It's very funny to see how people don't knowing about some argument "for certain" look at something completely wrong.
1. Michele Ferrari NEVER worked for Italian Federation (FIDAL). In the period 1980-1985, the Italian researcher who was his chief (Conconi) had a contract with Italian Olympic Committee (CONI) for testing and supporting athletes preparing top competitions. Michele Ferrari was one of his followers. Both lived in the town of Ferrara, and their studies on the blood were very appreciated also outside of the sport (Conconi had a nomination for Nobel Prize about his researches for Mediterranean Anaemia).
The link between Conconi and CONI terminated at the end of 1985. Some of the Italian athletes of middle and long distance used "autotrasfusione" (transfusion of their own blood) till when the system was officially banned, at the end of 1985. Some other athletes, instead, always refused to have any kind of treatment, in spite of the reccomandation from Olympic Committee (in this group, the Olympic Marathon Champion 1988 Gelindo Bordin, the World Champion 1987 of steeple Francesco Panetta and the European Champion of 10000m in 1986, Stefano Mei).
2. I never worked with Michele Ferrari, but I knew him from long time, already from 1968, since he was an athlete with good results in middle distances, especially when was in the school (1000m about 2'30" when 18).
But, of course, when I was responsible of the long distance for Italian Federation, and his daughter Sara was one of the best young Italian runners, I had the opportunity to meet him and to speak with him, about his daughter and, more generally, about methodology.
How I explained in my post, the experiances I had with all my athletes, Italian, Ukrainan, Kenyan, Ugandan and Ethiopian, are totally different from the experiences Ferrari had in cycling. I have data about one reality, who works in cycling data about another situation.
3. I confirm completely what I wrote last time. The two sports require different attitudes, and I continue to believe that EPO doesn't work with top athletes having a very hard, and correct, type of training.
I don't know if it's possible to have the same top results
completely clean in cycling, because athletics can be measured with times and exact distances, cycling is something different. But what I think is that, in cycling, the mentality was that ONLY with using of a lot of supports it was possible to be competitive (and the first part of Lance's interview confirms this idea : taking some PED was like filling a bottle for drinking or putting air in the tyres, because was a normal and general behavior). And, of course, NOBODY in the ambience had the interest in trying some experience WITHOUT doping, because with doping a lot of people can have economical advantages.
4. There is no ONE official research about the advantages of taking EPO, in a scientific way, with top runners in athleteics. Few athletes were caught, and people give merit to their doping for their results, BUT NOBODY KNOWS WHAT THEY COULD RUN WITH DIFFERENT TRAINING WITHOUT DOPING.
On the other side, I know very well where a top runner can arrive WITHOUT ANY DOPING, but I don't have proof of what they could do taking some PED.
What I know, is that I had 8 athletes between 26'30" and 26'55" in 10000m, the WR holder of steeple, 2 marathon runners under 2:04 and a lot under 2:07 men, and about 10 athletes between 2:18:47 and 2:22:00 in the marathon for women, reaching these results without any aid : and that's the reason because I don't believe in the effects of PED for this type of athletes.
5. At the end, I'm sure somebody goes to speak about the 3 kenyan marathon runners last year banned. Among them, only one (Mathew Kisorio) was a top class athlete, and he was caught for steroids, not for EPO. And, from when he started to take PED, he started also to run very much slower than before, so......