"The 33"-Road Bike Racing - DNA Testing Finally

This I hope will begin the process where cycling can finally clean up the sport. However, I am completely ignorant of the science behind how DNA can catch doping or EPO, steroid use etc... Can someone with a more qualified background shed some light as to how DNA testing will mitigate the risk of cheating?


Edited by Sue George

ProTour teams commit to DNA testing option
The UCI announced Wednesday that all 20 ProTour teams and all but a few of those teams' riders will participate in DNA profiling in an effort to address doping allegations. UCI President Pat McQuaid told the Associated Press (AP) that the agreement "gives us an important tool to work with".

On Tuesday it was revealed that DNA in a saliva sample from 1997 Tour de France winner Jan Ullrich was matched with that in blood bags labelled with the names "Jan," "number 1" or "Hijo Rudicio" ('son of Rudy') seized in the Operación Puerto investigation. Despite the recent evidence, Ullrich and his attorneys have maintained his innocence, denying any involvement in a blood doping program.

Per the agreement, riders would not put their DNA in a bank; instead they commit to do so if involved in a doping investigation that requires such evidence. In theory, the DNA information could enable riders to prove their innocence.

Speaking about the new measures, Gerrit Middag, general manager of the International Professional Cycling Teams (IPCT), told the AP, "It gives the right signal. In the long term, it will prove its value."

The half-dozen riders who have not committed to DNA profiling remain anonymous and currently do not face an official deadline to adhere to the new measures. However, at the launch of its new anti-doping initiative in March, the UCI announced that 100% of ProTour riders would commit to DNA testing, although it remains to be seen whether the new measures can be backdated to force ProTour riders implicated in Operación Puerto to provide DNA samples.

Although the Spanish courts have shelved the investigation, McQuaid has said the UCI will continue to address the Operación Puerto case. "We want to get all the truth out," he said."

I think the idea behind it is this:
(1) Riders have their DNA put on file or more likely just tested at a certain point
(2) If a urine or blood sample comes up positive for a banned substances, then the sample is tested.
(3) If the test in (2) matches the DNA from a particular rider from (1), then that person is considered "caught".


It's not that the DNA testing detects dopants. It doesn't. The idea is to match a particular sample to a particular rider without having to worry about figuring out whether a lab labeled samples properly and had the right code #'s for the right rider - think of the french lab that was involved with the Landis thing. What a mess that was. With DNA a lot less is left to doubt or speculation.

DNA testing is an extremely powerful tool- not only for the enforcement of laws but for the profiling of traits. I would be extremely nervous to have a private entity "hold" a typed sample and am therefore against the practice. Private bodies (such as WADA or the UCI) don't have sovereignty over themselves and can be forced by various sovereign nations (many with poor protections for people) to hand over the data for nefarious purposes. Just because we mostly live in fairly stable and fair countries doesn't mean the world is that way.

Think of what a boon cloning Vino would be to the economy of various poor country X.

There are other reasons that such a database should not be made that certainly outweigh the importance of cycling in the grand scheme of things.

Personally I feel that until WADA and the UCI demand the labs that do the testing adhere to protocol and procedure then all the testing in the world is meaningless. If we can't trust the results (and I don't) then DNA or any other type of testing has no validity. My suggestion would be that the riders give two sets of A and B samples and those samples are sent to two different labs and tested simultaneously.

DNA testing is an extremely powerful tool- not only for the enforcement of laws but for the profiling of traits. I would be extremely nervous to have a private entity "hold" a typed sample and am therefore against the practice. Private bodies (such as WADA or the UCI) don't have sovereignty over themselves and can be forced by various sovereign nations (many with poor protections for people) to hand over the data for nefarious purposes. Just because we mostly live in fairly stable and fair countries doesn't mean the world is that way.

Think of what a boon cloning Vino would be to the economy of various poor country X.

There are other reasons that such a database should not be made that certainly outweigh the importance of cycling in the grand scheme of things.

Well said!!!

This I hope will begin the process where cycling can finally clean up the sport.If by "clean up," you mean "destroy," then you might be right.

This I hope will begin the process where cycling can finally clean up the sport. However, I am completely ignorant of the science behind how DNA can catch doping or EPO, steroid use etc... Can someone with a more qualified background shed some light as to how DNA testing will mitigate the risk of cheating?


DNA testing can only be used to compare two blood samples and definitively answer if the blood is from the same source, it can only work to catch blood doping, which is now popular after synthetic EPO is now detectable. It can also be used to detect heterologous blood doping, i.e. Hamilton's case.

It will not help with drugs, hormones, etc. It will not help with rogue EPO -only the hemocrit test will help with this.

I wish people would stop posting the abuse of DNA testing scenarios, these scenarios would be extremely expensive and time consuming, and are already illegal in most of the world, including US and Europe, due to the use of DNA testing in crimes and diseases.

I thought this thread was about Anna Nicole Smith, Dannielynn and Howard K Stern. . .

Personally I feel that until WADA and the UCI demand the labs that do the testing adhere to protocol and procedure then all the testing in the world is meaningless. If we can't trust the results (and I don't) then DNA or any other type of testing has no validity. My suggestion would be that the riders give two sets of A and B samples and those samples are sent to two different labs and tested simultaneously.

+1

About time. I'm done with professional cycling. If the Basso bomb drops, you'll see sponsors start to flee for the exits en masse.

PedalMasher:

I agree. But not just Basso. Anyone of the top riders. Basso, Bettini, Boonen.

This is why all 20 teams have agreed and their riders. Because they all see the writing on the wall. Unlike advertising at a ball game (say Budwieser adds in Left field), no one associates a sponsor with a team quite like cycling. Even in NASCAR, the racers have more of the focus than the sponsor. In cycling, the Sponsors really take more or a prominent role.

However - it would be terrible for cycling. So I do not wish this to happen. The interest in cycling in the US is rising still. The more cyclists, the better off we are as cyclists. It will mean more of a local focus on bike paths, bike lanes, and, hopefully, the more people who drive cars aware of the cyclists on the road.

If by "clean up," you mean "destroy," then you might be right.

T-Mobile and CSC now have the strictest anti-doping controls in any sport. The problem is that there are now dirty and clean teams, but leaving it the way it was would kill the sport.

PedalMasher:

I agree. But not just Basso. Anyone of the top riders. Basso, Bettini, Boonen.



Bettini says he will quit before giving a DNA sample. He could prove he's clean, or maybe he knows something we don't yet.

About time. I'm done with professional cycling. If the Basso bomb drops, you'll see sponsors start to flee for the exits en masse.

No, they won't, they'll just impose an internal control mechanism independent of the directeurs and soigneurs, like T-mobile and CSC did.

no one is going to shy away from an audience of one billion in July.

Well - way to go Bettini. That will quell the doubters. What an ahole

Bettini says he will quit before giving a DNA sample. He could prove he's clean, or maybe he knows something we don't yet.

I can understand why some people wouldn't want to submit their DNA. There is so much more that people can do with DNA results besides just match people to a sample of tainted blood. There are huge ethical considerations because your DNA can say a lot about who you are or what you might be predisposed to. In fact, I think there are a lot of people who are considering genetic testing but who are afraid to do so because if insurance companies find out the results then it may affect their ability to get insurance. Anyways, I wouldn't want my DNA on file especially not with organizations that are so disorganized and subject to the problems mentioned in previous posts.

Snichlefritz:

I agree to some extent. But in this case, I think UCI and the ASO need to essentially tell the riders

"Look - we understand there are privacy concerns. But quite frankly, the sport will not survive another round of disqualifications, accusations and continued doubt within the public about cheating. So if you are really concerned about your privacy, we understand, and you can drop out now and go do something else. Bettini, I see your hand is raised? What - you have little education and really no other skills to provide the world at all except cycling? Hmmmm, well - sounds like your, oh what is the term, sh*t out of luck then. Better give us your blood and hair."

For those of you who support the idea that all the riders should hand over DNA samples let me ask you this. Would you hand over a DNA sample, or any sample, be it blood or urine, to an organization that does not follow it's simplest of protocols? One that does not keep the chain of custody in tact? One that does not follow the rules of anonymity? One that leaks to the press your results before you even have a hearing? Why in Gods name should these riders trust WADA and the UCI with this information when these two organizations have shown time and again to disregard their own rules? Remember you have no recourse to have you samples tested by anyone else. You have no way to defend yourself but to claim innocence. So yeah you can call Bettini an a-hole for not giving a sample...but ask yourself if you were in his shoes would you?

DNA testing of athletes is can of worms that shouldn't be opened.

I can understand why some people wouldn't want to submit their DNA. There is so much more that people can do with DNA results besides just match people to a sample of tainted blood. There are huge ethical considerations because your DNA can say a lot about who you are or what you might be predisposed to. In fact, I think there are a lot of people who are considering genetic testing but who are afraid to do so because if insurance companies find out the results then it may affect their ability to get insurance. Anyways, I wouldn't want my DNA on file especially not with organizations that are so disorganized and subject to the problems mentioned in previous posts.

First, to do a genome screen that you are suggesting would cost $200,000 a person and 6 months or more. Second, there are already laws that prohibit the use of DNA or any medical testing for reasons you suggest, 5 years in jail. My lab works with DNA samples, if anyone does anything other than what was approved by the donors, I could be sued and thrown in jail. This is law since 2000. There cannot be a "can of worms". They don't even need the whole DNA, they only need a small PCR-amplified piece to identify it as unique DNA sequence.

Thirdly, the big-brother scenario that people like to fantasize about could have been easily done to date with a large variety of simple medical tests, but has never happened. And finally, the US is the only country in the western world that does not require universal health care, so most riders are unaffected, even if someone did steal the DNA and do some work in a underground lab.

This is all a bullsh+t smokescreen, with DNA testing, they could match blood bags, they could also identify who used what needles often found around hotels at bike races, and the riders know this.

What bugs me is that the current cycling stars don't want an even playing field, they like the way it is. Two notable exceptions are Eric Zabel and Jens voigt, who have offered their DNA.

For those of you who support the idea that all the riders should hand over DNA samples let me ask you this. Would you hand over a DNA sample, or any sample, be it blood or urine, to an organization that does not follow it's simplest of protocols? One that does not keep the chain of custody in tact? One that does not follow the rules of anonymity? One that leaks to the press your results before you even have a hearing? Why in Gods name should these riders trust WADA and the UCI with this information when these two organizations have shown time and again to disregard their own rules? Remember you have no recourse to have you samples tested by anyone else. You have no way to defend yourself but to claim innocence. So yeah you can call Bettini an a-hole for not giving a sample...but ask yourself if you were in his shoes would you?

If I were making 500,000 euros a year+ to ride a bike, I would feel obliged to prove I was clean. These guys want it all: glory, unfair advantage, big salary and no doping standards to follow.
As for the breaking of rules in testing, you've been reading too much Landis propaganda. That guy has been spewing lies and misinformation from the minute he was caught, exactly like Hamilton, Ullrich and Basso.

If I were making 500,000 euros a year+ to ride a bike, I would feel obliged to prove I was clean. These guys want it all: glory, unfair advantage, big salary and no doping standards to follow.
As for the breaking of rules in testing, you've been reading too much Landis propaganda. That guy has been spewing lies and misinformation from the minute he was caught, exactly like Hamilton, Ullrich and Basso.

Exactly like the UCI who also says that the lab broke it's own protocols. The lab has admitted to not following it's own protocols so it's not just propaganda from accused riders. Look I agree that these guys should be tested and I'm not against using DNA. What I'm saying is since WADA can't follow it's own rules and protocols then the riders should not submit to testing until they do.

Well then the answer seems to be that the athletes submit a DNA sample, and if there is later any kind of lab mistake, no matter how small, then the athletes are presumed innocent and all investigations/punishment/suspensions are dropped.

If I were making 500,000 euros a year+ to ride a bike, I would feel obliged to prove I was clean. These guys want it all: glory, unfair advantage, big salary and no doping standards to follow.
As for the breaking of rules in testing, you've been reading too much Landis propaganda. That guy has been spewing lies and misinformation from the minute he was caught, exactly like Hamilton, Ullrich and Basso.

This would make you quite unique in the annals of professional sports, mon petit bonehead.

First, to do a genome screen that you are suggesting would cost $200,000 a person and 6 months or more. Second, there are already laws that prohibit the use of DNA or any medical testing for reasons you suggest, 5 years in jail. My lab works with DNA samples, if anyone does anything other than what was approved by the donors, I could be sued and thrown in jail. This is law since 2000. There cannot be a "can of worms". They don't even need the whole DNA, they only need a small PCR-amplified piece to identify it as unique DNA sequence.

Thirdly, the big-brother scenario that people like to fantasize about could have been easily done to date with a large variety of simple medical tests, but has never happened. And finally, the US is the only country in the western world that does not require universal health care, so most riders are unaffected, even if someone did steal the DNA and do some work in a underground lab.

This is all a bullsh+t smokescreen, with DNA testing, they could match blood bags, they could also identify who used what needles often found around hotels at bike races, and the riders know this.

What bugs me is that the current cycling stars don't want an even playing field, they like the way it is. Two notable exceptions are Eric Zabel and Jens voigt, who have offered their DNA.

You act like US law protects riders everywhere. DNA tested here may have all the protections you mention but can you speak for the protections everywhere cycling occurs? I don't know all the risks- I do know that there are many (evidenced by the passage of various laws around the globe) and I know that many places have no such laws. That makes the first part of your post irrelevant. Does this law since 2000 cover a rider in Kazakhstan?

I don't know what universal health care has to do with anything nor for the most part what US heath care has to do with European pro-cycling. I do know that the UCI and WADA have major problems following their own rules so why on earth would anyone want to give such powerful information to them?

They are not just talking about profiling DNA enough to match blood sample but also to ascertain chemical enhancements. Thats a lot more DNA analysis there than simple matching samples to blood bags. Do the teams get access to this profiling and can they use it as they see fit? Again, we cannot assume everyone is as honest or as ethical as we would hope to be. Why entertain a program so open to abuse?

This would make you quite unique in the annals of professional sports, mon petit bonehead.

OK, then all Discovery riders should just have moped engines and win every TDF from here on in, it seems that all you guys really want is a version of the rules that keeps American riders winning, then giving speeches to Europeans about moral standards. These guys: Basso, Ullrich, Riis, Pantani, Musseuw, Mazzoleni, Hamilton, Andrieu, Millar etc. have ruined the sport, not the people trying to clean up their mess.

I'd bet good money there's a bag of blood in Spain with "il cricket" written on it.

F**k Landis, he lied to everyone with his drinking story. I may think differently if his first reaction wasn't to make an excuse a 12 year old or patentcad would believe.

Y'all can send him your kids college fund.

OK, then all Discovery riders should just have moped engines and win every TDF from here on in, it seems that all you guys really want is a version of the rules that keeps American riders winning, then giving speeches to Europeans about moral standards. These guys: Basso, Ullrich, Riis, Pantani, Musseuw, Mazzoleni, Hamilton, Andrieu, Millar etc. have ruined the sport, not the people trying to clean up their mess.

I'd bet good money there's a bag of blood in Spain with "il cricket" written on it.

F**k Landis, he lied to everyone with his drinking story. I may think differently if his first reaction wasn't to make an excuse a 12 year old or patentcad would believe.

Y'all can send him your kids college fund.

I know your hatred for America and Americans seem to cloud every thing you type, but where and when did I ever say that I thought that riders shouldn't be tested? Look USA cycling has suspended a local pro mountain bike racer for missing a test after a race that he was never told about. He sued an got his ban reduced..of course he had to spend a boat load of money to get it reduced. The whole sport would be better off if all the governing bodies just followed their own rules. Is that too much to ask?

Only slightly off topic but do you at all see that your Ameri-Bashing is no different than the Euro-Bashing you accuse us of? Really you need to take good long look in the mirror.

DNA testing is an extremely powerful tool- not only for the enforcement of laws but for the profiling of traits. I would be extremely nervous to have a private entity "hold" a typed sample and am therefore against the practice....
The OP / article clearly states that the DNA is not going into a "bank." It's an agreement by the riders that if a doping investigation warrants a DNA test -- e.g. another bust along the lines of Puerto -- the riders will have already given their consent.



Private bodies (such as WADA or the UCI) don't have sovereignty over themselves and can be forced by various sovereign nations (many with poor protections for people) to hand over the data for nefarious purposes.
I'm sorry, but this is patently ridiculous.

First, it's fairly easy to obtain a DNA sample. Just ask John Athan. (http://www.heraldnet.com/stories/04/3/7/18303208.cfm) If a "nefarious individual" or a government agency wants your DNA, they're probably going to get it.

Second, privacy laws are pretty strong in the EU. So it's not like Turkmenistan will be able to file a lawsuit to get the sequence of Basso's 17th chromosome.

Third, the number of pro cyclists is chump change. 5,000 riders? Is it even that many? If you're going to worry about stuff like this, worry about CODIS (the FBI's DNA database). 4 million records of convicted felons -- which isn't enough for George Bush, who wants the FBI to collect DNA info on anyone, juvenile or adult, who has merely been arrested.



Think of what a boon cloning Vino would be to the economy of various poor country X.
PLEASE tell me you're just trying to be ironic or something with this line. :D



They are not just talking about profiling DNA enough to match blood sample but also to ascertain chemical enhancements.
Oookay.....

What PED's are you aware of that will actually alter your DNA? What PED's will be detected via a DNA test? What existing tests for PED's actually require an analysis of DNA? What's your source for this claim? And if you could make a more accurate test for a PED using DNA evidence, where's the problem, since it'd be entire orders of magnitude more difficult to tamper with DNA evidence than urine or blood. Enquiring minds want to know.

(If athletes really did start using gene therapy as a performance enhancement method, I might actually support the idea of doing a DNA database after all....)



There are other reasons that such a database should not be made that certainly outweigh the importance of cycling in the grand scheme of things.
OK, again: no cycling organization plans to make a DNA database.

This is a straw man argument, and a rather silly one at that.




For those of you who support the idea that all the riders should hand over DNA samples let me ask you this. Would you hand over a DNA sample, or any sample, be it blood or urine, to an organization that does not follow it's simplest of protocols? One that does not keep the chain of custody in tact? One that does not follow the rules of anonymity? One that leaks to the press your results before you even have a hearing?
Hey wait, when did we start talking about the FBI? :D

Besides, last I checked neither the UCI or WADA processes, handles or even touches any actual samples. So they are not responsible for "chains of custody" nor are they planning to make a DNA bank anyway. They just tell the labs what procedures they are supposed to follow.

For example, the UCI / WADA never touched the blood packets from Fuentes' lab (kept in custody by the Spanish police), were not involved in collecting Ullrich's DNA (German police) and did not select, do not run, and did not have any influence at the lab where the DNA testing was done. And given the odds that 9 packets of blood match Ullrich's DNA, it's pretty clear that they have him dead to rights.

As to leaks, let's face it, they are nearly impossible to avoid, let alone correctly attribute. Almost all of the leaks in the Puerto case, for example, appear to have come not from the UCI or WADA, but from the Spanish Police.



Remember you have no recourse to have you samples tested by anyone else.
Are you sure about this? (Not that I am necessarily disagreeing, mind you.) For example, would it really be inadmissible for Ullrich to get an independent lab to test his DNA, if the procedure went to the CAS or if he brought a case to civil court? Or: does he somehow have this option in a criminal proceeding, but not in anti-doping hearings...?



You have no way to defend yourself but to claim innocence.
Funny, both Hamilton and Landis appear(ed) to have numerous opportunities to defend themselves.....



So yeah you can call Bettini an a-hole for not giving a sample...but ask yourself if you were in his shoes would you?
I for one wouldn't (and don't) call Bettini names for his refusal.

As to the refusal itself, I would not support a fishing expedition. But if there's evidence on paper, and they've got a packet of blood that they can link to Bettini, then I do not support his refusal.

OK, then all Discovery riders should just have moped engines and win every TDF from here on in, it seems that all you guys really want is a version of the rules that keeps American riders winning, then giving speeches to Europeans about moral standards. These guys: Basso, Ullrich, Riis, Pantani, Musseuw, Mazzoleni, Hamilton, Andrieu, Millar etc. have ruined the sport, not the people trying to clean up their mess.

I'd bet good money there's a bag of blood in Spain with "il cricket" written on it.

F**k Landis, he lied to everyone with his drinking story. I may think differently if his first reaction wasn't to make an excuse a 12 year old or patentcad would believe.

Y'all can send him your kids college fund.

But there WERE no American riders implicated in Operation Puerto were there?

What's all this about Europeans having 'moral standards' anyway? I'll have to re-check the next time I'm with my family in Greece or Germany. I'll get back to you on that.

Funny, both Hamilton and Landis appear(ed) to have numerous opportunities to defend themselves.....

Bacciagalupe you took this quote out of context. In the context of my post accused riders cannot have other labs test their samples (I'm absolutely sure of this) to counter WADA and UCI claims. So all the accused athlete has really is his/her word that they didn't do it.

True Tyler did defend himself and frankly it was a silly defense and I believe him to be guilty. Landis will also have a chance to defend himself, but his defense will consist of showing the many errors the lab is alleged to have committed. Many of the allegations Landis is making concerning the lab, the UCI and the lab itself have confirmed to be true, despite what DocRay would have you believe. He can not take his sample to an independent lab and have the findings verified. If he were to ask for DNA testing to prove that his samples were actually his the only lab that would allowed to do this test is the one that found him positive to begin with.

All I'm saying is the game is set up that if an athlete wants to try to prove himself innocent he has little ammunition at his disposal.


Besides, last I checked neither the UCI or WADA processes, handles or even touches any actual samples. So they are not responsible for "chains of custody" nor are they planning to make a DNA bank anyway. They just tell the labs what procedures they are supposed to follow.


No but the lab is working for WADA, using WADA protocol and WADA approved (in some cases WADA designed) testing. So although Dick Pound never touched the sample himself he and his organization bear some of the responsibility for that lab to follow WADA rules.

As for leaks about the OP investigation my comments are about he broader aspects of dope testing in professional cycling. Until we have absolute confidence in the testing procedures, the methods and the labs conducting the tests I would be hesitant to have these riders hand over their DNA

A couple of things:

No one is making these guys ride. They are free to take their (for the most part) uneducated selves and go work for Starbucks for all I care. They should consider themselves lucky for their ability, and realize that they have only themselves to blame. I am sorry - but this would all be a non-issue if (guess who) the riders did not cheat in the first place.

UCI and other cycling aficionados are not just worried about today, but about the future of cycling. If everytime a rider wins the TdF or Giro and the public immediately assumes the person cheated or suspects such, guess what?? The sponsors will dry up.

Secondly - people go through invasive background checks, time cards, are constantly monitored or drug tested randomly by their employers. And guess what - it is all legal and legitimate because he who has the money has the power (you Republicans I would think love that thought).

UCI/ASO have a product to protect, and their sponsors have an image to protect. This is not a forced DNA sample. Riders can leave cycling.

And if you think public interest will remain the same if they think the cyclists are all doped up on drugs, and that all of them are cheating the system, you are kidding yourself. How many of you are honestly as interested in this year TdF after last year's fiasco. I bet most are just not quite as interested both because who knows if the winner cheated or not and secondly, who knows if the winner on the final day, carrying their home country flag will end up the eventual winner any more. Makes the whole race anti-climatic.

El Diablo Rojo, you write the following"

"All I'm saying is the game is set up that if an athlete wants to try to prove himself innocent he has little ammunition at his disposal."

Seems to me riders will now actually have more ammunition. Clears up the "lab screw-up" issue doesn't it?

I am going to refrain from responding line by line as people have said they don't like it. First off the crux of the issue for me is that the anti-doping authorities are not known for their adherence to following their own rules. Secondly, the world is not divided into the EU and the US and Pro-cycling goes to some pretty interesting places such as Libya and Malaysia- can you speak for the privacy laws everywhere cycling travels? I can't. As for the FBI thing, there is a vast difference between a government holding DNA profiles for convicted felons and an employment body holding DNA profiles for its participants.

Ulrich's DNA testing is pretty lock tight but as you clearly state the DNA was protected by governmental laws rather than by organizational rules. Yes leaks are nearly impossible to avoid and so is the loss of data (ask the IRS). How is voluntarily giving organizations that leak like sieves such powerful information a good idea? We are not talking about Ulrich's legal plight but rather a UCI testing scheme- one is rule of law the other is a organizing body. Ulrich is afforded protections under German law that athletes are not given under the WADA code (which is tyrannical). The difference is important.

There seams to be a difficulty in separating national legal systems from UCI anti-doping rules. Refusing to accept the UCI program is a far cry from refusing Italian/German/UK/etc legal warrants for DNA samples.

El Diablo Rojo, you write the following"

"All I'm saying is the game is set up that if an athlete wants to try to prove himself innocent he has little ammunition at his disposal."

Seems to me riders will now actually have more ammunition. Clears up the "lab screw-up" issue doesn't it?

Yes if you trust WADA and the lab doing the testing. Right now I don't feel that the riders or the fans have much confidence in either.

I'm all for comprehensive testing, and I believe that the governing bodies have the right and the duty to clean up the sport. However they also have the duty to make sure that the process is fair and conducted properly, as things stand I don't believe that is the case.

El Diablo Rojo:

What would it take then for you to be comfortable with DNA testing? Or is just the principle and this argument is a waste of time. A new set of protocols? Hiring an independent lab which is new to cycling (i.e. -not the same French labs?)


I read your opinions that you would be all for DNA testing if it was someone other than WADA/UCI.

A couple of things:

No one is making these guys ride. They are free to take their (for the most part) uneducated selves and go work for Starbucks for all I care. They should consider themselves lucky for their ability, and realize that they have only themselves to blame. I am sorry - but this would all be a non-issue if (guess who) the riders did not cheat in the first place. So, because its voluntary we should abuse them? Being a fan is voluntary as well. I am afraid you're condemning all cyclists with proof against only some. I don't think many of us like this technique used against us.


UCI and other cycling aficionados are not just worried about today, but about the future of cycling. If everytime a rider wins the TdF or Giro and the public immediately assumes the person cheated or suspects such, guess what?? The sponsors will dry up. What about the future of humanity. Do the ends of cleaning up the sport justify setting aside justice? I would rather the sport vanish than accept injustice (not that this program is really unjust- just extremely prone to abuse).

El Diablo Rojo:

What would it take then for you to be comfortable with DNA testing? Or is just the principle and this argument is a waste of time. A new set of protocols? Hiring an independent lab which is new to cycling (i.e. -not the same French labs?)


I read your opinions that you would be all for DNA testing if it was someone other than WADA/UCI.

I don't know about El Diablo Rojo but it would take the protections of a sovereign government for me to accept DNA testing- exactly what has happened in Ulrich's case.

A couple of things:

No one is making these guys ride. They are free to take their (for the most part) uneducated selves and go work for Starbucks for all I care. They should consider themselves lucky for their ability, and realize that they have only themselves to blame. I am sorry - but this would all be a non-issue if (guess who) the riders did not cheat in the first place.

UCI and other cycling aficionados are not just worried about today, but about the future of cycling. If everytime a rider wins the TdF or Giro and the public immediately assumes the person cheated or suspects such, guess what?? The sponsors will dry up.

Secondly - people go through invasive background checks, time cards, are constantly monitored or drug tested randomly by their employers. And guess what - it is all legal and legitimate because he who has the money has the power (you Republicans I would think love that thought).

UCI/ASO have a product to protect, and their sponsors have an image to protect. This is not a forced DNA sample. Riders can leave cycling.

And if you think public interest will remain the same if they think the cyclists are all doped up on drugs, and that all of them are cheating the system, you are kidding yourself. How many of you are honestly as interested in this year TdF after last year's fiasco. I bet most are just not quite as interested both because who knows if the winner cheated or not and secondly, who knows if the winner on the final day, carrying their home country flag will end up the eventual winner any more. Makes the whole race anti-climatic.

Look I don't think that anybody is saying that the riders are innocent victims here. They dope and they get caught (or not). The problem is that the governing bodies aren't even following their own rules when it comes to handling the samples. Until they live up to their end of the bargain then I think the riders should be skeptical of handing them their DNA. DNA is perceived by the public to be the magic bullet. If the DNA matches then you must be guilty. Well if the lab doing the testing is on the up and up then neither can the result be on the up and up. Given the state of affairs how would you feel if Dick Pound said you are guilty and we have the DNA proof to back it up. You trust Dick Pound to treat you fairly?

El Diablo Rojo:

What would it take then for you to be comfortable with DNA testing? Or is just the principle and this argument is a waste of time. A new set of protocols? Hiring an independent lab which is new to cycling (i.e. -not the same French labs?)


I read your opinions that you would be all for DNA testing if it was someone other than WADA/UCI.

To me the only way to make this work is to have the riders give 4 samples, two A and two B. Then two separate labs do the testing. The testing has to be blind, something that has not always been the case with the French lab (and yes Doc Ray they admitted to it). If both labs find the same result the rider should also be allowed to chose an accredited independent lab to test at his own expense. Look we are talking about a riders livelyhood. Yes it's sport but for these guys it's the only thing they have, if you are going to deny someone their basic right to earn a living as they choose then you'd better be damn sure of your facts.

The UCI and WADA need to fix this. This is their mess and they need to clean it up. Firing Dick Pound would go a long way to gaining the trust of the riders and the public. When you've got the head of an organization making comments with no proof or evidence to back them up you've got problems...just look at Iraq ;)

I actually like Dick Pound - and quite frankly, his credibility is a bit above athletes in general. How many riders need to be caught before you at least put their credibility on the same level.

Jan, Riis, Hamilton, Landis, the 1998 riders, not to mention the Track & Field types, you name them - they all denied it. Yet - guess what. They were ALL LYING. And yet you are more concerned with Dick Pound's credibility?

Dick Pound has no credibility. A anaerobic athlete tests positive for a aerobic increasing drug in an A sample then tests negative in the B sample and Pound questions the validity of the B sample. Then he calls for investigation into how the lab screwed up the B sample?

He is the head of a real organization tasked with fighting doping in sport and yet he acts like a gossipy buffoon (think Nazi frogmen). He is prejudicial and irresponsible.

It's not an either or problem. I don't believe the athletes or Pound but I give them all the benefit of doubt. I assume Pound is merely a idiot rather than self-promoting scum. I assume that the athletes are all clean until proven otherwise with only reasonable believability.

Dick Pound has no credibility. A anaerobic athlete tests positive for a aerobic increasing drug in an A sample then tests negative in the B sample and Pound questions the validity of the B sample. Then he calls for investigation into how the lab screwed up the B sample?

He is the head of a real organization tasked with fighting doping in sport and yet he acts like a gossipy buffoon (think Nazi frogmen). He is prejudicial and irresponsible.

It's not an either or problem. I don't believe the athletes or Pound but I give them all the benefit of doubt. I assume Pound is merely a idiot rather than self-promoting scum. I assume that the athletes are all clean until proven otherwise with only reasonable believability.


I do think Mr. Pound has all this totally covered. No distinctions necessary. He is a self-promoting scumbag idiot. I think Doc Ray runs his fan club in Canada, but I'm not sure.

I do think Mr. Pound has all this totally covered. No distinctions necessary. He is a self-promoting scumbag idiot. I think Doc Ray runs his fan club in Canada, but I'm not sure.

we're thinking about putting dick pound on an olympic stamp...:rolleyes:

i admit dick pound can be a bit of an a**hole, but he's done more to clean up doping in sports than most. he's dealing with people who use every trick in the book to cheat their way to a win. its time someone got tough on athletics who dope..........these incidents of 'innocent' rides being falsely accused aren't all that common.......last year everyone was convinced 'der kaiser' was innocent and what 'evidence' did they have? well.....apparently they had 9 blood bags worth. Had basso not cut and run to hide at discovery i'm sure his dna would come up with some interesting results as well.

sometimes you have to get tough on people, and i think this is a prime example. you would think any rider who was innocent would be first in line to prove they were clean.

this worry that the dna is somehow going to be used for alterior motives, or manipulated by labs with some hidden agenda really only exists in the realm of the paraniod american psyche

But the biggest dope in sports IS Dick Pound.

It's a puzzlement.

But the biggest dope in sports IS Dick Pound.

It's a puzzlement.

hey.....don't hate the player hate the game :D

Bacciagalupe you took this quote out of context. In the context of my post accused riders cannot have other labs test their samples (I'm absolutely sure of this) to counter WADA and UCI claims. So all the accused athlete has really is his/her word that they didn't do it.... All I'm saying is the game is set up that if an athlete wants to try to prove himself innocent he has little ammunition at his disposal.

I quoted you out of context? ;) I thought you were very clear, and you were/are protesting that the athletes cannot have retests done at the lab of their choice, and that this is unfair.

I disagree with your assesement, in no small part because the WADA code, for example, explicitly establishes that the accused have the right to present both evidence and question witnesses at any disciplinary hearing.

In addition, releasing those samples to a lab that is getting paid by the athlete is, sad to say, an open invitation for either the athlete or the lab to tamper with said sample in order to get the results they want. How could using a lab hired by the accused possibly be viewed as a credible test? What if they "shop around" and send it to lab after lab, until they get the results they want -- is that an acceptable option? Perhaps the athlete should start out by sending their own samples -- collected by an athlete-approved process of course -- to the lab of their choice, and running their own tests at their own expense.

Furthermore, it is my understanding that hiring the lab of your choice is not an option even in a criminal proceeding, where the standards and consequences are substantially higher than sanctions meted out by national federations.

What the riders can do is present evidence, question witnesses, and examine the documentation of the tests for flaws, errors and protocol / procedural violations. This goes far beyond mere proclamations of innocence -- as you already cited.

So there are good reasons why the accused can't pick out and hire a lab. And the accused have full access to the lab documentation, the right to present evidence, and the right to question witnesses -- i.e. numerous options for a defense.



The lab is working for WADA, using WADA protocol and WADA approved (in some cases WADA designed) testing. So although Dick Pound never touched the sample himself he and his organization bear some of the responsibility for that lab to follow WADA rules.
I agree that WADA has its responsibilities, most notably oversight of lab conduct. However, it is a common tactic / error to conflate the actions of WADA, the UCI, ASO, USADA, the CAS, the Spanish Police and so forth into a vast Anti-Athlete Conspiracy.

To wit: the labs are not working for WADA, UCI, USADA and so forth. Last I checked, they are hired and paid by the tour organizers, yes?



As for leaks about the OP investigation my comments are about he broader aspects of dope testing in professional cycling. Until we have absolute confidence in the testing procedures, the methods and the labs conducting the tests I would be hesitant to have these riders hand over their DNA
I agree that confidence is critical, and standards ought to be high. The problem with demanding "absolute" confidence is that as long as human beings are involved, this standard is utterly impossible to achieve.

For example, the national federations are not supposed to make any statements about a pending case. So Landis and his legal team can spend month after month issuing criticisms of the labs, but the USADA is not going to say anything at all. So by the USADA employees doing exactly what they are supposed to, and what I presume you want them to do -- keep their mouths shut -- Landis & Co have free reign to dump on the credibility of the lab.

Mind you, Landis is in part doing what he should -- presenting his assesement of the testing procedures. But in the public realm, this is a one-sided argument. He is tossing mud, and the USADA is definitively barred from wiping it off until the hearing is over. How can this setup create "absolute confidence?"

Last but not least, the "absolute confidence" standard is more critical with far weightier issues, namely the criminal justice systems of various nations. I'll leave it to you to decide if the FBI or NYPD meet these lofty standards that you believe should also be applied to athletes. ;)





First off the crux of the issue for me is that the anti-doping authorities are not known for their adherence to following their own rules....
And yet, athletes do get sanctions overturned when the labs do not follow the proper protocols. Go figure....

Besides, I thought the "crux of the issue" for you is that the DNA database that the UCI isn't planning to set up in the first place would become the source of numerous abuses of DNA information, including the the creation of the Vinokurov Clone Army.

Which, IMO, would actually be pretty sweet. I may need to Photoshop that one. :D Moving on....

re: Privacy laws, considering that the UCI is based in the EU, obviously any samples or DNA information would be subject to EU privacy laws. The government of Malaysia simply could not sue the UCI and demand a copy of its DNA database.

In addition, that "powerful data" could be obtained from a used water bottle. So if someone wants Basso's DNA for their own "nefarious" uses, there's no need to go to the UCI.

More importantly, there are no plans for the UCI to have such a database. So the point is moot.



Ulrich is afforded protections under German law that athletes are not given under the WADA code (which is tyrannical). The difference is important.
What protections? The UCI would be subject to the laws of the nation in which it functions (France IIRC). So the collection and release of any DNA data by the UCI would be subject, I'd assume, to French and/or EU laws.

And the WADA code is "tyrannical?" Oh, please. If that was the case, Ivan Basso and Marion Jones would be slinging fries at McDonald's right now.

• WADA code clearly states the burden of proof is on the anti-doping organization (3.1)
• departures from the testing standards are automatically invalidated, i.e. they can't make things up like tyrants often do (3.2.2)
• exemptions are made for theraputic use (4.4)
• samples cannot be used for any purpose except testing for violations, without the athlete's consent (6.3)
• athletes must be notified right away of an adverse findng (7.2)
• both an A and B test have to indicate an adverse finding (7.2)
• provisional suspensions can only be applied if a) the athlete can get a provisional hearing or b) the athlete can request an expedited hearing (7.5)
• an accused athlete has the full and explicit rights to a fair hearing, counsel of their choice, timely notification, to present evidence and to question witnesses (8)

While I will not say the execution of said code is perfect, there is nothing in there that says the head of WADA can ban an athlete for life on the basis of a single "A" sample, or via declaration by fiat. There is nothing "tyrannical" here.

Oh, and lest we forget: Any disciplinary hearing can be appealed to the CAS, which is completely independent of WADA.



You are welcome to support as many accused athletes as you see fit. But I recommend you stick to intelligent and provable critiques like "looks to me like the lab is sloppy and violated protocol" rather than "the Republic of Malaysia and the UCI are building a Vino Clone Army."

Why go to law school when you can read legal-brief length posts like the one above? Let's get back to witty one-liners and posts like:

'incorrect'.

Please.

But the biggest dope in sports IS Dick Pound.

It's a puzzlement.

This was a good one. Thanks for the laugh.

I actually like Dick Pound - and quite frankly, his credibility is a bit above athletes in general. How many riders need to be caught before you at least put their credibility on the same level.

Jan, Riis, Hamilton, Landis, the 1998 riders, not to mention the Track & Field types, you name them - they all denied it. Yet - guess what. They were ALL LYING. And yet you are more concerned with Dick Pound's credibility?

Dick Pound has made public comments about the amount of Hockey players on drugs, then when questioned about how he came up with that number he said he made it up. I'm sorry but that kind of conduct gives him zero credibility.

I disagree with your assesement, in no small part because the WADA code, for example, explicitly establishes that the accused have the right to present both evidence and question witnesses at any disciplinary hearing.

In addition, releasing those samples to a lab that is getting paid by the athlete is, sad to say, an open invitation for either the athlete or the lab to tamper with said sample in order to get the results they want. How could using a lab hired by the accused possibly be viewed as a credible test? What if they "shop around" and send it to lab after lab, until they get the results they want -- is that an acceptable option? Perhaps the athlete should start out by sending their own samples -- collected by an athlete-approved process of course -- to the lab of their choice, and running their own tests at their own expense.

Furthermore, it is my understanding that hiring the lab of your choice is not an option even in a criminal proceeding, where the standards and consequences are substantially higher than sanctions meted out by national federations.

How is the accused supposed to fight the main evidence, the positive sample, if he isn't allowed to have the sample tested by another lab?

Your understanding would be wrong. You can have an independent lab test samples in a criminal case, it happens all the time. OJ's team did for one high profile example. The Innocence Project, a group of lawyers that take on cases pro bono to get wrongfully convicted people out of jail, will take evidence to labs and have it checked against the states evidence.