It does seem like a mess - I'm not convinced about their ability to strip his titles. I'm also very suspicious, but agree that it's impossible to judge something so far in the past.
Interesting article and I hear what you're saying ninearms, but in my heart I think doping is a 'crime' rather than a 'foul'.
The article seems to have a circular argument, validating the use of doping, because it's prevalent, part of the spirit of the Tour and unless you do it you can't keep up. I don't agree with this logic - that doesn't mean I have a practical solution to the situation, but this implies that a history of action and a misguided belief that
'this is right' provides validity for any situation. Not for me.... not for a lot of history either.
It also sidelines the "does the sport become less interesting or valuable" question into mostly about interest. It all becomes less
valuable in my opinion - and over the past 20 years the public seem to have echoed this.
Also don't agree that the examples of boxing/shooting differing from running and biking. Beta blockers and fear reducing drugs might help enhance the effect of competing rather than the effect of training, but blood doping enhances the effect of competing. Everyone still has to train hard. This analogy doesn't fully work for me.
Still lots of good food for thought, and I'm not completely slating the article - just a few bits I liked, few bits I didn't

Maybe it's heart over head, but I'm still not in a position to chuck in the towel and accept doping as part of valuable sport to which I aspire.