Apr.2009.
After this long introduction, here comes finaly the summary of the recent news. First of all it shall be noted that the Austrian police investigation is performed by a special SoKo task force, and a few days ago the cheif investigator told that SoKo would most likely finalise their investigation report about the entire affair around 2 months from now. So we are still talking about an ongoing investigation, and the bullet points collected below is just a summary of what has recently been revealed from the investigation as new info:
- The blood doping equipment belonging to Matschiner, was stored in the basement of a flat in a small Austrian town. Several witnesses has watched Christian Hoffmann, visit this flat Aug.3 in 2008. Matschiner has confessed about being the owner of the blood doping equipment, but claim the equipment was never used after Aug.1 in 2008, where the new Austrian antidoping law made it illegal.
- A closer investigation of the blood doping equipment and the testimony from Bernhard Kohl however reveal, that the blood centrifuge was used 4 times as late as Sep.24 in 2008. Kohl has confessed to use it at this particulair day, and apparently also had knowledge that Pietro Caucchioli and Michael Rasmussen had been using it.
- Matschiner recently confessed to have been paying a lab, to perform secret control tests of his doped customers. All with the purpose to make sure, that the doping could not be traced. SoKo has now confirmed that they have good reason to believe, that this lab is the Austrian WADA lab in Siebersdorf, and confirmed that an ongoing investigation was also carried out about that.
- SoKo has also informed, that an investigation has now been started in Italy against Pietro Caucchioli. And that they also have asked foreign authoraties to start investigations against 1 Swiss rider, 2 Dutch riders and 1 German sports doctor.
www.oe24.at/news/sport/mehr-sport/SoKo-Abschlussbericht-erhaertet-Kohl-Vorwuerfe-0527540.ece
www.oe24.at/news/sport/Sportmix/Doping-Abschlussbericht-belastet-Hoffmann-0524234.ece
|
|
|
|
CrossRacer
National Champion
USA
322 Posts |
Posted - 04/09/2009 : 20:36:17
|
Some follow-up articles on Armstrong's reported test results:
http://www.dr.dk/Sporten/Cykling/2009/09/03/111604.htm
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=80407&postcount=219
Before my first post on this item I caught the fact that epo tests are done on urine samples but not blood samples. Instead of mentioning the lack of epo test, I guess a clearer statement would have been to say there was no urine sample taken so that an epo test could have been performed. But the epo test probably doesn't matter since the results might indicate a transfusion on a rest day instead of epo.
|
|
|
|
KD teammate
Hors Categorie
Denmark
5683 Posts |
Posted - 05/09/2009 : 12:10:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by CrossRacer
Some follow-up articles on Armstrong's reported test results:
http://www.dr.dk/Sporten/Cykling/2009/09/03/111604.htm
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=80407&postcount=219
Before my first post on this item I caught the fact that epo tests are done on urine samples but not blood samples. Instead of mentioning the lack of epo test, I guess a clearer statement would have been to say there was no urine sample taken so that an epo test could have been performed. But the epo test probably doesn't matter since the results might indicate a transfusion on a rest day instead of epo.
Yet, the truth is that nobody knows! The biological passport is designed to catch those riders, who post values that are certain to indicate doping. The values of Armstrong dont fit that category. Hence, we have various experts being left with a wide open window to launch their personal theory/speculation about whether or not the values are natural. The problem of course is, that no scientific experiments have ever been carried out, to decide how blood values fluctuate in an undoped rider throughout a 3-week race.
In regards of the blood values, then I recall that Damsgaard has found several factors to have an impact at the measured values. One of them is actualy the accuracy of the equipment/test. When he carried out the big antidoping program at Saxo Bank, he learned that in order to get consistent result, it was important that he used the same test equipment and the same person doing the test for each rider, in order to get results that were accurate enough. On the bottom line, I dont know how accurate UCI can measure the hematocrite, but in case they have an accuracy of +/-2.5%, we should be aware that the tested hematocrit values can be +/- 1 basispoint from the truth.
Other important factors to remember, is that dehydration after a warm stage, or if the rider is unlucky to have diarrhea a specific day, then his hematocrit can increase with several points. Also its well known, that altitude training and/or living at places with a lower oxygen content compared to sea level, will help you to increase your hematocrit. This fact alone, can easily explain why Armstrong suddenly had 2 hemaglobin values in June rising to 16g/dl.
At the moment, we lack enough scientific studies to say with certainty how the hematocrit of a top rider should develop in a 3-week race. So we should be careful before jumping to any conclusions. Damsgaard has found A GENERAL TENDENCY that hematocrit values will decrease during a 3-week race due to the fysical stress. But this doesnt automaticly mean, that riders with values outside this tendency is doped. We have to be carefull here. A lot factors could influence, and we still lack scientific research and tests, in order to check if decreasing values should be expected by all riders. One thesis could perhaps be, that all top10 riders who most of the time are not pushing themself to the limit, perhaps will be able to sustain the same hematocrit level throughout a 3-week race, while it perhaps only will be the other riders who spend more time in the red zone of their fysical limit, who will have a decrease in hematocrit.
For my own record, I am a bit tired of people playing experts in this field (without being experts). Most often the press/media are the one to blame. They tend to simplify the topic, and jump to wrong headlines/conclusions. For instance the Danish expert at Bispebjerg Hospital said, that Armstrongs development in blood values during the Tour, COULD be a sign of blood doping. This however doesnt pre-exclude, that other natural factors COULD also explain the values!
In regards of a decrease in reticulocytes, then Damsgaard, Aschenden, Zorzoli and all experts behind the biological passport, has outlined that only if its decreasing with a delay after the increase in heamtocrit, it is a sign of blood doping. So honestly I am a bit surprised, that Mørkebjerg now believe that the small decrease in Armstrongs reticulocytes, while we momentanly has a small increase in his hematocrite, is something to be alarmed by. To be honest, I await some of the more established experts like Damsgaard or Aschenden to comment on this. To me it seems like Mørkebjerg is reading to much speculation into the numbers.
Finaly I cant help also to highlight, that too me the most suspicious fact about Armstrongs blood values is actualy the fact that they are so incredible low! In the 90s we had Pantani and many other top riders with a hematocrite of 56, and hemaglobin values up around 19. A few riders, where Cunego and Ricco was two of them, has recieved a special permission from UCI to ride with a hematocrit limit at 51 (due to a high level, claimed to be natural born). In fact most top riders all have hematocrit in the level of 45-49, so for Armstrong to post a such low average value as 42, is actualy looking odd to me. So if any of you want to speculate about Armstrong, I think it should rather be that he could be using a product like HES to artificialy lower his blood values.
Finaly we are now back to my first point. The uploaded values from Armstrong doesnt reveal anything FOR SURE. They are only a small part of the story. They dont reveal if he could be doing other doping drugs, or artificially manipulating his blood values, or perhaps being slightly dehydrated after stage 10 and stage 20 (where his hematocrit increased), or perhaps being affected by other factors.
So thats why I dont think we should pay too much attention and energy into analysing Armstrongs numbers. We should leave that job for the people running the biological passport. Those people have probably already analysed his data, and decided what kind of follow up tests they need to do, to check if he artificially lower his blood values. In case no scientific test can proof it, we have to accept that he cant be convicted guilty of a doping violation. Its as simple as that. For my own record I have no trust in Armstrong, but we just cant judge him based upon speculation and undocumented theories. We need scientific proofs in order to make a verdict.
€ Winner of the Golden League Fantasy Game 2008 |
Edited by - KD teammate on 05/09/2009 12:38:13 |
|
|
|
Forstoppelse
Stagiaire
Denmark
19 Posts |
Posted - 05/09/2009 : 18:05:11
|
| It still is quite a coincidence that Armstrong's off-score rises 10% in the Tour, compared to his off- and early-season baseline. It is quite a coincidence that Armstrong doesn't dehydrate in the first week of racing with ITT, TTT, La-Grande-Motte, heat-wave and three mountain stages but then "dehydrates" after a rest day. It is quite a coincidence that this pattern continues. It is quite a coincidence that his hemaglobin drops from 14.8 to 13 in the Giro whilst rising from 14.3 to 14.5 in the Tour. Another coincidence it may be that a retic-percentage 0.7-1.3 makes his hemaglobin and hematocrit drop significantly in the Giro where as a retic-percentage of 0.5-0.7 makes his hemaglobin and hematocrit rise in the Tour. |
|
|
|
KD teammate
Hors Categorie
Denmark
5683 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2009 : 01:22:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by Forstoppelse
It still is quite a coincidence that Armstrong's off-score rises 10% in the Tour, compared to his off- and early-season baseline. It is quite a coincidence that Armstrong doesn't dehydrate in the first week of racing with ITT, TTT, La-Grande-Motte, heat-wave and three mountain stages but then "dehydrates" after a rest day. It is quite a coincidence that this pattern continues. It is quite a coincidence that his hemaglobin drops from 14.8 to 13 in the Giro whilst rising from 14.3 to 14.5 in the Tour. Another coincidence it may be that a retic-percentage 0.7-1.3 makes his hemaglobin and hematocrit drop significantly in the Giro where as a retic-percentage of 0.5-0.7 makes his hemaglobin and hematocrit rise in the Tour.
Perhaps those points you highlight should indeed be reason for concern. Yet I think they dont reveal any proofs about anything. We should all be carefull to remember, that the health values are no "absolute science". A lot natural factors can make them rise/fall.
I would like to repeate, that the most concerning point for me, is not the development of Armstrong's hematocrit value in the Tour, but more the fact the he had so low blood values, and yet still was able to ride so incredible fast! For a top rider I think his hematocrit value looks lower than what we normaly would expect. Why? I mean, if Armstrong before his comeback had decided he would dope again, then why didnt he choose to dope himself with an average hematocrit during the year of 48 instead of 42? Please tell me why?
One thesis could be, that he now use other doping methods than to increase his level of natural hemaglobin and hematocrit. Another thesis could be, that his average value of 42 has been artificial lowered from 48 by using a product like HES, in order to hide his true values and convince the public that his values are normal. But if Armstrong artificialy lower his blood values with a substance, then why didnt he just adjust his values so they showed a decreasing tendency in the Tour? Well perhaps he did try to do exactly that, but after stage 10 and stage 20 he just didnt calculate the dosis right. Perhaps because he didnt drink enough during those 2 stages?
My point is not to say that Armstrong is doped/undoped. To me it just seems like many people have "overanalyzed" the values of Armstrong. Right now Mørkebjerg has reacted upon the fact, that Armstrongs hematocrit was 43 instead of 41 after stage 10 and stage 20, while the 41.x values are considered natural. Speaking about reticulocytes they also fluctuate for a normal human being. UCI has decided a health limit, that it is allowed to fluctuate in the interval from 0.2 to 2.0 for riders. Armstrongs values in the Tour were all in the interval 0.5-0.7. The reason why I highlight this, is just to remind that his reticulocytes all were stable in July, and hence dont scream to heaven and earth about doping. Instead they are inconclusive. Meaning that other factors could also cause those values.
If my thesis is right, that Armstrong artificialy has lowered his blood values with a substance, then we basicly cant conclude anything upon his uploaded values. All the values are false. So the interesting part is not what we see, but rather what we dont see. First of all, I think its strange that he hasnt uploaded any of his old hematocrit values from 1999-2005 for comparison. Second, we should also be aware that he only uploaded the simple "health values", and didnt upload the entire results of his antidoping tests.
On the bottom line we can only speculate. My main feeling however is, that if Armstrong decided to increase his hematocrit values by illegal means, I have a hard time to imagine he would settle with an average value during the season of 42. As an experienced doper, he would know that raising it 2 values during the Tour is no performance revolution. Instead it would be a more effective power boost to choose an average values of 48. Then he could start the Tour at 49 and let it drop naturaly to 46. This would mean that Mørkebjerg would be happy, and he would be a lot faster during the Tour with 49-->46, instead of 43-->41-->43. An experienced doper like Armstrong would also know, that the right way to dope is by using a micro dossage each day. In that way the "correct" doping substance will be impossible to trace, and the values in the biological passport (incl. reticulocytes) wont fluctuate to show suspicious values.
So do you think Armstrong has an IQ below 100, and use the old ancient doping technique with a blood bag in the restday (but only a small one to increase it 2 points, so he doesnt get caught)? Or do you believe (like me), that he could be on to a more advanced and effective doping program, where he artificialy lowered his values during the entire season by a product like HES? In that case all his uploaded values are false, and only show how succesful he was to lower them.
We have no proofs about any of the theories, so we can only speculate. 
€ Winner of the Golden League Fantasy Game 2008 |
Edited by - KD teammate on 06/09/2009 08:55:22 |
|
|
|
Forstoppelse
Stagiaire
Denmark
19 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2009 : 18:31:58
|
Yes, I do believe he blood doped the old fashioned way, on the rest days, yes. We never saw Armstrong talking to the press at rest days, we never really saw him on rest days. I think his blood values - not talking about the fluctuations - seem normal. An untrained man would be around 48-50% in hematocrit, an athlete performing an extreme sport like cycling would be expected to be lower. I personally think we can conclude that Armstrong either blood doped or had severe dehydration - a dehydration to a point which Damsgaard (in his non-Astana-days) described as a poop-mess, riding at the back of the peloton and in no way being able to compete at the Tour.
About Damsgaard's defence of Armstrong, I both think and hope he knows that he looks like an idiot, both looking at Armstrong's blood values and remembering what he earlier said about Michael Rasmussen's blood values. This case doesn't just harm Armstrong, Astana and especially Damsgaard, it harms Saxo Bank's credibility. When Damsgaard is inconclusive of blood values this suspicious, you would think it would take a positive test for him to do something. I hope Damsgaard is actually onto something in the background, of course he can't go out in press and say that yes, Armstrong was doped. I think the team should take contact to Damsgaard, find out where this is going and if he has no intention of doing anything, I think a goodbye to Damsgaard would be fitting. |
|
|
|
OctaBech
National Champion
Denmark
898 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2009 : 06:58:50
|
I agree with Forstoppelse, Damsgaard has lost his credibility and can't be used as an insurance for the fans nor the investors; there aren't any eager investors waiting to jump aboard and "we" can't prove the Schlecks and Fabian are riding clean.
Team Saxo Bank is better off spending the money elsewhere like on keeping its riders.
But it doesn't just end with Damsgaard, the UCI passport also has yet to prove itself and if the margins are this forgiving combined with the leniency of the UCI inspectors, then the sport is back at status quo and all we can do is to wait for the next move from the French.
Because right now all the passport has achieved is to defend highly suspicious results with what in the past used to be suspicious blood values.
TdF '09 wasn't clean af the UCI doesn't manage to catch any high profile names then we'll see the peloton get dirtier next year.
Sorry about the post not being very coherent, but it's hard to be coherent when the debated passports aren't. |
Edited by - OctaBech on 07/09/2009 07:10:12 |
|
|
|
kxtr
National Champion
Germany
933 Posts |
|
|
Culkasi
Hors Categorie
United Kingdom
4081 Posts |
|
|
kxtr
National Champion
Germany
933 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2009 : 19:16:09
|
Thanks, Culkasi
So we'll have to see if this will be backed by more serious sources.
BTW: Bit worrying, that is reproduced by the German website radsportnews.com so easily - It used to be a great site when done by the old editor. Since he's gone it's merely about translating foreign news into german.
my new blog: http://waitingforthecaravan.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
KD teammate
Hors Categorie
Denmark
5683 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2009 : 23:29:26
|
In regards of the news about Rasmussen:
I wrote a part 4 right above, where you find the latest news about the Austrian blood doping affair. The fact is, that the Austrian radio channel Ö1 last week had access to read some prelimenary conclusions in the SOKO investigation report (expected to be finalized in November). One of the phrases they cited was that Kohl had confessed to use the blood doping eqiupment Sep.24-2008, and that he knew Rasmussen and Cauccioli also used the same eqiupment. Personally I have a hard time to figure out why Ramsmussen would want to use it during his suspension. I can however easily imagine he was a customor in 2006 and spring 2007 together with Boogerd, Dekker and Menchov.
In regards of Rasmus Damsgaard:
I think there is absolutely no reason to start throwing mud against Damsgaard. Why on earth do people start to question his integrety and objectivity, when he actualy defend noble principles and are being honest about what the current science can and can not proof? Those of you who claim that Damsgaard is no longer trustworthy, should really think twice about what you say! This man is close to one of the only trustworthy experts we have in this field! Its absolutely nonsenses when you start to blame him, that he wont say that Armstrongs blood values proof a pattern of blood doping. This is impossible, when we lack the science to make such conclusion.
I really tried in my long posts above to settle the score. The fact is that so far experts can only launch THEORIES that Armstrong did something wrong. Those theories can however not be proofed at present time, since the scientific studies of how blood values variate for doped and undoped riders under various circumstances, are yet an uncovered field for experts to explore. So far we have "only" the science in place for the blood passport to proof when a rider show big fluctuations in his blood values. Armstrong didnt show any big fluctuations, in reticulocytes or hemaglobin. Thus we have to accept he cant be nailed for blood doping. We have to accept that all the uncertainties playing into analysing and understanding the blood values, are currently making it impossible to throw out a clear cut judgment about Armstrongs values. SO PLEASE STOP.
Finaly comment about Damsgaard and the current antidoping program at Saxo Bank, is that he stoped being in charge of the program since Dec.31-2008. This change was made after the advice from Damsgaard, that now when the biological passport was up and running, it would be better to merge the two programs together into one overall program. In the current structure Saxo Bank pay UCI for performing what you could call a double biological passport. Damsgaard is still used by Saxo Bank as a consultant by the team, both to analyse the results from the biological passport, and to analyse and give advice about the passport values from riders the team consider to sign.
So Damsgaards expertice for sure continue to have value for the team. We should applaud him for his great work, and under no circumstance consider to stop paying for his expertise. That would basicly be plain stupid! He is a very needed man, in order to help avoiding to sign one of the "ticking bombs" out at the transfer market. I also like the fact, that Damsgaard has access to all results. We already saw how this resulted in the firering of Gusev at Astana (the moment he had wild blood values only being possible to acchieve with blood doping).
I think many of you are loosing the grip of what this is all about. The biological passport has never been a bullet proof testing method to stop all sorts of cheat. What it does, is that it close a lot of holes, and make it a lot more difficult for riders to dope. ITS A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. Certainly other testing methods and conventional tests are still needed, and the truth is that the biological passport most often is used as an instrument to show UCI when a rider need to be subject for target testing with conventional tests.
So the biological passport is a valuable instrument, that already has prevailed. Some of you are dissapointed that is couldnt catch Armstrong as a doping wreck in the Tour, but please be aware that the science behind need to be in place, before you shoot the man. In other words, the experts cant say yet with enough certainty, whether or not the Tour values of Armstrong only can be caused by doping. This has nothing to do with experts being in lack of integrity. In fact they show integrity, by saying that the current science cant proof it! 
€ Winner of the Golden League Fantasy Game 2008 |
Edited by - KD teammate on 07/09/2009 23:35:42 |
|
|
|
CrossRacer
National Champion
USA
322 Posts |
|
|
Forstoppelse
Stagiaire
Denmark
19 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2009 : 00:24:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by KD teammate
[
In regards of Rasmus Damsgaard:
I think there is absolutely no reason to start throwing mud against Damsgaard. Why on earth do people start to question his integrety and objectivity, when he actualy defend noble principles and are being honest about what the current science can and can not proof?
Because he had no problems seeing Michael Rasmussen as a very possible blood doper when he had more or less the same fluctuations as Armstrong has now and because Damsgaard had no problems firing Gusev instead of making further follow-up tests. I really do hope and believe that it's the last case he's learned from.
quote:
I really tried in my long posts above to settle the score. The fact is that so far experts can only launch THEORIES that Armstrong did something wrong. Those theories can however not be proofed at present time, since the scientific studies of how blood values variate for doped and undoped riders under various circumstances, are yet an uncovered field for experts to explore. So far we have "only" the science in place for the blood passport to proof when a rider show big fluctuations in his blood values. Armstrong didnt show any big fluctuations, in reticulocytes or hemaglobin. Thus we have to accept he cant be nailed for blood doping. We have to accept that all the uncertainties playing into analysing and understanding the blood values, are currently making it impossible to throw out a clear cut judgment about Armstrongs values. SO PLEASE STOP.
I'm sorry, I won't. I hope some journalist reads this as it's the evidence needed for convicting: In the Tour, Armstrong produced between 30% - 60% less blood than he did at the Giro and around 50% less than he did from August to May. Nonetheless, he raises both HCT and HB 5-6% after rest days in the Tour when he, producing almost twice as much blood, dropped 5-8% during the Giro. What does this mean? We can conclude that those 5% extra in the Tour, they were never baby-RBC's or, he didn't produce those 5% himself in the Tour. Those 5% couldn't be produced by Armstrong himself in the Tour which doesn't make dehydration very likely, unless part of dehydration is blood just turning up from nowhere. There is just no explanation to how he could get more RBC's but produce less RBC-babies in the Tour - or well, yes, there is..
Now, I do believe in Damsgaard but only as long as he's making himself trustworthy. Passing by this case would not only be damaging to the anti-doping fight, it would be damaging to his reputation. All in all, though, taking action in this case would do more damage than good to cycling in general. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Doping affairs in Cycling since 1980
