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

Yes, the sample that was mistreated, kept in a hot car for three days and without a reliable 'chain-of-control' tested positive. However, the B sample, which was refrigerated, kept under reliable chain-of-control, and delivered in a timely manner did not test positive. Not only did it not test positive, I think it did not show any indication at all of anything. There is a long thread on Track and Field News quite a ways back (~a decade) that has some posts by one of the most reliable anti-doping guys with links to the documents. If you are really interested and not just trolling, go look.

lagat could have made a fortune if he had patented his revolutionary mewthod of manufacturing Epo from clean urine

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

Yes, and please ignore all of the other facts around how different Lagat and Jones' cases were

Don't be an idiot, virtually anyone's urine will test positive for that if it's stored under certain conditions.

"Yes, the sample that was mistreated, kept in a hot car for three days and without a reliable 'chain-of-control' tested positive. However, the B sample, which was refrigerated, kept under reliable chain-of-control, and delivered in a timely manner did not test positive. Not only did it not test positive, I think it did not show any indication at all of anything. There is a long thread on Track and Field News quite a ways back (~a decade) that has some posts by one of the most reliable anti-doping guys with links to the documents. If you are really interested and not just trolling, go look."

-absolutely 100% untrue. That chain of events that the public was fed was a complete fabrication. Lagat had prepared for the worst, and even dropped from the competition. A "deal" was made.

[quote]James Naismith Li wrote:

Yes, and please ignore all of the other facts around how different Lagat and Jones' cases were[/quote

Or that he was a whisker behind another EPO champion and ran 3:26xx with only average 800m speed and a lack of altitude training

I did not follow the Lagat issue, but it sounds eerily reminiscent of the Ryan Braun baseball scandal. He won on a chain of custody battle and, in the process destroyed the reputation of the responsible drug testing official causing him to lose his job while Braun was able to continue to play ball in the playoffs. We later find out, thanks to Biogenesis, that Braun was doping all along and had to confess and offer an apology to the drug testing official....just saying that where there's a positive test, there is likely drug use. Don't think that warming urine to hot car temperatures would institute a chemical reaction that would simulate PED use.

James Naismith Li wrote:

Yes, and please ignore all of the other facts around how different Lagat and Jones' cases were

Exactly.

I bet the authorities totally wanted to protect a Kenyan distance runner's reputation as a star of the sport, but they had no problem trashing the reputation of a multiple gold medalist from the USA.

ukathleticscoach wrote:

[quote]James Naismith Li wrote:

Yes, and please ignore all of the other facts around how different Lagat and Jones' cases were[/quote

Or that he was a whisker behind another EPO champion and ran 3:26xx with only average 800m speed and a lack of altitude training

Seriously? That's the best you have? He must dope because he is fast and because, though he grew up at altitude and is from a population that has been at altitude for generations, he didn't do enough training at altitude to be as fast as he is?

Chachi's a User wrote:

I did not follow the Lagat issue, but it sounds eerily reminiscent of the Ryan Braun baseball scandal. He won on a chain of custody battle and, in the process destroyed the reputation of the responsible drug testing official causing him to lose his job while Braun was able to continue to play ball in the playoffs. We later find out, thanks to Biogenesis, that Braun was doping all along and had to confess and offer an apology to the drug testing official....just saying that where there's a positive test, there is likely drug use. Don't think that warming urine to hot car temperatures would institute a chemical reaction that would simulate PED use.

All that paragraph offered was support that you are as ignorant to testing as you are to Lagat's case.

James Naismith Li wrote:

Chachi's a User wrote:

I did not follow the Lagat issue, but it sounds eerily reminiscent of the Ryan Braun baseball scandal. He won on a chain of custody battle and, in the process destroyed the reputation of the responsible drug testing official causing him to lose his job while Braun was able to continue to play ball in the playoffs. We later find out, thanks to Biogenesis, that Braun was doping all along and had to confess and offer an apology to the drug testing official....just saying that where there's a positive test, there is likely drug use. Don't think that warming urine to hot car temperatures would institute a chemical reaction that would simulate PED use.

All that paragraph offered was support that you are as ignorant to testing as you are to Lagat's case.

Ok then, please explain the science that supports your position.

Can someone explain to me how any conditions create synthetic EPO in urine?

Also, sorry James about your third 2nd to last placing at the PAC meet in a row.

Former Swoosh wrote:

"Yes, the sample that was mistreated, kept in a hot car for three days and without a reliable 'chain-of-control' tested positive. However, the B sample, which was refrigerated, kept under reliable chain-of-control, and delivered in a timely manner did not test positive. Not only did it not test positive, I think it did not show any indication at all of anything. There is a long thread on Track and Field News quite a ways back (~a decade) that has some posts by one of the most reliable anti-doping guys with links to the documents. If you are really interested and not just trolling, go look."

-absolutely 100% untrue. That chain of events that the public was fed was a complete fabrication. Lagat had prepared for the worst, and even dropped from the competition. A "deal" was made.

Are you aware that Nike really has nothing to gain when they protect their T&F athletes from drug bans? Seriously, nobody watches or cares about T&F, and if one of Nike's athletes distance guys tested positive, there might be ONE article about it that makes it to ESPN and that's it.

Sponsoring distance track athletes is more or less a charity act for them. A single tweet from a guy like Kevin Durant or Roger Federer would have more influence and bring in more revenue than all of Nike's distance track athletes put together.

26mi235 wrote:

Yes, the sample that was mistreated, kept in a hot car for three days and without a reliable 'chain-of-control' tested positive. However, the B sample, which was refrigerated, kept under reliable chain-of-control, and delivered in a timely manner did not test positive. Not only did it not test positive, I think it did not show any indication at all of anything. There is a long thread on Track and Field News quite a ways back (~a decade) that has some posts by one of the most reliable anti-doping guys with links to the documents. If you are really interested and not just trolling, go look.

I couldn't find a thread. I did find this but it says nothing of what you say:

I can see that I will have to start at the basics with you guys.

First, there is a difference between improper storage creating synthetic EPO and improper storage creating a false positive for EPO.

Do you understand the difference? If yes, then we will move on.

Yes, with you so far. But either way, you have to explain how warming urine causes a chemical reaction that creates a substance that causes the EPO test to return a positive finding. Your hypothesis is that the sample, when taken, would not test positive. But, something happened during storage that changed the urine so it would generate a positive test. What happened? If your explanation is that the generated compound was not EPO remnants, then what was it and why did it cause the EPO test to go positive?

I don't understand, please continue.

Chachi's A User wrote:

Yes, with you so far. But either way, you have to explain how warming urine causes a chemical reaction that creates a substance that causes the EPO test to return a positive finding. Your hypothesis is that the sample, when taken, would not test positive. But, something happened during storage that changed the urine so it would generate a positive test. What happened? If your explanation is that the generated compound was not EPO remnants, then what was it and why did it cause the EPO test to go positive?

Do you know how an EPO test is read? Like this:

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.