The International Cycling Union (UCI) would like to react to the content of an article that appeared in the Wall Street Journal on 7th August, headlined âThe Mystery of the Five Missing Testsâ. This article contains several errors and misrepresentations which the UCI wishes to rectify.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the UCI abandoned the case of riders whose blood profile justified the opening of disciplinary proceedings according to the opinion of the blood passport expert panel at their last meeting. This is false. First of all the experts gave such opinion for six riders only. The UCI already opened disciplinary procedures against three of them. For the three remaining riders, the situation is the following:
â¢Â The first underwent a classic positive test showing in a direct manner the illicit manipulation suggested by his biological passport. This rider was suspended for two years at the end of a standard disciplinary procedure, which is why it was not necessary to open a procedure on the base of his passport.
â¢Â As for the other two riders, the procedure is still in progress. The time lapse between the discovery of an abnormal profile and the opening of a disciplinary proceedings is sometimes longer than one would like, but that is mainly because the biological passport is an avant-garde, sophisticated tool, which the UCI is the first Federation to have introduced. The management of a case brought to light by the biological passport is more complex than a case discovered during a classic test. Moreover, the respect of confidentiality rules, to which the UCI must conform under the World Anti-Doping Code, does not allow for any mystery or manoeuvre aiming to hide anything whatsoever. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) has been informed of the management of the two cases mentioned above.
The article in the Wall Street Journal implies that WADA decided to take measures against the UCI, as it did not have confidence in the management of the biological passport programme. This is totally false. WADA has never expressed any particular concerns on this subject and has taken no measures against the UCI. WADA has received the full collaboration of the UCI each time it has requested information on specific cases (which it has the right to do and which is part of its mission). In fact, WADA is very satisfied with the work accomplished by the UCI, pioneer of the biological passport for which WADA has publicly congratulated the UCI on several occasions.
The wonders what reasons pushed the journal to such unfair attack against the UCI and its management of the biological passport, when WADA itself is entirely satisfied, and given that the blood passport represents the most advanced tool in the fight against doping.
Service de Presse UCI