Urine TROU-ble! Day 2
Surprisingly educational reporting from Lindsey Hamilton of the Associated Press. Excerpt:
Testosterone creams, pills and injections can build muscle and strength and improve recovery time after exertion when used over a period of several weeks, according to Dr. Gary Wadler, a member of the World Anti-Doping Agency and a spokesman for the American College of Sports Medicine.
But if Landis had been a user, earlier urine tests during the Tour would have been affected, too, Wadler said. Landis’ first reported abnormal result was last Thursday, after his amazing come-from-behind performance in stage 17 of the race.
One-time use of steroids could result in an abnormal test, but it would have no effect on performance and could not account for Landis’ astounding feat Thursday, “so something’s missing here,” Wadler said. “It just doesn’t add up.”
Okay, that we knew, though it’s astounding how many columnists write as if testosterone or testosterone-producing steroids were something Landis could have taken after Stage 16 to get a spinach-like boost in Stage 17. Here’s something I didn’t know but should have figured out:
Athletes who use performance-enhancing anabolic steroids often also take synthetic epitestosterone to equalize the ratio, said Charles Yesalis, a recently retired Pennsylvania State University professor and doping expert.
There is no medical use for synthetic epitestosterone; it is used “to cheat drug tests,” Yesalis said.
Add that to the list of mysteries: Why wouldn’t Landis be taking an epitestosterone-based masking agent?
One more nugget:
Some men have naturally occurring high levels of testosterone and epitestosterone, but there is a sophisticated lab test that is often used to detect synthetic forms.
Which makes me wonder why sporting organizations do the T/E ratio test at all, just because it’s cheaper and faster?
Meanwhile, Phil Liggett of OLN wonders what’s going on with the Tour and the pre-race doping scandal:
For example, we’ve only publicized the fact that, in all, 22 riders never got to start the Tour de France in Strasbourg because of this so-called Operation Puerto, where a doctor has admitted treating 200 people, changing their blood, and using the blood booster EPO, et cetera, of which he said 58 are cyclists.
We’ve never heard one of the other athletes named, yet he’s said they are in football, basketball, tennis, et cetera. And now he’s saying, “Half the guys that you threw off the Tour de France, I’ve never heard of in my life.” And, in fact, the calls in Spain this week has said that four riders who were sent home have nothing against their name. They are free to ride again, and they’re not on the list, and they’re not under any drug suspicion.
In Velonews, some scientist gets all science-y:
[Andrew Pipe, a physician and medical and scientific adviser to the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sports in Ottawa] said it is imperative that the levels found in Landis during the Tour de France be compared with testosterone levels that have been detected in drug tests that have likely been carried out in the past on all the riders, not just Landis.
If no such comparable data is available, Pipe said, the rider will have to be tested again in the future. For this reason, Pipe said he was surprised that the findings from Landis’s A sample have been made public. “The last thing I would want is for the suspected athlete to know that we’re on to the fact that he or she may have an unusually high TE ratio and that we may have to administer further tests.”
More background from Andrew Hood in the same publication:
The T/E ratio can vary widely within individuals, and in some cases the T/E ratio may be above the 4:1 ratio without doping while others can stay below the threshold despite cheating. The ratio tends to be constant over time, but wild swings may indicate doping. Other factors can cause swings in the ratio, such as dehydration, fatigue and even alcohol.
Anything above that threshold sends a red flag for doping controls. Landis would not reveal what his T/E ratio was in the samples taken after stage 17 into Morzine, when he went on an all-day solo attack to crawl his way back into overall contention.
The T/E ratio is not a sure-fire way to measure testosterone in the body, but it’s the only detection method currently used under anti-doping controls.
Tim Maloney of Cycling News summarizes Team Phonak’s extensive history of doping scandals.
Comment by Brian C.B. —
July 29, 2006 @ 9:52 pm
”Which makes me wonder why sporting organizations do the T/E ratio test at all, just because it’s cheaper and faster?”
If you’re doing 100 tests for testosterone during the Tour, then doing the cheap screening makes sense, provided the screening is followed up by the molecule-level spectrum analysis. Of course, the rules block the rider from competing in other races after a single positive, not after the follow up. But, the rules aren’t meant to be fair to the rider, but solicitous the team sponsors and race promoters. This is the height of racing season, and the regulations aren’t geared for just the Tour winner (since the days of Lemond, Tour winners have tended to wager everything on this one race) but for riders who may be competitive in many, many smaller events. So, a rider could be picked up on the less-reliable testosterone ratio test and, if he’s not blocked from competition immediately, he could have lots of winnings and medals and team photos and press releases to regret–or for others to regret–by the time a second precise test confirms he’s dirty. For a clean rider isolated by a bum ratio result and cleared by the better test, it’s not fair. But, as I said, that’s not who’s in charge and if he doesn’t like the way things are then he can stop cashing the Phonek or Cofidis checks.
Speaking of Lemond, I used to like the guy, in part because I used to watch him race in person when he was a neo-pro and I was a slow, struggling amateur breaking into the sport. I revelled in his maturation as a rider in much the same way as, I’m sure, he followed my ripening into a slow, struggling amateur of greater experience. Anyway, he’s kind of a dick, now. His initial comments presume Landis is guilty and apparently he thinks that Armstrong may have been dirty, too. I don’t think that either opinion is justified, at least based on something other than gut feeling. I’ve got the same gut feeling as Greg, but I have to subject that feeling to the fact that there’s no objective evidence, finally, to pin either of them as dopers.