Lance Armstrong

Lance Armstrong (born September 18, 1971 in Plano, Texas) is a retired American professional road racing cyclist. He is most famous for recovering from testicular cancer to subsequently win the Tour de France a record seven consecutive times—1999 to 2005. His success prompted some to nickname the event the "Tour de Lance."

Allegations of drug use

Like many top cyclists, Armstrong has long been accused of using performance-enhancing drugs. Armstrong and his supporters have often attributed accusations of doping to jealousy and sensationalist journalism by French and European newspapers such as l'Équipe and Le Monde; some American journalists even have attributed them to anti-americanism, though European newspapers have made similar accusations against European riders such as Richard Virenque and Marco Pantani.

Related Topics:
L'Équipe - Le Monde - Anti-americanism - Richard Virenque - Marco Pantani

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Prior to August 2005 a variety of accusations were made but none of his accusers provided compelling evidence. An accusation was made in 1999, when Armstrong tested positive for corticoids. Armstrong explained he had used an external ointment in order to treat a rash, and produced a prescription for it. Use of the ointment broke cycling rules which state that while such external corticoids are legal, prescriptions must be shown to sports authorities in advance. However, sports authorities accepted the explanation and cleared Armstrong. Use of prescriptions unmotivated by medical needs, particularly external corticoids which cannot be distinguished from (prohibited) injected ones, has been described by some cycling insiders as a widespread trick.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

On August 23, 2005, L'Équipe, the major French daily sports newspaper, reported on its front page under the headline "The Armstrong Lie" that the cyclist had taken EPO during the prologue and five stages of the 1999 Tour de France but said that it had not technically tested positive because at that point EPO tests were not administered. The newspaper then reprinted two kinds of documents: one were urine sample record forms, filled at the time when samples were taken, signed by the athlete and testing officials, and bearing sample numbers. It is unknown how the newspaper may have obtained such documents or whether they are authentic. The other were results from the comparison of 3 testing methods (two older and one newer ones) on many samples from the 1999 Tour, undertaken by the LNDD (French National Doping Detection Laboratory, a French public laboratory specialized in doping techniques) on numbered samples. By comparing numbers on the two kinds of documents, l'Équipe concluded that 6 samples of Armstrong's tested positive for EPO on all three methods.

Related Topics:
August 23 - 2005

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Armstrong's web site commented - "Yet again, a European newspaper has reported that I have tested positive for performance enhancing drugs. Tomorrow?s L?Equipe, a French sports daily, is reporting that my 1999 samples were positive. Unfortunately, the witch hunt continues and tomorrow?s article is nothing short of tabloid journalism. The paper even admits in its own article that the science in question here is faulty and that I have no way to defend myself. They state: 'There will therefore be no counter-exam nor regulatory prosecutions, in a strict sense, since defendant?s rights cannot be respected.' I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance enhancing drugs."

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The director of the official French anti-doping test laboratory at Châtenay-Malabry, Jacques de Ceaurriz http://www.lequipe.fr/Cyclisme/20050823_121001Dev.html was quoted as saying he had "no doubt about the validity of our results." http://velonews.com/news/fea/8746.0.html He said that while being kept for long periods can cause EPO proteins to deteriorate, this would possibly result in negative tests for doped athletes, but not false positives. It should be pointed out that technically this statement is false. EPO is naturally produced in the body. It is present at low levels in normal human urine, and natural levels in a human doing high-altitude training (a known "trick" of Mr. Armstrong) could be unusually high. Therefore, false positives can be obtained by setting the sensitivity threshold too low. This is especially true if the number of control samples (for calibration purposes) is limited, as is the case with the 1999 urine samples. These calibration issues are a reason EPO wasn't officially tested for earlier. Incidentally, de Ceaurriz stated that his laboratory worked on numbered anonymous samples, and was unaware when he sent his results to WADA/AMA that some of the results concerned Lance Armstrong.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In addition to these accusations, and in response to them, Armstrong has also received open backing from US Cycling http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/cycling/4178098.stm, individual cycling officials http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/cycling/4201482.stm, from former Tour winners Eddy Merckx and Miguel Indurain http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/cycling/4177952.stm, and other public figures. Other figures refused to support Lance Armstrong.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Supporters argue numerous irregularities in the doping claim: "' Wada (World Anti-Doping Agency) and the US Anti-Doping Agency, they've all defined a process for collecting samples, managing samples, testing the samples, identifying the people who are involved,' said Johnson. ' They have certain rights in the process. None of that has been followed in this case.' Officials from cycling's ruling body (UCI), Wada, the French sports ministry and the Tour de France all agree normal anti-doping proceedings have not been followed. ' This isn't a 'doping positive. This is just a publication in a French tabloid newspaper. That's our perspective,'" added Johnson.'"--BBC

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

These allegations are still under examination by a number of news and anti-doping organizations.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• UCI Statement

On September 9, after a period of investigation, the UCI finally released a strongly-worded official statement condemning the WADA, the French laboratory in question, and the paper L'Equipe, for having failed to provide any official communication, and having failed to provide any data, evidence, or background on the allegations. The UCI stated that it was still "awaiting plausible answers" to its requests to WADA and the laboratory, but also indicated "We deplore the fact that the long-established and entrenched confidentiality principle could be violated in such a flagrant way without any respect for fair play and the rider's privacy." http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/more/09/09/bc.cyc.armstrong.doping.ap/index.html

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The accusers themselves, in particular the World Anti-Doping Agency, might face an investigation into their own practices, in connection to their allegations against Armstrong. The UCI stated "We have substantial concerns about the impact of this matter on the integrity of the overall drug testing regime of the Olympic movement, and in particular the questions it raises over the trustworthiness of some of the sports and political authorities active in the anti-doping fight."

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

WADA replyed that Lance Armstrong himself authorized the journalist to go to UCI and access the urine sample record forms. He did it and could see the documents. A copy of one of them was even given to him.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

It now remains to be seen what steps will be taken on the aftermath of UCI's denouncement, and whether the Armstrong doping allegations will be able to retain any credibility, since both the accusers and the defenders are now under official scrutiny for questionable practices, irregularities, and violations in their conduct.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• Tour de France doping scandals