After WADA’s harsh words for the UCI the other day in response to the report clearing Lance Armstrong’s name (and questioning WADA’s tactics and motives), the UCI has come back swinging:

“What strikes one most is that WADA leaves aside the main questions and conclusions of the report. WADA should not be allowed to divert the attention on side issues, but asked publicly to answer the many pertinent questions in the Vrijman report and in particular the following:

• Is it correct that WADA has put pressure on the laboratory to include in research reports the original sample codes, thereby violating the confidentiality that is guaranteed to the athletes?
• Will WADA make known which person within WADA has taken this decision?
• Does WADA admit that the World Anti-Doping Code was violated in that the samples were analysed for research purposes without the consent of the athletes, as well as WADA’s rule in the doping control form that the origin of the samples must be made untraceable?
• Will WADA confirm or deny that there have been contacts between WADA and D. Ressiot prior to August 23, 2005 that explain statements made by D. Ressiot in L’Equipe of that day?”