Armstrong Is Under Fire

The French sports newspaper L’Equipe alleged Tuesday that a frozen urine sample taken from Lance Armstrong during the 1999 Tour de France has tested positive for the banned substance erythropoietin, or EPO, a product used for blood doping.

The headline of the four-page L’Equipe story was “The Armstrong Lie.” Armstrong, 33, who retired from the sport July 24 after his seventh consecutive Tour victory, denied the charge.

“Unfortunately the witch hunt continues,” Armstrong wrote on his website Tuesday. “I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance-enhancing drugs.”

Armstrong won the 1999 Tour in his first appearance there after recovering from testicular cancer that had spread to his lungs and brain in 1996.

According to L’Equipe, a sample of Armstrong’s 1999 urine that had been frozen was tested last year at Chatenay-Malabry, a doping testing facility outside Paris that is accredited by WADA, the World Anti-Doping Agency. The international cycling federation did not begin testing for EPO until 2001.

L’Equipe reporters said they matched the six-digit numbers applied to samples to keep them anonymous with copies of medical forms filled out by each cyclist for the French Cycling Federation before every drug sample was taken at the Tour. According to L’Equipe, the scientists at Chatenay-Malabry were conducting research on frozen samples of several cyclists to help improve detection methods.

David Walsh, a writer for the London Sunday Times who co-wrote a book that sought to tie Armstrong and his U.S. cycling teams to blood doping, said Armstrong will not be the only prominent cyclist whose name is associated with doping from the 1999 race.

“But because of Lance’s stature in the race,” Walsh said, “I believe the paper did not want to overshadow the reporting about Lance. Keeping in mind where I come from, for anybody who reads this story, it is very credible.”

Armstrong is suing Walsh’s newspaper for printing excerpts from the book, “LA Confidentiel: Les Secrets de Lance Armstrong,” written with former L’Equipe journalist Pierre Ballester.

Jim Ochowicz, president of USA Cycling and a mentor to Armstrong when the Texan took up the sport, said he did not find the L’Equipe story credible.

“I’m curious to know why it took seven years to do this,” Ochowicz said. “We don’t know at all about the credibility of the samples they did test. I don’t know where those things were, how they’ve been handled in a seven-year period. This method of testing was put into practice at the 2000 Sydney Olympics. Why didn’t they test the sample then?”

Officials with the international cycling federation declined to comment.

L’Equipe and the Tour de France organization are owned by Amaury Sports Organisation. Tour director Jean-Marie Leblanc told European journalists that the L’Equipe charges appear “credible” and well-researched. “We are very shocked and very troubled by the revelations,” Leblanc said.

But five-time Tour winner Miguel Indurain of Spain defended Armstrong on the cycling website todociclismo.com. “They have been out to get him in France for a number of years,” Indurain said. “ ... Anything about Armstrong is news these days, but the question is whether all this is true or not.”

Because the most recent tests were done on what is known as the “B” sample and because the first, or “A,” sample was used up in testing done during the race in 1999, it would be unlikely that WADA, the UCI or the Tour could sanction Armstrong without a backup sample to provide corroborating evidence. But it also makes it more difficult for Armstrong to totally clear his name.

“He’s stuck with a cloud,” said Dr. Gary Wadler, a noted doping expert.Wadler said that because the research into this sample was done for scientific purposes, rather than to see whether a particular athlete was to be sanctioned for cheating, “it is disquieting to me that this became public in the way it did. Both parties -- the sport and the athlete -- are entitled to have due process and be able to provide appropriate issues of evidence.”

Dick Pound, WADA chairman, told Associated Press he would be interested to hear from Armstrong more fully.

“If the evidence is seen as credible, then, yes, he has an obligation to come forward and specifically give his comments especially after his previous comments that he has never used drugs,” Pound said.