Kohl fesses up, omerta in full swing...

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...6news&from=rss

So he admits the obvious, another dent in the conspitacy theory
heralded by Kunich and Ilan and all the Landis groupies, but "admitted
that he doped with EPO CERA......which he undertook on his own..."

Sure, he went out and procured it on his own...Good old "omerta", if
he wants to come back he needs to serve his time and stay mum, poor
guy...

Keith wrote:
Sure, he went out and procured it on his own...Good old "omerta", if
he wants to come back he needs to serve his time and stay mum, poor
guy...

He gets two years regardless. No reason to talk.

Bob Schwartz

"Keith" wrote in message
news
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...6news&from=rss

So he admits the obvious, another dent in the conspitacy theory
heralded by Kunich and Ilan and all the Landis groupies, but "admitted
that he doped with EPO CERA......which he undertook on his own..."

Do you really suppose that your stupid remarks make the slightest
difference? What I said and what I meant was that when it counted the TdF
had tests done that broke their own rules and those of the UCI. What's more,
they performed tests on samples obtained through illicit means and the
testers knew who those samples were supposed to belong to.

I realize that you're not a chemist and don't understand that a great deal
of the testing is INTERPRETTED and that just knowing who the samples belong
to can tip those interpretations one way or the other.

This is NOT to say that it is done purposely. But even you might try to
recall that just recently a French lab was claiming a positive that a
Belgian lab using the same sample was saying was negative.

Sure, he went out and procured it on his own...Good old "omerta", if
he wants to come back he needs to serve his time and stay mum, poor
guy...

Implying that somehow I'm claiming that people aren't doping just makes you
look like a dope.

When test results are difficult to interpret at best, you have to follow an
absolutely strict code of ethics and that French lab has shown little to no
ethics concerning sample ID's, white-outs which are against regulations,
they can't even copy the sample numbers into the records properly making it
questionable whether the sample they're testing is the one they are LATER
claiming it was etc. etc. etc.

It's time to grow up Keith and understand that this sample testing stuff is
very critical and that even slight deviations from procedures can give you
entirely different results or interpretations.

On Oct 16, 2:06*am, Keith wrote:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...oct16news&from....

So he admits the obvious, another *dent in the conspitacy theory
heralded by Kunich and Ilan and all the Landis groupies, but "admitted
that he doped with EPO CERA......which he undertook on his own..."

Sure, he went out and procured it on his own...Good old "omerta", if
he wants to come back he needs to serve his time and stay mum, poor
guy...

After reading statements such as:

"The test for CERA, the new form of EPO, "is one hundred-percent
sure," the expert for blood-doping at the Lausanne, Switzerland anti-
doping lab says"

from http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...ct08/oct12news
and similar statements by Brodry, I accept that science no longer has
any bearing with current dope testing.

-ilan

On Oct 15, 8:11*pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
"Keith" wrote in message

news
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...oct16news&from....

So he admits the obvious, another *dent in the conspitacy theory
heralded by Kunich and Ilan and all the Landis groupies, but "admitted
that he doped with EPO CERA......which he undertook on his own..."

Do you really suppose that your stupid remarks make the slightest
difference? What I said and what I meant was that when it counted the TdF
had tests done that broke their own rules and those of the UCI. What's more,
they performed tests on samples obtained through illicit means and the
testers knew who those samples were supposed to belong to.

Who's samples were obtained via illicit means?

wrote in message
...
On Oct 15, 8:11 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:

Do you really suppose that your stupid remarks make the slightest
difference? What I said and what I meant was that when it counted the
TdF
had tests done that broke their own rules and those of the UCI. What's
more,
they performed tests on samples obtained through illicit means and the
testers knew who those samples were supposed to belong to.

Who's samples were obtained via illicit means?

Armstrong's among others. Then after the "sample" was used up completely it
was reported to be positive despite the fact that there was no possibility
to second test.

And if you look here you'll see that all of this stuff is still very
questionable:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1...ubmed_RVDocSum

Tom is watching and cheering on Mccain presently. He is unavailable at
this time.

On Oct 15, 9:11*pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
"Keith" wrote in message

news
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...oct16news&from....

So he admits the obvious, another *dent in the conspitacy theory
heralded by Kunich and Ilan and all the Landis groupies, but "admitted
that he doped with EPO CERA......which he undertook on his own..."

Do you really suppose that your stupid remarks make the slightest
difference? What I said and what I meant was that when it counted the TdF
had tests done that broke their own rules and those of the UCI. What's more,
they performed tests on samples obtained through illicit means and the
testers knew who those samples were supposed to belong to.

I realize that you're not a chemist and don't understand that a great deal
of the testing is INTERPRETTED and that just knowing who the samples belong
to can tip those interpretations one way or the other.

This is NOT to say that it is done purposely. But even you might try to
recall that just recently a French lab was claiming a positive that a
Belgian lab using the same sample was saying was negative.

Sure, he went out and procured it on his own...Good old "omerta", if
he wants to come back he needs to serve his time and stay mum, poor
guy...

Implying that somehow I'm claiming that people aren't doping just makes you
look like a dope.

When test results are difficult to interpret at best, you have to follow an
absolutely strict code of ethics and that French lab has shown little to no
ethics concerning sample ID's, white-outs which are against regulations,
they can't even copy the sample numbers into the records properly making it
questionable whether the sample they're testing is the one they are LATER
claiming it was etc. etc. etc.

It's time to grow up Keith and understand that this sample testing stuff is
very critical and that even slight deviations from procedures can give you
entirely different results or interpretations.

So, who provided the DOPE Bernie? Who put you in contact with that
Doctor? Sing BABY Sing

On Oct 15, 8:06*pm, Keith wrote:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...oct16news&from....

So he admits the obvious, another *dent in the conspitacy theory
heralded by Kunich and Ilan and all the Landis groupies, but "admitted
that he doped with EPO CERA......which he undertook on his own..."

Sure, he went out and procured it on his own...Good old "omerta", if
he wants to come back he needs to serve his time and stay mum, poor
guy...

Bob Schwartz wrote:
Keith wrote:
Sure, he went out and procured it on his own...Good old "omerta", if
he wants to come back he needs to serve his time and stay mum, poor
guy...

He gets two years regardless. No reason to talk.

Though if he does, it improves the chance that others who declare their
innocence are telling the truth.

On Oct 15, 6:11*pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:


I realize that you're not a chemist and don't understand that a great deal
of the testing is INTERPRETTED and that just knowing who the samples belong
to can tip those interpretations one way or the other.


snip



Dumbass -


How dense can you get? Obviously, very.

Kohl admitted it.


thanks,

K. Gringioni.