4 ms·

Lance Armstrong's epic downfall

16 points by codegeek 14y ago

antidaily 14y ago
Hacker news?
- astrodust 14y ago
  If anyone was a hacker, it was Lance Armstrong and his team of doping-dodging experts. They hacked the system but didn't get away with it. These guys had cheating down to a science. Casino cheats would be envious.
  - holograham 14y ago
    that's not the definition of hacker by this site's standards
  - markyc 14y ago
    it it's front news on cnn, 99% of the time it doesn't belong here. this could be one of those times, but i guess the community decides that
- jlgreco 14y ago
  This story was tossed around here a bit a couple of weeks ago. It is nice to see an update on it.
taligent 14y ago
This has NOTHING to do with Hacker News.
- gm 14y ago
  People submitting these stories should be banned from submitting anything to this site. A waste of our time. If you want cycling news go to a cycling news site.
jlgreco 14y ago
My understanding is that all the samples taken from him and other cyclists over the years are stored in case they need to be retested in the future. My understanding is also that currently no tests have ever returned a positive for him, and the evidence that he doped is in the form of testimony. I imagine people will keep on checking those samples for years to come. It should be interesting what history will eventually decide.
- mvkel 14y ago
  Your understanding is correct. One thing to note: many, many dopers have also passed 100% of tests administered to them. They then voluntarily outed themselves in an effort to tell the truth.
- bunderbunder 14y ago
  > My understanding is also that currently no tests have ever returned a positive for him True. However, consider the following anecdote: The most prominent doping agent in professional cycling during the 1990s, erythropoietin, was undetectable for a long time. Eventually in 2000 a test that could distinguish the endogenous and pharmaceutical versions of the hormone. But even then, all that needs to be done to render this test ineffective is to come up with a way to produce a synthetic version with the same chemical structure as the natural one. So there's that. And there's the amount of money wrapped up in doping in professional cycling, which seems to be enormous. Given that, it would seem that this is a situation where absence of evidence is by no means evidence of absence.
  - jlgreco 14y ago
    Absolutely. The negative tests mean little today considering it is unlikely he would use anything that we can already detect.
- awongh 14y ago
  Not true actually: a urine sample from 1999 was tested later on (after they had developed the test for EPO) and found to be positive. Also, he tested positive for cortico-steroids (which was annulled with a and he also produced 2 separate "adverse" test results, (which basically indicates a physiology way outside normal, but isn't a confirmed positive)- one of which he is accused of bribing officials to cover up. For the purposes of hacker news at least, it's fascinating to see someone who so thoroughly gamed the system and got away with it. He methodically covered all the angles and was basically able to operate with total impunity.
pohl 14y ago
I don't understand why the article refers to "drug tests". I thought blood doping had nothing to do with drugs, and was particularly difficult to detect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_doping http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_doping
- bunderbunder 14y ago
  It doesn't (and didn't) always involve drugs, but it can. From the "Methods" section in the article you link: The term blood doping originally meant doping with blood, i.e. the transfusion of red blood cells. . . In the late 1980s, an advance in medicine led to an entirely new form of blood doping involving the hormone erythropoietin (EPO).

16 points by codegeek 14y ago

antidaily 14y ago

Hacker news?

astrodust 14y ago
If anyone was a hacker, it was Lance Armstrong and his team of doping-dodging experts. They hacked the system but didn't get away with it. These guys had cheating down to a science. Casino cheats would be envious.
- holograham 14y ago
  that's not the definition of hacker by this site's standards
- markyc 14y ago
  it it's front news on cnn, 99% of the time it doesn't belong here. this could be one of those times, but i guess the community decides that
jlgreco 14y ago
This story was tossed around here a bit a couple of weeks ago. It is nice to see an update on it.

taligent 14y ago

This has NOTHING to do with Hacker News.

gm 14y ago
People submitting these stories should be banned from submitting anything to this site. A waste of our time. If you want cycling news go to a cycling news site.

jlgreco 14y ago

My understanding is that all the samples taken from him and other cyclists over the years are stored in case they need to be retested in the future. My understanding is also that currently no tests have ever returned a positive for him, and the evidence that he doped is in the form of testimony. I imagine people will keep on checking those samples for years to come. It should be interesting what history will eventually decide.

mvkel 14y ago
Your understanding is correct. One thing to note: many, many dopers have also passed 100% of tests administered to them. They then voluntarily outed themselves in an effort to tell the truth.
bunderbunder 14y ago
> My understanding is also that currently no tests have ever returned a positive for him True. However, consider the following anecdote: The most prominent doping agent in professional cycling during the 1990s, erythropoietin, was undetectable for a long time. Eventually in 2000 a test that could distinguish the endogenous and pharmaceutical versions of the hormone. But even then, all that needs to be done to render this test ineffective is to come up with a way to produce a synthetic version with the same chemical structure as the natural one. So there's that. And there's the amount of money wrapped up in doping in professional cycling, which seems to be enormous. Given that, it would seem that this is a situation where absence of evidence is by no means evidence of absence.
- jlgreco 14y ago
  Absolutely. The negative tests mean little today considering it is unlikely he would use anything that we can already detect.
awongh 14y ago
Not true actually: a urine sample from 1999 was tested later on (after they had developed the test for EPO) and found to be positive. Also, he tested positive for cortico-steroids (which was annulled with a and he also produced 2 separate "adverse" test results, (which basically indicates a physiology way outside normal, but isn't a confirmed positive)- one of which he is accused of bribing officials to cover up. For the purposes of hacker news at least, it's fascinating to see someone who so thoroughly gamed the system and got away with it. He methodically covered all the angles and was basically able to operate with total impunity.

pohl 14y ago

I don't understand why the article refers to "drug tests". I thought blood doping had nothing to do with drugs, and was particularly difficult to detect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_doping http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_doping

bunderbunder 14y ago
It doesn't (and didn't) always involve drugs, but it can. From the "Methods" section in the article you link: The term blood doping originally meant doping with blood, i.e. the transfusion of red blood cells. . . In the late 1980s, an advance in medicine led to an entirely new form of blood doping involving the hormone erythropoietin (EPO).