Scinetific american article about isitope testing and Landis
#1
raodmaster shaman
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: G-ville
Posts: 1,431
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Scinetific american article about isitope testing and Landis
in the november scientific american, there is a good article about the isitope test that is used to show if an athlete is using synthetic compounds.
it explains that all the food we eat (since it was all recently other living organisms) has a pretty similar and narow ratio of carbon 12 to carbon 13. once your body digests that food and starts turning it into bilogical compounds (fats, cells, hormones, whatever) they will ALL have the same ratio.
syntheticly produced hormones have different ratios (less carbon 13 IIRC) than organically produced hormones because the chemistry and devices used to make them "sort out" the carbon 13 in ways that your body doesnt.
so in the test they look at the carbon 12/13 ratio of several compounds in your urine. if one (in floyd's case testosterone) has a different ratio than all the others (like cholesteral and such that no one would dope for), its a smoking gun that that compound was synthetically derived. it seems pretty air tight.
the expert they interveiwed did give one possible out for landis. he said that his only chance would be to argue that the synthetic cortisone he injected was some how metabilized and turned into a disproportionate amout of testosterone compared to the other compounds look at in the test, which could make floyd's natural testosterone look synthetic. but he didnt seem to put much faith in that possiblity.
ill try to find a link, but it was an intersting read, give it a look if you see it on the news stand.
it explains that all the food we eat (since it was all recently other living organisms) has a pretty similar and narow ratio of carbon 12 to carbon 13. once your body digests that food and starts turning it into bilogical compounds (fats, cells, hormones, whatever) they will ALL have the same ratio.
syntheticly produced hormones have different ratios (less carbon 13 IIRC) than organically produced hormones because the chemistry and devices used to make them "sort out" the carbon 13 in ways that your body doesnt.
so in the test they look at the carbon 12/13 ratio of several compounds in your urine. if one (in floyd's case testosterone) has a different ratio than all the others (like cholesteral and such that no one would dope for), its a smoking gun that that compound was synthetically derived. it seems pretty air tight.
the expert they interveiwed did give one possible out for landis. he said that his only chance would be to argue that the synthetic cortisone he injected was some how metabilized and turned into a disproportionate amout of testosterone compared to the other compounds look at in the test, which could make floyd's natural testosterone look synthetic. but he didnt seem to put much faith in that possiblity.
ill try to find a link, but it was an intersting read, give it a look if you see it on the news stand.
#2
Shut Up and Ride
Join Date: May 2005
Location: PA (Worst roads in existence)
Posts: 1,969
Bikes: 05 Cannondale Six 13 (Record 2008 with DT rr 1.1 rims, WI H2 Hubs and CX-ray spokes), OLMO Antares (Micx of 06 Record and Chorus), 1988 Tunturri, 1980's Fuji, 1970's Crescent (Sweeden)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Thanks for the heads up. I believe my one Prof. gets that mag. and I will see if I can get a copy of the article.
#3
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,728
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Only thing is, I think only 1 "expert" in 10 would say that taking testosterone the day of an athletic event would be a performance enhancing activity . . . so what would be the point. It makes more sense to believe that the testers need to be tested, not the testees !
#4
raodmaster shaman
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: G-ville
Posts: 1,431
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
weather or not it helped him is a moot point. if he broke the rules is all that matters.
i do agree that the lab should be scrutinized though. considering how much it probobly hacked off the french that another american won their race, sabotage shouldnt be ruled out, and i honestly think its floyds best deffense at this point. if nothing else they appear to have a history of leaking results.
but assuming the urine was his and untampered with, its pretty hard to make any excuses IMO.
i do agree that the lab should be scrutinized though. considering how much it probobly hacked off the french that another american won their race, sabotage shouldnt be ruled out, and i honestly think its floyds best deffense at this point. if nothing else they appear to have a history of leaking results.
but assuming the urine was his and untampered with, its pretty hard to make any excuses IMO.
#5
Mooninite
Join Date: May 2006
Location: South of Heaven
Posts: 3,186
Bikes: $53 Walmart Special
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
1 Post
Originally Posted by wagathon
Only thing is, I think only 1 "expert" in 10 would say that taking testosterone the day of an athletic event would be a performance enhancing activity . . . so what would be the point. It makes more sense to believe that the testers need to be tested, not the testees !
The "word on the street" is that he didn't purposely take testosterone during that race. But rather he blood-doped using a batch of blood that was tainted from testosterone use earlier in the season.
Not that anyone can prove that btw.
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
Originally Posted by shakeNbake
The "word on the street" is that he didn't purposely take testosterone during that race. But rather he blood-doped using a batch of blood that was tainted from testosterone use earlier in the season.
Not that anyone can prove that btw.
Not that anyone can prove that btw.
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Southern Maine
Posts: 8,942
Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12198 Post(s)
Liked 1,499 Times
in
1,110 Posts
Something is rotten in Denmark, I mean France. No one would throw away their career on something guaranteed to be found and equally guaranteed to
be of no immediate benefit.
be of no immediate benefit.
#8
Mooninite
Join Date: May 2006
Location: South of Heaven
Posts: 3,186
Bikes: $53 Walmart Special
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
1 Post
Originally Posted by Keith99
The street is an idiot. His ratio was about 11 to 1. Way out of line. If one or even 2 units of blood accounted for that those units must have been at 40 to 1 or more. Same kind of thing for any other ratio based test, which is what all the tests in question are. No way you could get that through blood doping.
#9
Professional Fuss-Budget
I've read at least one similar article from this summer. The isotope test is very strong; it's nowhere near as interpretive as, say, the EPO test.
I concur the lab should be held to a high standard of professionalism. The lab's work might turn out to be sloppy (that's Landis & co's assertion), but even they are not arguing that the samples are not Landis'. So I think he's in big trouble.
The idea that someone spiked Landis' sample is absurd. Everyone, including the French and the other racers, were overwhelmed and overjoyed by what seemed to be an incredible comeback. The amounts required to spike a sample without going way off the scale are excruciatingly precise. And why spike with testosterone, instead of something more obvious like EPO or amphetamines?
If Landis is lucky, his hip will be in shape to ride pro in 2008 but no one knows if he'll reach his current level again. And if he was doping, it was probably just routine for him and he thought the risks were minimal or manageable. Landis literally had nothing to lose. He knew it, his peers know it, his team knows it, and now you know it.
If he did dope, he'd be smart to pull a David Millar: fess up right now, take a 2-year ban, express contrition and get back to racing. Somehow I don't see that happening.
I concur the lab should be held to a high standard of professionalism. The lab's work might turn out to be sloppy (that's Landis & co's assertion), but even they are not arguing that the samples are not Landis'. So I think he's in big trouble.
The idea that someone spiked Landis' sample is absurd. Everyone, including the French and the other racers, were overwhelmed and overjoyed by what seemed to be an incredible comeback. The amounts required to spike a sample without going way off the scale are excruciatingly precise. And why spike with testosterone, instead of something more obvious like EPO or amphetamines?
If Landis is lucky, his hip will be in shape to ride pro in 2008 but no one knows if he'll reach his current level again. And if he was doping, it was probably just routine for him and he thought the risks were minimal or manageable. Landis literally had nothing to lose. He knew it, his peers know it, his team knows it, and now you know it.
If he did dope, he'd be smart to pull a David Millar: fess up right now, take a 2-year ban, express contrition and get back to racing. Somehow I don't see that happening.
#10
Wher'd u Get That Jacket?
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Somewhere in the Tubes
Posts: 1,317
Bikes: Calfee Dragonfly, Lemond Poprad, Airborne Manhatten Project, Calfee Luna Fixie
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Keith99
The street is an idiot. His ratio was about 11 to 1.
#11
Dirt-riding heretic
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Gig Harbor, WA
Posts: 17,413
Bikes: Lynskey R230/Red, Blue Triad SL/Red, Cannondale Scalpel 3/X9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
7 Posts
Originally Posted by Keith99
The street is an idiot. His ratio was about 11 to 1. Way out of line. If one or even 2 units of blood accounted for that those units must have been at 40 to 1 or more. Same kind of thing for any other ratio based test, which is what all the tests in question are. No way you could get that through blood doping.
The "ratio" test isn't just about dilution. As the body sees testosterone it degrades it to epitestosterone, so the ratio is constantly changing. The ratio isn't talking about concentration. You could have an 11:1 T:E ratio with a testosterone level of 400 or 1000. It all depends on the other level.
__________________
"Unless he was racing there was no way he could match my speed."
"Unless he was racing there was no way he could match my speed."
#12
CAT 2 wanna be
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Proctoville OH / Huntington WV
Posts: 441
Bikes: 2011 Fuji SL1.0
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
You need to check out the Daily Peloton Forums before we start preparing the rope to hang Floyd. There are a few very intelligent people over there detailing the testing process. They raise many interesting questions about Floyd's results.
Last edited by PolishPostal; 10-31-06 at 09:24 PM.
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: In the middle of horse country, in The Garden State
Posts: 3,159
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
And then wasn't there something about how the lab's definition of a "positive" test was under suspicion too?
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Someplace trying to figure it out
Posts: 10,664
Bikes: Cannondale EVO, CAAD9, Giant cross bike.
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
6 Posts
Originally Posted by PolishPostal
You need to check out the Daily Peloton Forums before we start preparing the rope to hang Floyd. There are a few very intelligent people over there detailing the testing process. They raise many interesting questions about Floyd's results.
BTW...Landis posts there. Really.
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
Originally Posted by DrPete
Huh? Being that epitestosterone is a degradation product of testosterone I'd have to think it would totally depend on when the blood was drawn with respect to the last testosterone dose. As to the pharmacokinetics of testosterone in stored blood, I'll leave that to someone who knows.
The "ratio" test isn't just about dilution. As the body sees testosterone it degrades it to epitestosterone, so the ratio is constantly changing. The ratio isn't talking about concentration. You could have an 11:1 T:E ratio with a testosterone level of 400 or 1000. It all depends on the other level.
The "ratio" test isn't just about dilution. As the body sees testosterone it degrades it to epitestosterone, so the ratio is constantly changing. The ratio isn't talking about concentration. You could have an 11:1 T:E ratio with a testosterone level of 400 or 1000. It all depends on the other level.
So again for anything except a yes/no type test the amount or ratio in any transfused blood would have had to be off the charts to cause a positive test result.
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
The WADA testing rules ban the use of "white out" on the lab's testing records. Yet, when Floyd's lawyer was allowed to look at HIS testing data, it was clear that someone at the lab had "whited out" the original information, and added new data.
The "Scientific American" is dealing with theory. In "real life", the results of a lab test are no better than the ethics and professionalism of the lab and its personnel. The lab that released Floyd's results to the press WEEKS before allowing Floyd's lawyers access to the actual test data has repeatedly shown that no one on its staff, from the director on done has a clue as to "ethics" or "professionalism".
We had a similar problem here in Houston with the police lab. Both with DNA tests used in murder cases and sexual assault cases and in intoxilizer exams used in DWI cases, the results were consistently wrong. And, they were always "wrong" in favor of the prosecutor and "wrong" against the person that was arrested and charged.
The Houston police lab says the mistakes were simply the result of a few poorly trained and poorly supervised lab techs. Yet, if the mistakes were "random", why were the mistakes ALWAYS in favor of the accuser?
The "Scientific American" is dealing with theory. In "real life", the results of a lab test are no better than the ethics and professionalism of the lab and its personnel. The lab that released Floyd's results to the press WEEKS before allowing Floyd's lawyers access to the actual test data has repeatedly shown that no one on its staff, from the director on done has a clue as to "ethics" or "professionalism".
We had a similar problem here in Houston with the police lab. Both with DNA tests used in murder cases and sexual assault cases and in intoxilizer exams used in DWI cases, the results were consistently wrong. And, they were always "wrong" in favor of the prosecutor and "wrong" against the person that was arrested and charged.
The Houston police lab says the mistakes were simply the result of a few poorly trained and poorly supervised lab techs. Yet, if the mistakes were "random", why were the mistakes ALWAYS in favor of the accuser?
#18
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,728
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Don't forget the 1999 incident with Lance . . . it was leaked that LA's test data showed positive for a banned substance. Only the French press ran with the accusations.
LA's data showed that the measure was just 0.2. That compares to the allowable amount of the substance which was 6.0. For that reason, it was against the rules for LA's 0.2 level to even be be released. Of course, it was not possible to show that a hundred other cyclists had tested higher--legally higher.
LA was asked if he had taken anything and he said he had not because he had not taken pills or received shots. The fact is, he had used a cortisone cream on saddlesores. However, this is perfectly permissible for any rider, and this fact had even been disclosed beforehand.
The takeaway message is that the 0.2 level should not have been leaked; the 0.2 was well below the 6.0 allowable level which was the point where the data is deemed to show a possible use of a banned substance; the French press will print the b.s. (they kept with the story because LA said he had not used anything so he should have measured 0.0 not 0.2).
In his press conference, LA was very generous to the French press in saying that he did not believe that the French press was just out to get him. Rather, LA said he thought they were really out to get the sport. He noted that there were 1,500 French reporters there that had never followed the sport before and were only there to find a story about drugs. But there was no drug story. It was a story about skin cream.
LA's data showed that the measure was just 0.2. That compares to the allowable amount of the substance which was 6.0. For that reason, it was against the rules for LA's 0.2 level to even be be released. Of course, it was not possible to show that a hundred other cyclists had tested higher--legally higher.
LA was asked if he had taken anything and he said he had not because he had not taken pills or received shots. The fact is, he had used a cortisone cream on saddlesores. However, this is perfectly permissible for any rider, and this fact had even been disclosed beforehand.
The takeaway message is that the 0.2 level should not have been leaked; the 0.2 was well below the 6.0 allowable level which was the point where the data is deemed to show a possible use of a banned substance; the French press will print the b.s. (they kept with the story because LA said he had not used anything so he should have measured 0.0 not 0.2).
In his press conference, LA was very generous to the French press in saying that he did not believe that the French press was just out to get him. Rather, LA said he thought they were really out to get the sport. He noted that there were 1,500 French reporters there that had never followed the sport before and were only there to find a story about drugs. But there was no drug story. It was a story about skin cream.
Last edited by wagathon; 11-01-06 at 01:53 PM.
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 76
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Pays-Bas
Posts: 181
Bikes: Koga Kimera Team Edition (2011) & TREK 5200 US Postal (2004)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
OK Yankees, hold your horses.
I don't have any problems about all the statements and possible facts made by some of you.
And therefore I respect everyone opinion on this topic although I believe most of it is bull****.
But guys please take your self a little bit more serious!
Stop blaming this Floyd saga on the French press.
I know they are a bunch of incompetent snckers which when there is a change will try to bring down every non-French athletic.
If you are well informed by your press as the French are by theirs the name Richard Virenque and the year 1998 must ring a bell.
He is the only one of the doped group of 98 who won several prizes in the TDF after he was accused and pleated guilty.
What I mean to say is that you both should get hold of better news sources and not always believe what your news source is telling you.
Use the internet and explore “the world”
I don't have any problems about all the statements and possible facts made by some of you.
And therefore I respect everyone opinion on this topic although I believe most of it is bull****.
But guys please take your self a little bit more serious!
Stop blaming this Floyd saga on the French press.
I know they are a bunch of incompetent snckers which when there is a change will try to bring down every non-French athletic.
If you are well informed by your press as the French are by theirs the name Richard Virenque and the year 1998 must ring a bell.
He is the only one of the doped group of 98 who won several prizes in the TDF after he was accused and pleated guilty.
What I mean to say is that you both should get hold of better news sources and not always believe what your news source is telling you.
Use the internet and explore “the world”
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Someplace trying to figure it out
Posts: 10,664
Bikes: Cannondale EVO, CAAD9, Giant cross bike.
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
6 Posts
I suggest you folks go the the Daily Peloton, go to the new forums and lurk and read a thread in the doping section called "Floyd's test digested (for dummies)" by a poster called "rational head"...not only will you get some gret info, you will also get some insight into what happens at more elite levels with testing. How it's all done.
Here's a link directly to the thread. There's a lot there, but it's worth reading and factual. No press hype by people that do not understand.
Here's a link directly to the thread. There's a lot there, but it's worth reading and factual. No press hype by people that do not understand.
Last edited by roadwarrior; 11-02-06 at 05:06 AM.
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Rural Missouri - mostly central and southeastern
Posts: 3,014
Bikes: 2003 LeMond -various other junk bikes
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 45 Times
in
36 Posts
The "science" is pretty much meaningless as evidence for a drug conviction. Finding synthetic substances in a cyclist's samples does not prove use of a banned substance. Case dismissed........
If the UCI, [WADA] wants to prosecute cyclists based on current testing protocols, then they had better figure out how to implement a "no exception" clause regarding all synthetic substances.
If the UCI, [WADA] wants to prosecute cyclists based on current testing protocols, then they had better figure out how to implement a "no exception" clause regarding all synthetic substances.
#23
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,728
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
You need blind testing by a non-French lab staffed by people with patient-type medical ethics that know what "private" and "confidential" means. The way it is now, it's just irresponsible hammering of certain riders, by media with certain animosities, based on knowlingly working with a corrupt testing establishment, publishing inferences and making accusations that just as easily may be based only on corrupted data. The French officials should be tested too. And test samples should be run through the mix to check the credibility of the system.
Last edited by wagathon; 11-02-06 at 04:07 PM.
#24
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: In the middle of horse country, in The Garden State
Posts: 3,159
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by wagathon
You need blind testing by a non-French lab staffed by people with patient-type medical ethics that know what "private" and "confidential" means. The way it is now, it's just irresponsible hammering of certain riders, by media with certain animosities, based on knowlingly working with a corrupt testing establishment, publishing inferences and making accusations that just as easily may be based only on corrupted data. The French officials should be tested too. And test samples should be run through the mix to check the credibility of the system.
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
Originally Posted by wagathon
You need blind testing by a non-French lab staffed by people with patient-type medical ethics that know what "private" and "confidential" means. The way it is now, it's just irresponsible hammering of certain riders, by media with certain animosities, based on knowlingly working with a corrupt testing establishment, publishing inferences and making accusations that just as easily may be based only on corrupted data. The French officials should be tested too. And test samples should be run through the mix to check the credibility of the system.
And in this case there is absolutely no issue at all of a conflict of interest, at least not against Landis. The riders who will benefit are not French and the Tour which is quite clearly French will be hurt badly if the winner doped. (Of course they would be hurt even worse if he doped and they turned a blind eye to it).