Dominguez detained in doping investigation

You're welcome. I mean to say that steroids (and creatine monophosphate?) are different than EPO and blood doping. While of course we can find many things in common, my reasoning is based on two things:1) We speak of top athletes, at the top of their training, where the absolute potential for improvement is smaller than for slower athletes. Here I would agree with ventolin and some kind of law of diminishing returns.2) We speak of high altitude athletes. EPO and blood doping serve to increase red blood cells, allowing greater use of the available oxygen. But high altitude Kenyans and Ethiopians, whether due to genetics of so many generations adapting to high altitude, or a life long exposure to high altitude, these athletes have naturally adapted to utilize more oxygen.So this leads me to assert that "almost top" athletes from sea level will gain more benefit from EPO and blood doping, than naturally faster athletes from high altitude.Although this forms the basis of my reasoning, it's only my opinion. I think we don't have enough knowledge to draw many certain conclusions.Similarly for you, you were highly trained, but not world class. And there is no "class" of world class athletes, that due to their genetics or environment, have a "steroid" head-start. It also looks like steriods can give a supernatural advantage, moreso than EPO.I might also ask if your training could not have been improved, by finding a more qualified trainer. But you can bench more than I can (and maybe your trainer too), so I say that with all due respect.

Sprint Geezer wrote:

Thanks rekrunner for your opinion.

I'm curious why you think that a steroid situation, an EPO situation, and a blood doping situation cannot be considered analogous.

Many sprinters were caught taking EPO. EPO, HGH plus steroids produce champions like Marion Jones, Kelly White, Dwain Chambers and many others. I think EPO produce results even for the Africans. Sure the Africans that ran 13:00 for the 5K would not improve one minute overnight. But I'm sure that runners like Bernard Lagat and Geb can enjoy some improvements from the use of EPO and other drugs. Is Geb not being represented by some famous German doping figure?

Nah. He's Dutch.

It's well established that sea level athletes can gain from EPO, including West African sprinters. EPO has recovery benefits for sprinters and Tour de France cyclists. And I don't argue about HGH or steroids, which seem to give supernatural benefits, especially for women.Maybe a Geb or a Lagat also receive some performance benefits (or even the same benefits) from EPO and/or blood doping. As far as I can tell, that remains to be seen. It's only my opinion, which doesn't seem to be yet contradicted by any fact.

BS Detector wrote:

Many sprinters were caught taking EPO. EPO, HGH plus steroids produce champions like Marion Jones, Kelly White, Dwain Chambers and many others. I think EPO produce results even for the Africans. Sure the Africans that ran 13:00 for the 5K would not improve one minute overnight. But I'm sure that runners like Bernard Lagat and Geb can enjoy some improvements from the use of EPO and other drugs. Is Geb not being represented by some famous German doping figure?

Mourith did test 2 times positive for EPO more athn 2 years distant, not just one time.

After been banned for 2 years he did try a come back on his career and he was caught with EPO for a second time.

After the first positive test he did deny and tried to process the Belgium Federation and the IAAF with the help of played science experts with the theory that his body produces it naturally.

The second time caught he could not deny no more and finally he did confess.

Ironically i would say that in support his defense he could get some Renato Canova ideas ! It´s my own irony of course, not that Renato defends a doper, but as he says that we can get top level without drugs and it can be a done with natural training, what is true eventually, he misses to use Renato opinion for his defense of be clean ! Besides Renato is a master of training the law judges will consider his argument.

Renato says Mourith best performance is the 3000m 7:26.62.

But the fact is that all were done with drugs. From the best cross performances to the best track PBs ALL WAS DONE WITH EPO HELP ! But most of the tests did negative always. Even the tests he did after both WCCChamps wins did test negative. However his drug take starts long before Belgium citizenship.

This takes us another question. EPO works as training help as well, to be able to resist to high training charge demand and in the day you go to compete you are clean. Modern EPO drug take use doesn’t consider EPO for the performance day but for training help. It’s a fact that if everything that able to more training on short term you will enhance your performance despite that on that competition day you are just clean.

I know one famous runner that I guess that he is one of those that Renato would admit that he is world top class, and one Russian doctor told me that during the training period when he was out of competition, the runner he did use EPO in small dosage and that way will not be detected by the drug test, be surprise test out of the competition or test during the competition. Rumours ? I guess it’s true.

Anyhow I did get one personal brief meeting with Renato and i did watch one of his conferences and in my opinion he is one man of very strong character and he is out of my drug suspicion. Renato´s ideas are outstand and unexpected because he thinks by himself and not by the mainstream or public opinion.

May be I don’t agree on him about few subjects. But I trust 100% on him and his honesty until someone else prove me I’m wrong.

The Monk wrote:

I can see your point but it's highly plausible that Bezebeu might have been duped.

Anything is possible. I remain suspect. I would certainly not trust any sort of interpretation by ghost as he has proven there is no doper whom he cannot sympathetically defend. He acts as though he has intimate inside information and connections when in fact he is a hobby jogger with no more inside information than I have. Instead it is also obfuscation and "I'm sure he..." and "we need to give him a break on humanitarian grounds." This is true whether it is Bezebeu or Eddy Hellebuyck (when is he going to pay back the money he stole, ghost?) or Cathal Lombard.

As for me, I'll save my sympathy for those clean athletes who have been cheated out of their rightful places on teams, in championships, and in paychecks.

Antonio, your remarks are carefully measured and well taken.

Renato is anti-drug, for certain. But it is his argument that the greatest natural distance runners cannot benefit from blood manipulation that causes one to question him.

At bottom, drug use is a type of fraud or a form of lying. Denying the effectiveness of drugs (as was done with steroids for a while) is not an effective way to combat the use of drugs.

It seems that law enforcement or the police get bigger results than WADA. Drug tests occasionally catch individual users, police operations catch groups of users, along with suppliers.

la la land wrote:

Antonio, your remarks are carefully measured and well taken.

Renato is anti-drug, for certain. But it is his argument that the greatest natural distance runners cannot benefit from blood manipulation that causes one to question him.

At bottom, drug use is a type of fraud or a form of lying. Denying the effectiveness of drugs (as was done with steroids for a while) is not an effective way to combat the use of drugs.

It seems that law enforcement or the police get bigger results than WADA. Drug tests occasionally catch individual users, police operations catch groups of users, along with suppliers.

I don’t have an attorney to defend Renato Canova, but after some analysis of Renato´s posts, in my opinion he says something logic and very simple that is hard to understand for some people.

He says that everything in the material world is limited. Our body is made of a limited potential and limited in every material aspect. When by training or every other way you reach your best physical potential, nothing more can help to enhance to run fast: no training, no drug, no mentality, no motivation, no will to win, no system, no muscle, no cell, no biomechanics, no input or output performance determinant can help. Those of top class at their runner event specialty it’s suppose to have reach each one top limit, or closer to that limit, the next step would be perfection, performance perfection and that doesn’t exist. Consequently nothing can help the performance enhance. No drugs, but no training at all.

I guess that Renato thinks that some runners did get that high top individual performance by good training, proper training methodology. I guess that he thinks some of his runners are in the group that are very closer of this top level by good training.

When someone riches that top level no kind of drug that can help performance enhance. Otherwise progression improve would be infinite and not finite as it is. The matter is finite and not infinite. This is the true for all the material world.

The opposite it’s also true. With one critical terminal disease, no drug, no chirurgical operation, no intervention might help.

This Renato´s logic scientific and ethic position is very genuine but after all is very simple, but I guess that most of the readers don’t understand the finite of the performance and it´s the main reason they don’t agree with Renato. Most of us we don´t trust in the other runner, don’t trust in the team runner, don’t trust in the friend, don’t trust in the family, some of us we don’t trust in ourselves. May be Ventolin is one of this kind.

Some don´t trust in no one else, they don’t trust in themselves, and see ghosts everywhere on every corner.

Who are the top champions ? To what extend some kind of drug may help someone that didn’t reach that top level by the training method ? What’s the improve and how many time take with or without drugs ? What kind of drugs ? How can be manipulate ?

The tons of money spend in drug detection is good waist of money or could be spend in another direction ?

Did Mr. Joe of world class or doesn’t ? Mourith, Ramzi or Paul Tergat by instance.

I guess that all that kind of questions are legitimate. But this is a second level of discuss. Renato is free to Have a different opinion.

Can self belief affect actualy blood values? No, and that's not my point. You don't need more red blood cells than normal to increase your power output.

In all these discussions about drugs drugs drugs, all the self procalaimed drug experts forget that there is no activation of the cardiovascular system without activation of the central nervous system. You know? Muscle fiber recruitment?

Antonio, everyone who compete in power events, or bodybuilding know that you can train as much and as well as you want. Yes you will reach some limit after some time. And you will stagnate. And you can think that this is the limit of the material world as you say.

But then you get some little "help" and you improve way beyond your previous limits.

There is no logic in what you say. That there exists certain physical limits for everyone is of course true. But you can not conclude that these limits are the same with or without drug.

Antonio, there is no such thing as reaching the limit of your potential. There is always a legal way to improve.

All of the World Records will be beaten by a very long way, with or without drugs.

2 hours for the Marathon will be beaten, and then beaten by a long way. etc etc etc on and on and on.

J.O. wrote:

Antonio, there is no such thing as reaching the limit of your potential. There is always a legal way to improve.

All of the World Records will be beaten by a very long way, with or without drugs.

2 hours for the Marathon will be beaten, and then beaten by a long way. etc etc etc on and on and on.

The fact that world records would be beat doesn´t meran that the perfromance doesn´t limit.

If you put the goal in about 2 hours in the marathon would be beaten or would not. But wouldn´t be Gebrelassie to beat it becqauae of his individual limitation. You see i mean individual limit what´s different from one individual to another. Gebre did get his top limit or may be 2:02 but not sub 2:00.

What about 1hour 30min in the marathon ? What about 30 seconds in marathon ? You see ther´s some limit somehow somewhere. 50meters in the long jump ? It´s not possible. There´s one universal limit somewhere somehow in the material world that we might not know what is precisely, but in each individual we can estimate with more precision. Renato says that is not serious that one of his runners is able to run 25:30 in 10k.

Science teach us that when you will run/move at light speed you will be light no more solid.

Drug user wrote:

Antonio, everyone who compete in power events, or bodybuilding know that you can train as much and as well as you want. Yes you will reach some limit after some time. And you will stagnate. And you can think that this is the limit of the material world as you say.

But then you get some little "help" and you improve way beyond your previous limits.

There is no logic in what you say. That there exists certain physical limits for everyone is of course true. But you can not conclude that these limits are the same with or without drug.

I do not appreciate weight, power events then i don´t know if what you say about power events it´s true or not true.

If i can decide i will get out from athletics the weight, the hammer, disc, vault, all that kind of events. I never see, i never watch. I think that athletics is all that deals with run from short speed runs to distance runs. I will move all those strength events to another sport, might be to the weight federation. Excuse me, i only speak about run events.

When in every competition i watch alive, if in between the 2 run events and despite ther´s one power track event, may be i go to the toilet, or to the bar and i drink one beer. I refuse to see it to watch it.

Renato--

Your argument rests upon the assumption that the testing system works--that is, that the testing system positively identifies all dopers as such, and that disclosure of a positive test is made public.

I don't think the assumption is supportable, given the 2 facts of 1) biosimilars and 2) constrained WADA positive test criteria.

By now, we all know that many EPO revelations emerge from legal questioning rather than from testing; we also have all heard about the Danish study, and are following its effects in the testing world. The assumption grows ever weaker.

The possibility of corruption/collusion only further weakens the assumption, already fatally weakened by the 2 facts above.

I still maintain that you cannot possibly be aware of everything that even your own athletes are doing, consciously or not--it is a matter of simple logic. You can be as certain as possible, but not 100%. Only the athlete knows.

And sometimes not even then.

OK, let's take roids etc. out of the equation and concentrate on EPO.

Again, all physiologic supporting factors must be in place to realize the benefits from EPO, all the way from liver and kidney function, to neurological biochemistry.

In a trained athlete from altitude (A), let's just say for sake of argument that all of the required factors are at higher levels than those of a trained athlete from sea level (SL).

Importantly, that does not mean that all of A's factors are at the highest level that A's body is capable of sustaining. A's body will respond in exactly the same way as SL's body to an EPO pulse, only at higher levels all around.

Renato's argument assumes that at least one of A's factors is maxxed-out, an assumption for which there is no physical evidence. If there were some controlled study of such an A athlete, before and after EPO use, then and only then could such a conclusion be drawn, and even then, only for that one athlete. I have never seen such a study.

And yes, there is a law of diminishing returns regarding performance gains, beyond which lies the vast no-man's-land of injury. In strength/power situations, it is seen not infrequently--a muscle tearing, a tendon ripping, a bone breaking, a bursa rupturing. That's why those athletes use supporting structures like tape and bracing.

But what are the physical properties that limit endurance running gains? In strength/power, it is properties that have to do with physical structures only being able to support a finite amount of force per unit area.

This is a serious question--what are they, specifically? How do elite endurance runners experience injury? Is it related mostly to hydration? Liver function? Kidney function? I have no idea. I know for a while the rage was sodium bicarbonate, to buffer ph, which was seen as a limiting factor in muscle function due to acidosis.

Back in my exercise physiology classes 20+ years ago, I seem to remember that performance was limited by decreasing plasma volume and increasing core temperature, both of which were manifestations of, in part, hydration. But what about "injury", however you want to identify that term?

Do elite endurance runners not get "injured", because they just cannot go hard enough to sustain injury? I know most of the injuries are related to training volume, and that training volume is one of the prime determinants of conditioning.

It's true that both EPO testing has improved, making testing more reliable, and that new techniques (e.g. microdosing) have also improved, to evade detection.Yet you are also making assumptions. EPO and blood doping requires a number of pre-requisites:- Money- Refrigerator/Freezer- Reliable source of electricity- Culture of cheating;lack of ethics/prideI've never been to either, but it seems likely to me that there are a number of fundamental differences between training camps in Iten, and training camps in Eugene.What's still missing is a "Ramzi-like" example of some Kenyan/Ethiopian athlete stuck at a mediocre level, suddenly breaking through. Well, some accused Nicolas Kemboi (if my memory doesn't fail me), but Renato gave a bunch of details surrounding his sudden performance, then disappearance.

Maybe top runners still get some benefit, but it hasn't ever been carefully measured to decide if there is no difference, some difference, or a big difference compared to slower runners.For distance running, of course there are still a whole range of injuries related to overuse: stress fractures, achilles tendinitis (tendinosis?), runner's knee, IT band, plantar fasciitis, etc.Geb just dropped out of the New York marathon, because of a knee problem.Hydration has practically no role in running injuries.

Sprint Geezer wrote:

...

A's body will respond in exactly the same way as SL's body to an EPO pulse, only at higher levels all around.

...

If there were some controlled study of such an A athlete, before and after EPO use, then and only then could such a conclusion be drawn, and even then, only for that one athlete. I have never seen such a study.

...

This is a serious question--what are they, specifically? How do elite endurance runners experience injury?

I put the Marathon limit at sub 1.50, that's 13 minutes for every 5k.

As you can see, it's a long way off, about 100 years.

Sprint Geezer wrote:

Back in my exercise physiology classes 20+ years ago, I seem to remember that performance was limited by decreasing plasma volume and increasing core temperature, both of which were manifestations of, in part, hydration. But what about "injury", however you want to identify that term?

Do elite endurance runners not get "injured", because they just cannot go hard enough to sustain injury? I know most of the injuries are related to training volume, and that training volume is one of the prime determinants of conditioning.

Decreasing plasma volume and increasing temperature are certainly important issues in endurance races, acompanied by glycogen depletion. We have to run within those parameters, and we always will, but they don't prevent improvements in power output over the course of the race.

Injuries are easy to avoid, you look where you are going and you listen to your body.

Increasing power output is simple too, just practice using a longer stride. This variable has no known limits, and for every 3% increase in stride length you get a 1% increase inn stride rate.