Landis fails drug test - or do drugs tests fail Landis?

[andyandy]

this particular test looks at the testosterone/epitestosterone ratio - and then compares it to "norms" to decide whether or not someone has used drugs....

but surely for elite atheletes, doesn't the simple fact that they are elite mean that they may be benefiting from extraordinary biological systems? How can such tests, which measure against norms be conclusive?
(to what deviation from the mean would be regarded as a suspicious - 3 standard deviations, 4? more?)

Just four days after riding triumphantly through the streets of Paris, Tour de France winner Floyd Landis has been implicated in the latest drugs scandal to hit cycling, after testing positive for testosterone.
Landis's test came following his incredible victory in stage 17, when - a day after losing eight minutes to the leaders after bonking during the final climb up the La Toussuire les Sybelles - he broke away from the peleton in the Alps to put himself back in the running.

"The Phonak cycling team was notified yesterday by the UCI [cycling's governing body] of an unusual level of testosterone/epitestosterone ratio in the test made on Floyd Landis after stage 17 of the Tour de France," said Phonak in a statement. "The team management and the rider were both totally surprised of this physiological result."http://sport.guardian.co.uk/tourdefrance2006/story/0,,1831777,00.html



some info on the T/E ratio.....
Testosterone, which is a natural hormone in humans, is a prohibited substance, but only on condition that the ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone exceeds the range of values normally found in humans and is not consistent with normal endogenous production. The upper limit of this ratio has been 6:1. The sample will, however, not be regarded as positive for testosterone when an athlete proves by clear and convincing evidence that the abnormal ratio or concentration is attributable to a pathological or physiological condition.2

In the Mary Slaney-Decker Case (1999) this ratio was between 9.5:1 and 11.6:1. The IAAF Arbitration Panel had no doubt that such a ratio exceeded the range of values normally found in humans. The Panel referred to scientific studies according to which many thousands of tests on athletes had shown very few ratios higher than 6:1. The Panel also noted that the ratios of the samples of Mary Slaney-Decker taken in previous years had ranged between 0.6:1 and 3.0:1. Because Slaney-Decker failed to establish clear and convincing evidence that her abnormal testosterone/epitestosterone ratio was attributable to pathological or physiological conditions, she was deemed to have committed a doping offence and was declared ineligible.
http://www.blues.uab.es/olympic.studies/doping/tarasti.htm

and according to this site, the 6;1 ratio has been exceeded naturally (i assume rarely) in the past.....

The ratio of the concentration of testosterone glucuronide to the concentration of epitestosterone glucuronide (T/E ratio) as determined in urine is the most frequently used method to prove testosterone abuse by athletes. A T/E ratio higher than 6 has been considered as proof of abuse in the past; however, cases of naturally occurring higher T/E ratios have been described. Since the introduction of the T/E ratio in doping analysis, the parameters that may or may not influence the T/E ratio, possibly leading to false-positive results, have been debated.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10732948&dopt=Abstract

so could landis be a victim of doping inaccuracies - or is he a dirty drugs cheat?

*nb i've actually no interest in cycling - but it's an interesting topic nonetheless....

[Hawk one]

I don't know about testosterone, but I know that when it comes to EPO testing, they first establish the norm for the particular athlete through a series of tests over a few weeks, and then have this ready in a database. Some cross-country skiers, for example, are known to constantly have a higher EPO level than is ordinary. This is why a high EPO level in itself won't get you thrown out for two years.

But if it's past a certain point, you will be denied starting on that particular day for health reasons.

Anyway, that was EPO, and I should think that something similar would be done with the testosterone tests... Though I admit I do not actually -know- this.

[andyandy]

I don't know about testosterone, but I know that when it comes to EPO testing, they first establish the norm for the particular athlete through a series of tests over a few weeks, and then have this ready in a database. Some cross-country skiers, for example, are known to constantly have a higher EPO level than is ordinary. This is why a high EPO level in itself won't get you thrown out for two years.

But if it's past a certain point, you will be denied starting on that particular day for health reasons.

Anyway, that was EPO, and I should think that something similar would be done with the testosterone tests... Though I admit I do not actually -know- this.

yeah...that would certainly make sense....it would remove the potential excuse of "but my T/E ratio is naturally high...." maybe that's what they do.....

[MichelQC]

Most, if not all, of the cyclist at that level take some form or another of "medication" to help them perform. Anyway, let's just wait until this is all confirmed before we condemn the guy.

[geni]

and according to this site, the 6;1 ratio has been exceeded naturally (i assume rarely) in the past.....



There is an appeals process where he could claim that is what happened.

[andyandy]

sounds like it could take a while to resolve....

The test is a complex one, because testosterone is naturally occurring. The ratio of the hormone to its shadow epitestosterone is measured and if it is over six-to-one, then the hormone is assumed to have been artificially administered. Appeals are sometimes accepted on the grounds that the cyclist has a naturally high level, or that the ratio is due to a medical condition, or occurred naturally.

This means it is highly likely that the Landis test will become a lengthy saga such as Tyler Hamilton's positive for blood doping, which took 17 months to confirm. The ICU is currently dealing with a disputed testosterone positive for the Spaniard Inigo Landaluze, who competed in this year's Tour. In the past, the Colombian Santiago Botero, king of the mountains in the 2000 Tour, is the biggest name to have fought a testosterone positive, and he won his case on medical grounds.http://sport.guardian.co.uk/tourdefrance2006/story/0,,1832060,00.html

[StewartP]

Stage winners are automatically tested. I feel and hope that if Landis had intentionally doped on Testosterone he would have known he'd be tested and caught had he won the stage.
Which he did.
So he wouldn't have.
Follow?

Testosterone is a naturally human hormone so it is possible that the trials and tribulations of his crash and burn the day before, overnight rehydration, and anger during the stage itself (remember the uncharactaristic fist at the finish line) produced a high level of testosterone in his body.

Or he could have been doped unknowingly, but again, my (twisted) logic in the first para would apply to anyone in his team management too.

I'm hoping its a test cock-up and test 2 comes out clean.

And if that's the case I'm also hoping the press and the mob believe it too.

[Lothian]

Stage winners are automatically tested. I feel and hope that if Landis had intentionally doped on Testosterone he would have known he'd be tested and caught had he won the stage.
Which he did.
So he wouldn't have.
Follow?
Unless he thought it would be masked somehow.

[NeilC]

It's a very weak argument that people wouldn't cheat because they know they are going to be tested. If this was worked then we wouldn't have all these drug takers in sport.

They time and mask their useage to get around the tests. Sometimes they get it wrong.

BTW, I was under the impression that long distance endurance training causes a drop in testosterone which makes a big result like that very suspicious.

[MilwaukeeMike]

Come on, the man needs his hip replaced. Did anyone actually think he did this on his own???

[shemp]

Hypothetical question:

Rider A has a naturally-occurring testosterone to epitestosterone ratio of 9:1. Rider B has a naturally-occurring testosterone to epitestosterone ratio of 2:1. At the end of a race, both riders are tested and show a testosterone to epitestosterone ratio of 9:1. Rider B is disqualified. Rider A is not disqualified.

Questions: 1. Is a high testosterone to epitestosterone ratio really beneficial to performance? 2. If so, why should riders be penalized for bringing their testosterone to epitestosterone ratio up to the same level as naturally occurs in a competitor?

[Jaggy Bunnet]

It's a very weak argument that people wouldn't cheat because they know they are going to be tested. If this was worked then we wouldn't have all these drug takers in sport.

They time and mask their useage to get around the tests. Sometimes they get it wrong.

BTW, I was under the impression that long distance endurance training causes a drop in testosterone which makes a big result like that very suspicious.

The test is on the ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone, not an overall level of testosterone - at least that is my understanding from here:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/more/specials/tour_de_france/2006/07/27/landis.doping/index.html

"Under World Anti-Doping Agency regulations, a ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone greater than 4:1 is considered a positive result and subject to investigation. The threshold was recently lowered from 6:1. The most likely natural ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone in humans is 1:1.

Testosterone is included as an anabolic steroid on WADA's list of banned substances, and its use can be punished by a two-year ban.

Testosterone can build muscle and improve recovery time when used over a period of several weeks, said Dr. Gary Wadler, a member of the World Anti-Doping Agency and a spokesman for the American College of Sports Medicine. But if Landis had been a user, his earlier urine tests during the tour would have been affected, he said.

"So something's missing here," Wadler said. "It just doesn't add up.""

So the actual level of testosterone is not what is tested, only the ratio.

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Hypothetical question:

Rider A has a naturally-occurring testosterone to epitestosterone ratio of 9:1. Rider B has a naturally-occurring testosterone to epitestosterone ratio of 2:1. At the end of a race, both riders are tested and show a testosterone to epitestosterone ratio of 9:1. Rider B is disqualified. Rider A is not disqualified.

Questions: 1. Is a high testosterone to epitestosterone ratio really beneficial to performance? 2. If so, why should riders be penalized for bringing their testosterone to epitestosterone ratio up to the same level as naturally occurs in a competitor?

If it is naturally occuring it is not a doping offence. Of course they will need to demonstrate that it is naturally occuring.

[wipeout]

In the past, the Colombian Santiago Botero, king of the mountains in the 2000 Tour, is the biggest name to have fought a testosterone positive, and he won his case on medical grounds.

http://sport.guardian.co.uk/tourdefrance2006/story/0,,1832060,00.html

Botero's team doctor was the guy at the center of the massive doping scandal that took Ullrich, etc. out of this years tour, Dr. Fuentes.

Landis' former teammate Santiago Botero managed to prove he had high testosterone levels in 1999, while Botero was a member of the Kelme team and his team doctor was Dr. Eufemiano Fuentes, the Spanish gynaecologist at the heart of the Operación Puerto investigation.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=features/2006/phonak_legacy

This article talks about how Phonak has had nine doping scandals in only two years and Landis is the latest one.

[Pup]

I think Shemp's hypothetical question is an interesting one, if I'm understanding it right.

Does this mean that a man with naturally far-below-normal testosterone, who would usually receive treatment from a doctor to bring it up to normal, must decide between receiving treatment or participating in certain sports?

[shemp]

If it is naturally occuring it is not a doping offence. Of course they will need to demonstrate that it is naturally occuring.

That isn't the point. The point of my question is, if someone has a naturally occurring advantage over another athlete, why shouldn't someone be allowed to take some of that substance to bring his level up to match?

However, I've given this some thought since posting the question. I think if you allow someone to take testosterone to bring their performance up to someone else's level, then it's no different than allowing someone to take steroids to build up their muscles to the same level as someone else who worked out without steroids to get those muscles. So I'm satisfied now that taking testosterone to improve preformance is as wrong as taking steroids.

[shemp]

I think Shemp's hypothetical question is an interesting one, if I'm understanding it right.

Does this mean that a man with naturally far-below-normal testosterone, who would usually receive treatment from a doctor to bring it up to normal, must decide between receiving treatment or participating in certain sports?

He might have to, unless he could convince the governing sports federation to give him a medical waiver.

[Ririon]

Does this mean that a man with naturally far-below-normal testosterone, who would usually receive treatment from a doctor to bring it up to normal, must decide between receiving treatment or participating in certain sports?
Yes it does. Most of the items on the doping list, including testosterone, are useful medicines for various diseases. If you have to take them for legitimate medical reasons, you must stop competing until the effect can no longer benefit you in a competition.

[andyandy]

looks like Justin Gatlin's going to need the same lawyer...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/athletics/5228060.stm

World and Olympic 100m champion Justin Gatlin is facing a lifetime ban after confirmation that his B sample tested positive for testosterone.
The American announced on Saturday that he had failed a doping test in April.

And anti-doping chief Dick Pound and Gatlin's lawyer Cameron Myler told Five Live on Sunday that the 24-year-old's B sample also tested positive.

[davefoc]

One thing seems clear to me here.

If the outside world is to make any decision about the reliability of thiese tests a lot more transparency is required on the part of the testing organizations.

What are the actual rations that are getting these folks banned? In the Landis case what were the rations prior to and subsequent to the positive result?

And a bit of a follow up on Shemp's questions. I think Shemp was asking a philosophical question about the whole idea of elite athlete sports. What is the poin?. Will we arrive at the time where we just shuffle through the population looking for the particular collection of genes that will provide for optimal performance and the poor fellows that don't have those unique combinations will have no chance since they won't be allowed to use chemicals to substitute for the advantages that the natural occuring freaks have?

[wipeout]

There are now two media reports/rumours of both a testosterone/epitestosterone ratio of 11:1 for Landis in his test result -- 1:1 being normal and 4:1 being the agreed doping level -- and another test showing the testosterone to be not from his body:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2006/jul06/jul31news

[a_unique_person]

He had nothing to lose, he thought he could tough it out.

[davefoc]

I thought Landis was probably telling the truth. It's looking a little less likely right now.

That IRMS test sounds flat out amazing. Exogenis testosterone has a different ration between C12 and C13 than testoterone produced in the body? I wonder why. And whatever the cause I suspect that the effect is very tiny and very difficult to accurately detect.

From this site:
http://www.measurement.gov.au/index.cfm?event=object.showContent&objectID=B54CCEF6-BCD6-81AC-148843FC82CAB33E
By measuring the C12:C13 ratio of steroids detected in urine, GC-IRMS can distinguish between administered and naturally occurring steroids and can identify steroid abuse in cases that would have previously gone undetected. The application of this technique is not simple - the instrumentation is expensive because of the high precision required, and larger sample sizes are needed, which increases the amount of sample preparation required before analysis. In March 1999 a GC-IRMS instrument was installed. Measurement of T/E ratio will continue to be used for routine screening of urine samples, with GC-IRMS used as a complementary test, particularly to confirm suspicious results.

[Bjorn]

There are now two media reports/rumours of both a testosterone/epitestosterone ratio of 11:1 for Landis in his test result -- 1:1 being normal and 4:1 being the agreed doping level -- and another test showing the testosterone to be not from his body:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2006/jul06/jul31newsIt has been pointed out that Landis' thyroid problems, the treatment of his inflamed hip with corticosteroids, as well as drinking alcohol on the night prior to stage 17, could be factors which could have affected his testosterone levels. "As soon as an athlete is controlled positive for testosterone, the same old stories come up," Ayotte continued. "The increase, even if natural, of the ratio testosterone/epitestosterone cannot, in any case, be explained by taking thyroid hormones or corticosteroids. Alcohol can in fact influence it, but only with women, and only for three or four hours."The same excuses every time ... I'll bet a dollar he is guilty and will be found guilty.

[Aepervius]

That IRMS test sounds flat out amazing. Exogenis testosterone has a different ration between C12 and C13 than testoterone produced in the body? I wonder why.

Probably the same reason the C12/C14 ratio is different in living animals/plants than in long dead one...

EAT see Wiki on gas chromatography :

Medicine

In combination with isotopic labelling of metabolic compounds, the GC-MS is used for determining metabolic activity. Most applications are based on the use of C13 as the labelling and the measurement of C13/C12 ratios with an isotope ratio mass spectrometer (IRMS); an MS with a detector designed to measure a few select ions and return values as ratios.

[davefoc]

I've been doing a little reading about the C12/C13 ratio.

I haven't found a solid source, but apparently the idea is that different people eat different foods. Different foods have different C12/C13 ratios which leads to people having unique c12/c13 ratios. Your own testosterone will have the same C12/C13 ratio has everything else that is created in your body. Exogenis testosterone is detected when the C12/C13 ratio is different than for substances created in the body.

C13 is different from C14 in that C13 is stable and does not automatically decay to some other isotope.

One interesting, but unrelated thing, I discovered as a result of looking for more information on the C12/C13 ratio is that measurement of the ratio is one technique for determining if the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere is anthropogenic or not. Fossil fuels have slightly different C12/C13 ratios than the CO2 in the atmosphere. If the rise in CO2 is caused by the burning of fossil fuels a change in the C12/C13 ratio would be expected with an increase in the CO2 level. This is exactly what is found.

[Silly Green Monkey]

Alcohol depresses testosterone in men, that's why drinking too much gives men breasts. The estrogen is no long in such a minority.

[mac]

Yes it does. Most of the items on the doping list, including testosterone, are useful medicines for various diseases. If you have to take them for legitimate medical reasons, you must stop competing until the effect can no longer benefit you in a competition.

Athlete's may request Therapeutic Use Exemptions.

As per WADA's website:

The purpose of the International Standard for TUE is to ensure that the process of granting TUEs is harmonized across sports and countries.


What is a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE)?

Athletes, like all others, may have illnesses or conditions that require them to take particular medications. If the medication an athlete is required to take to treat an illness or condition happens to fall under the Prohibited List, a Therapeutic Use Exemption may give that athlete the authorization to take the needed medicine.

What are the criteria for granting a TUE?

The criteria are:

¨ The athlete would experience significant health problems without taking the prohibited substance or method,

¨ The therapeutic use of the substance would not produce significant enhancement of performance, and

¨ There is no reasonable therapeutic alternative to the use of the otherwise prohibited substance or method.

[Ririon]

I stand corrected, mac. :)

[mac]

I stand corrected, mac. :)

Oops, sorry for being abrupt - it's late here and I'm hungry (still at work). The WADA site is quite informative - I've looked in quite a bit. They're a helpful bunch too. Great if one's an athlete - guess a few more could look in more often. ;-)

[Bjorn]

"The UCI communicates (http://www.news.com.au/sundayheraldsun/story/0,21985,20032477-11088,00.html) that the analysis of the sample B of Floyd Landis's urine has confirmed the result of an adverse analytical finding notified by the anti-doping laboratory of Paris on 26th July, following the analysis of the sample A,"

[davefoc]

It seemed likely that results from the second sample would match the first. I have a few questions though about the situation.

1. Was the testing done in physically different labs by different people?

2. Was the correlation between the two results good enough to suggest that the testing was reliable?

3. Has there been an official release of the quantitative results?

4. I understand that some of the quantitative results have been leaked but were they leaked accurately and why were they leaked instead of just being released officially?

5. How solid is the evidence that an 11 to 1 (assuming the leaked result is accurate) ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone is proof of doping?

6. How reliable is the ion ratio test as proof of uptake of exogenis testosterone?

7. Could any of the medications that Landis was taking have contributed to the result?

8. Are there any plausible scenarios whereby Landis could have received drugs that could explain these results without his knowledge?

[Bjorn]

It seemed likely that results from the second sample would match the first. I have a few questions though about the situation.

1. Was the testing done in physically different labs by different people?

2. Was the correlation between the two results good enough to suggest that the testing was reliable?

3. Has there been an official release of the quantitative results?

4. I understand that some of the quantitative results have been leaked but were they leaked accurately and why were they leaked instead of just being released officially?

5. How solid is the evidence that an 11 to 1 (assuming the leaked result is accurate) ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone is proof of doping?

6. How reliable is the ion ratio test as proof of uptake of exogenis testosterone?

7. Could any of the medications that Landis was taking have contributed to the result?

8. Are there any plausible scenarios whereby Landis could have received drugs that could explain these results without his knowledge?I don't know. What I do know is that the probability of a confession sometime later is relatively high - so far, the story has developed very much the usual way.

I didn't do it.
It's natural for me. Not usually, but that day it was.
Not my natural testosterone?
Something I ate or drank.
Not in food or drinks?
Someone must have drugged me without my knowledge.
.......
OK - my coach gave it to me.
I didn't know what it was.
I trusted him

Why not confess now and get it over with, like a gentleman?

OSLO, Aug 5 (Reuters (http://sport.guardian.co.uk/breakingnews/feedstory/0,,-5995641,00.html)) - Norwegian sprinter Aham Okeke faces a life ban from competition after being caught and then confessing to using the male sex hormone testosterone, anti-doping officials said on Saturday.

[davefoc]

Wow, Norway has a sprinter. Being of partially Norwegian ancestry it is difficult for me to imagine somebody related to me being a sprinter. Maybe its my English genes that really slow me down, or maybe the Swedish ones.

ETA: As to the idea he's really guilty: I'm such a sap. I just tend to believe people when they claim they're innocent. I am still holding out hope. But this is just really not looking good for him. Still there is the argument that Testosterone would not have been all that beneficial taken on a short term basis like it seems to have been here. Do we know anything about how many drug tests he had leading up to this one and what the results were?

[Ririon]

Wow, Norway has a sprinter. Being of partially Norwegian ancestry it is difficult for me to imagine somebody related to me being a sprinter. Maybe its my English genes that really slow me down, or maybe the Swedish ones.

Well, I don't think Aham Okeke's ancestry is very Norwegian, if that clears things up. :p Norway did in fact have a decent sprinter (top European level) who was ethnically Norwegian a few of years ago (Geir Moen). At least he looked Norwegian, I have not checked his family tree. :p Disclaimer: You may not call me a racist because of this post.

[Bjorn]

Wow, Norway has a sprinter. Being of partially Norwegian ancestry it is difficult for me to imagine somebody related to me being a sprinter. Maybe its my English genes that really slow me down, or maybe the Swedish ones.Well, he's born and raised in Nigeria. On the other hand, a "real" Norwegian won the 800 meters in Atlanta ...

ETA: As to the idea he's really guilty: I'm such a sap. I just tend to believe people when they claim they're innocent. I am still holding out hope. But this is just really not looking good for him.Always the same excuses ... in doping cases, the evidence comes first (hey, what's this in your blood/urine?), the explanations come later (I had no idea, I thought they were vitamins, and the label said "safe if not tested within 8 hours" ...).

Still there is the argument that Testosterone would not have been all that beneficial taken on a short term basis like it seems to have been here. Do we know anything about how many drug tests he had leading up to this one and what the results were?Judging by the way he performed, it certainly didn't hurt him.

[kittynh]

I feel really badly. Because it was such a good story, guy comes from behind. And hey, he may have justified any "cheating" as he has a serious hip injury. He may have felt he was kind of leveling the playing field.


A lot of people live their lives with this, "life isn't fair, so whatever I can do to make it more fair for myself is fine."

Not good.

[Bjorn]

A lot of people live their lives with this, "life isn't fair, so whatever I can do to make it more fair for myself is fine."And I am, in a way, fine with that. As long as they are honest about it.

However, if you participate in a sport with certain rules, follow them or be known as a cheater.