Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Beijing re-testing [new CERA positives]

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Beijing re-testing [new CERA positives]

    Is it just me ? Or is the topic of re-testing Beijing athletes for CERA starting to smell worse than stale urine? Why the huge delay? Who's being bought off, and how and why?

  • #2
    This isn't tallying ballots: it's hard science (very hard science). I applaud them for taking the time to get it right.

    Note from the story on the front page they've also decided to check for insulin.

    And this from in the story

    <<...The Beijing samples have been sent to the lab in Lausanne, Switzerland, where they are undergoing a process to ensure they are valid. Officials are deciding exactly how many to analyze and which methods to use.

    "About 1,000 altogether," Schamasch said. "We want to do this intelligently. We will work on everything we think is relevant and realistic."...>>

    They've got to invent whole new protocols, maintain integrity of chain-of-command and adequately preserve all the samples. Every simple slip in that procedure that leads to a positive costs thousands of dollars and makes the program look bad.

    Good science doesn't happen overnight.

    Comment


    • #3
      Fair enough, gh, but the question begging to be asked, is how the Tour de France got so many months ahead of the IOC in catching drug cheats.
      And what can go "wrong" during all those extra months?

      Comment


      • #4
        Tour de France ended a month before the OG did. It wasn't until 2 months after the TdF ended that they announced retesting program (September 27).
        And they were only testing what, dozens of samples?

        IOC is going to test a thousand samples. I'd say they're running on about the same timeline.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by gh
          Tour de France ended a month before the OG did. It wasn't until 2 months after the TdF ended that they announced retesting program (September 27).
          And they were only testing what, dozens of samples?

          IOC is going to test a thousand samples. I'd say they're running on about the same timeline.
          gh has it right, there were only a modest number because they target riders that had anomalous blood values on the early tests.

          Comment


          • #6
            It's interesting to think about this though. Has there ever been re-testing on such a huge scale? And what if the re-testing shows large numbers (say 100 or more) test positive and that the positive tests include some big names? That's a lot of media management on their hands.

            Given the apparent unreliability of the EPO tests (according to some posters on here) and the relatively short half life, you'd really imagine that EPO is something a lot of athletes might think worth taking a chance on.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by AthleticsInBritain
              It's interesting to think about this though. Has there ever been re-testing on such a huge scale? And what if the re-testing shows large numbers (say 100 or more) test positive and that the positive tests include some big names? That's a lot of media management on their hands.

              Given the apparent unreliability of the EPO tests (according to some posters on here) and the relatively short half life, you'd really imagine that EPO is something a lot of athletes might think worth taking a chance on.
              The half life of this type of EPO is much longer than with previous versions. Thus, athletes who had the drug were not so aware that they could test positive so long after the last use. However, one would suspect that there should not be the percentage positives as seen at the Tour since it was known since the Tour that the new version had these characteristics and that tests cold detect it (previously apparently it was thought to not be very detectable).

              Comment


              • #8
                Does anyone know the number of tests for CERA conducted on the Tour riders? And the percentage of positives? Is this public information anywhere or not?
                I understand the need for good science, of course. But, as I understand it, the CERA testing on the Tour riders was pioneer work. Now that has been done, and as of October 9th, the IOC announced the re-testing of Beijing samples. Now, on November 25th, they re-announce the re-testing, and postpone the time lines considerably. Perhaps they will start the process after Christmas, and perhaps we will know the results by late Spring.
                Do they have to do 1000 tests before any results are announced? I don't think so. What if they targeted suspicious performances, as the Tour did initially? What if some very big names showed up positive right away?
                Will it be better with more distance (time) from Beijing? Better for who?
                I'm not inclined to be a conspiracy theorist, but something is not ringing true here for me. Hopefully, I am wrong. I was once, or twice, before. :wink:

                Comment


                • #9
                  so, when exactly do we declare winners to be winners? before the London games or do we need to wait until 2016 before the winners can consider the medals in their possession to be theirs?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Perhaps relevant excerpt from the baseball drugs story (Mitchell Report) now posted on front page

                    <<...All players implicated in the report were given amnesty (as Mitchell recommended) as part of the collective bargaining agreement reached in April. Current players were instructed to perform community service, including talking with children about the dangers of performance-enhancing drugs. According to MLB's leading lawyer, Rob Manfred, they did so.

                    "His decision was appropriate," Mitchell said of Selig. "It's of critical importance that baseball turn the page and look to the future, and you can't do that if you devote yourself to years of contentious litigation over what punishment should be appropriate in what circumstance."...>>

                    bold mine.... this compared to our sport, like all the "amateur" sports, which are so concerned with looking backwards instead of forwards that they're eating themselves alive.

                    (not that I'm suggesting rulebreakers should escape punishment)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I appreciate the point, but what can you do? If you find out that a win was gained by cheating you have to disqualify them.

                      Of course, the only way for this delay not to happen is for athletes to stop taking drugs. Has that been tried yet?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        AIB you touch on what this sport has run from for decades, the easy way out. I call it laziness.
                        No form of litigation is simple nor quick, proving guilt is not a simple process nor a straight forward one, but for some reason, in track we expect these things to be cut and dry. We have written rules that legislate out all reasons and ensure punishment.
                        What gh posted and Selig is addressing is the focus. I am not advocating the MLB way of handling cheats (bury them and give them mild penance), but I wholly endorse the focus when these things happen. Selig is saying, do not make the punishment and bust the focus, it happens and you push on. Same thing gh is saying.
                        Handle the business of information as vigorously as you handle the business of testing and outting the positives. Moving forward in track has become a catch phrase for cover up, and they are not the same in any sense.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Smoke
                          Moving forward in track has become a catch phrase for cover up
                          ?!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            IOC says it has turned up a half-dozen positives (sports not specified) on the CERA re-testing. Short story now on front page.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Cycling, Rebellin is one of the names..plus 6 more according to "La gazzetta dello sport"..
                              -http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2009/apr09/apr29news
                              -http://www.gazzetta.it/Sport_Vari/Altri_Sport/Olimpiadi/Primo_Piano/2009/04/28/doping.shtml?from=rss

                              edit:
                              gazzetta.it updated the article.. now talking of 6 positive
                              2 from cycling
                              1 weightlifting
                              3 from track and field (1 gold medal)

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X