Dekker Ousted From Silence-Lotto Tour Squad

by Rant on July 1, 2009 · 8 comments

in Doping in Sports, Thomas Dekker, Tour de France

Looks like Thomas Dekker is in a whole heap o’ trouble today. Based on retesting of an out-of-competition sample given in December 2007 and on data aquired as a result of the UCI’s biological passport program. It appears that Dekker tested positive for EPO. The Daily Peloton is reporting that he tested positive for Dynepo, a second-generation form of the blood boosting drug. As Bart Hazen reports:

The nature of Mr Dekker’s haematological profile prompted the UCI to conduct a detailed review of the results of EPO analyses conducted on urine samples taken from him since the commencement of the biological passport programme. As part of this review, the UCI requested the WADA accredited laboratory in Cologne to re-examine the results of a urine sample collected from Mr Dekker in December 2007. On 30 June 2009, the Cologne laboratory reported a finding of recombinant EPO (Dynepo) in this sample. This result was reported in accordance with new EPO detection and reporting rules approved by the World Anti-Doping Agency in May 2009.

Yahoo! Sport/Eurosport (hat tip to Jeff for the link) notes:

“We have learnt on Wednesday morning that new tests… on samples from December 24, 2007, have proved positive for EPO,” his Silence-Lotto team said on their website.

“He (Dekker) has been immediately put on a list of ‘non-active’ riders,” said sports director Marc Sergeant.

At the time of the test, Dekker was riding for the Rabobank team.

Interesting that Dekker is accused of using EPO as a result of a December 2007 test. Although the blood cells that would be manufactured as a result of EPO use can be in the body for a long time, December is the off-season, and it seems odd to be using that particular drug at that particular time. Sure, those extra blood cells would be around at the beginning of the season, but given that the urine test can only see that particular form of EPO for a few days after it’s been administered, what was the point? Why not use it closer to the beginning of the season and maximize the benefit during competition?

I suppose that one argument in favor of using the drug at that time is that it would allow him to train harder, so there might be some benefit. Still, I find the timing of when he was using the drug to be unusual.

One thing to check, for someone who’s so inclined, would be what Dekker’s racing schedule was for the early part of 2008. Was he in any races during January 2008 or early February 2008? If so, that might explain the temptation to use EPO in December 2007. If not, then one has to wonder (assuming that the accusations are true, which they may not be), “What was he thinking?”

The timing of today’s announcement is interesting, too. It’s probably just a coincidence that this story came out just a few days before the 2009 Tour de France starts in Monaco, right? (Or, more to the point, it seems to be part of the now-annual ritual of offering up a doping sacrifice in the final days before le Tour begins.)

Dekker faces at least a two-year ban from cycling if he’s found guilty of using EPO. Meanwhile, Charley Wegelius, a Briton, will replace Dekker in the Silence-Lotto lineup.

More coverage of Dekker’s positive test result can be found at:

The New York Daily News
Agence France Presse
CyclingNews.com
VeloNews.com

Jean C July 1, 2009 at 4:09 pm

Dekker using EPO in December is not a surprise, there is other reasons like addiction, EPO provides a well-being, and of course, the need to rebuild rapidly blood after a blood “donation” for a doping program with blood transfusion.

Don’t forget what has said Dr. Conte: it’s more important to test athletes outside competition.

TBV July 1, 2009 at 6:35 pm

I think the timing is consistent with the UCI trying to get passport cases, and, while not sure of the case purely on manipulation grounds, went back for re-testing to get an anayltical positive instead of a pure passport case.

It’ll be interesting to see if there are ever pure passport cases that hold up.

TBV

William Schart July 1, 2009 at 7:46 pm

It could be that the passport is being used more as a preliminary screening than to gather hard evidence for a conviction. And this could be a good thing, if done well. Blood values suspicious? Let’s take a closer look. Normal blood values? Maybe we don’t have to look at you too closely.

I tend to think that perhaps there is a danger in trying to read too much in things like the timing of Dekker’s use of Dynepo. As Jean points out, there are many reasons why someone might take this in December, some of which could be a competitive value and others not. Therefore I don’t think we can meaningfully come up with why he did it, absent further evidence.

Luc July 2, 2009 at 12:32 am

Hi Rant,
Do I understand this right. Dekker was suspended for abnormal blood value back in ’07 relative to his value now. In other words is he clean today but was not in ’07 and now being suspended because of it? Does this only apply since the UCI passports have been implemented or could one compare to values say about 9 years ago?

Rant July 2, 2009 at 7:31 am

Jean,
This is certainly a perfect illustration of Conte’s idea that athletes should be tested in the off season. I hadn’t heard that EPO was either addictive (though, I suppose there are always psychological, rather than physical addictions) or that it gives a sense of well being.
TBV,
Seems like a reasonable conjecture. It makes sense to try and back up a biological passport case with actual evidence of what the rider did.
William,
I wouldn’t read too much into the timing of it. Just curious as to what benefit Dekker might have thought he would get by using the drug at that time. Definitely, it’s a good thing if they take a closer look because of suspicious blood values, rather than just convicting someone based on suspicion.
Luc,
There’s a “statute of limitations” of eight years. So, assuming that the federations/anti-doping labs have properly stored old samples, they have the right to go back and test samples that are less than eight years old for other drugs that they couldn’t detect in the past. Like CERA, for example, or human growth hormone (HGH). So, yes, it’s possible to look at an old sample with a new test, and then suspend someone based on the results. (Although, whether there is enough material left for A and B sample testing is another matter, and what the requirements for A and B samples for such retrospective testing might be a tad bit fuzzy, too.)
One aspect to this story that’s a bit odd, in addition to what you pointed out about the prior suspension, is why the lab didn’t detect Dynepo before. The anti-doping labs were capable of detecting that variant of EPO in December 2007. If Dekker really was using it back then, how come the lab missed it? That doesn’t speak well for the lab, to say the least.

Thomas A. Fine July 2, 2009 at 10:12 am

Maybe they redefined the standard so that they’d catch more positives. They’ve been criticized by some saying that obvious (to them) positives were not being counted as such.

Of course, when you lower a threshold, you get more false positives. Oh wait, I’m sorry, WADA doesn’t make mistakes.

tom

Jeff July 2, 2009 at 10:29 am

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/four-to-seven-more-doping-cases-possible-before-tour-start

CyclingNews says that L’Equipe says that there will be more announced soon.

I infrequently disagree with TbV, but I have a hard time believing the timing of the announcement(s) are coincidental or simply a function of the timing of the testing program.

Jeff July 4, 2009 at 6:04 pm

“CyclingNews says that L’Equipe says that there will be more announced soon.”

Well, if it was supposed to happen before the TdF start, then someone was very wrong.

Previous post:

Next post: