Jalabert, Pantani, Ullrich and Zabel alleged to be on French senate’s doping report
  October 23, 2014 Login  

Current Articles    |   Archives    |   RSS Feeds    |   Search

Tuesday, July 23, 2013

Jalabert, Pantani, Ullrich and Zabel alleged to be on French senate’s doping report

by VeloNation Press at 6:35 PM EST   comments
Categories: Pro Cycling, Doping
 
Details of positive tests from 1998 due to be published Wednesday morning

doping syringeOne day before the French senate publishes the list of riders who tested positive for EPO in the 1998 Tour de France, the Le Monde newspaper has printed the names of several of those concerned.

It states that former world number one Lauren Jalabert was implicated by retests carried out years later, as were fellow Frenchmen Jacky Durand, the most aggressive rider in 1998 and 1999, and Laurent Desbiens, who led the race for two days.

Le Monde also states that EPO was detected in the samples of the top three overall, namely the late Marco Pantani, Jan Ullrich and Bobby Julich. Erik Zabel, the best sprinter in 1998 and 1999, is also named, making nonsense of his claim in 2007 that he only used EPO once in his career, back in 1996.

Further names are expected to be released when the report is published tomorrow. It was originally due to be issued on July 18th, the day the Tour de France raced twice up Alpe d’Huez, but protests about the timing led to it being slightly delayed.

The retests were carried out in 2004 for scientific research. The names were only put to the code numbers recently. It is possible that a list of names from the 1999 Tour might also be released.

Meanwhile the riders’ association CPA has said it is opposed to the publication of the list, saying that there is the danger of a ‘serious violation of fundamental rights of the riders that this publication may generate.’

It claims the list is unreliable as the tests were performed years later, and that the conditions under which they were done are different to normal anti-doping controls.

It also states that because only a small number of riders were tested, that others who used EPO may appear to be cleared when their names do not appear on the list.

“Such a publication would be doubly unfair, unfairly condemning some riders while others would escape,” it argued.

It also states one more reason for its opposition. “The publication is itself a penalty without any right of defence. It would have undeniable and irreversible impact on the reputation of the riders complained of, and on their current and future work,” it asserted. “And while the counter-analysis seem excluded, the publication of a list would be tantamount to an accusation of doping without any possibility of defence.”

      comments




Subscribe via RSS or daily email

WHAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW
  Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy  Copyright 2008-2013 by VeloNation LLC