'Doping in Kenya is completely out of control'

Doping Kenya is redundant. Doping and Kenya are the same word

Your "sensical assertion" looks like speculative hypothesis, rather than established fact. If your blood is too thick, this could hypothetically be counter-productive, making the athletes run slower.

It's very clear you don't hav any clue about training. The volume of 180/200 km per week is something normal for thousands athletes in the world, and not only for the champions. We have some question, and it's important to answer those questions, before speaking of doping : we have to speak of training. 1st question : WHAT THE HEMATOCRIT IS ? Many look at the effectiveness of blood doping BECAUSE IT'S POSSIBLE TO ENHANCE THE Hct. We don't deny this fact, but remember the final goal of a coach is to help athletes RUNNING FASTER, not enhancing their Hct. The Hct is the product of the number of RBC (Red Blood Cells) per the MCV (Mean Corpuscolar Volume). So, an Hct of 50 can be the product of 5 millions RBC with MCV 100, or 6 millions RBC with MCV 83. The question is : THESE 2 HCT (that seem the same) DID WORK IN THE SAME WAY FOR AN ATHLETE, or there is some difference ? Because if the MCV is higher, this means the quantity of plasma is in percentage higher, and this reduces the level of VISCOSITY, with less PERIFERAL RESISTANCE. In other words, the heart reduces the effort for pushing in the circle the same quantity of blood, or, with the same level of effort, can increase the velocity of the blood circulation, with advantages in the total quantity of Oxygen delivered to the muscle fibers. We can start our discussion answering to this point. After, we can see that there are a lot of other questions, that physiologists don't consider when speak of training and consequentely of blood doping

Thanks. I appreciate that you won't keep coming back with the same set of tired, debunked arguments and examples, while deflecting and avoiding providing any substantial answers to challenging questions.

Here's one challenging question: assuming EPO "works" for top-tier Kenyans, did it work for top-tier athletes from these non-African countries: Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, Greece, Bulgaria, Belarus, Slovenia, Romania, Brazil and Spain? The Sunday Times reported that all these countries had higher blood doping suspicion than Kenya, during the period of 2001-2012, after blood-doping research scientists analyzed a large blood database leaked from the IAAF. How many of them have run sub-3:30 (1500m), sub-7:30 (3000m), sub-13 (5000m), sub-27 (10000m), sub-1:00 (half-marathon), or sub-2:06 (marathon)?

Here's an answer to one of my questions: no one has established what EPO does for athletes who have already benefited from training at altitude. Not scientists, not athletes, not coaches, not doctors, not pharmacists, not agents, not anti-doping bodies, not journalists, not fans, etc. Use and prevelance does not establish the relationship with "works". What little science there is shows that EPO and altitude training provide similar short term gains (3%-5%), when starting from an unknown state of training, for time trials ranging from 3000m-10000m.

I start from your last statement :

endurance athletes will continue to have a great incentive to do it. In particular when you are poor and have nothing to lose and you know the faster runners around you are doping.

This is true, but we need to look at the premise. And the premise is that THE COMMON FEELING, supported by Antidoping too, IS THAT EPO CAN GIVE A BIG ADVANTAGE (don't forget that scientists, not knowing anything about the training effects, spoke of 30" for 5000m, and the same in percentage (1 min in 10000, 2 min in HM and 4 min in full Marathon), all hypothesis clearly completely ABSURD for coaches used training athletes in clean way, that know where ALREADY was possible to arrive without any doping.

For example, I had athletes running under 27' in 10000m many times (Nicholas Kemboi 26'30", Ahmed Hassan 26'38", Imane Merga 26'48", Moses Mosop 26'49", John Korir and Mark Bett 26'52", Geoffrey Kirui 26'55") and in all the group only 2 can be considered as REAL CHAMPIONS : Nicholas Kemboi and Moses Mosop, all thye others were good athletes who found races well paced and achieved their PB remaining in the group.

At the moment, already 85 athletes ran under 27' : this means that that time is a NORMAL PERFORMANCE for GOOD TALENTED ATHLETES, but not real champions. In other words, Bekele and Gebrselassie were different subjects.

We live in a world where every day the economical power of BIG PHARMAS increases. In TV every 3 publicitary spots, one is for recommanding the assumption of some supplement, for different reasons (health, beauty, improvement in the efficiency, and so and so), so people are bombed by the idea that every kind of performance (not only in the sport) that is out of the average MUST BE DUE to some esternal help.

This creates the basic mentality for believing in doping : so the answer to the question "if EPO doesn't work, why a lot of athletes use : are all stupid ?", is "Are not stupid, but PLAGIARIZED by the continue talk about the advantages of blood doping.

We can discuss a lot about different training methodologies, but always having clear in our mind that training for a top performance is the correct mix between tough workouts and recovery. This means that making recovery faster is not important, because depends on the typology of the athlete and his technical choice.

Is it better to train at 80% of max level 3 times per week, with only one recovery day in between, or sometime at 90% recovering 2 days in between ? And what if we have some session at 100% of the effort, recovering in between 4 days ?

The chain, according people believing in the effects of blood doping, is : with the assumption of EPO athlete can recover faster, with more recovery can train more, and training more can improve his performances.

But the question is : DID THIS ATHLETE TRIED TO INCREASE IN CLEAN WAY THE SPECIFIC INTENSITY OF HIS TRAINING, USING MORE DAYS FOR RECOVERING, changing the classic schedule of "simmetric training" that doesn't allow to increase the level of one single session (otherwise he goes in overtraining), or never tried BEFORE using EPO ? Because, if never tried, how can compare what did before doping with what did after doping ? The limiting factor was in the mentality, because everybody understand that at the base of every improvement there is the increase of training.

Belief in doping is like a religion to people like Kelsall.

You're wasting your time Renato.

The claim that EPO does not work on top-tier athletes is beyond convenient and has narrowed to a point that you can't find a test group to disprove it. I'll side with the scientists and wait for Renato to conduct a scientific study on sub 27 guys.

Post the progression while doping of those athletes from non-African countries and we can discuss further. You can dope an average athlete to the gills and MOST won't get to world class level because of the lack of talent and proper training.

Re your second point - sorry you guys have narrowed down these athletes (aka cherry picked) to a point that such a study can't happen. What I will give you is this.. logically the effect may be less drastic because those athletes are already quite good so the absolute performance gains would naturally be lower, BUT enough to make all the difference at that level.

You are not on the side of scientists, but rather outside. Scientists generally say to excercise caution when interpreting results with elite athletes and elite performances. Occasionally scientists will express a belief or an opinion, usually couched in cautious language.

If you cannot conduct long term double-blind studies simulating athlete training and racing for ethical or practical reasons, you can ethically conduct observational studies: "an observational study draws inferences from a sample to a population where the independent variable is not under the control of the researcher because of ethical concerns or logistical constraints". There are limitations of course, but it should be possible to make observations that support the hypothesis.

For example, you can observe the top performances from these countries with higher blood doping suspicion than Kenya: "Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, Greece, Bulgaria, Belarus, Slovenia, Romania, Brazil and Spain". Or you can observe the increase in the number of sub-27 non-Africans in the two decades of the 1990s and 2000s. Or you can observe the top performances of Russia (est. 100% doping) to Japan (est. 0% doping).

Russia was estimated to be doping 100% in the 90's? By who?

And where the hell does Slovenia come into this? Slovenia has higher blood doping suspicon than Kenya??

Please moderatos don't ban me again for criticizing the mighty Rek. I appreciate he does do a valuable job for you in derailing ever single dicussion on the doping problem in Kenya. I've contacted Weldon and he asked for all the links to the threads you have been banning me for, so we'll soon find out if his anti-doping stance is genuine or just for show.

Renato, maybe you don't know , but for well trained athletes Vo2max is limited by the oxygen delivery to the muscles. This was a long time not clear, but seems to be solved now. That means if you can increase that oxygen delivery artificially (EPO, blood doping) you have an advantage.

Also for blood doping i have a very well known testemonial which is Jan Ullrich, a very talented and very well trained athlete. You can ask him what effect blood doping had on his performance :) Just ridiculous your thinking is.

That's a half truth at best. Competing in running (and most sports) is a luxury hobby - it's for rich folks ANYWAYS, no matter the color of their skin and no matter if there's money in it or not. Competing is mostly sacrifice and only the top 1% gets something in return to that sacrifice.

The unique situation with East Africans is that they ARE big part of that 1% so removing money will affect them the worst because they happen to be the people that can earn livable income with running and rely on that. But still, it's not all East African runners, it's a tiny part of them, they are not all sub 2:08 marathoners.

I had no idea you were banned,and i thought you and rek agreed with each other for the most part. Just not the kenya part .

😆 They agree when it comes to white athletes, and disagree on the black athletes 🤣

To avoid the risk of cherry-picking, who would you suggest are the best non-African candidates for such a performance progression analysis, from these countries of high blood doping suspicion: Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, Greece, Bulgaria, Belarus, Slovenia, Romania, Brazil and Spain? I looked worldwide, twice, not finding obvious non-African candidates based on their peak performances. I see you have confounded the effort listing three variables to consider: doping to the gills, talent, and training.

Regarding the second point, it is not because something is difficult to establish, that we can or should assume it, or we can conclude that it has already been established. Yet I have not made it impossible to perform such a study. For example, Pitsilidas could repeat his famous EPO time trials on the Scottish and Kenyan athletes, with some refinements: introduce a phase to optimally train the athletes at altitude to their peak 3000m performance, using that as the pre-EPO baseline, and then continue with a double-blinded EPO treatment compared to a control group, while motivating the athletes to race the time-trials at maximum effort, rather than tempo-ing it. Or someone can repeat the Stray-Gundersen altitude studies, with the addition of an EPO+altitude group -- even if conducted on amateurs this would provide more information than we currently have.

Where do you see me saying "Russia was estimated to be doping 100% in the 90's"? My only reference to 1990s was "the number of sub-27 non-Africans in the two decades of the 1990s and 2000s" -- not singling out Russia, but referring to all non-Africans worldwide for two decades (before the widespread rollout of the ABP).

I did take a degree of figurative poetic license with 100% and 0% estimates, but as you asked about Russia, it was researchers analyzing IAAF blood data from 2001-2009 who estimated Russian men (Country A) were 78% blood doping (54%-99%), and Russian women were 50% blood doping (35%-68%). I also recall a mention early Soviet/Russian research into blood doping and steroids as far back as the 1970s, but I cannot find back that reference. (Maybe from a paper or article from Sergei Iljukov?)

The countries I listed, "Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, Greece, Bulgaria, Belarus, Slovenia, Romania, Brazil and Spain", all come from a 2015 Sunday Times article analyzing leaked IAAF blood data from more than 5000 athletes between 2001-2012. All of these countries had higher country percentages than Kenya (and Ethiopia).

Regarding your bans, that has nothing to do with me.

Christer Malm isn't using any of that language. Lol

journals.plos.org

Autologous Doping with Cryopreserved Red Blood Cells – Effects on Physical Performance and Detection by Multivariate Statistics

The discovery of erythropoietin (EPO) simplified blood doping in sports, but improved detection methods, for EPO has forced cheating athletes to return to blood transfusion. Autologous blood transfusion with cryopreserved red...

Open link

"From the summarized literature, it can be estimated that elite athletes may improve performance by up to 3% with blood doping, regardless of method [

journals.plos.org

Autologous Doping with Cryopreserved Red Blood Cells – Effects on Physical Performance and Detection by Multivariate Statistics

The discovery of erythropoietin (EPO) simplified blood doping in sports, but improved detection methods, for EPO has forced cheating athletes to return to blood transfusion. Autologous blood transfusion with cryopreserved red...

Open link

–

journals.plos.org

Autologous Doping with Cryopreserved Red Blood Cells – Effects on Physical Performance and Detection by Multivariate Statistics

The discovery of erythropoietin (EPO) simplified blood doping in sports, but improved detection methods, for EPO has forced cheating athletes to return to blood transfusion. Autologous blood transfusion with cryopreserved red...

Open link

]. This enhancement is equivalent to, for example, seven minutes faster winning time in the 90 km cross country ski race Vasaloppet, 20–30 seconds faster time in any given 5000 m run at world class level, and four minutes faster finishing time in a marathon race. In cycling, a 3% increase in performance translate to a more than two hour faster winning time in Tour de France 2014."

I'm siding with Malm - "20-30 seconds faster time in any given 5000m run at world class level.

Keep in mind Malm has devoted his entire career to the effects of blood doping with elites & teaches at the university. I think it's safe to say that he knows a think or two about this subject. 😉

Even though you read what Renato said: "I said "EPO doesn't work with every athlete (including white caucasic) having proper training in altitude. And for me proper training means a volume not inferior of 180/200 km per week, at specific intensity (proper training that physiologists and expert of antidoping don't know, so don't know the effect of training)" you're choosing your own words saying those are his: "EPO would not work for top-tier athletes" - which is exactly what Renato is not saying.

It's this constant misunderstanding and misusing what he is saying, even though he says it so clearly.