Full quote from Eusebio Unzue, Caisse d'Epargne's directeur sportif, "Finally, Unzue stressed that, "350 controls have taken place in the Tour, and only Landis' one was positive."

Full quote from Eusebio Unzue, Caisse d'Epargne's directeur sportif, "Finally, Unzue stressed that, "350 controls have taken place in the Tour, and only Landis' one was positive."

and how many test were conducted on Landis....

He was tested and clean on prior stages.... Find the person who tainted the sample.... Strange that the samples were WAY out of wack.... WAY WAY out of wack... like someone DUMPED it in.... yeah and some more! and some more! Thats it! Nahhh ...
Add just a bit more....

and how many test were conducted on Landis....

He was tested and clean on prior stages.... Find the person who tainted the sample.... Strange that the samples were WAY out of wack.... WAY WAY out of wack... like someone DUMPED it in.... yeah and some more! and some more! Thats it! Nahhh ...
Add just a bit more....

It doesn't sound as though they were way way out of wack at all - I have heard people can get their ratios to 100:1 or better.

Full quote from Eusebio Unzue, Caisse d'Epargne's directeur sportif, "Finally, Unzue stressed that, "350 controls have taken place in the Tour, and only Landis' one was positive."

This seems very high. As I understand it there are only about 4-6 riders tested per stage (80 to 120 total tests). He may be including the pre-stage blood tests which aren't really drug tests. They are just screens for elevated hematocrit and are often done to 3 or 4 teams at a time since it is a relatively easy and cheap test.

you guys are hopeless...:mad2:

and how many test were conducted on Landis....

He was tested and clean on prior stages.... Find the person who tainted the sample.... Strange that the samples were WAY out of wack.... WAY WAY out of wack... like someone DUMPED it in.... yeah and some more! and some more! Thats it! Nahhh ...
Add just a bit more....

It's no wonder people are so inclined to believe these conspiracy theories since they don't even seem to have a grasp of the basic facts. He had an elevated T/E ratio reportedly of 11 to 1, Landis' own MD has said he seen values as high as 100 to 1 in bodybuilders, normal is ~1-2 to 1. Furthermore its been reported he did not have an elevated level of testosterone (so much for your arguement someone "DUMPED" it in).

Hey, What I have not seen reported is how many negative Landis Samples were obtained earlier in the tour and after the infamous positive. If there is only one positive test in all the samples, including his, this makes a strong case that the test is in error. My phisiology would tell me that if he were to use an exogenous steroid, then I doubt it could be cleared from the system in just a few days. Toodles,Frogge.

My phisiology would tell me that if he were to use an exogenous steroid, then I doubt it could be cleared from the system in just a few days. Toodles,Frogge.

This is why the riders are reportedly using testosterone, it clears the system relatively rapidly.

You'd have to be doing something incredibly foolish if you were doping is such a way that you would knowingly turn up a positive (unless you were simply gambling on not getting tested). Consequently the name of the game is to take as much as possible without tripping a postive test. Logically for substances like EPO or Testosterone you'd take small doses daily rather than large doses every few days.

I don't know what test they are getting. but most injectable tests will go 36-48 hrs.

TRANSDERMAL TESTOSTERONE 24-36hrs. Now unless they are using something new on the market or masking agents (probaly) to get the levels down.

yes this makes my wonder. Most test steriods will stay in your systme for more than 48hrs.

Now transdermal still around 24rs or more. either they are using new ones not availabe to the public or very small amounts with various masking agents.

yes this makes my wonder. Most test steriods will stay in your systme for more than 48hrs.

Now transdermal still around 24rs or more. either they are using new ones not availabe to the public or very small amounts with various masking agents.

I don't know your source, but there's a chance you are misreading the information. For example, a transdermal patch would produce effects for 24-36 hours, not because the testosterone stays around that long, but because the patch delivers it slowly over that timeframe.

But that assumes that it's being used as directed, and being left on for 24 hours. Illicit use for recovery would only have it on for 2-3 hours. Transdermal delivery (the drug continuing to 'soak' through the skin after the patch is removed) lasts another couple of hours. That leaves the rest of the evening, the following morning, and all day of racing until the test for the testosterone to be metabolized.

I don't know what test they are getting. but most injectable tests will go 36-48 hrs.

TRANSDERMAL TESTOSTERONE 24-36hrs. Now unless they are using something new on the market or masking agents (probaly) to get the levels down.
Check the medical literature: A.B. Singh et al. "Pharmacokinetics of a transdermal testosterone system in men with end stage renal disease receiving maintenance hemodialysis and healthy hypogonadal men (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=11397836&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_DocSum), J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2001 Jun;86(6):2437-45, found that standard transdermal testosterone patches have a serum half life of 2.1 hours in healthy men, which means that 99.7% of the testosterone clears the system in 24 hours.

yes this makes my wonder. Most test steriods will stay in your systme for more than 48hrs.

Now transdermal still around 24rs or more. either they are using new ones not availabe to the public or very small amounts with various masking agents.

Synthetic steroids are much easier to detect than testosterone itself. Jaksche's doctor said you can wear a transdermal patch for 6 hours a night without showing up positive. Manzano put the time at 2 hours I believe.

Thanks!

Hey,
Call me crazy, but is there a documented study that shows there are any benifits to a short rise in testosterone over such a short period. Are these very expensive and dangerous to the testing and career placebo's?.

Hey, What I have not seen reported is how many negative Landis Samples were obtained earlier in the tour and after the infamous positive.

four before stage 17, and three after all came back negative when testing Landis. this is per the interview with USA Today this morning.

Hey,
Call me crazy, but is there a documented study that shows there are any benifits to a short rise in testosterone over such a short period. Are these very expensive and dangerous to the testing and career placebo's?.


yes, someone please chime in with what benefit a small dose of testosterone would have over night.....I will say none, zero nada.

the glove don't fit folks......

I have not read all that has been posted yet. Can anyone with the background knowledge and credentials answer these q's?
1. How are the acceptable testosterone levels determined? 4:1, 11:1? Were there extensive studies done on a range of athletes in high endurance sports? How about athletes at thier max for weeks on end? After a particularly bad day with the possibility of higher than normal physical stress? How about an individuals baseline scores/levels? I find it hard to believe every human on the planet would be close to the same in every circumstance enough to make this test the accurate judge and jury. And what are the possibilities the test is flawed or results skewed by any meds he may be taking for a necrotic hip?
How accurate are tests used to determine use of synthetics based on these questions?

Lastly, If you are going to ruin someones life and livelihood shouldnt that be done first in court and not the media??( out of simple respect) The whole thing smells like a bad Circus and lacks professionalism from the accusers, but then, maybe there is a reason for that.

"I am not a doctor but I play one on tv." Actually I am a doctor and will try to inform as best as I can in this situation given what facts are in the media then extrapolating what has occured.
You have cyclist like Basso etc that are blood dopers, this can be tested for with good results as the blood cells give a different signature on chromatographs. Fairly fool proof and this is done over an extended period.
The testosterone cheaters (i.e. Barry Bonds etc.) use this to extend training parameters in the gym over a long time. The testosterone allows one to work out harder, longer, with more weight and recover faster.
So in Landis's case he is accused of the later. Now if he was using this enhancement he would have tested all year for this and his testosterone would have been elevated.
This is not the case. His "RATIO" is off not the total . The other substance Epi-testosterone is checked and a ratio of the two is what is off here. But not because he took or has too much teststerone but because he has two little epi therefore the high ratio of 11:1 or whatever. If he was using testosterone and it was to benefit him he needed it for more than one day. Therefore to be of aid to him he would have tested positive all 8 tests he took including three blood tests during the tour. especially the day or two after the supposed positive day.
Why would anyone take it for one day, there is no benefit, it is not speed or crack, it could not have aided him in any way for one day.
This is a guy that won three tours this year and his team tests him, all were normal, yet some say this is proof he cheated because if he was abnormally high in testosterone the otheres would show it. This is correct except he is not accused of high testosterone as the media says . None of the commentators did any research.
NOw he may be stupid and took it for one day, but I am sure he was aware it would not benefit him in a short run.
So where is the answer, I think he needs to get an endocrinologist and explain the above. Asssuming the facts at hand he either:
1, took testosterone and more than one test should be positive.
2. He took nothing and they should all be negative.

Case is neither 1 or 2 is true. so this doesnot add up ;something is missing, either tampering with the sample , tampering with what he ingested, or all the other tests missed a flaming doper! I do not know but I am in his corner for now, I do not think
he is an idiot. I am taking his demeanor and what others think of him, but I do not have an answer, but neither does anyone else. The lab in question tryed this with Lance and they like to leak to E'quipe, not a reputable outfit. Hope it is resolved this depressed me.

"350 controls have taken place in the Tour, and only Landis' one was positive."

Hmmm? Kinda' seems strane that this is the case where we know everyone dopes. Makes one wonder about the tests themselves.

The lab in question tryed this with Lance and they like to leak to E'quipe, not a reputable outfit.

What did they try with Lance?

[QUOTE=Live Steam
Makes one wonder about the tests themselves.[/QUOTE]

You mean the extensive list of caught dopers who never tested positive didn't make you suspect that the tests aren't very sensitive?

Well, the wonderful 'reporters' did it again today...
----------------------------------------
Mon Aug 7, 9:14 AM ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Embattled Tour de France winner Floyd Landis vowed on Monday to clear his name.

Samples taken from Landis during last month's Tour revealed excessive amounts of the male sex hormone testosterone and the American faces being stripped of victory and a two-year ban.
--------------------------------------------
Lovely. No wonder so many people are confused.

My take is a little different in that, though I don't really believe in a conspiracy, I wonder if the tests are to blame for the positive reading? What I mean is, if, as we all assume, many were and still are doping in one form or another, then why aren't more being caught? If they miss many then the test itself is and should be considered unreliable even in a positive.

As for the conspiracy part, I don't believe the French organizers were ready to plant evidence, but once there was doubt about another American who did win, they were ready to pounce and not give the person a chance. They acted, including WADA and otherts, in a very inappropriate manner. Makes one wonder if this type of finding was massaged even in a subliminal/subconscious manner.

yes, someone please chime in with what benefit a small dose of testosterone would have over night.....I will say none, zero nada.

the glove don't fit folks......

Maybe nothing, but if someone told you that it would help, and you just had a very bad day, the day before, and someone told you that you wouldn't caught, you might, might just do it. Landis is an athlete, and if someone told him (maybe say a shady doctor) that he would recover better if he slapped this patch on his balls, and to keep it on for 4 hours, and you wouldn't get caught, maybe he might do it, and maybe he fell asleep with it on, and maybe, and maybe...

I am sick of this whole conspiracy bit. That's what really doesn't fit. Why would someone want to take down someone who is regarded as a good rider, a hard worker, and a nice guy... I seem to remember lots of people talking about how Hamilton was set up as well, and well, we know how that all fell out don't we? It was supposed to be have been a conspiracy with him as well, because gosh darn it, he was so nice, there was no way he would dope.

Folks, pull yo' heads out your asses please. Doping is, and was, and will be rampant in pro cycling. I've seen it first hand on a local level in the Southeast, and guess what? The guys who got caught down here, both of whom I know, had just as many excuses as Landis, and then some. I am not surpised when anyone gets busted anymore. It could be anyone. Look at the stuff pending on Ullrich. Also someone who has been known to be clean and such, and a respectful guy, and a rider who is well liked. From the documents they've been uncovering in Puerto, he may have been the dirtiest one out there, but nobody would have ever known...

Maybe nothing, but if someone told you that it would help, and you just had a very bad day, the day before, and someone told you that you wouldn't caught, you might, might just do it. Landis is an athlete, and if someone told him (maybe say a shady doctor) that he would recover better if he slapped this patch on his balls, and to keep it on for 4 hours, and you wouldn't get caught, maybe he might do it, and maybe he fell asleep with it on, and maybe, and maybe...



Agree mostly but who says a hit of testosterone is going to be beneficial over night. Show me how that would work. I say BS, no way no how......

Check the medical literature: A.B. Singh et al. "Pharmacokinetics of a transdermal testosterone system in men with end stage renal disease receiving maintenance hemodialysis and healthy hypogonadal men, J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2001 Jun;86(6):2437-45, found that standard transdermal testosterone patches have a serum half life of 2.1 hours in healthy men, which means that 99.7% of the testosterone clears the system in 24 hours.

I havent read the study you are quoting from but from what you are saying about it they found the half life of Testosterone in blood to be 2.1 hours. Since the test in question is a urine test would the half life in urine be different?

Agree mostly but who says a hit of testosterone is going to be beneficial over night.

Manzano says so. Jaksche's doctor said so.

"My take is a little different in that, though I don't really believe in a conspiracy, I wonder if the tests are to blame for the positive reading?"

If the test is susceptable to false positives then why do so few fail the T/E test? The # of positives / # of tests ratio would set the maximum false positive rate of the test assuming every positive is false.


"What I mean is, if, as we all assume, many were and still are doping in one form or another, then why aren't more being caught?"

Because the dopers are smart enough to devise strategies that beat the tests and the tests set the bar relatively high to declare a positive. The more sensitive the test is to detecting doping the higher the false positive rate. They don't want false positives so they make the test less sensitive.

"If they miss many then the test itself is and should be considered unreliable even in a positive."

Reliability of a scientific test refers to it's repeatability. In this case, if everytime they tested Floyd's sample it came back with an 11/1 ratio of T/E this would be a very reliable test. This does not necessarily mean it's is a valid test. You could have a scale that consistently weighed you 10 lbs heavier than you actually were. It would be highly reliable yet not a valid (accurate) measure.

"As for the conspiracy part"

I think the only conspiracy that makes sense is someone spiking food/drink/massage cream, whatever before the actual dope test. They seem to have pretty stringent protocols in place these days to prevent actualy tampering with the dope test.

Synthetic steroids are much easier to detect than testosterone itself. Jaksche's doctor said you can wear a transdermal patch for 6 hours a night without showing up positive. Manzano put the time at 2 hours I believe.

And I say Landis simply forgot to set his alarm to wake up in time to avoid a positive. It doesn't take a bone head to do that, right?

Thanks for the Readers Digest version, your post helped with what little I know about steroids & hormones.

"I am not a doctor but I play one on tv." Actually I am a doctor and will try to inform as best as I can in this situation given what facts are in the media then extrapolating what has occured.
You have cyclist like Basso etc that are blood dopers, this can be tested for with good results as the blood cells give a different signature on chromatographs. Fairly fool proof and this is done over an extended period.
The testosterone cheaters (i.e. Barry Bonds etc.) use this to extend training parameters in the gym over a long time. The testosterone allows one to work out harder, longer, with more weight and recover faster.
So in Landis's case he is accused of the later. Now if he was using this enhancement he would have tested all year for this and his testosterone would have been elevated.
This is not the case. His "RATIO" is off not the total . The other substance Epi-testosterone is checked and a ratio of the two is what is off here. But not because he took or has too much teststerone but because he has two little epi therefore the high ratio of 11:1 or whatever. If he was using testosterone and it was to benefit him he needed it for more than one day. Therefore to be of aid to him he would have tested positive all 8 tests he took including three blood tests during the tour. especially the day or two after the supposed positive day.
Why would anyone take it for one day, there is no benefit, it is not speed or crack, it could not have aided him in any way for one day.
This is a guy that won three tours this year and his team tests him, all were normal, yet some say this is proof he cheated because if he was abnormally high in testosterone the otheres would show it. This is correct except he is not accused of high testosterone as the media says . None of the commentators did any research.
NOw he may be stupid and took it for one day, but I am sure he was aware it would not benefit him in a short run.
So where is the answer, I think he needs to get an endocrinologist and explain the above. Asssuming the facts at hand he either:
1, took testosterone and more than one test should be positive.
2. He took nothing and they should all be negative.

Case is neither 1 or 2 is true. so this doesnot add up ;something is missing, either tampering with the sample , tampering with what he ingested, or all the other tests missed a flaming doper! I do not know but I am in his corner for now, I do not think
he is an idiot. I am taking his demeanor and what others think of him, but I do not have an answer, but neither does anyone else. The lab in question tryed this with Lance and they like to leak to E'quipe, not a reputable outfit. Hope it is resolved this depressed me.

Now if he was using this enhancement he would have tested all year for this and his testosterone would have been elevated. This is not the case. His "RATIO" is off not the total . The other substance Epi-testosterone is checked and a ratio of the two is what is off here. But not because he took or has too much teststerone but because he has two little epi therefore the high ratio of 11:1 or whatever.
It's well accepted that raw testosterone levels are not a good way to detect doping because of testosterone's extremely short half-life. Exogenous testosterone suppresses the body's own production of endogenous testosterone and epitestosterone so the T/E ratio provides a much more reliable measure of doping.

You are correct that T/E ratios should be elevated all season if he's taking testostoerone throughout the season, but remember that in order to avoid false-positives the threshold for testing positive is set at four times the normal person's level. This means that Floyd could easily have been taking enough testosterone to keep his T/E levels at 3.5 times the normal athlete's without getting caught. Then if he screws up the night he bonks and takes too much testosterone or perhaps his dehydration causes his body to overreact to his regular dose and then instead of a 3.5:1 ratio he ends up with an 11:1 ratio.

It would be interesting, therefore, to see what Floyd's negative tests looked like. Were they near the normal 1:1 ratio or pushing the 4:1 envelope?

Remember that doping tests only catch a small fraction of the dopers. Basso, Ullrich, and the other Operacion Puerto dopers managed to do blood doping, hormones, etc. and pass dozens of doping tests with flying colors. Heras took EPO all season in 2005 and wasn't caught until late in the Vuelta. With most dopers, they try to keep their doping a little below the level where WADA will cry foul. They get away with it for years and then get caught when one time they are careless or unlucky and their blood or urine levels cross the line.