First, these are the B samples are supposed to be retained, but nobody's B samples have ever been used for testing 7 years after the fact.

Second, it does not appear as if any of these b samples are left to re-test by an indep lab

Third, it has not been established in any story that I have read if this test is valid, and if it is valid, if it is a test administered to every single Tour rider.

Fourth, it only is being applied to lance armstrong after an announced retirement, to urine samples 7 years old so that he can't defend himself by pissing in a cup.

Fifth, the data I have is that this test was done ostensibly to "test the validiy of the test used to detect the blood doping substance in question" (EPO). if this is the case, if this was a test-case for establishing the validity of an untried uncertified test procedure, why is this hailed as evidence that Lance was doping?.

Sixth In science you never do that- design an empirical framework for testing proposition X and then use the data from that to affirm the truth of unrelated proposition Y. This is pseudoscience

Seventh, This same Rag (L'Equipe) and this one guy, Leblanc, make accusations such as this EVERY SINGLE YEAR! In fact a simmilar accusation was hurled just a few months ago- and it again came to nothing.

Eighth:

"tested frozen, anonymous urine samples from racers in the Tour de France of 1999, two years before any tests for EPO had been authorized for the tour. Twelve of the samples tested positive for EPO. L'Equipe, which is owned by the same organization that owns the Tour de France itself, matched the numbers of the samples with original registration papers from 1999 and found that six of the positive samples were from Armstrong. Who were the others? L'Equipe leaves that question up to others, claiming that the "lively suspicions" over the years generated by the Texan's stellar success justifies their concentration on Armstrong "from a journalistic standpoint."
"

I call BULLSHIT! It was all anonymous, 12 samples tested come out positive, but they jump up and down, huff and puff, and 'out' lance armstrong while not outting the rest? or even discussing how many samples from DIFFERENT cyclists tested positive? A key way to evaluate the data? It was a witch hunt looking for something to use, not science. And of course, you seek, you find.

Frankly, I smell a big stinky French Yeti. I am not like the rest of the howlers here, I have no natural hatred of france, but the french as a whole harp on and on about Lance. I've had it. Bullshit.

DL