I *hope* its not true, but this report just made me lose my hope. When I thought the only problem was the RATIO of Test to Epi, I thought there was hope, lots of good reasons why it may be so. But, if they really have mass spec data suggesting the testosterone was synthetic, it does look bad. I agree, I would rather hear it from the UCT, but so far in this matter all that has emerged first in the popular press FIRST, i.e. there is a rider with a failed A test, the rider is Floyd, etc. is true, so I thought folks might find this latest report interesting. And it did come from a cycling website, not the popular press. Does anyone know (I really don't) that cyclingnews.com in any less reliable than the other cycling websites like velonews and eurosport? Of course, I believe its innocent until proven guilty, but this information, if accurate, does not look hopeful IMHO.