Is Canova Right About EPO?

B3O wrote:

I think the context in which he said this probably is significant.

Until very recently, it was widely believed that those who doped in Kenya did so to break into the elite category in the country, as they were struggling to compete.

Therefore, it is likely that Canova was right to suggest that it was those with less-than-ideal resources/situations would be the ones who would benefit most from doping. Those already at the top (assuming they are there clean), did not need to dope, as they already had the best coaches, best facilities, best financial backing, and were significantly better than others on the world stage.

This was a few years ago, however, and we know the landscape has changed. Those at the top ARE doping (if they weren't already before). This might be due to increased competition at the top end, and the struggle to stay at the top, or due to increased international competition, or the fact that this generation of elite Kenyans came through the ranks with those who were doping to try to reach the top, and therefore are a lot more aware of other peers it than the elites would have been 5-10 years ago.

I think people often neglect thinking about the wider picture, context, and decision making that goes in to it. Nothing happens in a vacuum, and there's a reason Kenyan doping is on the rise. We can't just assume they've only just discovered it, but rather it's been building over time to the point we're at now.

So Canova may well have been right when he made this comments. There was no need for Elite Kenyans to dope 5-10 years ago. They were already the best in the world with all the resources to keep them there clean. Something has changed since though, clearly.

B3O wrote:

I think the context in which he said this probably is significant.

Until very recently, it was widely believed that those who doped in Kenya did so to break into the elite category in the country, as they were struggling to compete.

Therefore, it is likely that Canova was right to suggest that it was those with less-than-ideal resources/situations would be the ones who would benefit most from doping. Those already at the top (assuming they are there clean), did not need to dope, as they already had the best coaches, best facilities, best financial backing, and were significantly better than others on the world stage.

This was a few years ago, however, and we know the landscape has changed. Those at the top ARE doping (if they weren't already before). This might be due to increased competition at the top end, and the struggle to stay at the top, or due to increased international competition, or the fact that this generation of elite Kenyans came through the ranks with those who were doping to try to reach the top, and therefore are a lot more aware of other peers it than the elites would have been 5-10 years ago.

I think people often neglect thinking about the wider picture, context, and decision making that goes in to it. Nothing happens in a vacuum, and there's a reason Kenyan doping is on the rise. We can't just assume they've only just discovered it, but rather it's been building over time to the point we're at now.

So Canova may well have been right when he made this comments. There was no need for Elite Kenyans to dope 5-10 years ago. They were already the best in the world with all the resources to keep them there clean. Something has changed since though, clearly.

OED wrote:

B3O wrote:

I think the context in which he said this probably is significant.

Until very recently, it was widely believed that those who doped in Kenya did so to break into the elite category in the country, as they were struggling to compete.

Therefore, it is likely that Canova was right to suggest that it was those with less-than-ideal resources/situations would be the ones who would benefit most from doping. Those already at the top (assuming they are there clean), did not need to dope, as they already had the best coaches, best facilities, best financial backing, and were significantly better than others on the world stage.

This was a few years ago, however, and we know the landscape has changed. Those at the top ARE doping (if they weren't already before). This might be due to increased competition at the top end, and the struggle to stay at the top, or due to increased international competition, or the fact that this generation of elite Kenyans came through the ranks with those who were doping to try to reach the top, and therefore are a lot more aware of other peers it than the elites would have been 5-10 years ago.

I think people often neglect thinking about the wider picture, context, and decision making that goes in to it. Nothing happens in a vacuum, and there's a reason Kenyan doping is on the rise. We can't just assume they've only just discovered it, but rather it's been building over time to the point we're at now.

So Canova may well have been right when he made this comments. There was no need for Elite Kenyans to dope 5-10 years ago. They were already the best in the world with all the resources to keep them there clean. Something has changed since though, clearly.

The change you speak of occurred in the late 70s/80s when the Italians moved in and the Kenyans went from very competitive to out of this world seemingly over night. Ask any of the old timers who ran during that period. There was a massive change that was anything but natural. As others have pointed out, the only other change since then has been that the Kenyans were finally tested close to what everyone else has been subject to.

The funny thing is that, despite the positives that started rolling in when the testing first began, the Kenyans have continued to get popped at an incredible rate. Doping is so rampant there that a huge number of them continue to risk it despite knowing there is a much greater chance they will get caught. It is such a part of their culture that, apparently, they know no other way to train at this point.

gecko wrote:

OED wrote:

The change you speak of occurred in the late 70s/80s when the Italians moved in and the Kenyans went from very competitive to out of this world seemingly over night. Ask any of the old timers who ran during that period. There was a massive change that was anything but natural. As others have pointed out, the only other change since then has been that the Kenyans were finally tested close to what everyone else has been subject to.

The funny thing is that, despite the positives that started rolling in when the testing first began, the Kenyans have continued to get popped at an incredible rate. Doping is so rampant there that a huge number of them continue to risk it despite knowing there is a much greater chance they will get caught. It is such a part of their culture that, apparently, they know no other way to train at this point.

I can tell none of you have ever had a Kenyan teammate in college.

MoPo wrote:

His premise is correct but ultimately guesswork. We still don't fully understand how EPO works and modern research shows that there is indeed limitations outside of oxygen transport and that muscular and nervous system fatigue are the limit and not oxygen delivery. Now, this doesn't mean that EPO doesn't work, it does but its effect on highly trained fully altitude acclimitised athletes will be more limited than say a sea level recreational athlete. Now Renato can argue that these athletes already have reached the point where Vasculogenesis and Angiogenesis has been maxed out by years of altitude adaption and maxed out Oxygen transport to the point where extra oxygen is not actually absorbed and that the limit which we now know is muscular endurance is defining characteristic at that point.

This process is now widely accepted in scientific circles as a fact so Renato is very much correct on the underlying process. What we don't know is if its actually true in these current athletes cases although the science leads to the belief that the benefits on altitude adapted high level elite athletes returns being at least greatly diminished although no studies have actually been done on elite athletes and much of the effects of epo on performance are still unknown.

So many of the people who give Renato abuse for his take are pretty clueless, but he could also end up being wrong, no one knows for certain yet. His premise is very much in line with the science though.

Kyx wrote:

Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:

Sadly you are right.

This messageboard wet it's collective pants because a "world famous coach" of Kenyans visited it and with stars in their eyes just believed anything he had to say. But behind it all is this - these athlete were his revenue stream and of course he has a motive to say all these guys are just ultra-talented products of their environment.

And at the time he could do just that - because the era in which he was most vocal was when many drugs were still basically undetectable (read: EPO) and nobody really understood how hard it was logistically to test in Kenya and that they actually had access to to the same stuff everyone else did. This idealistic fantasy of Kenyans just running in packs at 8000ft altitude, eating ugali and doing it the right way was perfect emotive "papier mache" to gloss over what really was happening (ramshackle clinics handing out all sorts of sh-t to "world class" athletes).

Aren't you brave? Attacking Renato anonymously on a public forum?