Alex Hutchinson calls out CANOVA over study confirming EPO works on Kenyan runners

m!ndweak wrote:

im pissed off at renato cause he continues to lie and demand everyone accept it or he writes 15 paragraphs and YELLS A LOT.

im pissed off that people on here continue to say that kenyan runners are just SUPER HUMAN

NO NEED TO SHOUT.

Unless, like me you don't have bold type on your computer and then you have to resort to SHOUTING TO GET THE POINT ACROSS!!!

I agree they aren't superhuman, just super fit.

JonO. wrote:

Drug, drugs and more drugs, it's just sick wrote:

Skip to 3:28, even the Aussie vegan disagrees with Rekrunner and JonO

https://youtu.be/rIyhhZPjKJY

"EPO parrots"

I think Durianrider has figured out that the power output in perfect condtions for the Tour winners in peak condition is FCP 6 watts per kilo as per the British cycling bioenergetics model.

Where I live this is not considered super human but super fitness.

Renato was right all those years ago and Ferrari was wrong. Ferrari knew how to play mind games with people, but he also says stuff than many will disagree with, just as Renato does.

Only a week ago on here you were quoting Ferrari for his comments that Armstrong never needed to take drugs. He was right then when it suited you, now he's suddenly wrong. Great consistency JonO.

Subway Surfers wrote:

Only a week ago on here you were quoting Ferrari for his comments that Armstrong never needed to take drugs. He was right then when it suited you, now he's suddenly wrong. Great consistency JonO.

What are you talking about? I didn't qutoe Ferrari about any such thing. I said Ferrari exaggerated Lance's power outputs by 10% and everyone believed it.

After 1990 Russian national men's records were set at 1500m, mile, 2000m, 10000m, 10km road, 15km road, 20km road, half marathon, 30km road and marathon. Worth noting also that those records were set post collapse of Soviet Union and the formidable communist sporting "system".

You are again not correct calling me a liar, when simply I share with everybody my experiences and the final belief that from my experiences I can have.

Instead filling every thread with the same articles, of course the only one supporting your obsession of 4%, why don't you try to see also some other research, that can show different results ?

For example, you can go again in the research about the 48 cyclists climbing Mont Ventoux.

Honestly, I have difficulty to follow the discussion, full of English words that I don’t know, but I understand that all the discussion is based on theorical assumptions, and not on results produced in practice.

I liked the way the experiment/research with the 48 cyclists was carried out. Firstly, the high number of subjects. Secondly, the final conclusions, that, according to the researchers, clearly show a dichotomy between the results in the lab and the results on the road.

Cycling is, of course, different from running. But in this case, I think the test can present several factors in common between the two disciplines.

Where is the PRACTICE of cycling different from running ?

In the continue variation of the HR, depending on the tactical situation of the race. And, especially, it’s different if we look at the great competitions with 20 stages in 22 days, such as Tour de France, Giro d’Italia and Vuelta de Espana.

While in running we can have the full control of our effort in training, in cycling this is not possible, because the intensity of the race depends of choices of the other participants, especially if inside a strong team.

For that reason, the recovery between one stage and the other is one of the most important factors, in order to be competitive at the higher level for all the period of the Tour.

So, following the common belief that EPO can increase the ability to recover, in this case the administration can produce some advantage.

But to speak about the increased recovery in athletics like a factor that can determine improvement in the final performance is methodologically wrong.

In training, the recovery depends on the intensity of the workout. The main goal is to be able to carry out workouts of high stimulus for the body, reaching volumes and intensities bigger than in the past. The recovery AFTER these workouts has the goal to allow the body to SUPERCOMPENSATE, making the athlete, after the supercompensation (or overcompensation), stronger than before.

For reaching this goal, it’s not important if the recovery is 2 days or 5 days : the OPTIMAL recovery is when the very tough training is completely absorbed by the body, and produces physiological variations at the base of every improvement in the performance.

So, when we train an athlete we can look at the INDIVIDUAL situation, having full control in what he is doing, something that in the case of cyclists can’t happen, because if they want to be competitive their effort depends on the general situation of the race, and they have to use all their energy almost every day, if interested in the final overall classification.

Hoever, if we look at TEMPO RACES (or, for example, at the WR of one hour, that is ATHLETICS on a bike as type of effort),

we can see great analogy between running and cycling.

The research has some point very interesting :

a) "the best predictor of time trial performance in highly trained athletes is muscle oxidative capacity, in contrast to the best predictor of maximal power output, which is oxygen delivery. The absence of a clear effect on average power in the submaximal test does not support an effect of rHuEPO on oxidative capacity".

The trial test carried out by the subjects of the research (climbing Mont Ventoux) had a duration of 1h40’, at even level of effort, so can be considered around the effort of a marathon runner when goes for about 30-32 km. For marathon runners, the most important physiological factor is the MUSCLE OXYDATIVE CAPACITY, while in all the researches looking at the effects of EPO the physiologists look at the TIME OF EXHAUSTION, that is connected with the oxygen delivery.

This clearly can explain something that seems the most part of people here are not able to understand : if we look at the advantages of EPO, this is in the increased AEROBIC POWER connected with the MAXIMAL OUTPUT, while is not a factor when we go for some race that, looking at the duration, can use only a PERCENTAGE of the maximal output.

In other words, EPO can help short distance, but, longer is the race, less advantage we can have, that is exactly the opposite of the LINEAR PROGRESSION somebody (obviously not knowing anything about athletics) tries to purpose (30” for 5000m, 1’ for 10000m, 2’ for HM and 4’ for full marathon, considering for every distance the SAME percentage, that ridiculous 4% that is in some study of people expert of Medicine but not of sport).

b) "The size of our study might have generated insufficient statistical power to detect a difference on the road race. However, for an effect of doping to be relevant for cyclists, it should have a clear effect on time trial or race performance. The absence of an effect of rHuEPO treatment on both a 45-min submaximal exercise test and a road race indicates that the effect is at best very small, and disappears in all other variability that is present during such an event.

While in the lab scientists can control any percentage of improvement, to transfer those percentage on the REAL PRACTICAL ACTIVITY is not possible".

The improvement they can control in a lab regards OBJECTIVE parameters (such as Hb, Hct, retycolocytes, number of RBC, etc…). And there is the WRONG idea that higher is the Hct, for example, faster the athletes can run. This is not true, because when we enhance the Hct over the natural level of the subject, we go to stimulate other situations in the body that don’t allow the athlete to use the supplement of value connected with the maximal power output.

We have to think that the goal of a coach is not to win the championships of the highest Hct, but to coach athletes to reach their best in their event, that is their distance in running.

d) "Moreover, effects on relevant performance measures were small, largely disappeared in the submaximal test, and were undetectable in a real-life cycling race".

This means that the COMPETITION is based on many factors, among them we need to create the best balance. When we go to analyze in a lab ONE SINGLE FACTOR, we forget a lot of combinations, that are the one creating the performance.

e) "In summary, we showed that it is possible to test potential doping substances in well controlled clinical trials and that results are much less pronounced than claimed in popular literature and accounts. More clinical research like this study will provide the evidence base for the prohibited list and might lead to more focused attention and adequate information to athletes and their medical staff. Overall, the results of our study showed that rHuEPO treatment enhanced performance in well trained cyclists in a laboratory-based maximal exercise test leading to exhaustion, but did not improve submaximal exercise test or road race performance".

I think this conclusion MUST give to all people overrating the effects of EPO on the performances, something to think about.

Some value (like 4% of increase) is clearly absurd, and absolutely not connected with the reality.

And I tell you another thing : if we have two groups of athletes like in the last research of Yannis (both with average of 63’ in HM and 2:12’ in Marathon), one group taking EPO and the other without EPO, but able changing training going to better volume and intensity, athletes with training only (when training is more effective) are, of sure, able to achieve a higher improvement than the athletes taking EPO but maintaining their usual training.

This because, if you ran 63’ and 2:12’, there are only two options : or you don’t have a real talent, so are not part of the subjects who are at the top of the world lists, and any test with you can’t be transferred to the leading group ; or you have a good talent, so your training is ridiculous, also if the researchers call it “well trained”.

And, in all those researches, I continue not to find the word TRAINING connected with something not generic, but really specific under the methodological point of view.

JonO. wrote:

casual obsever wrote:

Well, he just found Newton. Maybe Clausius or Hess will be next?

So have you figured out how injecting EPO circumvents the laws of physics yet?

Have you realized it doesn't have to?

JonO. wrote:

Drug, drugs and more drugs, it's just sick wrote:

Skip to 3:28, even the Aussie vegan disagrees with Rekrunner and JonO

https://youtu.be/rIyhhZPjKJY

"EPO parrots"

I think Durianrider has figured out that the power output in perfect condtions for the Tour winners in peak condition is FCP 6 watts per kilo as per the British cycling bioenergetics model.

Where I live this is not considered super human but super fitness.

Renato was right all those years ago and Ferrari was wrong. Ferrari knew how to play mind games with people, but he also says stuff than many will disagree with, just as Renato does.

It's all about how long he sustained that power, not that he reached it for 5 seconds on a stationary bike.

But Duran and British cycling are all about the dope to achieve duration of power.

Do you comment on DRs youtube videos? That would be an awesome 't*rd off if you started debating whether drugs work or not.

There would be literally millions of your typical one dimensional arguments composed of straw.

I repeat again what I wrote some day ago :

"The researchers need to overtake their protocols (always the same), and need to follow the evolution of physiological parameters of top athletes, according to their real training. This means, for example, to have a group of scientists in Kenya, following the training of some of the top runners and making tests every short period (for example, every 2 weeks) in order to understand WHY training can change the internal characteristics of the athletes.

For example, they can study the following factors :

1) How much the VOLUME of mileage at intensity of 80% of the PB of a marathon runner can change the number of capillary vessels ?

2) For how much long time this can happen ?

3) What happens if we maintain the same volume of mileage, increasing the intensity from 80 to 90% ?

4) What happens in the body after a session of long intervals with the double of the volume of the race (in the case of 10000m) at intensity 98% with short recovery ?

5) What happens if the same training is carried out in altitude or at sea level ?

6) What happens using variations of speed at the level of the cellular membrane ?

7) How short sprints uphill can influence the ability to "fuel" for a marathon ?

8) How easy aerobic run can influence the ability to do lactic tests ?

9) How the combination between general aerobic training, specific aerobic training, speed endurance and speed can be optimized, looking at the level of cortisol the athletes can reach ?

10) How a right modulation between volume and intensity can increase the shape ?

11) Which is the role of the recovery in the training at top level ?

12) Which is the role of the supercompensation and when this a winning application ?

13) Why athletes go in overtraining ?

14) What is the effects of overtraining on physiological parameters ?

These are the reasons because athletes can reach their top. And I'm still waiting somebody among the ACCULTURATED of EPO (including the scientists authors of the researches) able to answer to those questions.

Jon, I think it is hilarious that you use Durianrider as your ally when he says everyone at the top uses drugs and you have to use them to compete there.

He also goes on about form not mattering much when the blood is all doped up.

But you think that he thinks 6.0 is par for the course and just a fit clean performance.

Uh, OK.

The athlete improves al of those to a greater degree with drugs.

13 and 14 become lesser or non issues.

Frankly, I'm getting tired of all this ad nauseam undermining & minimizing the effects of EPO. If your points are all correct, then why in the hell do these top Kenyans keep testing positive for EPO, and few other drugs also? I mean what the crap is going on here? Are these Kenyans self-administering the EPO? Is it their coaches? Is it doping doctors that they're being steered to? How about this promising youngster Bett? What do you think about him? Whose his coach? Do you think his coach put him on the sauce or is he doing himself? Would Bett be told to go on EPO or would he pursue doping himself. And if that's the case, where or who are they getting the dope from?

I really don't want hear anymore excercise physiology lessons, but am more interested on your take with these top Kenyans getting popped for EPO and what's going on with their coaches.

And this:

http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-07/22/c_137340840.htm

Let's Get To The Bottom Of This wrote:

And this:

http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-07/22/c_137340840.htm

here are a few nice bits from this article, since the apologists will say that physics and a better look at performances says this is a waste of time to read.

"Julius Ndegwa, who competed for the East African nation in the 800m and 1,500m, told Xinhua that Kenyans are no longer sure whether the person they are cheering is running clean or not."

"His comments come in the wake of Olympic champions Asbel Kiprop and Kenyan-turned Bahranian Ruth Jebet being in the list of 109 athletes facing disciplinary action from the International Association of Athletics Federations Athletes Integrity Unit (AIU) for alleged doping offenses."

i know i know 90% of those are C-team kenyans, and the top ones like kiprop actually got slower

""It is as if Kenyan athletes don't care any more. The aura of invincibility has since dissipated and a Kenyan win is nowadays not celebrated like before," Ndegwa said, adding that marathon has become a doping ground because financial rewards are greatest there."

"It makes you wonder why the most talented athletes in the world who are born and raised at altitude and already with an advantage over most runners justify to themselves that it is okay to cheat," Ndegwa said."

easy....you never lose you make more money right? i like how this ex runner now coach didnt say the myth "an advantage head and shoulders above all runners"

nope he said kenyans have and advantage of most runners.....did you catch that? MOST runners....at least he isnt full of sh*t and trying to continue and push the myth and lies. he knows they are doping and is disgusted by it.

and i arleady know, elK and others will make the mockery and excuse that julius is out of his element since he was a C-team kenyan

at least he was clean

800 Metres 1:49.8h Nairobi (KEN) 24 JUN 2010

1500 Metres 3:53.8h Nairobi (KEN) 14 MAY 2013

10 Kilometres 30:18 Nairobi (KEN) 27 OCT 2013

Is not me that are minimizing the effects of EPO, but are the most part of scientists and people NEVER working in clean way with top athletes that maximize the effects, becoming the best testimonials PRO doping.

The fact that during the last 7-8 years in Kenya the culture of doping became widespread (we can't deny this, because is a FACT, not an opinion), and that before there were not Kenyan runners asking for some aid (and also this is a FACT, give me credit about this because I was in Kenya, and coached some of them, for the first time in 1998, so I know what I'm speaking about, while all people writing about doping in LR have only speculations), in my opinion is due to the following factors :

a) The continue overestimation of the effects of EPO on the performance. This situation pushed all the athletes without REAL strong values, or some of the athletes in a decreasing phase of the career, or some who wanted to cut the time of recovery after some injury, to use drugs, that before 2010 were practically unknown in Kenya.

b) The low level of methodological and medical education of the local coaches, thinking possible to REPLACE what they don't purpose in training with some drug (in this case EPO). In fact, all the athletes caught for EPO didn't have coaches with a good knowledge about advanced training, able to educate the athletes too, how, for example, Patrick Sang and Brother Colm normally do, and how I and John Litei do with the athletes we coach in Iten.

c) The fact that many athletes take EPO is not a proof they can have real advantages, but is the proof they BELIEVE possible to have advantages. How I explained before, the athletes taking EPO (apart the lack of ethical values) do this for two main reasons :

1) They (and sometimes their coaches) are part of the category of people thinking that, for training more, athletes have to increase their recovery ability. They, basically MINDWEAK and without big self confidence, finally become able to train with adequate volume and intensity AFTER taking EPO, so their improvement is DIRECTLY connected with the increase of training, and this is connected with the confidence that finally, using EPO, they can train at that level. Level that, BEFORE EPO, THEY REFUSED TO TRY.

2) They are lazy when have to build their Aerobic Power, not using long fast run, and/or long tests on track, in order to have a high level of LT (Lactic Threshold), and want to achieve the same results (or similar results) not with hard training in that direction, but using a shortcut.

Typical example of this was the training of many Maroccans, like Boulami and Ramzi, who NEVER went for long continue run very fast, and NEVER used long tests at fast speed on track. They used during the most part of season very short and lactic tests, that have the effect to LOWER the LT if used too frequently, without never train the Aerobic Power, something not possible under methodological and practice point of view. In these cases, the only solution for maintaining a high level of Aerobic Power is to use some blood manipulation.

This is also a reason because EPO can give some advantage in short distance, AND NO ADVANTAGE IN HM AND MARATHON, in spite of the fact that we have marathon runners of top level who were caught for EPO.

About the administration of EPO, there is not one channel only. The beginning started after an Austrian pseudo-coach involved in doping affairs with cyclists, banned from cycling and from winter sports (Stefan Matschiner) decided to go Kenya in the area of Kapsabet after his ban.

This is something from the newspapers of that period :

" It all began with a story that electrified the world's media: on 15 October, 2008, Bernhard Kohl, the fresh faced cycling ace, who had won best climber and a prestigious third place in the the Tour de France of the same year, was proved guilty of doping. He had taken the third generation form of erythropoetin (EPO) otherwise known as CERA, having mistakenly assumed that it was undetectable and invisible to anti-doping authorities.

In June of that year, Kohl's admission to the French sports newspaper L'Equipe that he had been doping since he was 19 years old sparked an outcry in Austria, where it was widely believed that his case was just the tip of the iceberg. The new anti-doping agency NADA, which was founded a month later, quickly revealed the full extent of the problem. Doping was engrained in a huge range of disciplines: not just cycling, but also winter sports — which have a quasi-religious status in Austria — football, athletics, and even triathlon. The confession of the queen of this discipline, 25-year-old Lisa Hütthaler, who was the first to be caught in the new anti-doping net and punished with a two-year suspension for taking EPO, led investigators to two ringleaders behind the scenes — Bernhard Kohl's former manager Stefan Matschiner, and a pediatric oncologist Andreas Zoubek.

The nerve-centre of Austrian doping

A short time later, the media returned to the tale of another sorcerer's apprentice in the shape of Walter Mayer. The feisty trainer of the Austrian national cross-country and Nordic skiing teams had been caught during the Salt Lake City Winter Olympics in 2002 in possession of blood bags and syringes, but had nonetheless re-emerged as the Austrian coach in the subsequent Olympics in Turin in 2006, where an Italian police search of the Austrian delegation's chalet revealed the same practices that had been discovered four years earlier. On the run from police, Mayer escaped from Turin in the dead of night and drove to the Austrian border where he crashed into a police roadblock, before being immediately relieved of his coaching duties by the Austrian Ski Federation (öSV).

However, Mayer was just one link in a complex organization. In January 2008, an exclusive report on the German TV channel ARD uncovered the nerve centre of Austrian doping, when it revealed that the Viennese laboratory, Humanplasma had supplied blood bags to 30 high-level athletes which included such illustrious cyclists as Denmark's Michael Rasmussen, the Netherlands' Michael Boogerd and Russian Denis Menchov. Each of them had spent a minimum of 2,500 euros per consultation, while the use of a cutting edge centrifuge, developed by Matschiner, had in part been financed to the tune of 20,000 by Kohl himself. In spite of all this, the Humanplasma case was closed with no further action on 8 March, 2009, because the anti-doping law could not be retroactively applied."

Matschiner was arrested in 2009 by Kenyan authorities, was extradited and never had the permission to go back Kenya again. But in the area of Kapsabet was created a criminal organization (probably still connected with Matschiner) with local doctors and pharmacists who started to purpose doping (not only EPO) to the athletes, at the beginning finding attention by second and third level only, looking at doping in order to fill the gap they had with better runners, looking at domestic road races (there was not antidoping, and the road races started to proliferate with some good money).

The same athletes, growing a little as value, and finding a manager, started to run in marathons of medium level, essentially in China, Korea, India and South America (all without antidoping control at that time), maintaining the same type of preparation, that included the given doping by the doctors. The most part of these athletes didn't have a real coach, but trained alone jumping from one group to another, without any control.

When, from 2012-2013, several of the marathons, before without antidoping control, started to use tests after the competition, some of the athletes were caught, because nobody explained them when to stop taking EPO. Really, when I read of something "scientific" in Kenya with these athletes I can only laugh, because the opposite is true : the total lack of knowledge.

In 2012, I personally had a meeting with Isaia Kiplagat, the chairman of AK, in his office. I explained what we knew and what we saw in some domestic competition, asking him to take action. But his answer was "Mzungu, this is not something up to you. Let us solve the problem".

Now, I don't think that REAL coaches give EPO to the athletes. I think there is, especially in the area of Kapsabet, and especially with the women, who frequently are coached by the husbands that don't have any clue about training, a lack of control, and that nobody goes to teach them how much the blood doping is useless and dangerous for the health, lookin at the future.

We need a very deep action for educating the athletes, especially the youngest, who are not in a well organized training camp. I see a big difference of individual values and of personal behavior between the athletes growing and training in a camp with good organization, discipline and level of education, and the athletes that are "free dogs", sometimes helped by older athletes who pretend to be their coaches, and that hope to take advantages from some management if the athletes they advice are able to improve their performances.

In all this situation, the first step is exactly the one to MINIMIZE the effects of EPO on the performance, at the same time INCREASING the fact that athletes of high level go to ruin their career for something that is useless, if they maintain continuity, motivation and stimuli for long time, for train at the optimal level (that is not what they do at the moment).

Brahim Boulami, faster than your precious Shaheen, would seem to be the best testimonial Pro EPO. Fastest 3000m steeplechase ever.

Renato Canova wrote:

Is not me that are minimizing the effects of EPO, but are the most part of scientists and people NEVER working in clean way with top athletes that maximize the effects, becoming the best testimonials PRO doping.

Marco Pantini says hello.

Renato Canova wrote:

And there is the WRONG idea that higher is the Hct, for example, faster the athletes can run. This is not true, because when we enhance the Hct over the natural level of the subject, we go to stimulate other situations in the body that don’t allow the athlete to use the supplement of value connected with the maximal power output.

Canova is a liar wrote:

Marco Pantini says hello.

Renato Canova wrote:

And there is the WRONG idea that higher is the Hct, for example, faster the athletes can run. This is not true, because when we enhance the Hct over the natural level of the subject, we go to stimulate other situations in the body that don’t allow the athlete to use the supplement of value connected with the maximal power output.

Canova is taking a Jon Orange guess there.

Lets see the data showing those "other situations" are detrimental.

notice how he doesnt mention anything about how rhEPO, you know the sh*t that is made from adding the EPO genome to E.coli bacteria then injected into hamster cells for mass production...SIGNIFICANTLY increases the size and number of mitochondria?

maybe your too old to see the advancements in science renato, but this is called chimera engineering. this isnt NORMAL EPO that the body produces from altitude training, no this is GENETICALLY engineered EPO, and e coli bacteria are on the cellular level VERY VERY similar to human mitochondria, in so much that science believes that mitochondria were once bacteria in our cells, that have now become part of our bodies.

"Although most of a cell's DNA is contained in the cell nucleus, the mitochondrion has its own independent genome that shows substantial similarity to bacterial genomes"

"There are two hypotheses about the origin of mitochondria: endosymbiotic and autogenous. The endosymbiotic hypothesis suggests that mitochondria were originally prokaryotic cells, capable of implementing oxidative mechanisms that were not possible for eukaryotic cells; they became endosymbionts living inside the eukaryote.[25] In the autogenous hypothesis, mitochondria were born by splitting off a portion of DNA from the nucleus of the eukaryotic cell at the time of divergence with the prokaryotes; this DNA portion would have been enclosed by membranes, which could not be crossed by proteins. Since mitochondria have many features in common with bacteria, the endosymbiotic hypothesis is more widely accepted."

rhEPO, obviously will not behave the same way natural EPO will, why? oh i dont know mabye cause its "grown" inside a e coli bateria, then multiplied inside a hamster cell...but you know more about science than most im sure, i mean you had to educate us all on periodization and methodology right?

one more thing that made me stop and think...you constantly brag and boast how amazing of a coach you are, to the point that you claim you are the sole reason Mo became unbeatable...yet then you disclaim rhEPO from working cause the athletes are sooooo superior and lived and trained at altitude their whole life...so that means your not that good of a coach and you just get lucky with this SUPERIOR talent, right?