Lagat's 'A' sample tested positive as well...

I see Jeff is stealing some of my thunder by actually moving along at a reasonable pace!

Jeff Wigand wrote:

Depending on the oligosaccharides attached to the protein, they will print out in the test along the spectrum between, basic, neutral and acidic.

What was found in Lagat's case is that high temperatures allowed enzyme activity to occur that wouldn't have taken place in a properly stored sample. The active enzymes shifted the pH readout towards the basic end of the spectrum, triggering the positive test. When the B sample, properly stored, was tested, it showed the normal, natural EPO band lines (and not a complete absence of EPO, as used to be the case with cyclists that would drop protease in their urine, destroying both their synthetic and natural EPO.

Full report available here.

http://www.letsrun.com/2003/lagatfull.doc

Thank you! I am surprised by a helpful response on these boards....

the shadow wrote:

This will get swept under the rug, just like they did for good 'ol Bernie...

99 out of 100 times the B sample will confirm the A if both are handled the same way. In Lagat's case, the A sample was mishandled, the B sample was handled properly and tested negative. The B samples was divided into 2 separate samples and retested again and then again. I don't recall exactly what happened with Lagat's his A sample, but his B sample was definitely clean. You can choose to believe Lagat is dirty because one testing of his A sample came up positive, but was mishandled, or he is clean because his B sample which was tested two times and came up negative. The latter makes more sense to me.

And the B sample was negative.... your point?!?!

Word.

Simple.Common.Sense.Wisdom.

Just because we love the sport doesn't mean that yoga goddesses or trophy brides and their wanna-be's won't stop buying Nike Free's in droves.

Only the poorer gals buy the imitations.

Nike probably makes more from selling running shoes as casual shoes than they do out of selling shoes to actual runners...

Jeff, when I read the report, both A and B samples were mishandled. The B sample was merely refrigerated, and only frozen 6 days later.It was not the case that the B sample was normal. But rather, the B sample did not match the A sample.It was the difference in the B sample and A sample results that suggested some enzymatic activity resulted in altered bands in both results. Closer re-inspection of the A-sample results showed that it was not an exact match for synthetic EPO either.

We can make nothing from this lack of information.When you look at the facts surrounding all the cases, you will see there is no reason to compare Lagat with Marion Jones, and neither with Rita Jeptoo.

marion j.... wrote:

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/trackandfield/news/story?id=2576909

Of course marion jones failed the A sample for EPO around the same time

she too passed on the B sample ,but we later found out she had been on EPO all along

make of that what you will

rekrunner wrote:

We can make nothing from this lack of information.

When you look at the facts surrounding all the cases, you will see there is no reason to compare Lagat with Marion Jones, and neither with Rita Jeptoo.

marion j.... wrote:http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/trackandfield/news/story?id=2576909

Of course marion jones failed the A sample for EPO around the same time

she too passed on the B sample ,but we later found out she had been on EPO all along

make of that what you will

You are right about the test results, we all know one thing though - they were all doping

you better believe it

the last time ole bernie was clean was sometime before he lined up alongside el guerrouj for the first time

about 15 years ago

the shadow wrote:

This will get swept under the rug, just like they did for good 'ol Bernie...

Good chance of it. Political Correctness rules. Stories were made up about Lagat's sample being kept in improper conditions, broken chain of custody, and more, all bunk. He was let go because he was a poor third worlder, blah blah. This is why he and his coach and agent were told to shut up or the real story would come out when they tried to get a "formal apology". A lot of E. Africans have been doped and gotten away with it, either by avoiding all out of season testing, or officials who let certain countries, those poor downtrodden third worldsrs, get away with far too much.

Author: the shadow

Message: This will get swept under the rug, just like they did for good 'ol Bernie...

You come across as an extremely jealous masters runner who's records Lagat will absolutely crush in the next few years.

News Flash: Most Masters records holders enhance their person, and every one of these cheaters claims they are pure as fresh-white snow.

The shadow is wrong, so are you. If either of you fools were correct, then there should be a lot more positive test results. So, where are all of these positive results? Only the shadow knows.

So, courtesy of involvement in Letsrun, shortly after Lagat's postive test and exoneration I was contracted to be an expert witness to the B sample testing by USADA after another positive A sample. So unlike 99.999% of posters here, I actually have experience with the entire process.

1) I'm not going into why Lagat's case was out of the ordinary and why anyone with a modicum of scientific education or desire to understand should realize that he was not guilty in the first place. This has been covered at length and the reasons shared. The A sample was egregiously mishandled, and the B sampel..while not perfectly handled...was handled better and negative.

2) After the Lagat fiasco, extra procedures were added to the protocol to verify the integrity and non-degraded nature of the samples.

3) Anyone who thinks Lagat's case was "fixed" does not have my first-hand experience. USADA was incredibly embarrassed by the whole affair. They were hostile to myself as an expert witness from the get-go. If I so much as spoke a word during the 3-day procedure, I would have been kicked out. I was told to hold my questions until the end, then the lab head was conveniently not there and I was told to submit my questions in writing. They never responded.

4) Standard lab protocol handling such samples requires them to be refrigerated during the entire processing of the sample. Their equipment was equipped with the capability to refrigerate (centrifuges etc) but they did not turn it on. Given that the reason for the error in Lagat's test was degradation, it made no sense not to simply turn on regrideration-capabe equipment being used. This made me understand how far we had to go in bringing protocols up to standard practice. Of course, I asked a question about this but like all the others they never responded.

Thank you for your post [Been there done the test].

I have been trying to say this on this board many times when trolls or uninformed. You cannot get through to the former but you can to some of the latter. The repeated trolling of such threads is a good illustration why the policies of LetsRun result in a much less effective, less informed, and less interesting board. I know that there was a link somewhere to the extended report (about 20-40 pages, it was close to a decade ago).

Basically, you have to question any trolling-type comment from someone that has not been posting under the same handle hundreds of times. J.R. in this thread does post under a consistent handle but he does not have the best reputation (although I do not know if some of it comes from people posting under just slightly modified names (extra space, period, etc.).

There are cases where posters do not use the same consistent handle, and you are an example. I will occasionally post something under a different name when there is person information involved.

We don't need the idiotic explanations about his sample.

Who here thinks that El G was dirty? IF you think that El G was dirty and Lagat was clean then you are a complete idiot.

I would love to hear how Lagat was not dirty IF anyone believes El G was.

NOLIMIT wrote:

We don't need the idiotic explanations about his sample.

Who here thinks that El G was dirty? IF you think that El G was dirty and Lagat was clean then you are a complete idiot.

I would love to hear how Lagat was not dirty IF anyone believes El G was.

What is idiotic is making your decision completely based on supposition with no supporting evidence.

If you believe everyone who performs well is doping, why do you bother following the sport? Why are you here?

Personally, I used to follow cycling. Based on the rate of positive tests for top athletes, I did indeed decide that most of the top cyclists were dopers. I have not watched a Tour stage in about eight years.

Yet you are here. Why?

The fact is, Lagat's only "positive" test was a complete artifact, and science has proven this. You can speculate anything you want, but to connect that flawed postive as support of your speculation displays nothing more than ignorance.

Lots of doped athletes test clean for various reasons. But a flawed positive is not supportive of an assumption of doping.

My assertion has nothing at all to do with him having a positive "A" test. Do you believe El G was doped? If you do then tell how Lagat could have possibly been clean.

Hesch dopes. How can you believe that anyone nearly as fast to him or faster than him is clean?!

NOLIMIT wrote:

My assertion has nothing at all to do with him having a positive "A" test. Do you believe El G was doped? If you do then tell how Lagat could have possibly been clean.

So what is the 1500m time beyond whom everyone is doped? What qualifies you to make that judgement with no evidence whatsoever?