Monday, November 20, 2006

Vindicated? Not quite yet.

There's a little bit of good news for ol' Floyd Landis. The lab that performed the urine tests that revealed abnormally high testosterone in Landis's system has admitted to at least one "administrative error" in the handling of the samples. Specifically, there was an incorrect identification number on his backup sample.

This individual mistake doesn't necessarily mean that the sample wasn't his, and it doesn't explain why the original sample tested so high for testosterone. However, it does introduce an element of doubt into the integrity of the testing process.

This post on Landis's blog tells how to access some additional documents that support his position that he didn't take any testosterone. I looked through one presentation that explains how there were also errors with the handling of the original sample, evidence of sample degradation, and inconsistency between repeated tests. A retired physician put together the presentation, but he describes himself as a "long-time Landis coach and advisor," so he may not be completely objective. However, without hearing the lab's defense, it certainly seems like reasonable doubt.

I hope it's true.

Thanks to Holly for the head's up.

2 comments: said...


this is linked into the daily roundup of Landis news at trust but verify, a relatively unbiased source of news on the case.

The informed consensus there agrees with you that Landis has not yet made a convincing case in his defense, but might be able to.


Burt Friggin' Hoovis said...

Dude, you got it wrong.

The original sample didn't "test high for testosterone," as has been widely and erroneously reported by folks who need a quick soud bite. The sample tested with at testosterone/epitestosterone ratio that was abnormal...Floyd's testosteone levels were normal.