R
Ride-A-Lot
Guest
http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/6984.0.html
--
o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot o-o-o-o
www.schnauzers.ws
--
o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot o-o-o-o
www.schnauzers.ws
R
Ride-A-Lot
Guest
Ride-A-Lot wrote:
>
> http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/6984.0.html
>
I guess we all saw this at the same time.
--
o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot o-o-o-o
www.schnauzers.ws
>
> http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/6984.0.html
>
I guess we all saw this at the same time.
--
o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot o-o-o-o
www.schnauzers.ws
P
Phil, Squid-in-Training
Guest
Ride-A-Lot wrote:
> Ride-A-Lot wrote:
>>
>> http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/6984.0.html
>>
>
> I guess we all saw this at the same time.
Waah waaah waah. The media creates news where there doesn't need to be any.
Phil
> Ride-A-Lot wrote:
>>
>> http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/6984.0.html
>>
>
> I guess we all saw this at the same time.
Waah waaah waah. The media creates news where there doesn't need to be any.
Phil
B
BB
Guest
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 18:31:03 GMT, Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
> Ride-A-Lot wrote:
>> Ride-A-Lot wrote:
>>>
>>> http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/6984.0.html
>>
>> I guess we all saw this at the same time.
>
> Waah waaah waah. The media creates news where there doesn't need to be any.
Damn right. They just should let those roadies take all the drugs they
want, then they won't have to fuss over it all the time.
--
-BB-
To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least)
> Ride-A-Lot wrote:
>> Ride-A-Lot wrote:
>>>
>>> http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/6984.0.html
>>
>> I guess we all saw this at the same time.
>
> Waah waaah waah. The media creates news where there doesn't need to be any.
Damn right. They just should let those roadies take all the drugs they
want, then they won't have to fuss over it all the time.
--
-BB-
To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least)
M
MattB
Guest
BB wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 18:31:03 GMT, Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
>> Ride-A-Lot wrote:
>>> Ride-A-Lot wrote:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/6984.0.html
>>>
>>> I guess we all saw this at the same time.
>>
>> Waah waaah waah. The media creates news where there doesn't need to
>> be any.
>
> Damn right. They just should let those roadies take all the drugs they
> want, then they won't have to fuss over it all the time.
I loved the old SNL "All Drug Olympics" with Beloushi smoking cigs and
eating the chocolate donettes after having been on a multi-day multi-drug
binge.
"The chocolate ones make me faster."
I especially agree when it comes to non-performance enhancing drugs, like
that stoner Canadian snowboarder a while back. So what? They say he's a bad
role model, but we would have never even known about that facet of his
lifestyle if he wasn't tested and then it was publicized!
Of course if you know many snowboarders, it's isn't much of a stretch of the
imagination, but I digress...
Matt
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 18:31:03 GMT, Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
>> Ride-A-Lot wrote:
>>> Ride-A-Lot wrote:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/6984.0.html
>>>
>>> I guess we all saw this at the same time.
>>
>> Waah waaah waah. The media creates news where there doesn't need to
>> be any.
>
> Damn right. They just should let those roadies take all the drugs they
> want, then they won't have to fuss over it all the time.
I loved the old SNL "All Drug Olympics" with Beloushi smoking cigs and
eating the chocolate donettes after having been on a multi-day multi-drug
binge.
"The chocolate ones make me faster."
I especially agree when it comes to non-performance enhancing drugs, like
that stoner Canadian snowboarder a while back. So what? They say he's a bad
role model, but we would have never even known about that facet of his
lifestyle if he wasn't tested and then it was publicized!
Of course if you know many snowboarders, it's isn't much of a stretch of the
imagination, but I digress...
Matt
K
kantspel
Guest
MattB wrote:
>
> Of course if you know many snowboarders, it's isn't much of a stretch of the
> imagination, but I digress...
>
> Matt
>
>
paraphrased from the daily show...
"...Olympic officials first became suspicious of so&so when they found
out he was a snowboarder."
>
> Of course if you know many snowboarders, it's isn't much of a stretch of the
> imagination, but I digress...
>
> Matt
>
>
paraphrased from the daily show...
"...Olympic officials first became suspicious of so&so when they found
out he was a snowboarder."
P
Phil Squire
Guest
"BB" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
SNIP
> >
> > Waah waaah waah. The media creates news where there doesn't need to be
any.
>
> Damn right. They just should let those roadies take all the drugs they
> want, then they won't have to fuss over it all the time.
>
Absolutely cause those pro mtb racers are all clean ;-)
Phil
> --
> -BB-
> To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least)
news:[email protected]...
SNIP
> >
> > Waah waaah waah. The media creates news where there doesn't need to be
any.
>
> Damn right. They just should let those roadies take all the drugs they
> want, then they won't have to fuss over it all the time.
>
Absolutely cause those pro mtb racers are all clean ;-)
Phil
> --
> -BB-
> To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least)
J
JD
Guest
Ride-A-Lot <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/6984.0.html
Big deal, it's GRS so who cares?
JD
> http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/6984.0.html
Big deal, it's GRS so who cares?
JD
B
bri719
Guest
MattB wrote:
>Of course if you know many snowboarders, it's isn't much of a stretch of the
>imagination, but I digress...
>
>
well that J. Kerry sure is a dope, but you can't say we're all on the
stuff
I actually find it funny that I enjoy all the same hobbies as the guy
(except windsurfing) but can't stand him & won't vote for him.
bri
--
* enjoying the karma *
remove LKJSDFJSD from address to email
>Of course if you know many snowboarders, it's isn't much of a stretch of the
>imagination, but I digress...
>
>
well that J. Kerry sure is a dope, but you can't say we're all on the
stuff
I actually find it funny that I enjoy all the same hobbies as the guy
(except windsurfing) but can't stand him & won't vote for him.
bri
--
* enjoying the karma *
remove LKJSDFJSD from address to email
S
Shawn
Guest
bri719 wrote:
> MattB wrote:
>
>> Of course if you know many snowboarders, it's isn't much of a stretch
>> of the imagination, but I digress...
>>
>>
>
> well that J. Kerry sure is a dope, but you can't say we're all on the
> stuff
>
> I actually find it funny that I enjoy all the same hobbies as the guy
> (except windsurfing) but can't stand him & won't vote for him.
OK, we're talking about Tyler Hamilton here. Con-cen-trate. Focus, I
know its hard, but you can do it...
He was framed. That's what I'm going with until that argument is shot
down in a massive fireball of evidence and confessions.
Athletes were told before the Olympics that samples would be saved for
later testing as better tests came along. "You may not get busted now,
but when you're 50 we may still strip you of your medal." Sure some are
stupid enough to doubt, but I have a hard time believing Hamilton
ignored the USOC, and USCF pounding the fact into his skull.
But then again, we're a win at all cost kind of society.
Just ask W.
Shawn
> MattB wrote:
>
>> Of course if you know many snowboarders, it's isn't much of a stretch
>> of the imagination, but I digress...
>>
>>
>
> well that J. Kerry sure is a dope, but you can't say we're all on the
> stuff
>
> I actually find it funny that I enjoy all the same hobbies as the guy
> (except windsurfing) but can't stand him & won't vote for him.
OK, we're talking about Tyler Hamilton here. Con-cen-trate. Focus, I
know its hard, but you can do it...
He was framed. That's what I'm going with until that argument is shot
down in a massive fireball of evidence and confessions.
Athletes were told before the Olympics that samples would be saved for
later testing as better tests came along. "You may not get busted now,
but when you're 50 we may still strip you of your medal." Sure some are
stupid enough to doubt, but I have a hard time believing Hamilton
ignored the USOC, and USCF pounding the fact into his skull.
But then again, we're a win at all cost kind of society.
Just ask W.
Shawn
B
bri719
Guest
Shawn wrote:
> OK, we're talking about Tyler Hamilton here. Con-cen-trate. Focus, I
> know its hard, but you can do it...
> He was framed. That's what I'm going with until that argument is shot
> down in a massive fireball of evidence and confessions.
> Athletes were told before the Olympics that samples would be saved for
> later testing as better tests came along. "You may not get busted
> now, but when you're 50 we may still strip you of your medal." Sure
> some are stupid enough to doubt, but I have a hard time believing
> Hamilton ignored the USOC, and USCF pounding the fact into his skull.
what I heard as of this morning is, the Olympic re-test is in, and they
said it tested negative. the one from the race in Spain(?) came back
positive (again).
so what does the IOC (or USOC) make of THAT?? sounds inconclusive at
best. and I'm no conspiracy theorist but I'm starting to think along
the same lines as you... clearly someone else's blood was in there, but
how it got there is anybody's best guess. it should definitely become
more clear over the next days or weeks.
whatever happens I believe the guy and not out of blind allegiance but
past history and his after listening to his statements as well. go Tyler.
bri
p.s. I just heard a blurb on the radio that said they're allowing him to
keep the gold...so I'll be waiting to hear the full explanation or
searching out over the web later
--
* enjoying the karma *
remove LKJSDFJSD from address to email
> OK, we're talking about Tyler Hamilton here. Con-cen-trate. Focus, I
> know its hard, but you can do it...
> He was framed. That's what I'm going with until that argument is shot
> down in a massive fireball of evidence and confessions.
> Athletes were told before the Olympics that samples would be saved for
> later testing as better tests came along. "You may not get busted
> now, but when you're 50 we may still strip you of your medal." Sure
> some are stupid enough to doubt, but I have a hard time believing
> Hamilton ignored the USOC, and USCF pounding the fact into his skull.
what I heard as of this morning is, the Olympic re-test is in, and they
said it tested negative. the one from the race in Spain(?) came back
positive (again).
so what does the IOC (or USOC) make of THAT?? sounds inconclusive at
best. and I'm no conspiracy theorist but I'm starting to think along
the same lines as you... clearly someone else's blood was in there, but
how it got there is anybody's best guess. it should definitely become
more clear over the next days or weeks.
whatever happens I believe the guy and not out of blind allegiance but
past history and his after listening to his statements as well. go Tyler.
bri
p.s. I just heard a blurb on the radio that said they're allowing him to
keep the gold...so I'll be waiting to hear the full explanation or
searching out over the web later
--
* enjoying the karma *
remove LKJSDFJSD from address to email
T
tcmedara
Guest
bri719 <[email protected]> wrote:
> Shawn wrote:
>
>
>
> what I heard as of this morning is, the Olympic re-test is in, and
> they said it tested negative. the one from the race in Spain(?) came
> back positive (again).
>
From Velonews: http://tinyurl.com/54rua
"On Thursday officials notified Hamilton that the case has been closed
because tests on the B-Sample was "considered as non conclusive because of
lack of enough intact red blood cells."
IOC medical chief Arne Ljungqvist said in a conference call Thursday that
the second sample had been damaged because testers inadvertently froze the
second sample, ruining red blood cells."
It'll be interesting to see where this goes now, eh?
Tom
> Shawn wrote:
>
>
>
> what I heard as of this morning is, the Olympic re-test is in, and
> they said it tested negative. the one from the race in Spain(?) came
> back positive (again).
>
From Velonews: http://tinyurl.com/54rua
"On Thursday officials notified Hamilton that the case has been closed
because tests on the B-Sample was "considered as non conclusive because of
lack of enough intact red blood cells."
IOC medical chief Arne Ljungqvist said in a conference call Thursday that
the second sample had been damaged because testers inadvertently froze the
second sample, ruining red blood cells."
It'll be interesting to see where this goes now, eh?
Tom
T
TM
Guest
"tcmedara" <[email protected]> wrote in
>
> It'll be interesting to see where this goes now, eh?
>
He'll keep the gold on a technicality. He'll probably get a two year
suspension from racing pro for both the A and B sample coming back positive
in Spain.
Long story short, 4 tests and 3 positives. One inconclusive. No negatives.
Pretty clear that he is guilty, but he'll keep living the lie as long as he
can.
>
> It'll be interesting to see where this goes now, eh?
>
He'll keep the gold on a technicality. He'll probably get a two year
suspension from racing pro for both the A and B sample coming back positive
in Spain.
Long story short, 4 tests and 3 positives. One inconclusive. No negatives.
Pretty clear that he is guilty, but he'll keep living the lie as long as he
can.
B
bri719
Guest
TM wrote:
>He'll keep the gold on a technicality. He'll probably get a two year
>suspension from racing pro for both the A and B sample coming back positive
>in Spain.
>
>Long story short, 4 tests and 3 positives. One inconclusive. No negatives.
>
>Pretty clear that he is guilty, but he'll keep living the lie as long as he
>can.
>
>
what about the possibility that samples were somehow tainted with
someone else's blood (I'm not suggesting how, simply that it was
possible)? all somebody has to do is sneak in a few drops of somebody
else's sample or they accidentally become mixed and it automatically
fails. if the monkeys running the IOC doping agency can "mistakenly"
freeze a sample (think of the number of samples taken and the number of
athletes, and how stupid one has to be to mess that up), there are
obvious issues outside of whether he really did or did not have some
kind of blood doping going on. I believe the guy did not have a
transfusion, until proven guilty. it's quite a serious charge and I
just don't believe he would intentionally slip up that badly. the guy's
been a top rider for years and there's too much at stake to risk it.
I wonder where this leaves him with the team, but I think it will be
resolved in his favor. when you're this good and this close to winning
without outside help, there's no reason to cheat. I simply want to know
what happened as far as treatments and whatnot after he was forced to
dropped out of the TDF from a fall, but hopefully everything will come
out in the clear.
bri
--
* enjoying the karma *
remove LKJSDFJSD from address to email
>He'll keep the gold on a technicality. He'll probably get a two year
>suspension from racing pro for both the A and B sample coming back positive
>in Spain.
>
>Long story short, 4 tests and 3 positives. One inconclusive. No negatives.
>
>Pretty clear that he is guilty, but he'll keep living the lie as long as he
>can.
>
>
what about the possibility that samples were somehow tainted with
someone else's blood (I'm not suggesting how, simply that it was
possible)? all somebody has to do is sneak in a few drops of somebody
else's sample or they accidentally become mixed and it automatically
fails. if the monkeys running the IOC doping agency can "mistakenly"
freeze a sample (think of the number of samples taken and the number of
athletes, and how stupid one has to be to mess that up), there are
obvious issues outside of whether he really did or did not have some
kind of blood doping going on. I believe the guy did not have a
transfusion, until proven guilty. it's quite a serious charge and I
just don't believe he would intentionally slip up that badly. the guy's
been a top rider for years and there's too much at stake to risk it.
I wonder where this leaves him with the team, but I think it will be
resolved in his favor. when you're this good and this close to winning
without outside help, there's no reason to cheat. I simply want to know
what happened as far as treatments and whatnot after he was forced to
dropped out of the TDF from a fall, but hopefully everything will come
out in the clear.
bri
--
* enjoying the karma *
remove LKJSDFJSD from address to email
S
Shawn
Guest
bri719 wrote:
> what I heard as of this morning is, the Olympic re-test is in, and they
> said it tested negative. the one from the race in Spain(?) came back
> positive (again).
>
> so what does the IOC (or USOC) make of THAT?? sounds inconclusive at
> best. and I'm no conspiracy theorist but I'm starting to think along
> the same lines as you... clearly someone else's blood was in there, but
> how it got there is anybody's best guess. it should definitely become
> more clear over the next days or weeks.
>
> whatever happens I believe the guy and not out of blind allegiance but
> past history and his after listening to his statements as well. go Tyler.
>
> bri
>
> p.s. I just heard a blurb on the radio that said they're allowing him to
> keep the gold...so I'll be waiting to hear the full explanation or
> searching out over the web later
>
The lame thing about the test claims is that, if the samples were taken
with reasonable care to avoid contamination during handling, testing
could easily be done to look for someone else's DNA in the sample.
People can be identified by the spit they leave on a postage stamp
(thank heaven for self stick, or I'd be so busted...um, never mind),
it'd be a snap to identify DNA from two different people in a blood
sample (especially with a clean sample of Tyler's blood).
Shawn
> what I heard as of this morning is, the Olympic re-test is in, and they
> said it tested negative. the one from the race in Spain(?) came back
> positive (again).
>
> so what does the IOC (or USOC) make of THAT?? sounds inconclusive at
> best. and I'm no conspiracy theorist but I'm starting to think along
> the same lines as you... clearly someone else's blood was in there, but
> how it got there is anybody's best guess. it should definitely become
> more clear over the next days or weeks.
>
> whatever happens I believe the guy and not out of blind allegiance but
> past history and his after listening to his statements as well. go Tyler.
>
> bri
>
> p.s. I just heard a blurb on the radio that said they're allowing him to
> keep the gold...so I'll be waiting to hear the full explanation or
> searching out over the web later
>
The lame thing about the test claims is that, if the samples were taken
with reasonable care to avoid contamination during handling, testing
could easily be done to look for someone else's DNA in the sample.
People can be identified by the spit they leave on a postage stamp
(thank heaven for self stick, or I'd be so busted...um, never mind),
it'd be a snap to identify DNA from two different people in a blood
sample (especially with a clean sample of Tyler's blood).
Shawn
S
SuperSlinky
Guest
Shawn said...
> The lame thing about the test claims is that, if the samples were taken
> with reasonable care to avoid contamination during handling, testing
> could easily be done to look for someone else's DNA in the sample.
> People can be identified by the spit they leave on a postage stamp
> (thank heaven for self stick, or I'd be so busted...um, never mind),
> it'd be a snap to identify DNA from two different people in a blood
> sample (especially with a clean sample of Tyler's blood).
>
> Shawn
Red blood cells don't have a nucleus or mitochondria, thus no DNA. I
think we can assume he didn't have a whole blood transfusion that would
contain white blood cells with DNA.
> The lame thing about the test claims is that, if the samples were taken
> with reasonable care to avoid contamination during handling, testing
> could easily be done to look for someone else's DNA in the sample.
> People can be identified by the spit they leave on a postage stamp
> (thank heaven for self stick, or I'd be so busted...um, never mind),
> it'd be a snap to identify DNA from two different people in a blood
> sample (especially with a clean sample of Tyler's blood).
>
> Shawn
Red blood cells don't have a nucleus or mitochondria, thus no DNA. I
think we can assume he didn't have a whole blood transfusion that would
contain white blood cells with DNA.
S
Shawn
Guest
SuperSlinky wrote:
> Shawn said...
>
>
>>The lame thing about the test claims is that, if the samples were taken
>>with reasonable care to avoid contamination during handling, testing
>>could easily be done to look for someone else's DNA in the sample.
>>People can be identified by the spit they leave on a postage stamp
>>(thank heaven for self stick, or I'd be so busted...um, never mind),
>>it'd be a snap to identify DNA from two different people in a blood
>>sample (especially with a clean sample of Tyler's blood).
>>
>>Shawn
>
>
> Red blood cells don't have a nucleus or mitochondria, thus no DNA. I
> think we can assume he didn't have a whole blood transfusion that would
> contain white blood cells with DNA.
There's still plenty of DNA to PCR up a useable amount.
Shawn
> Shawn said...
>
>
>>The lame thing about the test claims is that, if the samples were taken
>>with reasonable care to avoid contamination during handling, testing
>>could easily be done to look for someone else's DNA in the sample.
>>People can be identified by the spit they leave on a postage stamp
>>(thank heaven for self stick, or I'd be so busted...um, never mind),
>>it'd be a snap to identify DNA from two different people in a blood
>>sample (especially with a clean sample of Tyler's blood).
>>
>>Shawn
>
>
> Red blood cells don't have a nucleus or mitochondria, thus no DNA. I
> think we can assume he didn't have a whole blood transfusion that would
> contain white blood cells with DNA.
There's still plenty of DNA to PCR up a useable amount.
Shawn
T
TM
Guest
"Shawn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> SuperSlinky wrote:
> >
> > Red blood cells don't have a nucleus or mitochondria, thus no DNA. I
> > think we can assume he didn't have a whole blood transfusion that would
> > contain white blood cells with DNA.
>
> There's still plenty of DNA to PCR up a useable amount.
>
Let's skip over the fact that you can't get dna from mature red blood cells
and pretend for a moment that you can.
Why would you even consider that red blood cells of different minor types
could be created by cells with the same dna profile?
Think about it.
Your hypothetical dna test is redundant in this instance.
The fact is he has the red blood cells of two individuals in his system. He
needs to explain it. There are explanations; surgery, chimera,
maternal/fetal transfer; he needs one quick.
If he is innocent he should demand to be regularly tested and he will
continue to test positive and be cleared. If he is guilty then you'll see
him question the test and the labs and keep his blood to himself. Time, not
a dna test, will make the answer clear to everyone.
news:[email protected]...
> SuperSlinky wrote:
> >
> > Red blood cells don't have a nucleus or mitochondria, thus no DNA. I
> > think we can assume he didn't have a whole blood transfusion that would
> > contain white blood cells with DNA.
>
> There's still plenty of DNA to PCR up a useable amount.
>
Let's skip over the fact that you can't get dna from mature red blood cells
and pretend for a moment that you can.
Why would you even consider that red blood cells of different minor types
could be created by cells with the same dna profile?
Think about it.
Your hypothetical dna test is redundant in this instance.
The fact is he has the red blood cells of two individuals in his system. He
needs to explain it. There are explanations; surgery, chimera,
maternal/fetal transfer; he needs one quick.
If he is innocent he should demand to be regularly tested and he will
continue to test positive and be cleared. If he is guilty then you'll see
him question the test and the labs and keep his blood to himself. Time, not
a dna test, will make the answer clear to everyone.
S
Shawn
Guest
TM wrote:
>>
>>There's still plenty of DNA to PCR up a useable amount.
>>
>
>
> Let's skip over the fact that you can't get dna from mature red blood cells
> and pretend for a moment that you can.
Packed RBCs aren't purified by flow cytometry (last I heard). There is
other stuff in there.
>
> Why would you even consider that red blood cells of different minor types
> could be created by cells with the same dna profile?
I didn't.
> Think about it.
duh!
>
> Your hypothetical dna test is redundant in this instance.
>
> The fact is he has the red blood cells of two individuals in his system. He
> needs to explain it. There are explanations; surgery, chimera,
> maternal/fetal transfer; he needs one quick.
I thought the chimera defense would be really interesting.
"Why is Tyler so good?"
"He's two people in one body."
If he could prove it, it'd make a good JAMA article.
Actually he doesn't need to explain it if the case is dropped, or he
chooses to take the two year suspension.
With the IOC "We had too many samples." argument, all the results for
the entire Athens Games are suspect. We'll see if this is used as a
grounds for appeal by other athletes who've been stripped of medals, or
otherwise sanctioned.
The Vuelta results are a different story.
Shawn
>>
>>There's still plenty of DNA to PCR up a useable amount.
>>
>
>
> Let's skip over the fact that you can't get dna from mature red blood cells
> and pretend for a moment that you can.
Packed RBCs aren't purified by flow cytometry (last I heard). There is
other stuff in there.
>
> Why would you even consider that red blood cells of different minor types
> could be created by cells with the same dna profile?
I didn't.
> Think about it.
duh!
>
> Your hypothetical dna test is redundant in this instance.
>
> The fact is he has the red blood cells of two individuals in his system. He
> needs to explain it. There are explanations; surgery, chimera,
> maternal/fetal transfer; he needs one quick.
I thought the chimera defense would be really interesting.
"Why is Tyler so good?"
"He's two people in one body."
If he could prove it, it'd make a good JAMA article.
Actually he doesn't need to explain it if the case is dropped, or he
chooses to take the two year suspension.
With the IOC "We had too many samples." argument, all the results for
the entire Athens Games are suspect. We'll see if this is used as a
grounds for appeal by other athletes who've been stripped of medals, or
otherwise sanctioned.
The Vuelta results are a different story.
Shawn
B
bri719
Guest
TM wrote:
>Your hypothetical dna test is redundant in this instance.
>
>The fact is he has the red blood cells of two individuals in his system. He
>needs to explain it. There are explanations; surgery, chimera,
>maternal/fetal transfer; he needs one quick.
>
>
what about.....mixed samples (not as likely because two different tests
produced the same issue) -- or a loss of blood from an accident which
required administration of a volume of someone else's blood to his system.
does that equate "blood doping"? I sure would hope not. but if that's
the case I'm sure it would be explained, and if he needs to be banned
for something as minor as replacing a lost pint of his own blood, that's
pretty sad.
bri
>Your hypothetical dna test is redundant in this instance.
>
>The fact is he has the red blood cells of two individuals in his system. He
>needs to explain it. There are explanations; surgery, chimera,
>maternal/fetal transfer; he needs one quick.
>
>
what about.....mixed samples (not as likely because two different tests
produced the same issue) -- or a loss of blood from an accident which
required administration of a volume of someone else's blood to his system.
does that equate "blood doping"? I sure would hope not. but if that's
the case I'm sure it would be explained, and if he needs to be banned
for something as minor as replacing a lost pint of his own blood, that's
pretty sad.
bri