USADA: The Reasoned Decision: A Review

The Reasoned Decision is the United States Anti-Doping Agency, (USADA) summary of testimony from former teammates of disgraced seven-time Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong.  Other testimonies from involved persons connected to the U.S. Postal Service Professional Cycling Team, Astana, and the Discovery Channel Cycling Team doping scandals are also included.  Along with a large volume of doping-related financial records.  Of utmost importance to USADA was the financial arrangements between Lance Armstrong and the convicted doping doctor Michele Ferrari.  USADA contends that Lance Armstrong paid Michele Ferrari money in exchange for dope and medical expertise.  This arrangement between Lance Armstrong and Michele Ferrari would expand into an organized doping conspiracy involving select cycling team riders, team doctors, and team trainers.  The doping conspiracy would extend from 1999-2010, or for most of Lance Armstrong's professional cycling career.*

Background

Floyd Landis wrote USA cycling president Steve Johnson a letter describing past doping offenses Lance Armstrong had engaged in.  Many of these Lance Armstrong doping offenses Floyd Landis had personally witnessed and/or participated in.  Jeff Novitsky opened a criminal probe, convened a federal grand jury, subpoenaed witnesses, and began to record testimony to discern whether taxpayer money had been used to fund a doping conspiracy within the United States Postal Service Professional Cycling Team.  But, suddenly the criminal probe ended.  Why Jeff Novitsky ended the criminal probe remains a mystery.  But due to the serious charges alleged by Floyd Landis, USADA had no choice but to investigate the case.

Ground Rules: The "Non-Analytical" Positive

In any investigation it is necessary to establish some ground rules.  USADA had no laboratory tests to extract evidence from to establish a doping violation.  Lance Armstrong never failed a dope test.  USADA would have to utilize the "non-analytical" positive.  People would be asked or compelled to testify about their participation in, or knowledge of, doping offenses Lance Armstrong had engaged in. The accumulated testimony would prove the "non-analytical" positive case.  The response to this appeal for information concerning the Lance Armstrong doping conspiracy produced a bonanza of informants.  Former cycling teammates, former team support staff, businessmen, people who Lance Armstrong had abused with accusations and slander, all came forward.  Frankie and Betsy Andreu were praised for their courageous whistleblowing.  Floyd Landis and Tyler Hamilton provided devastating eye witness facts.  USADA had an open and shut case.

The one holdout, the man who refused to testify?  Lance Armstrong.  But USADA had an answer for Mr. Armstrong.  The Reasoned Decision states;

Weight to be given to Lance Armstrong's refusal to testify

Article 3.2.4 of the [USADA] Code provides for the adverse inference to be imposed against an individual [if he or she] fails or refuses to testify on any relevant matter on which USADA seeks to question him.  Long before Article 3.2.4 was adopted in the 2009 version of the Code, Court of Arbitration for Sport, (CAS) Panels recognized the propriety of imposing an adverse inference against a respondent in an anti-doping case who invoked the Fifth Amendment to avoid testifying or otherwise failed to appear and respond to the charges against the respondent.  For instance, in the case of Lazutina v. IOC an athlete failed to appear, and, as a result, the panel drew the adverse inference that she had intentionally ingested the prohibited substance found in her blood. 

The panel held: "Ms. Lazutina did not give evidence and there has been no explanation from her as to how that prohibited substance came to be in her blood.  In the light of that failure to explain, the Panel concludes that the prohibited substance was in Ms. Lazutina's blood as a result of the intentional exogenous ingestion by her.

Lazutina v. IOC, CAS 2002/A/370 Paragraph 9.10.

In addition to the overwhelming evidence of Lance Armstrong's doping it should not be forgotten that Lance Armstrong refused to confront the evidence against him and in-person appearing in front of neutral arbitrators.  Armstrong's refusal to confront the evidence against him in-person in a hearing, leads to a strong inference that Armstrong doped exactly as charged by USADA. PP. 87-88.

Well there are several issues here.  Apparently, the CAS and USADA have determined that the right not to be compelled to admit a criminal act against one's self in a civil or criminal case, the right against self-incrimination, no longer applies in sport doping arbitration.  Federal judge Sam Sparks should have considered Code 3.2.4 before issuing his ruling dismissing Lance Armstrong's lawsuit against USADA.  Apparently, the CAS thinks the rights afforded to defendants in the United States do not apply in sports arbitration, and the American Constitution is nothing more than exotic toilet paper.  Perhaps the CAS decision against Ms. Lazutina was written in the Republic of North Korea.  The second problem here is the definition of exogenous.  An exogenous substance is not found naturally in the body.  An endogenous substance is found naturally in the body.  There is no such thing as "exogenous ingestion".  The statement should read, "willful ingestion of an exogenous substance".  The third problem here is the endless narrative provided by the prosecutor who wrote this summary.  "Armstrong's refusal to confront the evidence against him, in-person, in a hearing, leads to a strong inference that Armstrong doped exactly as charged by USADA".  An irrelevant fanciful opinion.  A fantasy.  No factual evidence to support this assertion.  The reader will encounter this narrative many times on "evidence" that amounts to hearsay.  "Evidence" that would never be admitted into a court of law.

The writing style of The Reasoned Decision.

Complete and utter garbage. The Reasoned Decision proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that cyclists are not doctors.  The medical conclusions reached by former teammates of Lance Armstrong are preposterous.  Most of the incoherent summary presented in The Reasoned Decision is based on hearsay, conjecture, press releases, innuendo, surmise, everything but hard evidence to prove Lance Armstrong used performance-enhancing drugs.  The narrator obviously has no concept of cycling history, and the tapestry he weaves of circumstantial evidence is far from convincing; even under the "comfortable satisfaction" standard. Sam Sparks, the judge who castigated Lance Armstrong for "vilifying" the anti-doping process, obviously chose to censure the wrong party.  Judge Sam Sparks should have reprimanded USADA for this sleazy character assassination of Lance Armstrong.  Travis T. Tygart should have been ashamed to affix his signature to this summary.  The Reasoned Decision reads like a blog; full of inaccurate statements and factual errors.

Mistakes

It would be impossible to list every mistake in The Reasoned Decision without going insane.  I will mention a couple of glaring examples.  Kristen Armstrong is savaged with libelous accusations when ex-teammates of Lance Armstrong claimed that Kristen Armstrong distributed cortisone tablets to the riders, in brown paper lunch sacks, at the request of Lance Armstrong.  Kristen Armstrong was "rolling joints."  Inadmissible hearsay.  Kristen Armstrong may have distributed harmless placebos or vitamin supplements.  Was Kristen Armstrong a chemist?  Was Kristen Armstrong a doctor?  Did someone chemically analyze the contents of those sacks?  Will USADA produce a sample as evidence?  Did Kristen Armstrong have any first-hand knowledge of the contents of those sacks?  A defense attorney would have a field day cross-examining these idiotic accusers!  No court in the world would accept or admit this nonsense as evidence.

Then Emma O' Reilly makes the preposterous statement that the blood of the 1999 Tour de France Lance Armstrong cortisone "positive" test came from a cortisone injection administered to Lance Armstrong "weeks earlier," during the Route de Sud.  The half-life for cortisone is six hours.  Total elimination from the body 20-24 hours.  A stored blood bag containing cortisone may account for the positive test result, but why would anyone draw oxygen-depleted blood during an exhausting race.  Insane conjecture is totally unsupported by scientific facts or common sense reasoning.  The cortisone did not come from the Route de Sud.  You would think with a budget of 15 million taxpayer-funded dollars a year, USADA could have hired an editor to proofread the document before publishing the damn thing.  Yet the narrative drones on about the accumulation of "facts" that support the case.  Absurd.  Voodoo science does not generate facts.

The Reasoned Decision reads like an outline of David Walsh's, Seven Deadly Sins.  I might suggest The Reasoned Decision is a masterwork of plagiarism, but most of the facts presented in the report are common knowledge.  The author engages in infuriating circumlocutions, selectively grasping quotes without providing any context.  USADA should have published the witness statements instead of publishing this incoherent rambling mess.  I could not believe The Reasoned Decision was written by a legally trained professional writer.

David Zabriskie

One gem I found, though.  The story of David Zabriskie.  David Zabriskie raced to escape a broken home and a drug-addicted parent.  David Zabriskie wanted to find solace and sanctuary in cycling.  David Zabriskie was reluctant to embrace the doping culture in cycling.  David Zabriskie was concerned about the side-effects of EPO.  What impact would EPO have on his health, on his body, would EPO cause genetic mutations in his children?  David Zabriskie joined the peloton to escape from his own chaotic family situation.  Cycling was a cathartic escape, a panacea.  Then, according to USADA, Johan Bruyneel sent Jose "Pepe" Marti and Dr. Luis del Moral, under the direct orders of Lance Armstrong, to inject David Zabriskie and teammate Michael Barry with EPO as a part of an illicit team doping program.  David Zabriskie was so upset at this misfortune he cried bitter tears. P. 111-112

Betsy Andreu.

I made some notations about Betsy Andreu; but suffice to say; Betsy Andreu is a true anti-doping crusader and not a hypocrite, like her husband Frankie Andreu.  I was surprised to learn that Frankie Andreu used performance-enhancing drugs in multiple races, not in just one stage of the Tour de France.  Frankie Andreu said he "wouldn't put that shit in my body" meaning dope.  But when Betsy Andreu saw Frankie Andreu breaking wind for Lance Armstrong up the col, in the lead group, on television, during a stage of the Tour de France, she flipped out!  "What is Frankie doing?"  "He's juiced!"  Besty laid down the law.  Besty told Frankie, "choose, EPO or me"!  Betsy Andreu told Frankie Andreu she would not marry him unless he stopped doping.  Frankie obeyed Betsy and became an outspoken anti-doping crusader himself.  The way Lance Armstrong treated Betsy Andreu was disgusting.  Betsy Andreu claimed she heard Lance Armstrong confess to a group of doctors that he used a large number of performance-enhancing drugs as a professional cyclist.  Betsy and Frankie Andreu, and Lance Armstrong, were all together in a hospital room, in Indiana, where Lance Armstrong was being treated for testicular cancer. This room is where the "drug confession" occurred. Lance Armstrong called Betsy Andreu "a crazy bitch, with a personal vendetta.".  The cycling world was split right down the middle about Betsy Andreu.  Some people loved Betsy, some people hated Betsy.  The haters have probably forgiven her.  So, Betsy Andreu, you get a special mention, and many thanks, for helping to expose "cycling's greatest fraud".

Conclusion

The Reasoned Decision is a morass of disconnected statements, poorly organized, badly written, seemingly without aim or purpose.  "Non-analytical" positives lower the bar so low that a simple smear could destroy the career of an athlete.  USADA is so arrogant and smug that they don't even seen to care about the image they are projecting to anti-doping professionals, or to the cycling community.  USADA seems to take no pride in their work.  Refusal to incriminate yourself is not a doping violation.  The fact that Lance Armstrong quit without firing a shot, or contesting your accusations, does not justify your slovenliness USADA! Results are not all that matter! Damn the torpedoes!

Addendum:

Why did I bother to write this review, you might ask?  I was looking for Paul Kimmage's classic book, Rough Ride, but I found this sorry excuse of a report instead.  The report is dated, having no real value or interest to anyone today except for cycling doping historians.  Without a doubt, USADA created the greatest eyesore in the history of the anti-doping crusade, and USADA should be ashamed of themselves.  The Reasoned Decision will forever serve as a model of how not to report a doping violation.  Athletes shouldn't need to worry about being humiliated by an anti-doping agency that makes a pretense to unbiased professionalism.

*These allegations include all seven of Lance Armstrong's Tour de France victories, (1999-2005)  plus two comeback years, (2009-2010).  The Motorola years are not included even though Lance Armstrong won the World Championship.  Doping allegations during the Motorola years were dealt with in other litigation.

Tom Danielson Tests Positive Again

Tom Danielson has tested positive on the "B" sample for an "anabolic agent" according to USADA.  There is some speculation that the "anabolic agent" is DHEA, a testosterone precursor that can also be used as a masking agent.

Oddly enough, Mr. Danielson originated this speculation by making an announcement prior to the 2015 Tour of Utah he had received a letter from USADA stating he had tested positive for synthetic testosterone. This is most unusual. Generally, the regulatory agencies are on the phone to L'Equipe long before the ink is dry on the Lab Document Package with breaking news. Amazingly, neither USADA or the UCI leaked the story.

Perhaps the regulatory agencies have finally learned not to initiate a witch hunt before the athlete has a chance to collect his wits and prepare an adequate defense.

Mr. Danielson does not appear on the "provisionally suspended" list. Perhaps the secretary is on a coffee break?

Jonathan Vaughters is backpedaling as fast as he can from the situation by informing the fanatics of some astounding news.  Cannondale Garmin informed Mr. Danielson that his contract would not be extended before Mr. Danielson tested positive for an anabolic agent.  What Mr. Vaughters omitted was why the contract was not extended.  One could speculate Mr. Vaughters is suggesting that Mr. Danielson hired Levi Leipheimer as a personal coach, trainer, consultant, and bulked up with drugs in order to win the Tour of Utah in order to prove to other teams he was still a valuable asset. (A person should avoid contact with such people to avoid impropriety, especially as Levi Leipheimer is an expert on how to dope and avoid detection.) Others might suggest that the contract was terminated because Mr. Danielson is 37 and about to join the masters.  Others might suggest that Cannondale Garmin knew Mr. Danielson was using drugs, or Cannondale Garmin was complicit in this behavior.  Why would Mr. Vaughters wonder why neither USADA or the UCI has told him what Mr. Danielson tested positive for?  True.  Mr. Danielson was still employed by Cannondale Garmin when he tested positive, which is suggestive. But since Mr. Danielson has been terminated by Cannondale Garmin, is it any business of Jonathan Vaughters?  Perhaps, Mr. Vaughters could hold another press conference and be more forthcoming about the circumstances of why Mr. Danielson's contract was not extended.

The next step for Tom Danielson is the USADA Anti-Doping Review Board.  There he will have an opportunity to argue he was accidentally poisoned by a tainted supplement or he was a victim of sabotage.  At considerable expense.

Travis Tygart: Out Of Bounds

Travis Tygart is pounding the drum for Lance Armstrong to come forward, complete with confession in hand, to implicate the duplicitous nefarious scoundrels that comprise the UCI leadership, who allegedly accept bribes in return for favorable suppression of positive dope tests.  Hein Verbruggen allegedly stuffed his pockets on numerous occasions from desperate cyclists who would rather continue to "unduly enrich" themselves rather than face arbitration hearings, suspensions, disgrace, and lack of income.  It has also been alleged that the current president of the UCI Pat McQuaid along with the current UCI executive committee endeavored to cover up this bribery scheme.

Of course, all of these issues were to be rectified by an investigation by an independent committee of highly qualified people who were expected to leave no stone unturned to arrive at the truth.  There was a question as to the true nature of the independence of the committee, however, when it was revealed that some of the committee members had affiliation with the International Olympic Committee that by implication would infer a covert effort to protect the World Anti-Doping Agency from any culpability.  Also one would wonder if the committee composed of such people would have a motive for revenge against the UCI for past skirmishes and lawsuits that were filed between the UCI and WADA during the Hein Verbruggen administration.

Nevertheless, the lack of cooperation of Lance Armstrong to come forward and blow the whistle on the UCI is troublesome considering the fact that the independent committee was disbanded before considering the bribery issue and considering the fact that the UCI executive committee has refused to take any action.  Travis Tygart is convinced that the independent committee was abandoned so that the blinders and handcuffs would remain on in order to leave the truth opaque.  Perhaps Lance Armstrong would be more forthcoming if Travis Tygart would be more diplomatic and compromise by reducing the lifetime ban he imposed with a more reasonable suspension.  However, this is unlikely to happen because then cycling fanatics could accuse USADA of employing the same sort of duplicitous tactics that Hein Verbruggen employed only in a opposite sense, bribery for information, instead of bribery for suppression of information.  This USADA method was quite successful when applied to cyclists who were more than willing to provide affidavits to implicate Lance Armstrong, Johan Bruyneel, Michele Ferrari, et al, during the steroid era of rampant doping that allegedly occurred on the United States Postal Service Professional Cycling Team.  Indeed, USADA was not loath to bribe riders with sweetheart deals to extract "truth."  So why would USADA be reluctant to continue the trend of deals for information with Lance Armstrong, the man who could settle the issue once and for all?  Is it because Lance Armstrong refused to come forward and admit under oath that the entire contents of the Reasoned Decision was truth not statements based upon envious people with an axe to grind or upon imaginary embellishments contrived through an excess of prosecutorial zeal?  Lance Armstrong did admit to using performance enhancing drugs, but he never suggested that the contents of the Reasoned Decision reflected an accurate depiction of events.  Most people came to the conclusion that the contents of the Reasoned Decision reflected truthful accounts of events by default not through an a posteriori examination of the evidence preferably by an independent committee.  It would be reasonable to conclude that USADA had in mind verification of the Reasoned Decision by the chief culprit himself, and it is not unreasonable to suggest that Lance Armstrong would be baited into implicating himself into some sort of criminal case by careful legal maneuvering that would be revenge for the lack of a criminal indictment by the Federal Grand Jury probe.

Nevertheless, Lance Armstrong refused to accept a barren hook devoid of the worm on the advice of his attorney who scented out the trap.  After all,  Lance Armstrong would have to confirm the conclusions of the Reasoned Decision, if he refused to confirm every conclusion, USADA would call him an outright liar, deceiver, and cheat, as they have done with his denials of using performance enhancing drugs after riding with Discovery Channel in 2005.  Lance Armstrong claims to have ridden clean in 2009 and 2010, but USADA claims UCI Biological Passport data that proves doping, even though in the absence of a failed anti-doping test the UCI Biological Passport data is nothing more than a statement of probability.  Perhaps USADA was counting upon Lance Armstrong to confirm under oath that the UCI Biological Passport data that USADA had in their possession was a factual record of doping in spite of his formal denials during the Oprah Winfrey "confession," more  icing on the cake.  For years the UCI Biological Passport has been criticized as an expensive boondoggle that exposes nothing more than wishful thinking, but an admission by Lance Armstrong would be the final coup de grace to all of the critics forevermore who have the audacity to question the UCI Biological Passport and would set in stone another atrocity against the fundamental rights of athletes.

Clearly Travis Tygart should focus on his own concerns and refrain from trying to police the entire cycling community.  We all know that the UCI is a corrupt organization that should be placed under adult supervision and that the elements that promote corruption should be eradicated without constantly being reminded of this fact by USADA.  We realize that the UCI needs immediate reform and replacement of certain undesirable elements and a new refreshing approach, but we are also cynical enough not to expect miracles.  But then again intransigence, obstinacy, and a refusal to make concessions in expectation of future rewards is also the wrong approach to the problem and ensures nothing more than continual failure to achieve stated goals.  But can you reason with grandiose madmen to make them discern reason from folly?  Good luck with that.

Lance Armstrong to USADA: No Dice

When one lives in a privy, one becomes accustomed to the smell of shit!
Alexander Puskin

The long expected self immolation of Lance Armstrong did not materialize after all.  The New York Times reporter Juliet Macur has reported that Lance Armstrong did not meet the deadline to report to USADA in order to clarify his career doping history under oath.  Tim Herman, one of Lance Armstrong lawyers, did state that Lance Armstrong might be willing to testify to an international tribunal since ninety five percent of the doping problems and legal jurisdiction lie outside of the domain of USADA.

“We remain hopeful that an international effort will be mounted, and we will do everything we can to facilitate that result,” Herman said in the statement. “In the meantime, for several reasons, Lance will not participate in Usada’s efforts to selectively conduct American prosecutions that only demonize selected individuals while failing to address the 95 percent of the sport over which Usada has no jurisdiction.”

An International Tribunal?

The Europeans are not concerned with resurrection of old skeletons, and inquisitions are old hat.  If Lance Armstrong had something important to speak of that falls under the existing statutes of limitations, [do statutes of limitations still exist outside of the jurisdiction of USADA?] say knowledge of doping on the 2009 Astana team, then this information might be valuable enough for Armstrong to leverage an immunity deal and an amnesty.  Otherwise, Armstrong has nothing of value except for obsolete information on how to defeat doping tests, information that could be better gleaned from Michele Farrari.  However, there is still the prospect of Lance Armstrong exposing the UCI as a corrupt organization that can be purchased with bribery to cover-up positive drug tests.  And there is also the possibility that WADA could also be exposed as a corrupt organization susceptible to conspiracy.  Lance Armstrong might have other valuable information available for the tribunal, but old hat statements about antiquated doping do not fit the bill.

USADA: Sweeten the Pot

Apparently, although USADA baited the rat trap with a temping morsel, the rat got cold feet at the last moment and rejected the morsel as not temping enough. A reduction of a lifetime ban from athletic sport to eight years is no incentive, since both punishments equate to a lifetime ban for Lance Armstrong.  Armstrong is forty two years old, he would be fifty when allowed to compete again in a triathlon.  Who would worry about competing against a geriatric stale joke?  But, perhaps Lance Armstrong's refusal to testify under oath is intended to leverage a sweeter deal, since USADA has a history of offering sweetheart deals of reduced suspensions to informants.  Indeed, it seems incredible to note that after encouraging serial dopers with long histories of drug abuse to finger Lance Armstrong with bribes of amnesty and immunity, that USADA would seem so intransigent with respect to Lance Armstrong fingering dopers, doctors, and their confederates.  However, it is impossible to deny that USADA is salivating at the prospect of baiting the most notorious doper in the history of cycling into hanging himself.

Warm Up the Privy!

Lance old friend.  You will be lucky if you have one red cent left after these people get through with you.  You would have been better served if you would have followed counsel's advice and kept your mouth shut.  Your stupid Oprah admission to use of performance enhancing drugs, although laudable, will end up with you losing the manor house, the outbuildings, and your new residence of abode will be the privy!  But don't worry, your offended nostrils will become acclimated to the stench over time.  Like Alexander Puskin, you won't be able to runaway from Tsar Nicholas I and the censorship. USADA will dog your steps every inch of the way and in the end you will become dependent upon people whom you thoroughly loath.  The most galling prospect of all will be paying Floyd Landis money, your willing dolt.  Forget an amnesty, you are dealing with self serving people who will never accede to your demands.  Resign, your career is over.   

Lance Armstrong Doping: Comedy of Errors

Stupid race predictions based upon irrational thought processes result in lost wages and a boon for the casinos.  Cadel Evans, the iron horse, cracked on the col and had to be paced to the finish by his teammate Tejay van Garderen.  Meanwhile, Bradley Wiggins and his Team Sky teammate, Christopher Froome, are one two in the overall general classification.  Already, even before the finish of the race, the haters and doubters have emerged, accusing Bradley Wiggins and Team Sky of being the "British" U.S. Postal Service Professional Cycling Team.

Of course, Bradley Wiggins, in a profanity-laced tirade, blamed the press for inventing doping allegations, citing his numerous passed drug tests and his hard work.  Big deal.  Lance Armstrong used the same argument.  Lance Armstrong cited his perfect test results and his hard work ethic to explain his phenomenal seven-year reign, all to no avail, as the USADA has contrived an outrageous conspiracy theory based not upon science, but upon the testimony of convicted dope fiends and proven, liars.

Goes with the territory.  You win a Tour de France and immediately everyone questions your integrity.

3 Associates of Lance Armstrong Receive Bans.

Juliet Macur, the correspondent of the New York Times, is a very responsible journalist, but whatever happened to the one-dollar newspaper?  Luis Garcia del Moral, team doctor, USPS, and Michele Ferrari, also euphemistically known as doctor blood, banned.  Pepi Marti, USPS trainer, banned.  These people did not respond to the USADA charging letter and were subsequently banned for life from Olympic competition and cycling.
Without a hearing or a trial either, but who among USADA cares about due process?

As the deadline approached for Lance Armstrong to decide to accept the USADA charges or march to an arbitration hearing, Lance Armstrong filed a lawsuit against the USADA.  The filing contains an incredible amount of outrageous charges against the USADA, that is phrased as a lampoon, in the most hilarious style, which will elicit uncontrollable laughter and streams of tears from your eyes, dear reader.  But U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks failed to appreciate the humor.  In a stinging dismissal Judge Sparks accused Lance Armstrong not only of improper format, but even worse, of "vilification of Defendants."  Judge Sparks did not dismiss the case on the merits of the legal arguments and invited Lance Armstrong to re-submit his argument within twenty days minus the breach of etiquette.  Immediately, Lance Armstrong filed a version with a much more serious tone.  USADA then gave Lance Armstrong a thirty-day extension to respond to the charging letter in consideration of an expected ruling by Judge Sparks.

But this is certainly not the end of the affair.  Representative James Sensenbrenner is questioning why United States taxpayers are funding USADA.

Here are the blood values for Herr Armstrong.  Are they conclusive proof of blood doping and rEPO use as alleged by USADA?  You make the call.

Conclusion:

Here a tantalizing snippet to consider.   Travis Tygart claims he has "overwhelming evidence" to support his claims.  Lance Armstrong was flying under the radar.  The science was junk, the tests meaningless.  All due to the sophisticated masking techniques employed by Michele Ferrari.  Alas, these arguments do have some merit.  Let us examine the olive oil/testosterone concoction allegedly developed by Michele Ferrari.  This is a very basic and simple method of administering drugs to patients, a muscle depot injection.  With muscle depot injections the drug is absorbed into the muscle making the drug very long-lasting and slow to metabolize. If the bladder was flushed out with multiple water bottles during a very difficult or hot stage, this could prevent a testosterone "spike," and without a "spike" above 4:1 there is no need to conduct a carbon isotope ratio test.  Thus it is possible to fly below the radar.  But not for fourteen years of team doping with multiple performance-enhancing substances.  Not for fifty-six riders on seven Tour de France championship teams, none of whom ever tested positive.  No.  If based on the science and the test results there is overwhelming evidence of non-doping among the United States Postal Service and Discovery Channel professional cycling teams. Not the contrary as alleged by USADA.  Lack of scientific evidence of doping cannot be replaced by demented confabulations of convicted dopers who are also proven, liars.