Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 1 of 1 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
11,561 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Apparently not quite the "disaster" as portrayed.

Damsgaard has commented and basically said the WADA rules are too stringent on the EPO test and you can tell someone is taking it well below the criteria required to trip a positive. Especially if combined with other sorts of longitudinal data. WADA still refuses to adopt his method. IOW, like most dope tests, to be postive you really need to be considerably over the limit.

Apparently the lab that was rubbished for not being able to detect the EPO was using a new test and not the current WADA approved one. Regardless, they only carried out step 1 in the process and not steps 2 and 3 which are required to declare an official AAF (i.e. positive). They used the appropriate language for step 1, declaring all tested samples "suspicious" for containing EPO and sent the results off to the authors. Who then, failing to understand protocol, claimed they were unable to detect EPO when if fact they had detected it in every sample that contained it.
 
1 - 1 of 1 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top