's Forum Archives - General

Archive Home >> General(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 )

Garzzelli test "Non-Negative"!! Should he be tossed??(10 posts)

Garzzelli test "Non-Negative"!! Should he be tossed??Cima Coppi
May 18, 2002 3:27 AM
Well I must say I am a bit disappointed in my pick to win his second Giro. Cycling News this morning is reporting the anti-doping tests in the Giro have resulted in finding a banned substance ("likely probenecid") in Garzelli's test sample. You can read about it here:

Should he be tossed from the competition? Why should this banned substance be treated any different from the more serious banned substances such as EPO or NESP, especially if the substance in question can be used as a masking agent?

What are your thoughts? In my opinion, the Giro is shooting itself in the foot for not taking a harder stand on this issue. Do they think Garzelli is a "clean" savior who can correct the scandal from last year's Giro?

re: Garzzelli test "Non-Negative"!! Should he be tossed??cyclopathic
May 18, 2002 4:16 AM
Lance was tested once on TdF positive on cortisone which came from cream he used for saddle sores. With respect to Garzelli he is likely doping but I'd give it a benefit of doubt. Afterall they didn't find "performance enhancing" substances, only "masking" diuretic, maybe he is just full of it and needed relieve ;). Innocent before proven guilty.

The UCI list of "banned" substances is very eclectic at best, and some of the "banned" substances are present in overcounter medications, easy to get caught.
So you think he took a masking agentspeedisgood
May 18, 2002 5:14 AM
accidently in a cold medication? Or that it was used for a legit purpose? Come on, either he's trying to hide something, the test was a false positive, or the results were from tampering.

You don't just take known banned substances unless you're trying to hide bigger ones. While I agree with "innocent until proven guilty", I consider this test proof of guilt.

I think they should kick him out and ban him unless there's proven to be some other circumstances that justify the presence of a banned substance in his urine (tampering, medical justification, etc.)

The UCI needs to take a harder line in the doping "war" if they're going to make a lasting impact. Look at all the other guys booted for full-on doping (eg., the Panaria guys.) It's obvious that current controls aren't eliminating drug use, just curtailing it.

My 2 cents.
no I think any diuretic should be bannedcyclopathic
May 18, 2002 6:22 AM
it helps to drop dead weight and improves climbing.

It's possible the chemical substance is present in other medication and/or he just got something from team doc or someone else. If you're constipated /side effect of dehydration/ would you think that "that pill" might be a banned?

As I said there was an example of cortisone found in Lance blood in TdF which french media jumped on and accused Lance of doping.

I certainly agree on taking harder line on dope, the problem is that some test have less then 70% accuracy. Many doping cases get thrown out of court because of lack of prove, meanwhile the damage is done.

I am sure Giro organazers took the most sensitive line. They can't affort to through out popular rider without solid prove. If he is caught the second test would show it, so what if he rides a couple more stages?
Looks like little Marco was right! <eom>Pneumo
May 18, 2002 5:49 AM
Do two "non-negatives" make a positive?Pneumo
May 18, 2002 5:50 AM
Good questionEJC
May 18, 2002 8:04 AM
It is important to note that a "non'negative" is NOT a positive!

Unfortunately, the levels of testing and ratings/results are as convoluted and complex as the euthanasia issues. With dope tests you have positives, false-postives, false-negatives, non-negatives, negatives, and more.

How they use these results vis-a-vis giving riders the boot or not is equally complicated.

BUT, remember that non-negatives are NOT positiives.

I am too damn confused. I'd go ride on this Saturday if it weren't SNOWING FOR CHRISSAKES!!! Yes, that is right, it is SNOWING HERE!!!


Adios garzellizooog
May 18, 2002 6:38 AM
I think he should be tossed. See ya
May 18, 2002 7:11 AM
garzelli! he should be blown out, with all the pomp and circumstance that he deserves. why take nesp? it forces you to take a masking agent. if they don't find the nesp, which isn't difficult to find as it is not produced by the body, they will find the masking agent. mapei is in denial as well. the whole "spiked drink" theory? it's not a date rape drug you morons! i can hear the garzelli interview now:
reporter: "are you saying that someone spiked your drink?"
garzelli: "yes! i was at the club last night and had a drink. i felt funny and went to bed. this morning i woke up and could climb better than ever. someone MUST have slipped me something!"
give me a break. sack his ass and move on! watch the tour tape from last year. if he's such a great climber, why does lance go by him like he was riding by a cat 4 woman?
diuretics, in this case, help reduce leg and foot swelling and the "heavy leg" feeling you get after riding many days in a row. of course, a good leg rub and sleeping with your feet elevated will do the same thing!
ah, the giro.
re: Garzzelli test &quot;Non-Negative&quot;!! Should he be tossed??Iseemo
May 20, 2002 5:23 AM
NO. I would allow any rider the benefit of 2 tests. Laboratory tests are only as good as the people running them and people make mistakes. I think it would be much worse for the sport to toss out a " clean" rider after one test than a "dirty" rider after two.