A couple days ago I worked on a piece about the world cycling championships in Mendrisio, in canton Ticino.

Most of the piece was on Fabian Cancellara, a Swiss nicknamed "Spartacus" for his amazing power. He's excellent in the time trial and not too bad in regular road races.

One nagging little bit I wanted to touch on was doping . Both interview partners in the piece  - an Italian-speaking Swiss a colleague interviewed, as well as the head of the country's road cycling association - expressed zero confidence that professional road cyclists are clean, or that the sport's governing body is doing enough to prevent doping.

I posed the statement to the UCI, the governing body, asking for comment. That was  met with disdain, to be charitable, and apparently under the presupposition that the issue of doping in cycling had been dreamed up by yours truly and that concerns didn't actually exist.

Note to press officer: you catch more journalists with honey than with venomous rage and wild conspiracy accusations.

After a 30-minute conversation, the message was this (paraphrased): "Your questions are too stupid to comment on." Ironically, the doping issue would have taken up about three lines at the bottom of the piece.

The UCI does spend a significant amount of money on testing. But as I would learn, quantity doesn't necessarily translate into quality.

Added the spokesman: "The UCI and WADA [World anti-Doping Agency] have an excellent relationship." The UCI is suing WADA.

The piece is here.