Obvious Landis question



S

Steve

Guest
.... or is it for the UCI.

Anyway, if his Stage 17 urine sample was so radioactive for exogenous
testosterone, why don't they test his other pee samples for the same thing?
Surely he gave subsequent samples, especially after the TT. Would that not
be better than a B sample ?

Will they be able to scientifically prove that it is indeed his sample, not
a "donor".

The lab said that the test is foolproof, a test equipment manufacturer said
that there is an margin of error and my common sense says that nobody, or
test is foolproof. Damm, he has a hell of a high legal mountain to conquer.

This whole thing does not make sense. Wait, didn't David Byrne write a song
about this?

Steve
 
"Steve" <h90943@hotmaildotcom> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> ... or is it for the UCI.
>
> Anyway, if his Stage 17 urine sample was so radioactive for exogenous
> testosterone, why don't they test his other pee samples for the same
> thing?
> Surely he gave subsequent samples, especially after the TT. Would that not
> be better than a B sample ?
>
> Will they be able to scientifically prove that it is indeed his sample,
> not
> a "donor".
>
> The lab said that the test is foolproof, a test equipment manufacturer
> said
> that there is an margin of error and my common sense says that nobody, or
> test is foolproof. Damm, he has a hell of a high legal mountain to
> conquer.
>


They have already shown that his ratio was hors limits and the exogenous
testosterone. What more would retesting the other samples prove? And with
the half life of the testosterone, from Landis' POV it could onvy validate
what the lab/UCI is claiming.
 
Carl Sundquist wrote:

> They have already shown that his ratio was hors limits and the exogenous
> testosterone. What more would retesting the other samples prove? And with
> the half life of the testosterone, from Landis' POV it could onvy validate
> what the lab/UCI is claiming.


If they test the other sampels and find exogenous test., it shows a
timeline.
If they sample and find normal ratio, it might establish the masking agent.
 
Steve wrote:
> ... or is it for the UCI.
>
> Anyway, if his Stage 17 urine sample was so radioactive for exogenous
> testosterone, why don't they test his other pee samples for the same
> thing? Surely he gave subsequent samples, especially after the TT.
> Would that not be better than a B sample ?
>
> Will they be able to scientifically prove that it is indeed his
> sample, not a "donor".
>
> The lab said that the test is foolproof, a test equipment
> manufacturer said that there is an margin of error and my common
> sense says that nobody, or test is foolproof. Damm, he has a hell of
> a high legal mountain to conquer.
>
> This whole thing does not make sense. Wait, didn't David Byrne write
> a song about this?
>
> Steve

who is David Byrne? i have never heard of him.
 
> > This whole thing does not make sense. Wait, didn't David Byrne write
> > a song about this?
> >
> > Steve

> who is David Byrne? i have never heard of him.


David Byrne is the lead singer of the Talking Heads. Surely you've
heard of the Talking Heads. If not, look em up. Really good tunes.
Though I can't recall the song Steve mentioned.

Linda
 
"Steve" <h90943@hotmaildotcom> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> This whole thing does not make sense. Wait, didn't David Byrne write a
> song
> about this?


He did - "It's All Bush's Fault".
 
Linda Lou wrote:
>>> This whole thing does not make sense. Wait, didn't David Byrne write
>>> a song about this?
>>>
>>> Steve

>> who is David Byrne? i have never heard of him.

>
> David Byrne is the lead singer of the Talking Heads. Surely you've
> heard of the Talking Heads. If not, look em up. Really good tunes.
> Though I can't recall the song Steve mentioned.
>
> Linda
>

"Stop Making Sense"
 
Ernst Noch wrote:
> Linda Lou wrote:
> >>> This whole thing does not make sense. Wait, didn't David Byrne write
> >>> a song about this?
> >>>
> >>> Steve
> >> who is David Byrne? i have never heard of him.

> >
> > David Byrne is the lead singer of the Talking Heads. Surely you've
> > heard of the Talking Heads. If not, look em up. Really good tunes.
> > Though I can't recall the song Steve mentioned.
> >
> > Linda

>
> "Stop Making Sense"


I think Steve meant "Crosseyed and Painless." Or maybe
"Don't Worry About the Government."

Ben

ps. "Stop making sense" is actually a line from the song
"Girlfriend is Better." Yes, I am a geek for knowing that.
 
[email protected] wrote:
> Ernst Noch wrote:
>> Linda Lou wrote:
>>>>> This whole thing does not make sense. Wait, didn't David Byrne write
>>>>> a song about this?
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve
>>>> who is David Byrne? i have never heard of him.
>>> David Byrne is the lead singer of the Talking Heads. Surely you've
>>> heard of the Talking Heads. If not, look em up. Really good tunes.
>>> Though I can't recall the song Steve mentioned.
>>>
>>> Linda

>> "Stop Making Sense"

>
> I think Steve meant "Crosseyed and Painless." Or maybe
> "Don't Worry About the Government."
>
> Ben
>
> ps. "Stop making sense" is actually a line from the song
> "Girlfriend is Better." Yes, I am a geek for knowing that.
>


A yeah, they had a live album with that name.
Maybe "Drugs"?

[...]

The boys are making a big mess
This makes the girls all start to laugh
I don't know what they're talking about
The boys are worried, the girls are shocked
They pick the sound and let it drop
Nobody know what they're talking about

I'm charged up...I'm kinda wooden
I'm barely moving...I study motion
I study myself...I fooled myself
I'm charged up...It's pretty intense.
I'm charged up...Don't put me down
Don't feel like talking...Don't mess around
I feel mean...I feel O.K.
I'm charged up...Electricity.
 
"Carl Sundquist" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:BrVBg.5295$yO4.1346@dukeread02...
>
> "Steve" <h90943@hotmaildotcom> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> ... or is it for the UCI.
>>
>> Anyway, if his Stage 17 urine sample was so radioactive for exogenous
>> testosterone, why don't they test his other pee samples for the same
>> thing?
>> Surely he gave subsequent samples, especially after the TT. Would that
>> not
>> be better than a B sample ?
>>
>> Will they be able to scientifically prove that it is indeed his sample,
>> not
>> a "donor".
>>
>> The lab said that the test is foolproof, a test equipment manufacturer
>> said
>> that there is an margin of error and my common sense says that nobody, or
>> test is foolproof. Damm, he has a hell of a high legal mountain to
>> conquer.
>>

>
> They have already shown that his ratio was hors limits and the exogenous
> testosterone. What more would retesting the other samples prove? And with
> the half life of the testosterone, from Landis' POV it could onvy validate
> what the lab/UCI is claiming.
>


Really? Has the lab proved anything? The only thing we know is that the lab
(the same lab that refused to cooperate with a UCI audit) has made some
accusations. This is the same lab that accused Armstrong of taking EPO in
1999. What credibility does the lab have? Do you believe the lab's
accusation agsinst Armstrong also? What more does a lab have to do to lose
credibility? Are all cyclists easily imtimidated?
 
"Stu Fleming" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Carl Sundquist wrote:
>
>> They have already shown that his ratio was hors limits and the exogenous
>> testosterone. What more would retesting the other samples prove? And with
>> the half life of the testosterone, from Landis' POV it could onvy
>> validate what the lab/UCI is claiming.

>
> If they test the other sampels and find exogenous test., it shows a
> timeline.
> If they sample and find normal ratio, it might establish the masking
> agent.


If they test all the samples and find exogenous testosterone in only one,
the one sample associated with the most newsworthy performanceof the entire
TDF, it shows that

1) the LNDD lab tainted that sample. Or
2) Landis purposly tainted himself in order to win, knowing that he would be
tested and caught.

Which makes more sense?
 
"Yves LaDouche" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Stu Fleming" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Carl Sundquist wrote:
>>
>>> They have already shown that his ratio was hors limits and the exogenous
>>> testosterone. What more would retesting the other samples prove? And
>>> with the half life of the testosterone, from Landis' POV it could onvy
>>> validate what the lab/UCI is claiming.

>>
>> If they test the other sampels and find exogenous test., it shows a
>> timeline.
>> If they sample and find normal ratio, it might establish the masking
>> agent.

>
> If they test all the samples and find exogenous testosterone in only one,
> the one sample associated with the most newsworthy performanceof the
> entire
> TDF, it shows that
>
> 1) the LNDD lab tainted that sample. Or
> 2) Landis purposly tainted himself in order to win, knowing that he would
> be
> tested and caught.
>
> Which makes more sense?


3) Landis purposly tainted himself in order to win, thinking he will
get away with it.
 
Tom Kunich wrote:
> "Steve" <h90943@hotmaildotcom> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > This whole thing does not make sense. Wait, didn't David Byrne write a
> > song
> > about this?

>
> He did - "It's All Bush's Fault".


A CIA plot to discredit . . ..
 

Similar threads

I
Replies
38
Views
683
Road Cycling
William Asher
W
P
Replies
13
Views
597
Triathlon
Hebrew Hammer
H
B
Replies
82
Views
2K
Road Cycling
Mark & Steven Bornfeld
M