re: #10 Destro

Am I the only one who Googles?

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/2005-08-24-armstrong-samples-details_x.htm

Weirdly misleading headline, given the meat of the story:

” The lab did not identify the samples as being from Armstrong, and the testing was done with assurances that identification of the samples would be confidential and not used for doping enforcement. But L’Equipe reporters matched the samples’ identification numbers in the lab report with information Armstrong released to French judicial investigators in a 2000 doping probe.

Armstrong has been at odds with French doping officials and media since his 1999 win, but he never has been linked to a positive test, a point he emphasized in his prepared rebuttal.

“The paper even admits in its own article that the science in question here is faulty and that I have no way to defend myself,” Armstrong said in a statement released late Monday night. “They state: ‘There will therefore be no counter-exam nor regulatory prosecutions, in a strict sense, since defendant’s rights cannot be respected.’ I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance-enhancing drugs.”

Based on the information published byL’Equipe, it is unlikely a legal result of positive can be determined for the 1999 urine samples from Armstrong. When blood and urine samples are processed for testing, the fluids are separated into two batches: A and B. The standard method for verifying a positive doping result requires that the A sample be tested first; if that is positive, the B sample then is tested. Positives cannot be declared unless both A and B samples are positive.”