Independent lab?

oddball said:

i'm pretty sure if they did send the B sample anywhere for additional
testing they could potentially open up a whole 'nother can of worms.
everything from secure chain of custody, temperature of sample when it
left the lab, temperature of sample when it was received by second lab,
etc. i've transported urine samples in the past and have taken
numerous soil and groundwater samples. from sample collection to
delivery you've got to make sure you have your [censored] together or else
you open yourself up to all kinds of problems if someone down the road
contests the results.

There are a bunch of accredited labs scattered about. Immediateley
after sampling A and B are sent to separate labs. Both test at the
same time. I don't understand the reason for waiting between tests in
the first place. It's stupid. It should be as quick and definitive a
procedure as possible. Two strikes, you're out. The other
alternatives don't matter.

The only reason there is a waiting period is because the lawyers got
involved. They need the extra time to maximize overbilling.

R

"MMan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Jake said:

Why does the B-sample get tested by the same lab as the A-sample with
such
high stakes involved? Shouldn't the B-sample be tested by an
independent
lab with no interest in proving Landis either guilty or innocent? Is
this
too much to ask of WADA?

Excellent question.

I'm also wondering if the tester knew that what he/she was testing was
Landis's B-sample, or if there's any sort of "blind" procedure
involved.

Highly unlikely in a complex and long-winded testing procedure.

RicodJour said:

oddball said:

i'm pretty sure if they did send the B sample anywhere for additional
testing they could potentially open up a whole 'nother can of worms.
everything from secure chain of custody, temperature of sample when it
left the lab, temperature of sample when it was received by second lab,
etc. i've transported urine samples in the past and have taken
numerous soil and groundwater samples. from sample collection to
delivery you've got to make sure you have your [censored] together or else
you open yourself up to all kinds of problems if someone down the road
contests the results.

There are a bunch of accredited labs scattered about. Immediateley
after sampling A and B are sent to separate labs. Both test at the
same time. I don't understand the reason for waiting between tests in
the first place. It's stupid. It should be as quick and definitive a
procedure as possible. Two strikes, you're out. The other
alternatives don't matter.

The only reason there is a waiting period is because the lawyers got
involved. They need the extra time to maximize overbilling.

So this lawyer dies and goes to heaven (it could happen) and as St Peter's
checking him in he say, "you look really young for a man of 90."

"Ninety?! I'm only 47."

"Oh, sorry, I was just guessing based on the hours you billed."

Ron

<Montesquiou> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Bonjour dear friend.

Metaphor ( from the french word metaphore)
Referee (from the french word référer)
Laboratory (from the french word laboratoire)

The english word I had to learn was : "moron".
It is your name, it is not ?

You make some interesting points but they are getting obscured by your
communication style.

"RicodJour" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

oddball wrote:

Quoted message said:

The only reason there is a waiting period is because the lawyers got
involved. They need the extra time to maximize overbilling.

Not true. The extra time is for the athlete to get a team together that
understands the substances, testing protocols, reasons for false positives,
etc.

In article <[email hidden]>,

MMan said:

Montesquiou said:

Quoted message said:

I'm also wondering if the tester knew that what he/she was testing was
Landis's B-sample, or if there's any sort of "blind" procedure
involved.

LOL !

What about a Frog-Bashing, my friend ?

Lets go !

???????

That was weird ...

Consider the source.

--
tanx,
Howard

Never take a tenant with a monkey.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

in message <[email hidden]>,

Howard Kveck (') said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

MMan said:

Montesquiou said:

> I'm also wondering if the tester knew that what he/she was testing
> was Landis's B-sample, or if there's any sort of "blind" procedure
> involved.
>

LOL !

What about a Frog-Bashing, my friend ?

Lets go !

???????

That was weird ...

Consider the source.

Sauce, dear boy, sauce. With just a soupcon of red wine.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Tony Blair's epitaph, #1: Tony Blair lies here.
Tony Blair's epitaph, #2: Trust me.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>,

Howard Kveck (') said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

MMan said:

Montesquiou wrote:
> > I'm also wondering if the tester knew that what he/she was testing
> > was Landis's B-sample, or if there's any sort of "blind" procedure
> > involved.
> >
>
> LOL !
>
> What about a Frog-Bashing, my friend ?
>
> Lets go !

???????

That was weird ...

Consider the source.

Sauce, dear boy, sauce. With just a soupcon of red wine.

It's better with butter.

--
tanx,
Howard

Never take a tenant with a monkey.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 10:37:33 -0400, "Jake" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Why does the B-sample get tested by the same lab as the A-sample with such
high stakes involved? Shouldn't the B-sample be tested by an independent
lab with no interest in proving Landis either guilty or innocent? Is this
too much to ask of WADA?

If this were a court case in the U.S. - and both presumptions are not
true in this case - the answer is that both sides would usually prefer
it that way. The one with the stronger case because if both labs came
up with the same answer, it makes a stronger case with a judge or
jury, both of whom are probably non-technical in the area. The weaker
side would be looking for any disagreement, to work and worry at it in
court.

The exceptions would be when the weaker side either concedes the
situation and simply wants to pass over it as quickly as possible to
work over the other evidence or when they plan to make the lab itself
their case. In the latter case, either the lab has to be completely
above reproach AND prepared to make that case to the non-technical
judge or jury, or the other side will have it tested elsewhere.

In this case, the lab only has to meet the requirements of the
UCI/Tour protocols and nothing else. The case will go where it will,
but it is unlikely to be a court of law and definitely not one in the
U.S.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

Howard Kveck said:

Simon Brooke said:

Sauce, dear boy, sauce. With just a soupcon of red wine.

It's better with butter.

Get the butter.

--
E. Dronkert

Jake said:

Why does the B-sample get tested by the same lab as the A-sample with such
high stakes involved? Shouldn't the B-sample be tested by an independent
lab with no interest in proving Landis either guilty or innocent? Is this
too much to ask of WADA?

I can't believe that's their "backup". That's the most idiotic thing
I've heard of in a long time. The B sample should be completely
independent from the A. Different takers of the sample, keepers of the
sample and testers of the sample.

Any slight interest I had in the Tour de France is gone. It's a joke.

<[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Jake said:

Why does the B-sample get tested by the same lab as the A-sample with
such
high stakes involved? Shouldn't the B-sample be tested by an
independent
lab with no interest in proving Landis either guilty or innocent? Is
this
too much to ask of WADA?

I can't believe that's their "backup". That's the most idiotic thing
I've heard of in a long time. The B sample should be completely
independent from the A. Different takers of the sample, keepers of the
sample and testers of the sample.

Any slight interest I had in the Tour de France is gone. It's a joke.

So you lost interest in the Tour because you don't approve of the way a B
sample is handled ?

Wow, tough crowd / fair weathrer fan.

cr113 said:

I can't believe that's their "backup". That's the most idiotic thing
I've heard of in a long time. The B sample should be completely
independent from the A. Different takers of the sample, keepers of the
sample and testers of the sample.

You expect the poor riders to pee twice ? Or alternatively to pee a bit,
then hold on while the next bunch of testers come and then pee some more.

trg said:

<[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I can't believe that's their "backup". That's the most idiotic thing
I've heard of in a long time. The B sample should be completely
independent from the A. Different takers of the sample, keepers of the
sample and testers of the sample.

Any slight interest I had in the Tour de France is gone. It's a joke.

So you lost interest in the Tour because you don't approve of the way a B
sample is handled ?

No, I lost interest because it appears that the results are fixed.

Donald Munro said:

cr113 said:

I can't believe that's their "backup". That's the most idiotic thing
I've heard of in a long time. The B sample should be completely
independent from the A. Different takers of the sample, keepers of the
sample and testers of the sample.

You expect the poor riders to pee twice ? Or alternatively to pee a bit,
then hold on while the next bunch of testers come and then pee some more.

If Landis was innocent, would he have minded peeing twice?

Donald Munro said:

You expect the poor riders to pee twice ? Or alternatively to pee a bit,
then hold on while the next bunch of testers come and then pee some more.

Do you think there could be any way to rig the protocol so that they
would have to provide the "clean" sample (a la Flo-Jo), then wait and
provide the second "natural" one?

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Donald Munro said:

cr113 said:

I can't believe that's their "backup". That's the most idiotic thing
I've heard of in a long time. The B sample should be completely
independent from the A. Different takers of the sample, keepers of the
sample and testers of the sample.

You expect the poor riders to pee twice ? Or alternatively to pee a bit,
then hold on while the next bunch of testers come and then pee some more.

If Landis was innocent, would he have minded peeing twice?

Have you any idea at all what you're talking about? Have you ever tried to
pee in a cup after a race? Especially a hard race where you're a bit
dehydrated to begin with? These guys have to sit around for hours sometimes
drinking a gallon of water trying to force something. Once it starts it may
be barely enough to fill the cup. And you can't let the guy out of your
sight the entire time since he could then substitute someone else's urine
for his own.

At the Jr. Nationals we had the pee guy at the FINAL DINNER with the third
place winner from the races waiting for him to be able to pee. Right in the
middle of speeches the two of them got up and leave and only the kid comes
back looking relieved.

Tom Kunich said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If Landis was innocent, would he have minded peeing twice?

Have you any idea at all what you're talking about? Have you ever tried to
pee in a cup after a race? Especially a hard race where you're a bit
dehydrated to begin with? These guys have to sit around for hours sometimes
drinking a gallon of water trying to force something. Once it starts it may
be barely enough to fill the cup. And you can't let the guy out of your
sight the entire time since he could then substitute someone else's urine
for his own.

At the Jr. Nationals we had the pee guy at the FINAL DINNER with the third
place winner from the races waiting for him to be able to pee. Right in the
middle of speeches the two of them got up and leave and only the kid comes
back looking relieved.

Then don't have a test. Or take the test in the morning. Or pee into
one cup and then split the samples under supervision and send the
samples to different places, independent of one another. Or make a
second sample optional. Just do something that will give the guy a
chance to prove himself innocent.

Do you really feel satisfied with the results of this race?