The story making headlines this week concerns mistakes made in the doping controls during last year's Tour of California. It seems the sponsors are not very happy with the organizers of the race.
Last year executives at AEG, the company that organizes the race, boasted that no riders tested positive for banned substances, but have now acknowledged that riders were not tested for EPO.
Wait a minute.
Of all the scandals to have hit cycling in the past year, why is this such a big deal?
What performance enhancing aspects are on offer from the European Patent Office anyway?
Last year executives at AEG, the company that organizes the race, boasted that no riders tested positive for banned substances, but have now acknowledged that riders were not tested for EPO.
Wait a minute.
Of all the scandals to have hit cycling in the past year, why is this such a big deal?
What performance enhancing aspects are on offer from the European Patent Office anyway?
And isn't Amgen the title sponsor of the race? Yes, that Amgen, the world's leading supplier of Erythropoietin.
If they really cared about anemic, cancer ridden professional cyclist's health, they'd giving that shit away. Instead, they require prescriptions, and therapeutic use exemptions. What's next, banning it's use for competition altogether? That would make at least one hero very unhappy.
And besides, this is California were talking about; shouldn't they be testing for weed?
No comments:
Post a Comment