Bill C wrote:

On Jul 24, 9:35 am, MagillaGorilla wrote:


Can you give an example of when a rider's confidentiality was violated
by WADA or the labs?

Magilla- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Where the **** do you think the leaks are coming from, the tooth
fairy? The UCI has been responsible for some too, but not the current
ones.
We're not gonna get names because the press protects "their"
sleazeballs. It's BS they can print **** from "unmamed sources" and
ruin people with it.
Bill C


The leaks are coming from someone in the athlete's entourage (when the
athlete is notified of the positive A-sample, they tell lots of people).
The "leaks" are also coming from the federation when they're notified.

But none of the leaks are coming from WADA or the labs. The lab
workers don't even know who the **** it is who tested positive because
all they have is a number ID.

Second - what ****ing difference does it make given that in 99.999% of
allpositive A-tests, the athlete is found guilty. You appear to be
calling a "violation of a rider's confidentiality" what is really just a
delay.

Once the federation is notified, they can make it public if they want.

Where are you coming up with this confidentialuty violation stuff? And
second, what difference does it make given that they are all found
guilty anyway. All you seem to be arguing about is a silly delay in
notifing the public should take place. Why is that such a big deal to you?


Magilla