UCI And Anti-Doping Expert Clash Over Disgraced Cyclist

The question of whether or not disgraced cyclist Lance Armstrong doped during his comeback has sparked a dispute between the world governing body of cycling and anti-doping expert and Australian scientist, Michael Ashenden.

While Armstrong recently said in an interview with Oprah Winfrey that he did not use banned performance enhancing drugs during his comeback, the United States Anti-Doping Agency ruled there was a strong probability that he cheated during his comeback from 2009 to early 2011. Ashenden is very much convinced that the test values of Lance Armstrong showed he doped during the comeback and this has what led to several clashes in the media between the UCI, which is in damage control following the Armstrong scandal, and the anti-doping expert.

The Australian scientist served on the UCI panel that reviewed the biological passport data of professional riders, but resigned last year. In a media statement, Ashenden said McQuaid has been deceitful and deliberately misled the public and the media about the suspicious blood values of the banned cyclist during his comeback in 2009 and 2010 and added that the world governing body of cycling have been forced to admit that they never sent his suspicious blood values to their expert panel for the examination. Ashenden claimed doping exper

ts were only given nine of 38 blood tests provided by the Texan rider during his Tour de France comeback years of 2009 and 2010 and questioned why the world cycling body failed to pass on all tests.

Ashenden added that the world cycling body were derelict in their obligations to faithfully run the passport program if they fail to examine the raw data of Lance Armstrong when he placed third at the 2009 Tour de France. He went on to remark that the UCI was “biologically illiterate” if it had examined Armstrong’s test results from the 2009 Tour and did not see evidence of a possible blood transfusion. The UCI, on the other hand, claimed that it was Ashenden himself who cleared the blood profile of the banned cyclist before the 2009 Tour though it admits that the profile of the cyclist was never submitted to the expert panel for analysis after May 4, 2009 – two months before the Tour de France.

Ashenden does not understand the protocols of the testing process, the UCI remarked and added that his concerns are unfounded.

In another development, Hein Verbruggen, who was president of cycling’s governing body when the disgraced cyclist won his seven Tour de France titles, attacked WADA and denied he aided any cover-up of Armstrong’s doping. He added that there was simply nothing to cover-up as Armstrong, nor his teammates, never tested positive. Verbruggen, who ran the International Cycling Union (UCI) for 14 years and remains its honorary president, was deeply critical of WADA and anti-doping officials in the US and France for their failure to expose the cyclist during his career. The UCI honorary president brought forward his side of the story by delivering letters to International Olympic Committee president Jacques Rogge and 14 other Olympic executive board members by hand at the Lausanne Palace Hotel where they have been holding a meeting of two days.

pdf_iconDownload in PDF: UCI And Anti-Doping Expert Clash Over Disgraced Cyclist

Comments

comments