Francois,can you post the technicalities of how the body can react in such a way as to generate the traces in the urine that synthetic epo does ?

sorry, I have no idea at all...

i'd be very interested in hearing more about this explanation.

the way the urine test detects exogenous epo is through differences in glycosylation of the protein. i don't see how a training response could change this in a human.

source?

---

_______________________________________________

What does Rutger Beke have to do with Tyler Hamilton? I don't understand the connection am I missing something?

Yeah, I agree with you.

Beke tested positive for EPO that gets your hematocrit (red blood cells by unit of blood) to higher levels but not impossible though. Tyler tested positive for using blood transfusion... they found different "types" of blood, or inconsistent one. (I'm sure François knows this, just making my point. )



Completely different... and although I'm huge fan of Tyler, he's indeed in big trouble... :/

---

---

http://twitter.com/krepster || http://www.pedro-gomes.com || follow all the action on facebook

Tyler has hired lawyers and doctors to do what Beke's dr and lawyers did...that is to prove that it was a reaction of his body.
Beke was given less time and less resources and was able to apparently convince the national gov. body he is under whereas tyler hasn't.

source:

http://www.duathlon-info.com/Triathlete/Default.asp



scroll down to rutger beke. He went in front of the belgian committee and apparently (translating what's in french there) his lawyers have shown that the positive result was due to his body reacting in a strange way.

I am not qualified to say how that can be. Brent suggested it's odd, but I really have no idea...not even sure if they did a blood or urine test in the first place.

Francois,

I can't read French, but did the Federation actually exonerate Beke or is this just his explanation?



Shawn T

I heard (unofficially) that they are waiting for an independent group of doctors/scientists to confirm the findings of Beke's drs and lawyers.

so he is not suspended. the decision is temporarly suspended.

220 mag in the uk published a short article from a Belgian newspaper stating his coaches were expecting this as he has a high percentage of red blood cells in his haematocrit as a result of training at high altitude.

I was afraid of that. Basically he is in the same boat as tyler at this point. Both say I didn't do it and have lawyers and doctors saying he didn't do it. Getting WADA or the CAS to agree is the tough part.



Styrrell

he is not in the same boat at all as his doctors showed that it seems to be a natural reaction.

Tyler is far from having anyone saying that but his wife (and the fact that a teammate has also tested + to the same thing doesn't help)

Believe me when I say this is not a Beke vs Hamilton comment. Right now i think they are both in big trouble. Hamilton and Beke both are saying that they have had experts investigate and thier experts exonerate them. Until they convince either WADA or the CAS they are in deep trouble. Hopefully if beke is innocent he will be exonerated.

Styrrell

Sounds like a complete load of crap to me.... Beke was busted not because he had a high hematocrit (which could be caused by training adaptations) but because they found recombinant EPO in his urine (or blood?). The only "training adapations" that cause that are actually taking EPO.

---

_______________________________________________

This was my point. How can "training adaptations" cause your body to generate a substance that is not naturally found/generated by the body. After all, was this not the entire basis of the EPO test (ie differentiating natural from synthetic) ?

the question is whether beke's positive test was blood or urine.

blood tests can only show indirect markers of epo use, not the presence of the recombinant form.

the more expensive and labor intensive urine test does distinguish between natural and recombinant forms of the hormone because they have a slightly different charge due to changes in the way the protein is glycosylated.

generally, the blood test is used as a screen to identify suspect samples that can then be subjected to the urine test.

my guess is that the beke result was probably just a blood test, which since the markers are indirect, could be argued.

good point - I can't imagine they would only do a blood test without taking urine as well. The blood test alone would be pretty worthless since almost anyone with enough $$$ for lawyers and doctors could BS their way out of trouble.

---

_______________________________________________

as I said, I am just reporting what I read...no idea what the deal is however. thanks for the info.