A few days ago, after the announcement of Patrik Sinkewitz Adverse Analytical Finding for HGH, UCI's Press Officer Enrico Carpani declared with evident complacency that the UCI "didn't want to officially announce the date of scientific validation of the test in order to allow an element of SURPRISE". 

As with other cases in the past (i.e. the CERA test at the 2008 TdF), the UCI chose to clamorously STRIKE the usual "bad guy", on the eve of Milan-Sanremo, instead of trying to PREVENT BY INFORMING, proving once again that the show provided by the anti-doping fight is way more important than the image of cycling. 

The UCI prefers such philosophy of AMBUSH as the deterrent over a prevention-dissuasion approach. 
I am not going into the deep of the matter of Sinkewitz case, but I can't help but remind everyone that there is not one single scientific study proving any positive effect of HGH on performance. 
Already back in 2008, a double blind study conducted by J. Hansen of the Garvan Institute in Sydney demonstrated that a treatment of HGH on a group of 64 athletes for 8 weeks brought the same results as placebo. 

But the UCI, instead of emphasizing the lack of performance enhancement, the dangers for health or the validation of a specific test for such a costly drug, once again preferred the vainglory of announcing the first ever case of an HGH positive in cycling.