Sunday Mail Has More Details on Paula's Blood Values and Off Scores + News She'll Put up £1m for an MRI lie detector

It is very simple, if we use the Sunday times numbers. At the World Championships HalfMarathon in 2003, Paula's hemoglobin level went from 12.0g/dl prerace to 15.6g/dl postrace within a time span of 2 days. Do the math. That is exactly a 30% increase in hemoglobin values in 2 days. The most plausible explanation for this massive, rapidly changing hemoglobin value is a blood transfusion. Variations from body position of blood draw, or timing of test would be small variations of about 0.1-0.4 g/dl, probably something like plus or minus 3% variation , or it wouldn't be useful as a lab test that is ordered everyday by thousands of doctors across the world. These are common, routine lab tests that are done all the time. They are not fancy, complicated lab tests.

Nobody has a natural increase of 30% in their hemoglobin values in 2 days.

Paula's OFF scores are really OFF, 82 to 114.87 in 2 days.

If not a blood transfusion then it must be a WHOPPER OF A LAB ERROR. Let's see the results of other athletes tested at the same lab on the same day, to see if they also show huge errors, or is just unlucky Paula that has WHOPPER LAB ERRORS.

Another interesting observation is that all 3 of the postrace samples from the Sunday Times show Hemoglobin levels, 15.6,15.1, and 16.2g/dl that are ALL ABOVE THE UPPER LIMIT OF NORMAL RANGE FOR A FEMALE of 15.0g/dl. Go ask all of your female runner friends what their Hemoglobin level was on their last bloodwork they had done. See how many will have a single Hemoglobin score over 15.0. My best guess is between 0-2 women out of a hundred. Many more will have low numbers, indicating anemia, a common condition in females. But Paula has 3 scores above normal!

As another poster pointed out, if these are 1/1000 cutoff numbers( I am not sure that they are), then the odds that a clean athlete could randomly give these lab results on 3 occasions is 1/1000 x 1/1000 x 1/1000 = 1 in a BILLION chance. If we use the 1/100 cutoff, then the odds are only 1 in a MILLION probability. WOW! That's a real confidence builder, isn't it Paula and Wejo.

So you see, Paula is just really UNLUCKY when it comes to blood test results...nothing to see here...move along now...Nobody needs to see any blood test results before and after her world record marathons....because she has already been declared innocent...you don't need to see them...They would show her innocence... with transparency..but they are very complicated......you wouldn't be able to understand them....and you know...Paula has really been unlucky with bloodtest lab errors...

Yes of course. You are 100% correct. Still, she can't be banned imho because of the 2003 rules (and because that was 13 years ago), which is why I made the comparison to the EPO tests of the frozen samples from the 2001 TdF.

rjm33 wrote:

It is very simple, if we use the Sunday times numbers. At the World Championships HalfMarathon in 2003, Paula's hemoglobin level went from 12.0g/dl prerace to 15.6g/dl postrace within a time span of 2 days. Do the math. That is exactly a 30% increase in hemoglobin values in 2 days. The most plausible explanation for this massive, rapidly changing hemoglobin value is a blood transfusion. Variations from body position of blood draw, or timing of test would be small variations of about 0.1-0.4 g/dl, probably something like plus or minus 3% variation , or it wouldn't be useful as a lab test that is ordered everyday by thousands of doctors across the world. These are common, routine lab tests that are done all the time. They are not fancy, complicated lab tests.

Paula changing her story from what is in her biography, where she didn't question the October 2nd reading, to now saying the testing equipment must be faulty, doesn't look too good. I'm not sure who is advising her, but resorting to a 'faulty equipment' argument is a last resort. And poor if she is indeed innocent.

I have no idea how easy it is to have a blood transfusion done. Maybe if she can prove she was in and around Vilamoura between Oct 2 and the start of the race then that would really help. I'm guessing you have to travel to specialist facilities to have a blood transfusion. Perhaps I'm wrong?

I'm not saying she is obliged to prove her innocence, of course, but if a blood transfusion is a complicated process then it would really help, and I personally would be inclined to believe her version of events, if, between Oct 2 and Oct 4 2003, she was nowhere near a facility where she could have a blood transfusion done. I always thought that this is why athletes went to visit a certain magical healer in Munich.

FWIW, I'm not sure a blood transfusion is the same as 'taking drugs'. If the blood is your own, it's hardy 'drugs'. So if someone says they have never taken drugs, then that does not necessarily mean that they never had a blood transfusion.

A blood transfusion is not a complicated process, with no special facilities needed, as it could easily be done in a hotel room the night before the race. Lance Armstrong and many bike racers did blood transfusions in their hotel rooms or on the team bus, with press reporters right outside the bus!!!

A blood transfusion is not taking drugs, but it is cheating. I have already stated that Paula knew she could never and would never be found guilty for a blood transfusion with the rules that were in place at the time in 2002-2005. She gets to keep all her wins, awards, medals, records, and money....what she may not keep is her reputation for integrity and honesty........

(It's not important, but the TdF samples were from 1999.)It's a fallacy to look for one single explanation. The 12.0 and 82 values look unusually low, and would need an informed expert evaluation, which would include looking at the type of machine, any calibration documentation, and other athletes' values from the same time.Putting aside that Paula cannot technically be banned from these blood samples, what is still missing *today* is an expert determination, factoring all external factors, like doping control forms, and the variability of not collecting blood using 2009 standards, that the three suspicious values, combined with this low value, and the rest of her profile, is something that could trigger and lead to an ABP violation.This idea is mainly formed by a partially informed non-expert public, fueled by a strong implication from the UK press.

You cannot combine the probabilities like that, as the tests are not completely independent.

rjm33 wrote:

...

As another poster pointed out, if these are 1/1000 cutoff numbers( I am not sure that they are), then the odds that a clean athlete could randomly give these lab results on 3 occasions is 1/1000 x 1/1000 x 1/1000 = 1 in a BILLION chance. If we use the 1/100 cutoff, then the odds are only 1 in a MILLION probability.

Link to the BBC interview

[quote]rjm33 wrote:

It is very simple, if we use the Sunday times numbers. At the World Championships HalfMarathon in 2003, Paula's hemoglobin level went from 12.0g/dl prerace to 15.6g/dl postrace within a time span of 2 days. Do the math. That is exactly a 30% increase in hemoglobin values in 2 days. The most plausible explanation for this massive, rapidly changing hemoglobin value is a blood transfusion. Variations from body position of blood draw, or timing of test would be small variations of about 0.1-0.4 g/dl, probably something like plus or minus 3% variation , or it wouldn't be useful as a lab test that is ordered everyday by thousands of doctors across the world. These are common, routine lab tests that are done all the time. They are not fancy, complicated lab tests.

Nobody has a natural increase of 30% in their hemoglobin values in 2 days.

Paula's OFF scores are really OFF, 82 to 114.87 in 2 days.

I agree. Was seriously ill and having my blood test daily for several months.

Dehydration etc does not make a massive difference. No way will you see a variation of above 1 in a few days eg 10 to 11 The only thing giving a big variety was being ill and the levels dropping and being given a blood transfusion to raise it. Even then you need a fair amount of bllod just to raise it by 1.0

rekrunner wrote:

It's a fallacy to look for one single explanation.

what is still missing *today* is an expert determination

You have no idea what you are talking about. Dehydration is the cause. It happens in one hour not two days.

My god Jon Orange is back, Letsrun.com's biggest idiot, I thought he'd been consigned to an institution several years ago given that his ridiculous posts ceased for a while. He's back and he's more stupid than ever!

rjm33 wrote:

A blood transfusion is not a complicated process, with no special facilities needed, as it could easily be done in a hotel room the night before the race. Lance Armstrong and many bike racers did blood transfusions in their hotel rooms or on the team bus, with press reporters right outside the bus!!!

Ah ok, thanks.

I wonder whether Paula would do the same high stakes lie detector test if the question was: "have you ever had a blood transfusion before a race".

If she did blood-dope, then I'm not going to condemn her, as it seems like many of her rivals were breaking the rules. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em?

Outside Magazine - John Bradley

Writing in a London newspaper, Phil Liggett, the veteran cycling broadcaster, pointed out that as many as 100 international racers have died prematurely during the past decade, most from heart attacks. The likely cause, Liggett argued, was the ongoing abuse of EPO, a synthetic and stealthy version of a hormone that spurs red-blood-cell production and thus boosts endurance.

"A body of literature shows that EPO conveys a five- to 15-percent advantage," says Charles Yesalis, an epidemiologist at Penn State University and an expert on drugs in sports. Translated into minutes, a five-percent boost would have been the difference between first and 143rd in last year's Tour. But EPO can also be lethal. The drug's most immediate threat is "hyperviscosity," or thickened blood, which can cause a heart attack. Studies about permanent health effects from EPO use are inconclusive, but the sludge-like blood can linger for up to 120 days.

UNFORTUNATELY, AUTOPSIES can only show that a heart attack occurred, not that EPO caused it or was even present in the bloodstream at the time of death"

I'm checking outside if down is up. Phil Liggett claimed this? The die hard defender of the UCI and Armstrong utters something resembling the truth?

Did Phil retire from broadcasting for the UCI? WTF.

Heralds Scotland

"This prompted respected cycling broadcaster Phil Liggett to cite some 100 international racers who had died prematurely during the previous decade, mostly from heart attacks.

He said the likely cause was use of erythropoietin (EPO), which increases the red cell count and consequently the blood's oxygen-carrying capacity.

However, EPO also causes hyperviscosity, a thickening of the blood to the consistency of strawberry jam. At very low heart rates, such as when athletes are sleeping, this can cause heart attacks.

It has been reported that some riders use a heart-rate monitor and an alarm, set to go off during the night. Then they pedal for a few minutes on a turbo trainer to make the blood flow less sluggish."

Most chilling of all was the comment that cyclists would "live to ride during the day, and then ride to stay alive at night".

Any runners die from EPO?

rekrunner wrote:

Any runners die from EPO?

Yes, but I'm not digging up the bodies so you can run tests on them

Just find a quote from the running equivalent of Phil Liggett -- or it never happened.

fred wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

Any runners die from EPO?

Yes, but I'm not digging up the bodies so you can run tests on them

Tarno