Lanced: The Shaming of Lance Armstrong Read Online Free PDF Page B
Author: David Walsh
what the average haematocrit for the riders was, the Union Cycliste International (UCI) medical inspector, Martin Bruin, smiled and said: "I can't tell you that."
For the general reader, the average haematocrit is 43 to 45%; it should be lower for endurance athletes. High haematocrit levels indicate EPO use and cycling's authorities use a 50% cut-off point. Exceed that and you are out of the race. This gives riders a significant margin to play with. Because they now do blood tests, the UCI know from their haematocrit readings whether cyclists are using EPO. If they told us the average haematocrit for the peloton, we too would know.
Tired of the endless pursuit, most of the decent journalists on the Tour have stopped asking questions. And as the coast was clear, the UCI came sailing in to announce proudly that all 96 drug tests on this year's Tour were negative. The Tour of Renewal had become the Tour of Authenticity. On Tuesday last, the Council for the Prevention of Doping in France (CPLD) offered a different take on the same tests.
The council is funded by the French government and is independent of all sports organisations. It sent the same 96 urine samples to the national laboratory at Chatenay-Malabray and found 45% of the samples contained "doping products". Twenty-eight were positive for corticosteroids (also called corticoids), 10 were positive for the asthma drugs salbutamol and terbutaline and a further five were positive for both.
Within the sport, few were surprised. The UCI and the Tour organisation said the presence of banned substances did not necessarily mean doping. It turns out that all but two of the riders involved in the positive cases had medical certificates allowing them to use corticoids and/or asthma drugs. It is worth being precise about the figures: 43 positives from 96 samples provided by 71 riders. Lance Armstrong, as Tour leader, would have been tested 12 or 13 times and the American has said he does not have a medical certificate allowing him to use any drug.
So what we're left with is 43 positives from something like 83 or 84 samples, but in the vast majority of cases the riders have medical certs. L'Equipe called it "Doping On Prescription". France Soir called it "The Tour of the Hypochondriac".
And is it not astonishing that around 50% of the Tour's peloton should need prescription drugs to compete?
The conclusion doesn't change. Doping is destroying cycling and many other sports. It is pervasive and it is sanctioned by sports bodies and event organisers. Last week, the CPLD in France showed us what can be achieved when there is a will.
Is there anybody else out there who gives a damn? Who cares that today's champions are hypochondriacs and that tomorrow's will come directly from the laboratories, injected with alien but powerful genes?
When the lying had to stop
David Walsh
October 29, 2000
"
We may not be convinced that Armstrong dopes, but as the champion professional cyclist, we cannot be sure that he doesn't
"
On Friday, Antoine Vayer arrived at his home in northwest France. It had been a long day at the cycling doping trial in Lille and a tough drive home, but he felt not a hint of weariness. The day, in fact the whole week in court, had rejuvenated him. He now knew that the battle against doping wasn't as hopeless as everyone had presumed. "This trial," he said, "has been the best thing to have happened to cycling."
When Friday's court session ended, Vayer stood not far from Richard Virenque. Once a sporting icon in France, Virenque is now a disgraced drug cheat. For so long they had been on opposite sides of sport's battle line: Vayer, a coach and trainer, fought for clean sport; Virenque, a talented rider, felt compelled to cheat. They were once part of the same Festina team, but not on speaking terms.
That's what happens in the world of doping - those who cheat distrust those who don't. Virenque and most of his teammates ridiculed Vayer and his scientific
For the general reader, the average haematocrit is 43 to 45%; it should be lower for endurance athletes. High haematocrit levels indicate EPO use and cycling's authorities use a 50% cut-off point. Exceed that and you are out of the race. This gives riders a significant margin to play with. Because they now do blood tests, the UCI know from their haematocrit readings whether cyclists are using EPO. If they told us the average haematocrit for the peloton, we too would know.
Tired of the endless pursuit, most of the decent journalists on the Tour have stopped asking questions. And as the coast was clear, the UCI came sailing in to announce proudly that all 96 drug tests on this year's Tour were negative. The Tour of Renewal had become the Tour of Authenticity. On Tuesday last, the Council for the Prevention of Doping in France (CPLD) offered a different take on the same tests.
The council is funded by the French government and is independent of all sports organisations. It sent the same 96 urine samples to the national laboratory at Chatenay-Malabray and found 45% of the samples contained "doping products". Twenty-eight were positive for corticosteroids (also called corticoids), 10 were positive for the asthma drugs salbutamol and terbutaline and a further five were positive for both.
Within the sport, few were surprised. The UCI and the Tour organisation said the presence of banned substances did not necessarily mean doping. It turns out that all but two of the riders involved in the positive cases had medical certificates allowing them to use corticoids and/or asthma drugs. It is worth being precise about the figures: 43 positives from 96 samples provided by 71 riders. Lance Armstrong, as Tour leader, would have been tested 12 or 13 times and the American has said he does not have a medical certificate allowing him to use any drug.
So what we're left with is 43 positives from something like 83 or 84 samples, but in the vast majority of cases the riders have medical certs. L'Equipe called it "Doping On Prescription". France Soir called it "The Tour of the Hypochondriac".
And is it not astonishing that around 50% of the Tour's peloton should need prescription drugs to compete?
The conclusion doesn't change. Doping is destroying cycling and many other sports. It is pervasive and it is sanctioned by sports bodies and event organisers. Last week, the CPLD in France showed us what can be achieved when there is a will.
Is there anybody else out there who gives a damn? Who cares that today's champions are hypochondriacs and that tomorrow's will come directly from the laboratories, injected with alien but powerful genes?
When the lying had to stop
David Walsh
October 29, 2000
"
We may not be convinced that Armstrong dopes, but as the champion professional cyclist, we cannot be sure that he doesn't
"
On Friday, Antoine Vayer arrived at his home in northwest France. It had been a long day at the cycling doping trial in Lille and a tough drive home, but he felt not a hint of weariness. The day, in fact the whole week in court, had rejuvenated him. He now knew that the battle against doping wasn't as hopeless as everyone had presumed. "This trial," he said, "has been the best thing to have happened to cycling."
When Friday's court session ended, Vayer stood not far from Richard Virenque. Once a sporting icon in France, Virenque is now a disgraced drug cheat. For so long they had been on opposite sides of sport's battle line: Vayer, a coach and trainer, fought for clean sport; Virenque, a talented rider, felt compelled to cheat. They were once part of the same Festina team, but not on speaking terms.
That's what happens in the world of doping - those who cheat distrust those who don't. Virenque and most of his teammates ridiculed Vayer and his scientific
Similar Books
Tangled Up in Princes (Royal Romances Book 1)
Molly Jameson
The School on Heart's Content Road
Carolyn Chute
Tree Girl
Ben Mikaelsen
In the Fifth at Malory Towers
Enid Blyton
Protocol 7
Armen Gharabegian
Shipwreck Island
S. A. Bodeen
Havana
Stephen Hunter
Vintage Stuff
Tom Sharpe