End of the line for dopers?

Don't let the facts get in the way of a good headline:

"While they have had many enquiries from reporters, so far they (the scientists) have had none from the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), the US anti-doping agency (USADA), or the International Olympic Committee (IOC)"

Besides, they haven't even had the work published. Years and years away from being adopted if it even works.

I'm a mass spectroscopist, and I can tell you that this "breakthrough' is likely BS. The way to go is Accelerator Mass Spectrometry, but it's a touch on the expensive side

the IOC won't be enquiring

hell they don't even bother checking the samples they have

just sayin wrote:

the IOC won't be enquiring

hell they don't even bother checking the samples they have

this

Remember in 2012 when they weren't even going to test the Athens samples from 2004, and did so only after there was a big inquiry from journalists why retests of the samples weren't being done.

The IOC doesn't want positive tests.

more lets run hyperbole wrote:

I'm a mass spectroscopist, and I can tell you that this "breakthrough' is likely BS. The way to go is Accelerator Mass Spectrometry, but it's a touch on the expensive side

"uses existing equipment, making it inexpensive to implement"

1. Hasn't been tested / vetted.

2. Hasn't been accepted by WADA or IOC.

"The research will now be presented to other scientists for independent reviews, but no response has yet been registered from the World Anti-Doping Agency or the International Olympic Committee."

RE: "No response"

Perhaps they do not wish to really catch the dopers.

What are you trying to say?

Most Interesting Coach ITW wrote:

Can it detect genetic augmentation?

Not this test.

Frankly I like the hair test the IAAF is using, albeit somewhat unfair to women.

But the Biological passport has the DNA, future DNA tests will also be able to detect doping.

In 2-3 years it will be virtually impossible to cheat using chemical methods. Cheating will have to become far more high tech than any runner (or sprinter) could afford.

Rio might be the cleanest Olympics in a long time.

advocate of devils wrote:

just sayin wrote:

the IOC won't be enquiring

hell they don't even bother checking the samples they have

this

Remember in 2012 when they weren't even going to test the Athens samples from 2004, and did so only after there was a big inquiry from journalists why retests of the samples weren't being done.

The IOC doesn't want positive tests.

Its easy to catch dopers now. You can't dope.

>DNA/rDNA alterations from foreign substances

>mass spectrometry

>full cycle hair samples (no offseason goes uncovered)

>secondary biological responses to doping substances

The only reason we're not catching dopers is because the scandal in ALL SPORTS would be so huge and terrible it would end sports. People would be shocked at all the huge names that would go down.

advocate of devils wrote:

Remember in 2012 when they weren't even going to test the Athens samples from 2004, and did so only after there was a big inquiry from journalists why retests of the samples weren't being done.

The IOC doesn't want positive tests.

Are you sure that IOC retested EVERY frozen sample from Athens?

So Lagat was clean, el G was clean, Bekele was clean...and moreover! Marion Jones was clean, Justin Gatlin was clean, Rashid Ramzi was clean, Tomashova was clean...etc.

Ben L Wrong wrote:

Are you sure that IOC retested EVERY frozen sample from Athens?

So Lagat was clean, el G was clean, Bekele was clean...and moreover! Marion Jones was clean, Justin Gatlin was clean, Rashid Ramzi was clean, Tomashova was clean...etc.

Mass Spectrometry from any sample years old would detect even 1 trillionth of a foreign steroid particle.

You don't even need the test from those Olympics, you would effectively just need one test to cover that athletes entire past.

Ben L Wrong wrote:

advocate of devils wrote:

Remember in 2012 when they weren't even going to test the Athens samples from 2004, and did so only after there was a big inquiry from journalists why retests of the samples weren't being done.

The IOC doesn't want positive tests.

Are you sure that IOC retested EVERY frozen sample from Athens?

So Lagat was clean, el G was clean, Bekele was clean...and moreover! Marion Jones was clean, Justin Gatlin was clean, Rashid Ramzi was clean, Tomashova was clean...etc.

I never said they retested every sample

They didn't

Pretty obvious why

Frogtech wrote:

Most Interesting Coach ITW wrote:

Can it detect genetic augmentation?

Not this test.

Frankly I like the hair test the IAAF is using, albeit somewhat unfair to women.

But the Biological passport has the DNA, future DNA tests will also be able to detect doping.

In 2-3 years it will be virtually impossible to cheat using chemical methods. Cheating will have to become far more high tech than any runner (or sprinter) could afford.

Rio might be the cleanest Olympics in a long time.

I think you might be missing the point. People are going to end up welcoming genetic augmentation. It's not going to be a bad thing. It will improve quality of life beyond simple athletic enhancement.

When the tide turns and everyone is either augmenting, or becoming a dinosaur, you can't ban it any longer or the sport will die too.

When that tipping point will happen, obviously I can't say, but it will happen.

in the new world my 21 5k will be good ?

Most Interesting Coach ITW wrote:

Also, if it truly is 100 times more sensitive and can "look further back in time", it may cause more problems than it solves.

What it could reveal is how contaminated our food and water sources are, and how many people have taken medications that are still lingering in the body.

Even if it is 100 times more sensitive, they can not give out sanctions for 100th the amount of a substance in the body.

Anyone who has ever had contaminated meat, that had clenbuterol in it, would seeming test positive forever, and if 0 metabolites are allowed to be in the body, then they are finished forever...until WADA is overrun by the approaching genetic revolution that is.

Agreed. Something that's purported to be that sensitive, would likely have a commensurately-greater risk of returning false positives. Additionally, there are banned substances used therapeutically, that (at least until now) were allowed to have been used if "enough time" elapsed from time of use. And, you're so right regarding environmental contamination.

It's a slippery slope that will need to be negotiated quite carefully.

As long as sport is competitive, dopers will be around. Its a constant battle between the dopers trying to get better, sneakier drugs and the experimentalists trying to get better, more accurate tests.

Thesmallcheese wrote:

As long as sport is competitive, dopers will be around. Its a constant battle between the dopers trying to get better, sneakier drugs and the experimentalists trying to get better, more accurate tests.

10/10.

But for a while some elites might sleep from bad to worse.

But will fans still follow running when world records are no longer broken?

Not a Coach wrote:

more lets run hyperbole wrote:

I'm a mass spectroscopist, and I can tell you that this "breakthrough' is likely BS. The way to go is Accelerator Mass Spectrometry, but it's a touch on the expensive side

"uses existing equipment, making it inexpensive to implement"

http://sportsvibe.co.uk/news/athletics/new-drug-testing-method-unveiled-in-us-32661

No. There are dozens of types of mass spectrometry and they are as different to each other in terms of mass accuracy, resolution, speed, sensitivity and ms/ms capability as their huge price range ($50K - $5M) would suggest. This statement means nothing without a lot more information and scientific peer review.

I read about this "breakthrough" on the BBC web site. It sounds a bit like somebody's wishlist ; reliable , ultra sensitive and pretty cheap to administer! I won't be holding my breath waiting for its introduction. As previously stated , before an athlete's career is finished/reputation trashed the test has to be 100% reliable and accurate - otherwise any penalties wont stand up in a court of law. We are years away for this point with the new test. Also , be aware

1) Where there is a test there is always a way to get round it - if you know in enough detail how the test works and you have the resources to help you consistently test negative.

2) this leads on the the depressing fact that a great many vested interests - shoe companies , promoters , TV stations , governing bodies don't want a clean sport - or at least are prepared to turn a blind eye to doping when it suits them - because nobody will watch international events where WRs are not even approached and in general everybody runs much slower than they did ten or twenty years ago!