The story should have ended in Oct. 2003, when the IAAF announced:
"The analysis of the B sample of Kenyan middle distance runner Bernard Lagat has failed to confirm the initial result of the anti-doping test conducted in Tubingen, Germany on 8 August 2003, where the analysis of the A sample returned an adverse finding for Erythropoietin (EPO).
The analysis of the B sample was conducted by the IOC-accredited laboratory in Cologne, Germany on 29 September and did not corroborate the original result. Consequently the athlete is able to compete."
In fact, the Kenyan Athletic Federation should not have publicly announced the A-sample finding until after B-sample corroboration.
Lagat didn't test positive. Educate yourself.
Read the report. If someone ran a scantron through the machine backwards and it said they failed, and then they re-ran it through correctly and they passed, as well as the carbon copy which passed, would you say they failed?
Also, Lance DID test positive (unlike Lagat).
What is an "adverse finding" if not a positive? He escaped a violation because the B sample did not return a positive finding also. He was lucky.
That would be a false positive. Like eating a pile of poppy seeds might trigger an opioid positive.