# Bitches, I told you so... (Lance Armstrong related) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 24, 2005, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421 "2005-08-24T14:12:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Baldwin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baldwin/32/7264_2.png) [@Baldwin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baldwin)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/61 "2005-08-25T16:21:23Z")
I’m just trying to get the image of yellowish popsicles out of my mind. ---
**Author:** ![ouryL](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ouryl/32/6067_2.png) [@ouryL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ouryL)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/62 "2005-08-25T18:19:12Z")
The first time I ever heard of EPO was when my father received it during his radiation treatments. Could the metabolites be a remnant of his previous cancer treatments? ---
**Author:** ![flight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbce88/32.png) [@flight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flight)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/63 "2005-08-25T18:23:14Z")
I have no dog in this race (bicycling dog, funny image), but I think there are a few erroneous points that need to be cleared up here. > [@lieu](#): > > Six of the samples obviously were tied to additional participants, right? Ethicality of the non double blind aside, how did they react to the accusations against them? The double blind was still in effect. Lance neutralized it by releasing his numbers. As (to my knowledge) no one else released theirs, no one else can be tied to those other positives. > [@InkBlot](#): > > This one has some merit. The reliability of the messenger is in some question, and there has been some question on how L’Equipe got hold of all the information they used to connect the dots, since the lab itself would not have had all of the info needed. The lab did not have the information because the lab did not want it and did not look for it. There is no question that L’Equipe is anti-Lance. That is why they dug up the info, but it was all readily available info. > [@Finagle](#): > > As for (3), I personally only have L’Equipe’s word for it that the numbers matched or even that the test was unambigously positive. Do we at least have a journal article reporting the results? This is critical. Does anyone else have access to this info or know where we could find it? > [@Finagle](#): > > There’s also something else that doesn’t add up for me. In 1999, there was apparently no test for EPO. Threemae and others claim that doping is rampant in biking (you know, with the wife getting stopped at the border with EPO and all). Yet only six other samples tested positive along with a lot of negatives (with no word on whether those six samples belonged to an individual or multiple people?) So you’re asking me to believe that Lance was virtually the only guy using EPO in the 1999 TDF? Color me dubious. I could be a question of degree. There is evidence that the chemicals do degrade. It is possible that only the very heavily doped samples still contain enough to get a positive. > [@Fiveyearlurker](#): > > Also, having been in a lab for the past ten years or so, I can say that there is no way in hell that I would trust any samples older than a month. I have tubes in my freezer that are so poorly labeled that I have no idea what’s in them anymore. I’m sure that I have experiments that I’ve spiked in proteins in order to make sure that I could detect it in a real sample. I’m sure that these samples are poorly labeled. > > All lab freezers are like this. > > Also, if the false positive rate is, say, 1%, which is a conservative estimate I would guess. This guy has probably had 100 blood tests in his life. One would be expected to come up positive just based on statistics. We really can’t say anything about the freezers one way or another, but the fact that they had so many of the numbers match up makes it unlikely that this is just a labelling error. Also, you mention the chance of error, which is what the second sample is there to prevent. Though there is a possibility of error on one sample, six is really pushing it. ---
**Author:** ![ouryL](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ouryl/32/6067_2.png) [@ouryL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ouryL)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/64 "2005-08-25T18:26:08Z")
> [@flight](#): > > I have no dog in this race (bicycling dog, funny image), but I think there are a few erroneous points that need to be cleared up here. > > The double blind was still in effect. Lance neutralized it by releasing his numbers. As (to my knowledge) no one else released theirs, no one else can be tied to those other positives. > > The lab did not have the information because the lab did not want it and did not look for it. There is no question that L’Equipe is anti-Lance. That is why they dug up the info, but it was all readily available info. > > This is critical. Does anyone else have access to this info or know where we could find it? > > I could be a question of degree. There is evidence that the chemicals do degrade. It is possible that only the very heavily doped samples still contain enough to get a positive. > > We really can’t say anything about the freezers one way or another, but the fact that they had so many of the numbers match up makes it unlikely that this is just a labelling error. Also, you mention the chance of error, which is what the second sample is there to prevent. Though there is a possibility of error on one sample, six is really pushing it. Then it wasn’t a double blind test since he couldn’t have them(the numbers) if it were. ---
**Author:** ![ouryL](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ouryl/32/6067_2.png) [@ouryL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ouryL)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/65 "2005-08-25T18:29:37Z")
> [@ouryL](#): > > Then it wasn’t a double blind test since he couldn’t have them(the numbers) if it were. Besides, once the testing protocals have been violated, how can we trust the integrity of the samples? ---
**Author:** ![js\_africanus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/87869e/32.png) [@js\_africanus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/js_africanus)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/66 "2005-08-25T19:27:05Z")
> [@Finagle](#): > > What is the false positive rate on the EPO test? How reliable is it? He’s in a high-risk group, so to speak, in that he’s among a population where the doping is fairly common. He tests positive six times, not once. If a gay man tests positive for AIDS six times, he should probably lay off the unprotected sex. > [@OP](#): > > …Mr. Armstrong provided his negative test results to the media. …[The newspaper] see the sample numbers and compare them with the sample numbers from Armstrong’s negative test results in 1999. So he’s connected to the tested samples because he forfeited his anonymity (sp?). Given this and all the testimony that seems to be out there, the OP’s conclusion does sound defensible. FYI: Read Gerd Gigerenzer’s _Calculated Risks_ to learn about this sort of thing. Every woman should read that book to understand the risks of breast cancer screening. ---
**Author:** ![Finagle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b19c9b/32.png) [@Finagle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Finagle)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/67 "2005-08-25T19:39:37Z")
> [@js\_africanus](#): > > He’s in a high-risk group, so to speak, in that he’s among a population where the doping is fairly common. He tests positive six times, not once. If a gay man tests positive for AIDS six times, he should probably lay off the unprotected sex. Meh. Bad analogy. The six tests came from, apparently, six legs of the same race. They aren’t what you’d call independent samples. \* If \* there was something in his blood that was causing a false positive, then it’s likely to be in all six samples taken from that period. But to continue your analogy, because he’s in the high risk group, they’ve apparently scrutinized this guy’s pee as closely as science allows for the past six years. Including, one imagines, with this latest test. And they’ve found nothing. And he’s kept on winning. It’s totally within the realm of possibility that the dopers are simply keeping one step ahead of the scientists. It’s also possible that there’s just nothing to find. I dunno. It’s also totally possible that Lance won the first Tour(s) while using EPO and then, once the spotlight was on him, had to compete without it. To me, that would be somewhat disappointing, but also be pretty impressive. ---
**Author:** ![js\_africanus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/87869e/32.png) [@js\_africanus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/js_africanus)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/68 "2005-08-25T19:55:21Z")
> [@Finagle](#): > > Meh. Bad analogy. The six tests came from, apparently, six legs of the same race. They aren’t what you’d call independent samples. \* If \* there was something in his blood that was causing a false positive, then it’s likely to be in all six samples taken from that period. No, it’s not a bad example. This isn’t a case of sampling from a population, this is a case of applying Bayes’s rule. ---
**Author:** ![Finagle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b19c9b/32.png) [@Finagle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Finagle)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/69 "2005-08-25T20:26:08Z")
> [@js\_africanus](#): > > No, it’s not a bad example. This isn’t a case of sampling from a population, this is a case of applying Bayes’s rule. You’re going to have to explain that one to me. Six samples increase our confidence that the test is positive for something. But as the article points out, the test has been known to generate false positives based on naturally occurring substances in some people. So six tests doesn’t increase our confidence that the substance was EPO or that the test itself is not flawed. ---
**Author:** ![threemae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f9b8f/32.png) [@threemae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/threemae)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/70 "2005-08-25T20:31:41Z")
> [@Finagle](#): > > To follow up my own post, in the article that threemae cite that started this thread, I note the last paragraph reads: > > "The test also has been recently overturned for producing false positives. Belgian triathlete Rutger Beke was cleared Aug. 9 of EPO doping charges despite two positive tests because a review showed he naturally excreted proteins that would give a positive result. " > > I’d like to hear opinions from Princhester and threemae about that. > There’s also something else that doesn’t add up for me. In 1999, there was apparently no test for EPO. Threemae and others claim that doping is rampant in biking (you know, with the wife getting stopped at the border with EPO and all). Yet only six other samples tested positive along with a lot of negatives (with no word on whether those six samples belonged to an individual or multiple people?) So you’re asking me to believe that Lance was virtually the only guy using EPO in the 1999 TDF? Color me dubious. Sure. If you want to get in a serious discussion about the validity of the test, you’re more than welcome to go there. Briefly, some individuals _do_ have a genetic disposition towards producing certain isoforms from their own natural EPO that will come back as positives in this EPO test. However, this is a long-standing and persistent trait. It’s like blood type or something similar, it won’t shift around during the course of your life-time. The reason that the Belgian triathlete was able to get off was by demonstrating that he was an individual like this and that he naturally _always_ produces a positive EPO control even though he isn’t using synthetic EPO. IF this were true for Lance Armstrong, he would have produced positive EPO controls at the start of this year’s Tour, all of his warm up races, etc. because, again, it’s a consistent and invariable trait for each individual. **fiveyearlurker** , you work in a research lab, don’t you? Frankly, this is a slightly different deal. While a research lab can afford to organize hundreds of vials with hand-written tape, whatever, the lab that produced this test processes thousands of samples monthly from French and international sport. Their tracking processes are doubtlessly more sophisitcated. Finally, for everyone bringing up the issue of _other_ riders being doped, I haven’t disagreed with you. Dope is a major problem and it infiltrates the peloton to a tragic level. I’ve never pitted Mr. Armstrong for being doped. It’s his actions regarding dope that I’ve criticised. ---
**Author:** ![threemae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f9b8f/32.png) [@threemae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/threemae)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/71 "2005-08-25T20:38:57Z")
> [@ouryL](#): > > Then it wasn’t a double blind test since he couldn’t have them(the numbers) if it were. No, it isn’t double blinded, but it is blinded where it matters. This is so that lab technicians, etc. can’t screw the results. People have criticized the results because it was a French lab, and as we all know, the French are raving lunatics with a single goal in life, to falsely impeach Lance Armstrong, so that’s why they are labled by number rather than name. ---
**Author:** ![threemae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f9b8f/32.png) [@threemae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/threemae)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/72 "2005-08-25T20:44:39Z")
> [@Finagle](#): > > Meh. Bad analogy. The six tests came from, apparently, six legs of the same race. They aren’t what you’d call independent samples. \* If \* there was something in his blood that was causing a false positive, then it’s likely to be in all six samples taken from that period… > It’s also totally possible that Lance won the first Tour(s) while using EPO and then, once the spotlight was on him, had to compete without it. To me, that would be somewhat disappointing, but also be pretty impressive. Sorry to have such broken up posts, but I’ve been leaving my computer for class. Anyway, I understand you’re point regarding not being completely independent samples, but they were spread out over three weeks. No, it isn’t possible that this false test is a result of left ever metabolites from his cancer treatment. The creators of the IMMULITE assay readily admit that it can only detect EPO use from a sample collected within three to four days after EPO use. The only plausible cause of a false positive on this test is being an individual that naturally produces EPO which looks like synthetic EPO in the isoform urine assay. Again, this is a permanent trait and would lead to him _always_ producing a positive result for this test, including all throughout this year’s Tour. ---
**Author:** ![Uvula\_Donor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/e19adc/32.png) [@Uvula\_Donor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uvula_Donor)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/73 "2005-08-25T20:50:49Z")
> [@wring](#): > > how’d I get dragged into this? I don’t even follow the **sport** , let alone any of the participants. It’s that silent “w”. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Finagle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b19c9b/32.png) [@Finagle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Finagle)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/74 "2005-08-25T20:52:34Z")
> [@threemae](#): > > Briefly, some individuals _do_ have a genetic disposition towards producing certain isoforms from their own natural EPO that will come back as positives in this EPO test. However, this is a long-standing and persistent trait. It’s like blood type or something similar, it won’t shift around during the course of your life-time. The reason that the Belgian triathlete was able to get off was by demonstrating that he was an individual like this and that he naturally _always_ produces a positive EPO control even though he isn’t using synthetic EPO. IF this were true for Lance Armstrong, he would have produced positive EPO controls at the start of this year’s Tour, all of his warm up races, etc. because, again, it’s a consistent and invariable trait for each individual. I guess, once again, I’d need to see the science here. Is it absolutely established that there’s no legal dietary supplement that might cause these proteins to appear in the urine? Assuming that Lance was given EPO during his cancer treatments, how long would it take for the markers to disappear? Days? Years? Would the stress of a long race release it from stored resources in the body? Again, if we’re asserting that doping is rampant during the races, what would account for so few positives showing up from the 1999 race? (In the lack of other evidence, I’m sort of assuming that the six other positives belonged to six tests from one other individual.) You might convince me that Lance was using, but can you convince me that he was the only one, or that he was using more than anyone else? Frankly, I find it much easier to believe in a fluke of biochemistry than that everyone else on the Tour was Simon Pure. ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/75 "2005-08-25T21:32:43Z")
I think some enormously salient issues are these were performed for experimental purposes, and the samples are six fucking years old. Had they been stored at -80 deg C or in LN2 I’d be a bit more confident, but dilute samples of protein in unbuffered aqueous solution do NOT remain stable indefinitely at -20 deg C, especially if the door to the freezer is opened and closed on a regular basis. These lab freezers are frost-free, but a fair amount of temperature cycling does occur due solely due to traffic, and if it’s in a testing lab, there’s a ton of traffic. If I freeze aliquots of any growth factor such as this and intend to use it to do an actual experiment, I store them at -80 deg C, and throw them out after a year if they’re not used up, usually in orders-of-magnitude (even several orders-of-magnitude) higher concentrations than one would expect to find in a urine sample, in a pH7.2-7.4 buffered saline, and I add carriers/stabilizer to prevent degradation and adhesion to the sample tubes to boot. Proteins can be highly stable, but at low concentration, in a solution with a pH potentially as low as 5.0 (or high as 8.0), containing urea, at relatively high temperature, I would be _highly_ sceptical of the result unless I knew for 100% certain that the samples had been undisturbed and kept in some temerature moderating vessel (like these [Stratacoolers](http://www.stratagene.com/products/displayProduct.aspx?pid=699)). Given that these samples were meant to be analyzed within days or weeks of collection, I _highly_ doubt they’ve been stored with such care. Likely they’ve sat in the back of some freezer in a typical cardboard cryostorage box, getting shuffled around as people rummage about inside to get at their samples of interest, set aside on a shelf at room temp. to make room occasionally, stuffed back in. Repeat about 1000 times over a 6-year span. So when somebody says they can detect traces of EPO in someone’s urine sample that’s that old, and has been stored in that manner, it’s a remarkable claim in itself, never mind who the claim is being made about. Questions about mishanding or tampering are perfectly legitimate, and absolutely need to be addressed with the highest standards of forensic care before going public with such potentially libelous claims. Add that the test results were not obtained under the ausipices of a sanctioned body for the purposes regulating competition, and leaked to a hostile news source, and my level of sceptisicm, plus the bullshit meter, has been pinned. So I’m calling major fucking bullshit on the whole story. If it weren’t for the idiotic extremes slanderers in this forum and elsewhere are willing to go to tar somebody for the sin of being too fucking good, I would never have dignified the notion with an even remotely carefully thought-out response. “Told you so”? Fuck off. This is a smear campaign, a pathetic manifestation of a national sports culture tainted with an inferiority complex bred generations ago. ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/76 "2005-08-25T21:37:49Z")
I think some enormously salient issues are these were performed for experimental purposes, and the samples are six fucking years old. Had they been stored at -80 deg C or in LN2 I’d be a bit more confident, but dilute samples of protein in unbuffered aqueous solution do NOT remain stable indefinitely at -20 deg C, especially if the door to the freezer is opened and closed on a regular basis. These lab freezers are frost-free, but a fair amount of temperature cycling does occur due solely due to traffic, and if it’s in a testing lab, there’s a ton of traffic. If I freeze aliquots of any growth factor such as this and intend to use it to do an actual experiment, I store them at -80 deg C, and throw them out after a year if they’re not used up, usually in orders-of-magnitude (even several orders-of-magnitude) higher concentrations than one would expect to find in a urine sample, in a pH7.2-7.4 buffered saline, and I add carriers/stabilizer to prevent degradation and adhesion to the sample tubes to boot. Proteins can be highly stable, but at low concentration, in a solution with a pH potentially as low as 5.0 (or high as 8.0), containing urea, at relatively high temperature, I would be _highly_ sceptical of the result unless I knew for 100% certain that the samples had been undisturbed and kept in some temerature moderating vessel (like these [Stratacoolers](http://www.stratagene.com/products/displayProduct.aspx?pid=699)). Given that these samples were meant to be analyzed within days or weeks of collection, I _highly_ doubt they’ve been stored with such care. Likely they’ve sat in the back of some freezer in a typical cardboard cryostorage box, getting shuffled around as people rummage about inside to get at their samples of interest, set aside on a shelf at room temp. to make room occasionally, stuffed back in. Repeat about 1000 times over a 6-year span. So when somebody says they can detect traces of EPO in someone’s urine sample that’s that old, and has been stored in that manner, it’s a remarkable claim in itself, never mind who the claim is being made about. Questions about mishanding or tampering are perfectly legitimate, and absolutely need to be addressed with the highest standards of forensic care before going public with such potentially libelous claims. Add that the test results were not obtained under the ausipices of a sanctioned body for the purposes regulating competition, and leaked to a hostile news source, and my level of sceptisicm, plus the bullshit meter, has been pinned. So I’m calling major fucking bullshit on the whole story. If it weren’t for the idiotic extremes slanderers in this forum and elsewhere are willing to go to tar somebody for the sin of being too fucking good, I would never have dignified the notion with an even remotely carefully thought-out response. “Told you so”? Fuck off. This is a smear campaign, a pathetic manifestation of a national sports culture tainted with an inferiority complex bred generations ago. ---
**Author:** ![vibrotronica](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/a9a28c/32.png) [@vibrotronica](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vibrotronica)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/77 "2005-08-25T21:50:12Z")
When I saved my pee in the freezer for six years, they called me crazy. Well who’s crazy now doctor? \Who’s the crazy one now???\ ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/78 "2005-08-25T22:01:33Z")
Sorry about the double-post. Not sure how that happened. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/79 "2005-08-25T22:13:07Z")
Some may find some more relevant info in this long [thread](http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=132748). At least you might between the usual did/didn’t stuff. ---
**Author:** ![Uvula\_Donor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/e19adc/32.png) [@Uvula\_Donor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uvula_Donor)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/80 "2005-08-25T22:55:15Z")
**threemae** , I’m not trying to be an asshole or anything, but what’s with you and Lance Armstrong? Did he run over your dog when you were a kid or something? Just wondering. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421.md?page=5)