Tyler was "set up" to fail!?
- Thread starter TiMan
- Start date
.
He didn’t test positive for a doping product, he tested positive for receiving a blood transfusion from another person. Why he would actually do this I could not imagine. There would be no advantage to this and the risk is as you could imagine could lead to a fatal disease.antone said:
This just doesn’t make since, but when I read the testing protocol for the newly approved test I began to suspect the testing method was never properly validated and I’ll bet more will come out on this matter later this year.
No advantage to this? Please.... Read up a little on the effects of blood transfusions. This is what they used to do before the EPO days.Espada9 said:
I hate the blindly negative remarks on US or any other athletes but let`s be realistic and accept facts when they come out.
Speaking of Lance (reading your other comment) it would have been helpful if you had seen a Mark Spitz interview during the Olympics. He had mentioned quite a few things about doping and the involvement of sponsors in exposing or covering certain offenders that were very realistic.
As far as Hamilton is concerned, what other kind of proof besides his multiple negatives would be needed to prove his guilt?
Can't some one gain the same advantage by storing their own blood and putting it back into their arteries just before a race? What would be the advantage of using somebody elses blood and risking a bad reaction and diseases and all of that fun stuff?George K. said:
Two fishy things about Hamilton's story are the blood test at the olympics that was clean the first time they tested it, then it showed signs of a transfusion when they decided to test it again. A commitee deliberated over the unclear results of the second test and then declared them positive. Secondly, the story of "the extortionist" sounds pretty crazy. If some one was using the threat of positive tests against the Phonak team in order to get money, I have no problems believing that the same person could have had a friend who tried to contaminate the tests.
I'm not entirely convinced that Hamilton is enirely clean, but his situation is rather unique.
Here is a little info about TYler and the Olympics. From several other scources seem to verify what **** Pound mentions. The test in the olympics was positive all along. Is the test is reliable- probably- the developers and Pound are aware any test must withstand legal challenge.tas1978 said:
http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/7332.0.html
Storing your own blood for later use is not a bad idea. A few problems- after donating blood you are mildly/moderately anemic and this will diminish the effectiveness of your training- so it can't be done near the time of the event. One could give blood and take epo and iron to rapidly bring you back up, but this would still take a couple of weeks. This necessitates storage. 30-40 days can be done without significant resources, but longer requires more sophisticated facilities.
Donated blood is just a lot easier logisticly.
Transfusions are quite effective with at least one blinded study
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=3573270
Tyler wan not accused of transfusing his own blood, he was accused of transfusing blood from someone else, think about it, how risky is that, for what? A result you can get through altitude, hyper baric chambers or EPO?George K. said:
The test method used to detect blood abnormalities on a cellular level was incorrectly validated, how can you trust the results?
Perro Loco said:
This article
http://www.physsportsmed.com/issues/2001/06_01/news.htm
suggests your blood is fully restored within 4 weeks, if not sooner. So I am still puzzled as to why Tyler would risk a transfusion of someone elses blood, given the inherent health risks, and what must be a greater chance of detection. Surely he was aware the test was being implemented for 2004.
And as far as resources, Tyler was well paid by Phonak, and could have "prepped" stateside before going to Greece, so I don't think difficulties in logistics provide an explanation.
The other baffling issue is why he would do this twice, after already being "warned" about a positive result from the Vuelta.
Bssttt, WRONG! I should have know you would not understand blood doping, synthetic hemaglobin or oxygen boosting protocols.Espada9 said:
Man you people really don't get it. Not at all.
All we know is that Tyler's blood showed anomalies.
It could have been bovine plasma---or Actovegin supplements, as USPO used in the 2000 TDF. or it could have been another human beings plasma.
Or it might have been 3 incorrect analysis by two different lab techs.
We do NOT know what Tyler's blood was like.
What we know is that Tyler swears it was not from another person. That is Tyler's script. Don't make it true by repeating it as if it were so. We do NOT know the truth, yet.
Tyler's remarks are worth as much as; "I have never tested positive"
Learn about how Lance's corrupt doctor learned his modern blood oxygen boosting techniques.
Stop spreading falsehoods, and get real about oxygen boosting methods. Ask any of the 1984 USA Cycling Team (60 athletes), they used Concini blood transfusions in Los Angeles.
Francesco Conconi, Dr EPO
www.ergogenics.org/donati.html
Read the dossier of Sandro Donati, former National Track Coach of Italy.
An interesting fact about transfusions- the old school style of blood doping-is that it was not declared illegal by the IOC UNTIL 1985. The year after the US cycling team dominated as never before. Despite many rumors and innuendos about several finnish distance runners and cross country ski teams in the 70s. Of course it was a futile effort as there was now way of detecting it and only until recently was the IOC became truly serious about catching atheletes doping.
As a practical matter, an endurance athlete cannot use their own blood supplies. Especially when you are doing the Rour of Romandie, TDF, Olympics and the Vuelta. No way Tyler can store up enough of his own plasma. Not enough time and human stores won't last a year. (PFC & HBOC can last years)tas1978 said:
So he needed; 1) another human being or 2) a bovine synthetic solution aka (Actovegin) or other 3) another form of synthetic hemaglobin and/or HBOC derivative.
Tyler's case is unique in that he was busted. That was unique. 3-times positive by two different labs.
In any case, whether you admire Tyler or believe it is another misunderstanding, you must admit, Tyler picks dopers as his key teammates. Zulle, Camenzind are admitted anemia drug users, and Perez is another apparent blood doper.
The Phonak team was built for Tyler and he approved three dirty riders, not counting himself.
What does that say?
I agree, certain members admitted to recieving transfusions, however I would not lump every member as having recieved transfusions. It's also interesting that people keep mentioning Mark Gorski - honcho of tailwind/USPS/discovery team. He may have recieved transfusions he may not have- I don't know. However I think he won a medal as a track cyclist- match race. You know the race where they come to a standstill and then try and sprint over a short distance.kennf said:
An increased hematocrit for these athletes is of marginal benefit ( one report in the medical lit suggests there may be a small benefit to anerobic efforts due to increased buffering offered by increased red cell mass- this is more recent data and probably wasn't appreciated at the time).
If anybody has any reference on whom did what please post.
Perro Loco said:
One-third of the US Team denied using the then legal blood transfusions. That leaves 20 that admitted to it. I heard from several sources that it was expected that ALL would use the then "cutting edge method". And given that Connie Carpenter bounced another women off the team (an admitted drug user but otherwise fine person) it is hard for me to believe the denials.
bw: The track stars both medaled and admitted use;
Rebecca Twigg, Steve Hegg, Harvey Nitz
And blood transfusion were not the only trick. (Hegg went positive for caffeine too)
My point is, these these folks benefited despite being in events that lasted 12 seconds to 4 minutes.
The Grewals and Carpenters would have even more to gain from the blood doping.
IV bags were haning from all the picture frame hooks at the hotel and a special physician was brought in specifically to supervise the transfusions.
Did some refuse? 40 athletes refuse to admit it.
Several sources.kennf said:
At least one-third of the USA team denied using the blood transfusions. (despite having a physician supervised crew brought in for that specific purpose)
Rebecca Twigg admitted it.
Harvey Nitz & Steve Hegg admitted it. And don't forget the caffeine overdoses too.
Can you believe that Tammy Thomas denied it?
She's gone positive for the whole kitchen sink and finally received a lifetime ban---but she denies a blood transfusion.
I do not believe her.
Flyer said:
Well.....a healthy person can give 1000 cc of his blood with little to no problems.....
they then "spin it down".....concentrate it into about 600c's of pure "packed red cells" and freeze it. It can be kept for over three months.
Each "unit' of packed cells(250cc) will boost Hct by about 3% and thats not bad in my books......so say you have an average 44% Hct before a race, give two units of your own blood in the hours before the race and you now have 50%.
If you test out before the race at over 50% with the team crit tester($250) then you run in a 1000cc or more of saline or ringers and keep drinking water and bingo you are 49%.
Perro Loco said:
Lasse Viren did eventually admit to autologous transfusions. But they were not illegal in the 1972 and 1976 Olympics. He ran an extremely limitted competition schedule so had the luxury of saving up blood and using it only for the big event each year.
tas1978 said:
The olympic A sample was tested only once. It was initially interpretted negative but deemed suspicious-apparently proximate or in some grey area. The A sample data was reinterpretted twice, then flipped on the interpretation. The decision to test the confirmatory B sample was then intitiated. But since the decision to test was made after 10 days-the time the procedures called for freezing the blood of a negative tested athlete-the blood was frozen destroying the rbc.
This homologous transfusion test looks at antibodies on the red cell surface. Why would bovine plasma lead to a false +ve?Flyer said:
I think that most likely TH did blood dope (perhaps an accidental homologous that was supposed to be autologous), but I don't think Actovegin would be the reason for the +ve results as it would not alter red cell surface antigens.
