Landis Cheated

[suzzer99]

Ahhh thank you. You just gave me more details about the Tour testing process than Sports Illustrated, Sportscenter, or PTI ever has. So he didn't know he would be tested that day. Then once he took the lead he just couldn't resist, or prayed it would be out of his system or something?

I'm sure he's probably guilty, I'm just trying to understand the details.

[Ortho]

This is hard to judge, really. I mean, he went out knowing that he had to win the stage the next day, and apparently with the self-belief to think he could do it. Since he was trying to win the stage, he had expect that he was going to be tested, although even halfway through his (amazing, nothing will ever change that) ride, he probably had 10% chance of it actually coming off.

So, if he was using a patch, that makes me assume that he thought it wouldn't produce a positive the next day. This is somewhat reasonable, if riders are using these patches, because my assumption is that the use of these patches are much more common than positive tests. It could be that the strain on his body from the crack the day before and the superhuman effort that he made on the day left his system unable to "dilute" or "absorb" (I'm out of my medical depth here) the synthetic testosterone and/or to not produce enough epitestosterone to get the ratio under 4:1 (I have no idea if they would've tested for synthetic testosterone if his ratio had been correct, but my understanding is that they would only have tested for synthetic testosterone if the ratio is bad, though I could be wrong on this point).

So, he was under incredible strain 2 days in a row, did an astonishing ride that took everything out him, and drank really absurd amounts of water during the ride (which may or may not have changed anything). Maybe he took a patch and all these fatigue-type factors didn't allow him to get back to normal limits by the time of the end of the stage.

On the other hand, maybe there is the possibility that he got a false positive on the testosterone ratio from a naturally occuring 11:1 ratio and then got a false positive on the isotope thingy for synthetic testosterone, but I think that an unbiased observer would make that at like a 1% chance. I was and still am a big fan of Floyd, and I wish that the evidence didn't say what it does, but I think it overwhelmingly likely that he's guilty based on what I've seen. I do think that it's a shame that this happened to Floyd, though I see doping as what you have to do to have this job rather than something naughty that a string of lone gunmen get caught doing.

The one area where the Sport/Labs have been out of line is that the information appears to have been leaked and should not have become public until after the b-sample was tested. But Floyd pulled out of races, etc. and so I am not so sure whether there properly a leak or what. Also, there doesn't seem to be much reason, even assuming the leak, to assume that the lab results aren't reliable, though I personally would like to see separate labs testing the A and then the B sample. But, I'd like to see riders randomly tested year-round, whether they are racing or not. We can't hope to stop doping at this point-we can only hope to make it more difficult.

[BigSoonerFan]

[ QUOTE ]
The one area where the Sport/Labs have been out of line is that the information appears to have been leaked and should not have become public until after the b-sample was tested. But Floyd pulled out of races, etc. and so I am not so sure whether there properly a leak or what. Also, there doesn't seem to be much reason, even assuming the leak, to assume that the lab results aren't reliable, though I personally would like to see separate labs testing the A and then the B sample. But, I'd like to see riders randomly tested year-round, whether they are racing or not. We can't hope to stop doping at this point-we can only hope to make it more difficult.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, they do love the American riders.

[J. Henry Christ]

[ QUOTE ]
For one thing, what kind of difference in performance would taking synthetic testosterone ONCE make?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, if the story is true as it appears to be, then it makes enough of a difference that Landis would risk his reputation and his career (what's left) for it.

[ QUOTE ]
For another, what kind of safeguards are applied to the samples?

[/ QUOTE ]

I have yet to hear Phonak or Landis claim the samples were tainted, rather he and his representatives seem to have come up with numerous explanations for the results, thus (in my mind) solidifying the validity of the results.

[ QUOTE ]
I mean, Landis has been tested on other occasions.

[/ QUOTE ]

And all were found to be negative... except that one where he rode the greatest ride of his life, and possibly the most inexplicable ride in TdF history.

Unfortunately, I say all this as very much a Floyd Landis fan. However despite rooting for him all year, I cannot hold him to a double standard that I would not for other riders. His B sample confirms the initial test results, his explanations are inadequate, and I am afraid he has been caught... and innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt has never applied to drug testing in sports, so despite being a Landis fan, I can't ask for his test results to be treated differently.

[suzzer99]

So can applying a testerone patch produce dramatic results on that same day?

[Ortho]

For cyclists, it doesn't appear to be a performance-enhancer so much as it is an overnight recovery-enhancer, which of course does help performance. I do not know exactly how much it helps, though I assume that it is significant because the riders take the risk of having their lives and careers ruined if they are caught taking it.

Edit: I mean to say, recovery is everything, but if Floyd was helped on his big ride by some wonder drug that gave him a big boost on the day, that drug probably wasn't testosterone.

[Phanekim]

the "synthetic" test is a ratio test.

synthetic testosterone has a higher ratio of c12 to c13 than natural testosterone. This is because of the vegetable origin of synthetic testosterone. If it is higher than what is considered normal...then they assume there has to be synthetic testosterone.

THis is different from the EPO test on tyler. on the tyler test, they test for an antigen on the red blood cells. EPO will cause red blood cell production , however, there is a different marker on naturally made rbc and synthetic. Its like a fingerprint. This is virtually the nail in the coffin. THis is very similar to DNA and is NOT and interpretative test or a ratio test.

Now Landis' defense will probably revolve around 2 things.

First, the test itself. THe test is a chromotagraphy test. Chromotagraphy is usually a process where you use a substance that will have a higher affinity for one substance over another. In this case, they will run something that will attract the c12 and separate it from the c13. THis, will in turn lead the their ratio. This is the best simplification i can give you.

Doing this in regular gchem and ochem labs...in my experience chromotagraphy is extremely unreliable. Now those guys are professionals and have done two samplings. Two positive but unsimilar results could discredit the test.

Also, if the ratio is similar with landis' other samples, he'll be in the clear.

Its speculative. IF you ask me, it is a 50-50 deal. If this case was tried in the United States , he would be found not guilty. There are too many holes that i haven't even mentioned to create enough reasonable doubt.

For example, why was testosterone just high for one day? you probably would see a rise and fall in the samples collected in day b4 and after. Why is this an anomaly? Lets say you take it stage 17...wouldn't some still be in your system on the sample collected stage 18?

Also, the active ingredient here is testosterone. He , if anything had a lower than normal testosterone. I mean EXTREMELY abnormally low testosterone in his system. This would indicate that his sample could very well be tainted. Twice? maybe...i dont have the information. But as you can see, several lines of defense can happen.

WIth foriegn courts, i'm not sure. BUt if this case was tried in the USA, there would be lots of reasonable doubt.

Also, I do not believe landis cheated. ON a personal level, it just sounds too stupid. WHy would he use something that was relatively marginally effective (unless he recived a spiked IV). WHy would he use it and risk everything on a already outside chance to win the tour. he woulda been the favorite next year with a healthy hip. It just doesn't make sense.

Now, if he is found not guilty. Expect his lawyers to go after these newspapers. After the unfair backlash he's recieved, he's gonna make a killing now.

[Ortho]

[ QUOTE ]
the "synthetic" test is a ratio test.

synthetic testosterone has a higher ratio of c12 to c13 than natural testosterone. This is because of the vegetable origin of synthetic testosterone. If it is higher than what is considered normal...then they assume there has to be synthetic testosterone.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, for clarity, this is a second ratio. The first ratio is the t:e ratio, which measures testosterone vs epitestosterone (the biproduct of testosterone use by the body), and the "synthetic" test determines a ratio between the different kinds of carbon in the testosterone. For those just tuning in, either natural testosterone doesn't have one of these carbons or has it in very small amounts, and synthetic testosterone has larger amounts of whichever the naughty carbon is.

[ QUOTE ]
First, the test itself. THe test is a chromotagraphy test. Chromotagraphy is usually a process where you use a substance that will have a higher affinity for one substance over another. In this case, they will run something that will attract the c12 and separate it from the c13. THis, will in turn lead the their ratio. This is the best simplification i can give you.

Doing this in regular gchem and ochem labs...in my experience chromotagraphy is extremely unreliable. Now those guys are professionals and have done two samplings. Two positive but unsimilar results could discredit the test.

Also, if the ratio is similar with landis' other samples, he'll be in the clear.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not getting where you're getting this from. My understanding at this point is that, reliable or not, these isotope tests (that's the difference between the various carbons, right, and cromotography is the method?) have been accepted by the cycling authorities and WADA and so he's stuck, no?

[ QUOTE ]
For example, why was testosterone just high for one day? you probably would see a rise and fall in the samples collected in day b4 and after. Why is this an anomaly? Lets say you take it stage 17...wouldn't some still be in your system on the sample collected stage 18?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure that he wasn't tested after stage 16, though your point about a post-stage-18 test is a valid one. I am unsure. The old trick with EPO was to hydrate yourself with an IV to lower your hemocrit, but you would probably know better than I would if something like that is available as an easy "flush".

[ QUOTE ]
Also, the active ingredient here is testosterone. He , if anything had a lower than normal testosterone. I mean EXTREMELY abnormally low testosterone in his system.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have not personally seen any specific numbers (not that I'd be able to interpret them anyway, I'd have to rely on secondary sources) reporting his actual levels. I've only seen the ratios.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I do not believe landis cheated. ON a personal level, it just sounds too stupid. WHy would he use something that was relatively marginally effective (unless he recived a spiked IV). WHy would he use it and risk everything on a already outside chance to win the tour. he woulda been the favorite next year with a healthy hip. It just doesn't make sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I can disagree with these points, at least for the sake of argument, but I am not happy about doing it. I too, in my heart of hearts, still don't want to believe that he cheated, and I am actually troubled by why I don't want to believe the evidence that's out there. I feel like I'm in denial or something.

It's hard to know about the possible recklessness of using a patch. Landis needed a huge ride the next day, everyone knew it, and if this is something that riders semi-routinely use, the risk of detection might've been quite small. His hip presents another incentive imo: who knows what he will be after a hip replacement; any minor complication and his career could be over. Win or lose this year, this has to have been his best chance to win, with many of the favourites gone, etc. This truly was the chance that comes once in a lifetime, and part of why what he did was so amazing was that he wasn't willing to let it go after stage 16, when everyone else would have.

[ QUOTE ]
Now, if he is found not guilty. Expect his lawyers to go after these newspapers. After the unfair backlash he's recieved, he's gonna make a killing now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, and I hope that you are right and that he is innocent. My position has changed over the past couple of weeks, and after somewhat embarassing myself in front of friends arguing his innocence, the second "synthetic" results came out and I now believe that he is guilty. But it is an argument that I would be happy to lose. My own feeling is that the explanations for his innocence don't work for me. 1) someone set him up seems somewhat silly and 2) I just can't buy that he was so extremely unlucky as to not only test positive for the bad t:e ratio (whether the t:e test is accurate or useful or not, it's the first and only time he had a bad ratio, and that's quite unlucky that it came on that day) and then be so unlucky as to get a false positive on the "synthetic" test (as far as I understand, there is no particular reason that a high t:e ratio would be more likely to produce a bad "synthetic" ratio) for the same sample. I just can't buy it, no matter how badly I would like to.

I do hope that you turn out to be right, and I also hope that, no matter how it comes out, people can at some point understand how incredible what he did this year was and, even if he were guilty, how little a part of that was played by drugs.

[gusmahler]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
For example, why was testosterone just high for one day? you probably would see a rise and fall in the samples collected in day b4 and after. Why is this an anomaly? Lets say you take it stage 17...wouldn't some still be in your system on the sample collected stage 18?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure that he wasn't tested after stage 16, though your point about a post-stage-18 test is a valid one.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought they only tested the stage winners and overall leaders. Landis wasn't a leader or a stage winner after either 16 or 18. (This is just nitpicking, though, because he was a leader after 15 and after 19, and other stages also, I believe).)

[Ortho]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
For example, why was testosterone just high for one day? you probably would see a rise and fall in the samples collected in day b4 and after. Why is this an anomaly? Lets say you take it stage 17...wouldn't some still be in your system on the sample collected stage 18?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure that he wasn't tested after stage 16, though your point about a post-stage-18 test is a valid one.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought they only tested the stage winners and overall leaders. Landis wasn't a leader or a stage winner after either 16 or 18. (This is just nitpicking, though, because he was a leader after 15 and after 19, and other stages also, I believe).)

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, yes-that's right. My mistake. So, he wouldn't have been tested after 18 after. Him taking the jersey and winning 17 had become fused in my mind.