Tweet
No, That is you saying that I am smarter than others. Thanks for the compliment but I never said that.
I just told you who are the real experts and you got all defensive about it.
You misunderstood this statement. The athlete said the BAP threshold is the only valid criteria. The panel disagreed that there is such a rule. Here is what was said just before that statement
then the panel also said "
So the panel is telling the athlete and YOU that the BAP threshold rule is but a single test.
the panel is stating that other tests can be used as well to verify if there is presence of rEPO. That is what you cannot seem to understand. The T/E Ratio test is but a single test. Another type of test, say CIR test can give a different result or conclusion than the T/E Ratio test. That other test does not make T/E Ratio test no longer a threshold test. That is absurd!!!! Same with my other example for the other non-threshold substance. the panel agreed that not all 4 threshold tests need to be proven. Only 1 of the tests is sufficient.
Did the UCI have any of those other tests in their rules? No but they too can still be used to detect the presence of rEPO. In fact it was the labs back then that had these test criteria. At that time, the athlete was positive only when over the 80% threshold. The time of the case, it became a sort of grey zone because of the new information and transition that was to occur .... but that can be the case with other substances as well including threshold substances!
But the test was a threshold type test. Everyone said so .... but you got confused. Badly!
I sufficiently explained my statement that you quoted. It's just too bad that you cannot understand. Sorry!
.
I just told you who are the real experts and you got all defensive about it.
You misunderstood this statement. The athlete said the BAP threshold is the only valid criteria. The panel disagreed that there is such a rule. Here is what was said just before that statement
then the panel also said "
So the panel is telling the athlete and YOU that the BAP threshold rule is but a single test.
the panel is stating that other tests can be used as well to verify if there is presence of rEPO. That is what you cannot seem to understand. The T/E Ratio test is but a single test. Another type of test, say CIR test can give a different result or conclusion than the T/E Ratio test. That other test does not make T/E Ratio test no longer a threshold test. That is absurd!!!!
Same with my other example for the other non-threshold substance. the panel agreed that not all 4 threshold tests need to be proven. Only 1 of the tests is sufficient.Did the UCI have any of those other tests in their rules? No but they too can still be used to detect the presence of rEPO. In fact it was the labs back then that had these test criteria. At that time, the athlete was positive only when over the 80% threshold. The time of the case, it became a sort of grey zone because of the new information and transition that was to occur .... but that can be the case with other substances as well including threshold substances!
But the test was a threshold type test. Everyone said so .... but you got confused. Badly!
I sufficiently explained my statement that you quoted. It's just too bad that you cannot understand. Sorry!
.
Oh...and don't forget this:
The fact is that the BAP and the other interpretative criteria are used to declare not a threshold of human body production but rather an image from the electropherogram as indicating the presence of non-human EPO.
[img]https://media.*****.com/media/l3E6uhDAN3W7vylji/*****.gif[/img]
Did 5 people tell you that you are wrong?
Did no people tell you that you are right?
I thought so
Go away. I'm tired of humiliating you. Seriously.
Comment