A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Racing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 4th 04, 03:24 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...

Rumors have surrounded this guy for a while now. I personally do not
know him, but have ended up on the podium with him several times and
honestly have no ill feelings toward him. I tended to chalk up the
rumors to guys that were a little jealous of his results. In my naivety,
I thought that "Local" guys just didn't dope.

The bigger question I have after reading this is: Why the [email protected]#$ is he
being allowed to race after this positive test?!! Positive 4 months ago
and still racing. What is to dispute? Is there anyway this could
reasonably be a false positive? At Superweek he was flying and in
hindsight taking $ out of clean riders pockets. What message does this
send? I for one think the USCF should get its head out of the sand and
start testing at as many NRC races as possible.

------------cut--------------

Fuentes disputes positive

The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) has announced that Californian Dave
Fuentes is currently involved in the USADA adjudication process after
returning a positive test for oxymetholone metabolites at the Redlands
Classic on March 25, 2004. Fuentes is disputing the finding.

Oxymetholone is a steroid also known under the trade name Anadrol,
approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of
anemias caused by deficient red cell production. It has has been
demonstrated to have significant toxic side effects on the liver.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...ug04/aug04news
Ads
  #2  
Old August 4th 04, 04:09 PM
LMBenton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...

wrote in message
ervers.com...
Rumors have surrounded this guy for a while now. I personally do not
know him, but have ended up on the podium with him several times and
honestly have no ill feelings toward him. I tended to chalk up the
rumors to guys that were a little jealous of his results. In my naivety,
I thought that "Local" guys just didn't dope.

The bigger question I have after reading this is: Why the [email protected]#$ is he
being allowed to race after this positive test?!! Positive 4 months ago
and still racing. What is to dispute? Is there anyway this could
reasonably be a false positive? At Superweek he was flying and in
hindsight taking $ out of clean riders pockets. What message does this
send? I for one think the USCF should get its head out of the sand and
start testing at as many NRC races as possible.

------------cut--------------


What's the timetable for a doping test/ban?

How long does it take to get the results back, and after that, how long does
it take to make the announcement, etc...



  #3  
Old August 4th 04, 05:52 PM
Casey Kerrigan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...

In article rs.com,
wrote:

Rumors have surrounded this guy for a while now. I personally do not
know him, but have ended up on the podium with him several times and
honestly have no ill feelings toward him. I tended to chalk up the
rumors to guys that were a little jealous of his results. In my naivety,
I thought that "Local" guys just didn't dope.

The bigger question I have after reading this is: Why the [email protected]#$ is he
being allowed to race after this positive test?!! Positive 4 months ago
and still racing. What is to dispute? Is there anyway this could
reasonably be a false positive? At Superweek he was flying and in
hindsight taking $ out of clean riders pockets. What message does this
send? I for one think the USCF should get its head out of the sand and
start testing at as many NRC races as possible.

------------cut--------------


Riders have the right to appeal the results of the first test. This is
one reason why any sample taken is divided into two samples an A sample
and a B sample. If the A sample if found to be positive for drugs then
the rider can appeal and ask for the B sample to be tested. I believe
that even after the B sample is tested ( if it is also positive) the
rider can file an appeal and try to contest how the test was conducted
and other things like this. During the appeal process riders can keep
on racing. This is the same for any action a rider may be suspended for
( ie the right to appeal the suspension decision and the right to keep
racing untill the appeals process has run its course).

This isn't a case of the USCF/USAC condoning drug use it is a case of
giving riders a fair due process system before suspending them from
competition.
  #4  
Old August 4th 04, 08:47 PM
WooGoogle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...

I dunno if he took it or not, but why would one take steroids?
Wouldn't EPO result in better performance?

local guys not doping - check out Jame Carney's diary on
cyclingnews. He is adamant that a lot of local guys are doping and
because the USADA only tests one random rider at events when they
test, people can play the odds and dope and if USADA shows up to an
event, just don't get top three ( and a guaranteed doping test ).
Jame wants testing at every event possible for exactly this reason -
to weed out the cheaters.

wrote in message servers.com...
Rumors have surrounded this guy for a while now. I personally do not
know him, but have ended up on the podium with him several times and
honestly have no ill feelings toward him. I tended to chalk up the
rumors to guys that were a little jealous of his results. In my naivety,
I thought that "Local" guys just didn't dope.

The bigger question I have after reading this is: Why the [email protected]#$ is he
being allowed to race after this positive test?!! Positive 4 months ago
and still racing. What is to dispute? Is there anyway this could
reasonably be a false positive? At Superweek he was flying and in
hindsight taking $ out of clean riders pockets. What message does this
send? I for one think the USCF should get its head out of the sand and
start testing at as many NRC races as possible.

------------cut--------------

Fuentes disputes positive

The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) has announced that Californian Dave
Fuentes is currently involved in the USADA adjudication process after
returning a positive test for oxymetholone metabolites at the Redlands
Classic on March 25, 2004. Fuentes is disputing the finding.

Oxymetholone is a steroid also known under the trade name Anadrol,
approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of
anemias caused by deficient red cell production. It has has been
demonstrated to have significant toxic side effects on the liver.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...ug04/aug04news
  #5  
Old August 4th 04, 09:04 PM
TritonRider
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...

From: (WooGoogle)
Date: 8/4/2004 3:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

I dunno if he took it or not, but why would one take steroids?
Wouldn't EPO result in better performance?

local guys not doping - check out Jame Carney's diary on
cyclingnews. He is adamant that a lot of local guys are doping and
because the USADA only tests one random rider at events when they
test, people can play the odds and dope and if USADA shows up to an
event, just don't get top three ( and a guaranteed doping test ).
Jame wants testing at every event possible for exactly this reason -
to weed out the cheaters.

Sad but it looks like Brian may be sort of right, but he needs to include a
lot more sports too.

http://content.health.msn.com/conten.../92/101457.htm

Here's just some of it:
"Younger and Younger Kids Use Performance-Enhancing Drugs


Why is Yesalis startled? In the late 1980s, his research team published a study
in the Journal of the American Medical Association showing that at any one time
nearly 500,000 kids had used steroids. Now anabolic steroids aren't something
you take just once -- that would have no effect. Steroids are used in six- to
12-week cycles.


But that's not the scariest part. In June 2004, the CDC published its latest
figures on self-reported drug use among young people. It's called the Youth
Risk Behavior Surveillance or YRBS report.


"We had been looking at 1% to 2% of girls and 5% to 6% of guys who'd used
steroids," Yesalis says. "Now the girls are over 5%. You are talking more than
a million kids now. From 2001 to 2003, girls' steroid use went up 300%. Guys
went up 20% or so."


And the kids taking these drugs are getting younger. Among 12th graders, 3.3%
of girls and 6.4% of boys have used steroids at least once. But 7.3% of ninth
grade girls -- and 6.9% of ninth grade boys -- have already been using these
hormones. "

Bill C
  #6  
Old August 4th 04, 10:13 PM
Bob Schwartz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...

WooGoogle wrote:
I dunno if he took it or not, but why would one take steroids?
Wouldn't EPO result in better performance?


The assumption here is that the test catches everything.

There are testing statistics in the USADA annual report. From
http://www.usantidoping.org/files/ac...eport_2003.pdf
Page 36

Out of 6890 total tests only one came up positive for EPO. By that
I think one can conclude that either EPO doping is very, very rare
or that the test is ****. One or the other.

One would imagine that steriods are the most abused performance drug
but the testing does not support that. Out of those 6890 tests only
18 came up positive under 'Anabolic Agents'. Four of those were from
the Balco THG crowd, another 6 were Nandrolone-Oh-my-God-I-took-a-
contaminated-supplement positives. So again, the conclusion is
clearly that either no one is using or that the test is ****. Is the
reader an optimist or a pessimist? In the optimistic view the war
on drugs is all but won.

Frankly I think it was just blind chance that they caught Bergman.

With respect to Carney's views on the amount of testing that is done,
I think he is dead on. A friend in the triathlon arena tells me
that when would show up to a race with dope testing they would take
the top 5 plus *ten* randoms. Anthough that is from a larger base
of competitors than in a typical NRC event, it is still better
testing odds than top three plus one random.

To get an idea of just how seriously the US takes the issue of
maintaining a drug free Olympic movement one can just look at the
financial page. The entire top to bottom budget for the USADA is
$10.1 million including $4.3 million for testing. This is what
we spend to regulate the billion dollar industry that is US
Olympic athletics. A good comparision is Barry "The Juicer"
Bonds who signed a contract worth $90 after breaking baseball's
home run record.


Fuentes sounds like a real douchebag. The guy got popped which
means he was free to crank it up on anything he liked at
Superweek. What a classy way to leave the sport.

Bob Schwartz

  #7  
Old August 4th 04, 10:14 PM
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...

Casey Kerrigan wrote:
In article rs.com,
wrote:


Rumors have surrounded this guy for a while now. I personally do not
know him, but have ended up on the podium with him several times and
honestly have no ill feelings toward him. I tended to chalk up the
rumors to guys that were a little jealous of his results. In my naivety,
I thought that "Local" guys just didn't dope.

The bigger question I have after reading this is: Why the [email protected]#$ is he
being allowed to race after this positive test?!! Positive 4 months ago
and still racing. What is to dispute? Is there anyway this could
reasonably be a false positive? At Superweek he was flying and in
hindsight taking $ out of clean riders pockets. What message does this
send? I for one think the USCF should get its head out of the sand and
start testing at as many NRC races as possible.

------------cut--------------



Riders have the right to appeal the results of the first test. This is
one reason why any sample taken is divided into two samples an A sample
and a B sample. If the A sample if found to be positive for drugs then
the rider can appeal and ask for the B sample to be tested. I believe
that even after the B sample is tested ( if it is also positive) the
rider can file an appeal and try to contest how the test was conducted
and other things like this. During the appeal process riders can keep
on racing. This is the same for any action a rider may be suspended for
( ie the right to appeal the suspension decision and the right to keep
racing untill the appeals process has run its course).

This isn't a case of the USCF/USAC condoning drug use it is a case of
giving riders a fair due process system before suspending them from
competition.


Thanks for the info Casey. I agree due process is necessary.

I just feel it would be better for all involved if it moved along
faster; Fuentes if he is innocent or clean riders like me if he isn't.
He will have basically raced the entire 2004 season and potentially
taken away wins from clean riders before it is resolved.

I also feel that unless the USCF/USAC starts testing more, then drug use
is only going to increase. I very rarely see or hear about any testing
what-so-ever at US events.
  #8  
Old August 4th 04, 10:15 PM
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...

WooGoogle wrote:
I dunno if he took it or not, but why would one take steroids?
Wouldn't EPO result in better performance?


Don't know...

local guys not doping - check out Jame Carney's diary on
cyclingnews. He is adamant that a lot of local guys are doping and
because the USADA only tests one random rider at events when they
test, people can play the odds and dope and if USADA shows up to an
event, just don't get top three ( and a guaranteed doping test ).
Jame wants testing at every event possible for exactly this reason -
to weed out the cheaters.


I totally agree with Jame.

ps: have you seen Jonas's haircut lately ;-)

wrote in message servers.com...

Rumors have surrounded this guy for a while now. I personally do not
know him, but have ended up on the podium with him several times and
honestly have no ill feelings toward him. I tended to chalk up the
rumors to guys that were a little jealous of his results. In my naivety,
I thought that "Local" guys just didn't dope.

The bigger question I have after reading this is: Why the [email protected]#$ is he
being allowed to race after this positive test?!! Positive 4 months ago
and still racing. What is to dispute? Is there anyway this could
reasonably be a false positive? At Superweek he was flying and in
hindsight taking $ out of clean riders pockets. What message does this
send? I for one think the USCF should get its head out of the sand and
start testing at as many NRC races as possible.

------------cut--------------

Fuentes disputes positive

The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) has announced that Californian Dave
Fuentes is currently involved in the USADA adjudication process after
returning a positive test for oxymetholone metabolites at the Redlands
Classic on March 25, 2004. Fuentes is disputing the finding.

Oxymetholone is a steroid also known under the trade name Anadrol,
approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of
anemias caused by deficient red cell production. It has has been
demonstrated to have significant toxic side effects on the liver.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...ug04/aug04news

  #9  
Old August 4th 04, 10:20 PM
Bob Schwartz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...

Bob Schwartz wrote:
A good comparision is Barry "The Juicer"
Bonds who signed a contract worth $90 after breaking baseball's
home run record.


Of course that should be $90 *million*.

Bob Schwartz

  #10  
Old August 4th 04, 10:51 PM
Ewoud Dronkert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Fuentes disputes positive" or How the USCF promotes doping...

On Wednesday 04 August 2004 23:13, Bob Schwartz wrote:
There are testing statistics in the USADA annual report. From
http://www.usantidoping.org/files/ac...eport_2003.pdf
Page 36

Out of 6890 total tests only one came up positive for EPO. By that
I think one can conclude that either EPO doping is very, very rare
or that the test is ****. One or the other.


Or the window between using and testing positive is very small.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Doping or not? Read this: never_doped Racing 0 August 4th 03 01:46 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.