Lagat's B sample negative!!!

[dl]

Analysis of Bernard Lagat B Sample returns negative result
Wednesday 1 October 2003
Monaco - The analysis of the B sample of Kenyan middle distance runner Bernard Lagat has failed to confirm the initial result of the anti-doping test conducted in Tubingen, Germany on 8 August 2003, where the analysis of the A sample returned an adverse finding for Erythropoietin (EPO).

The analysis of the B sample was conducted by the IOC-accredited laboratory in Cologne, Germany on 29 September and did not corroborate the original result. Consequently the athlete is able to compete.

Following the original finding, the athlete had been withdrawn for the national team for the 9th  IAAF World Championships by the Kenyan Federation.

28 years old, Bernard Lagat is a leading 1500 metre runner with a personal best at that distance of 3:26.34 and was the winner of that event at the IAAF World Cup in Athletics in Madrid in September 2002. In 2003, he came second behind Hicham El Guerrouj at the IAAF World Indoor Championships in Birmingham.
IAAF

[Guest]

Re: Lagat's B sample negative!!!

Wow, some good news on the doping front for once! I don't want to say, "I told you so" to anyone who used Lagat's A positive to make blanket accusations against Kenyan distance runners, so I'll just use this opportunity to plead that we all just move on.

Lagat is clean, as are virtually all Kenyan distance runners.

[Guest]

Re: Lagat's B sample negative!!!

Does nothing to take the unjustified stain off Lagat's name of course. Nor does it get him the WC medal (and major cash) he lost.

Sue the bastards!

[gh]

Re: Lagat's B sample negative!!!

Our front page will shortly have the official statement from Lagat as issued by his agent.

[tafnut]

Re: Lagat's B sample negative!!!

Am I missing something obvious here? How can you have the same pee pop positive and then negative?

[Guest]

Re: Lagat's B sample negative!!!

Does this mean we also have to issue apologies to Mike Price, Ryan Leaf, Bennie Chatman and all the other Cougs we slandered in the last month?

[Guest]

Re: Lagat's B sample negative!!!

>Does nothing to take the unjustified stain off
>Lagat's name of course. Nor does it get him the
>WC medal (and major cash) he lost.

Sue the
>bastards!>>

Looks like you might get your wish: this from his statement on the front page

<<I have suffered economically from not being able to pursue my profession as I would have anticipated and I remain concerned over the way in which this matter entered the public domain. These are issues I will be discussing with my Heidelberg lawyers Dr Michael Lehner and Wolfgang Kreissig in the near future but it would be premature to say specifically what course of action I will be following.>>

[Natasha]

Re: Lagat's B sample negative!!!

I'm feeling awful because I'm one of those people who thought in my mind that he was guilty. I really have learned a valuable lesson here and I will always remember this as I make opinions about other people. I really do hope that as an athlete he can continue to progress and the stress of this situation not continue to weigh heavily on him.

[Jon]

Re: Lagat's B sample negative!!!

I understand that Lagat is in the clear, but what exactly does a negative B sample mean? Was there something in the A sample? Or was an error made in the testing of the A sample? Does a negative B sample ALWAYS override a positive A sample? Surely each case where this happens should be investigated and treated as separate cases?

Personally, I'll wait until I hear more about the case before judging Lagat. Still, there are definitely some people who are going to view Lagat with suspicion from now on. Look at Diane Modahl - she spent her every last penny on protesting her innocence (and won her case), yet some people still view her as being suspicious. It's the classic, pessimistic view (often seen in track and field) of being guilty until proven innocent.

[bhall]

Re: Lagat's B sample negative!!!

B sample always wins. Well actually... if either of the two samples is negative then the test is negative. If both are postive then the test is positive.

[Guest]

Re: Lagat's B sample negative!!!

>Am I missing something obvious here? How can you
>have the same pee pop positive and then negative?>>

Because there's no magic machine into which you stick a sample and ask it, "is there bad stuff in here?" and it tells you yes or no. It's a sophisticated scientific process requiring human involvement and humans make mistakes.

The IOC routinely checks its accredited labs for accuracy, sending through dummy samples for which it knows what's up. Labs have been bounced from the roster both for missing positives that were there and for finding positives that weren't (talking all kinds of substances, not EPO in particular).

Given the newness of the EPO test, Lagat's questioning of the whole thing may indeed hold water.

[Guest]

Re: Lagat's B sample negative!!!

It may hold water, but it is more likely that another doper has got off on a technicality.

[Guest]

Re: Lagat's B sample negative!!!

Dear Deuche,

I assume that's pronounced like in douche-bag, right? Please explain why it's "more likely" that a doper got off? What's your scientific basis for deciding that if one of two samples is wrong it's the B one? More likely you can't even spell science and are just another troll.

[Piglet]

Re: Lagat's B sample negative!!!

Is it possible that there was EPO in both samples, but that the EPO degraded in the time between test A and test B into something else, and hence does not show up in test B?

[Guest]

Re: Lagat's B sample negative!!!

<<B sample always wins. Well actually... if either
of the two samples is negative then the test is
negative. If both are postive then the test is
positive.>>

If so, then it seems like it would be in the best interests of all parties (athlete, national federation, iaaf, wada, etc...) to test the B sample immediately. Or, at a minimum, the athlete should be allowed to request an immediate retest of the B sample.