Doesn't Russian Doping Scandal Prove Canova is Right about EPO?

Spain (and Portugal to a lesser extent) have a multiple cases of EPO use documented (thanks to things like operation Puerto) that is why they are being singled out - you are debating the efficacy of EPO after all and you should therefore look first where you have confirmed cases. Despite your nit picking in the European national records list you do not change the fact that these two nations held a stack of European records from 1500m to the Marathon in the 1990s and they represent a small population relative to Europe as whole.

And they improved their national records even though blood doping and steroids were in use before the advent of EPO and even though participation in distance running throughout Europe as a whole was declining badly throughout the 1990s - that is why the European cross country championships was introduced as well as things like the u23 age group.

And this is the fact that you repeatedly ignore - the talent pool in Europe was decreasing markedly this in itself will have impacted the progress in European distance running records (even then they still progressed mainly due to the Spanish and the Portuguese and Dieter Baumann)

In contrast participation in distance running increased markedly in Africa throughout the 1990s mainly due to the professionalization of the sport which paid the athletes very badly by Western world standards but very handsomely by African standards.

There are taboo people/subjects on letsrun.com and because of that it will one day be its downfall.

In the past 15 months the spotlight has gone on Kenya and some of the very best runners ever in mens V02MAX events (1500m-5000m) and they struggle to break 3:31 or 13 minutes.

As I said elsewhere, I knew a cyclist (went out with an old class mate) who was taking a cocktail of drugs and he gets to sit at home in his new house and look at multiple olympic & world medals. The testing that took place 10-15 years ago was extremely weak and nobody wants to relitigate the mess.

OK let's make this simple.The hypothesis is that EPO is the obvious and only explanation for the massive drops in world records during the "EPO era" in track -- the 1990's, the marathon success in its own "EPO-era", post 2007, and more generally East African success on the track and the roads.The accepted basis for this hypothesis is that EPO is scientifically proven, and lots of anecdotes in cycling, and the case studies of Lombard (who didn't set a European record) and Hellebuyck (who couldn't even set a new PR) and testimonials from other athletes who "feel invincible".So assuming EPO causes massive improvements in performance, coupled with the universal availability of EPO, and the universal undetectability of EPO, we should be able to see evidence of significant performance enhancement, at the world level, *UNIVERSALLY*.Forget looking at documented cases in Spain and Portugal, and tiny little national records, and decreasing talent pools in Europe.I don't want to look at the little picture explaining why EPO didn't work in little pockets here and there because of things like decreasing talent pools.Let's try to find a place, outside of Africa and Africans, were we see EPO "working", to get a reasonable estimate of an expected benefit.Let's look at the WHOLE WORLD population, minus the Africans.Let's look at the period between 1985 and 2005 for all of the remaining six continents: North and South America, Europe, Russia, Asia, Australia, and Antarctica.Let's take special care to exclude African descendants, like Moroccans in Belgium, and Kenyans in Denmark and USA.My radical claim is that, the benefit of EPO cannot be greater than the progression of record performances for this near worldwide pool of athletes between 1985-2005.After all, if EPO is the reason for East African domination, then we should be able to observe it outside Africa too.The progression of performance is something unambiguously measured by a stopwatch.To put numbers to illustrate my radical claim, if "world" times drop by 5%, but "non-African" times drop by 1%, then either:- EPO can explain, at maximum, only 1% of the drop in "world" times, or- Africans are taking more EPO than non-Africans (the exact opposite of cycling), or- non-Africans are non-responders to EPOThe best reason to think EPO doesn't help Kenyans, is that it hasn't really helped the rest of the non-African world compete with the Kenyans.

Just to let the board know, I am retiring jCo name after tonight. I am not Jon Orange. I am actually an original poster from early 2000 (back from merv). I stand by my OP statement that why haven't the Russian men run world leading times during this massive doping spectacle?

Hey Gary, Eddy H was over 40 years old and making money.

Did you get paid for racing when you were 40?

jCo wrote:

Just to let the board know, I am retiring jCo name after tonight. I am not Jon Orange. I am actually an original poster from early 2000 (back from merv). I stand by my OP statement that why haven't the Russian men run world leading times during this massive doping spectacle?

Which poster did you play on Merv?

The Russian guy ran 1:42 off of 60 miles a week, and his coach was holding him back from crossing the line into staleness.

So many Russian females excelled on drugs and hard work.

You would probably have to be immersed in Russian culture to understand what's going on.

I have already Badsplained why he's right that it doesn't work on African distance runners, but it doesn't work any others either. It's really very simple - working muscle at marathon pace doesn't require enough oxygen for extra RBC's to make any difference.

People fool themselves into thinking jogging is an "aerobic" workout as opposed to a "cardiovascular" workout. Sure your heart has to beat lots of times continuously and will get stronger. Sure, the nearly complete absence of an anaerobic component means you're generating little to no acid. But it is precisely that low acidity which means you are not using anywhere near the level of oxygen your muscles could be using. By keeping intramuscular pH high, you limit the rate of gas exchange between blood and muscle.

EPO does work on the runners who work at lowest muscle pH, i.e. middle distance, African and otherwise. And indeed that's where most of the record-smashing was in the epo-soaked 90's and early 2000's.

That's not what Canova says.

Canova:

"If you take the lactate immediately after the test, you cant have a real value, because for the next minutes the concentration of lactate in the blood continues to grow, while the production of lactate inside the muscle fibres already is over.

Going to the marathon, the new type of athletes have a high ability in buffering. One of the reasons of this may be the improvement in the permeability of the membrane. One of the ways for defining "Endurance" is "the speed of removing lactate from muscle fibers or buffering".

So, if with marathon runners "old style" our goal was to reduce the production of lactate at the speed of the race, in order to teach to the muscle fibres to use as fuel, at the same speed, more fatty acid and less glycogen (and this fact could build the ability in lasting longer at the Marathon Pace), now we look for increasing the speed of buffering, allowing the athletes in using a part of the lactate they produce.

A top marathon runner till 2000/2005 was no more able to overtake 10mml with any type of test, because the goal of his training was to reduce the produiction of lactate (that is connected with the consumption of glycogen).

A top marathon runner of today is still able to reach 15mml of lactate, if we do a max test (for example, 2' uphill at max speed)."

I didn't say his reasons were right, only that it's true African distance runners (and others also) have no reason to be helped by EPO. I don't know what the hell he's trying to say about lactate there. Lactate is recycled as fuel by the athlete already, no special training needed.

EPO works for other "long distance" events like cycling and Nordic skiing because they are not steady-state. People go on surges and hit low pH, requiring much more oxygen, so more RBC's are a huge advantage, both during the surge, and during the recovery.

rekrunner wrote:

OK let's make this simple.

Yes, let's make this simple.

You were given lots and lots of links to peer reviewed science showing these drugs work.

Instead of addressing those studies, you invent some other hypothesis that you can then "disprove".

Classic misdirection from the Jon Orange, Ghost, J.R. school

sweet my three posts have been deleted....told you LRers, you speak out against canova or paula and you get your posts deleted

Some animals are more important than other animals....apparently.

i agree with spencer wrote:

sweet my three posts have been deleted....told you LRers, you speak out against canova or paula and you get your posts deleted

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Yes, let's make this simple.

You were given lots and lots of links to peer reviewed science showing these drugs work.

Instead of addressing those studies, you invent some other hypothesis that you can then "disprove".

Classic misdirection from the Jon Orange, Ghost, J.R. school

...I am enraged that you left the besserwisser-nonentity-Aragon out of your quote!

If one cares to actually read the material they refer to, it is clear that out of the "83 studies" referred by the link of rmj33, only a handful are about performance-enhancing effects of blood doping. To summarize zillionth time the two key problems with the existing literature:

1) Only a handful of the blood doping studies utilize double-blind protocol, so placebo effect could've contributed to some portion of the results (not necessarily that much to Vo2MAX).

2) While some blood doping studies have used very well trained subjects with some individual participants having Vo2MAX-values in excess of 80 ml/kg/min, none have used a group of elite athletes. None. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada. That is why some of the studies referred by rjm33's link have disclaimers such as that "[t]he subjects in this study, although good-caliber runners, were not elite distance runners, and the results obtained in this study may or may not be applicable to the latter" (Brien, 1987) and "[t]he runners in this study, although good local road runners, were not elite distance runners and the results may not be applicable to the latter" (Williams, 1981). Sounds like even some of his own sources don't fully vouch for the underlying claims.

It is also borderline embarrassing for rjm33 to refer to the Conconi/EPO-study of 1988, when it had nothing to do with recombinant Erythropoietin (ie. banned EPO) which is clear after a precursory look on the abstract. I've even pointed this to him, but don't get fact spoil a good story about Conconi "testing" or "knowing" rEPO already in 1986-1987.

In this light, my opinion is that there is very little solid evidence that rEPO works on elite athletes, so to evaluate the data, we are more less forced to deal with the "raw" data (ie. actual seasonal variations in track speeds).

You either agree or disagree with me, but these are the facts. You are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.

Aragon,

It is fine that we disagree.

I would only point out that it is clear that performance enhancing drugs work in the populations in which they have been studied.

It is also clear that there are not double-blind studies on elite athletes (and are unlikely to be, considering the ethical and competitive issues involved.

Dealing with the raw data is not a very good proxy, because we do not know what specific drugs or combination of drugs the individuals are on. We get a very partial, illusory glimpse if we look only at those who are caught in the anti-doping positives. Russia is a very good example of this.

In every other area of medicine and pharmaceuticals, once you establish that a drug works (and is safe) generally on the study population, it is generally assumed that it works on everybody. This is not always true, as we know that it does not always hold and sometimes sub-populations do respond differently. Those cases emerge over time or from post-release study.

There is no theoretical foundation to conclude that EPO (and other performance enhancing drugs) do not work in elite athletes. The physiology is the same. The physiological mechanisms are well understood (unlike is some medications)

Given the transparency issues and the confounding factors of other drug use it is not clear to me that there will ever be clear, compelling weight of evidence based on that.

There's no such thing as facts. Everything is manipulated, massaged, manufactured. You live in a sea of concepts that don't have anything to do with reality. You see what worldview tells you to see.

So don't start spouting crap about facts.

Part 1

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=7402974&page=1

A double blind study on EPO with all the subjects having a VO2max over 80 mL/kg/min will never happen.

I know that the study from Conconi from 1988 was on serum erythropoietin levels in XC skiers, and not the actual use of recombinant EPO in the skiers.

Do you know the history of Dr. Francesco Conconi?

Dr. Conconi was doping Italian runners, cyclists, swimmers, rowers, XC skiers, speed skaters, wrestlers, etc. since the year 1980 with autologous blood transfusions. Michele Ferrari was his lab assistant. They added EPO to the autologous blood transfusions when EPO when became available. Dr. Conconi is generally regarded as the guy who introduced EPO to the sport of professional cycling. He even doped himself with EPO at the age of 59 for a mountain bike race where his hematocrit was 57%.

Let's take a look at the history of Dr. Francesco Conconi:

It was on 14 August 1980 that Professor Conconi submitted a proposal to the Italian National Olympic Committee (CONI) proposing that selected Italian athletes be assisted by staff of the University to improve their performance. Conconi proposed that he help athletes in the sports of cycling, canoeing, rowing, long distance skiing, speed skating, swimming and wrestling. The Olympic committee (CONI) accepted the offer. According to Sandro Donati, a coach of the middle distance running team from 1981 onwards, this method of preparation was blood doping.[2] Professor Conconi approached Donati regarding improving the performances of his athletes with estimations of the improvements at 3 to 5 seconds for 1,500 metre races, 15 to 20 seconds for 5,000 metre races and 30 to 40 seconds for 10,000 metre races.[3]

There was a partnership between the Olympic Committee and Professor Conconi's biomedical research centre at the University of Ferrara and the Olympic Committee financed his research.[4] According to Donati, Professor Conconi together with the Italian Athletics Federation and a major Italian Research Institute administered testosterone and anabolic steroids to athletes for events in the 1980s.[3] Over several years, CONI funded the research of Professor Conconi with over two million euros.

The work of Professor Conconi and his many assistants at the Ferrera University produced great results in sport. In the 1992 and 1994 Winter Olympics, Italy won 34 medals. Many of the athletes had hematocrit levels of over 50%.[2]Conconi had listed subjects' names, gender, sport, date of analysis as well as whether or not they were treated with EPO. Despite funding by CONI and the IOC to come up with an EPO detection test, Conconi was using the money to buy the drug and then administered it to athletes who were also paying Conconi.[12] Conconi is said to have made a technique to balance EPO, Blood Thinner and Human Growth Hormone in a mixture that Athletes could take safely and pass doping tests without testing positive. With this ability to safely take EPO, Donati estimated that 60 to 70% of the peloton used EPO in the mid-1990s.[13]

Bjarne Riis the 1996 Tour de France winner was a rider of the Gewiss team and was treated with EPO in 1994 and 1995 in Conconi's Institute in Ferrara. During the 1996 season Riis was coached with one of Conconi's assistants Cecchini and would win the Tour de France.[17]

On October 18, 1995 Pantani was taken to hospital after an accident in the Milano–Torino race where a hematocrit percentage of 60.1% whereas in the previous June it had been 45%.[23][24] At this time there was no limit to the hematocrit level but the large fluctuation was suspicious.

Alexandre de Merode, a former President of the IOC's Medical Committee appointed Conconi as a member of the medical committee and funded Conconi's alleged research into a test to detect the use of EPO. During this time the President of CONI from 1993 to 1998, Dr. Mario Pescante, suppressed a report by Donati which indicated Conconi's involvement in doping.[2]

In 1999 the investigations into the doping activities of Conconi began. About twenty doctors and researchers from Professor Conconi's Biomedical Research centre were under investigation.[4] In an investigation in front of Judge Piero Messini D'Agostini two hematologists submitted a report in which they concluded that the blood values of athletes treated by Conconi indicated doping.[25]

In 2000 Italian Public Prosecutor Pierguido Soprani alleged that Conconi drugged himself. This was because Conconi at the age of 59 recorded a hematocrit value of 57% while competing in a Mountain Bike Race on 3 September 1994.[10]

Computer files of Conconi that were seized in the investigation were later reported about in the press. These files were for patients of Conconi and included Ivan Gotti, Pavel Tonkov, Abraham Olano, Marco Pantani, Tony Rominger, Gianluca Bortolami and Giorgio Furlan. These files showed hematocrit variations in individuals during treatments. Ivan Gotti's hematocrit went from 35.2% in January 1997 to 50.7% in June 1998. Marco Pantani's level went from 40.7 in March, 1994 to 58% in June and July 1994. During the 1995 Tour de France, Pantani had a level of 56% and after his accident in Milano–Torino it was 60%. Claudio Chiappucci had a hematocrit level of 35% in January 1994 to 60% in June, 1994 after he came fifth in the 1994 Giro d'Italia.[26]

In 2004 Judge Oliva alleged that the athletes treated at the Institute indeed had taken EPO during the 1993 season but due to the statute of limitations, none would be prosecuted.[27] The Judge found Conconi 'morally guilty'.[28] The judge had looked at medical reports of 33 cyclists in the period 1993-1995, including Chiappucci's, and all blood tests showed largely fluctuating hematocrit-values, indicative for EPO-use.[29]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francesco_Conconi

Asli Alptekin lost her 1500m gold for doping. Ramzi lost his 1500m gold for doping. Genzebe Dibaba and Tirunesh Dibaba were at the same hotel in Sabadell as Jama Aden during Operation Rial in Spain, where the 4 different types of EPO were found with the 62 used syringes and 23 syringes preloaded with EPO. Genzebe broke the old 1500M world record held by Qu Yunxia of China, which was set in 1993.

Spain has had Operation Puerto with Dr. Fuentes and his 211 bags of blood in 2006, then Operation Galgo in 2010 with Ms. Fernandez, and Operation Rial with Jama Aden and the Dibabas in 2016.

The women's marathon all-time performance list has 2 out of the top 5 women of all time banned for doping (Russian Liliya Shobukhova 2:18:20 and Kenyan Rita Jeptoo 2:18:57). This means that 40% of the top 5 women of all time in the marathon are dopers. I think we should also include Ms. Paula Radcliffe. She is about 3 minutes faster than the 2nd fastest woman of all-time Liliya Shobukhova (Russian doper).

Then it would be 3 out of the top 5 women of all time in the marathon are dopers. This would increase the percentage to 60%.

Do you think that all of this is just a placebo effect?

Sorry Aragon, too much energy in my reply.

4:09 plus 18 = 4:27 mile. Congrats and best wishes for your future.

Correction: It was 2009 3K SC gold medalist Marta Dominguez that was mentioned in connection with Operation Galgo and Dr. Fuentes.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/athletics/34873287

What makes 80 mL/kg/min VO2max the magic number where blood doping becomes ineffective? That seems arbitrary. Why not 60 or 70 or 77 or 78.5 mL/kg/min?

What happens at your magic number to make blood doping ineffective?

Do you have any studies to back up your claim that blood doping becomes ineffective and does not work at your magic number?

Where is your defense of the Italian doper Francesco Conconi?

Renato told us that Alex Schwazer was going to show the world that he could win clean. Alex had emails with Michele Ferrari about EPO IV microdosing and also met with Dr. Ferrari in 2010. Alex was banned in 2012 for EPO. He came back this year after his 4 year ban…and tested positive for testosterone. He is now banned for another 8 years.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/kostner-skips-doping-hearing-schwazer-091024867--spt.html

;_ylt=AwrBT8pOX1tYjoAA1xVXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEyMHIzYm5vBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMyBHZ0aWQDVUkyQzRfMQRzZWMDc3I-

http://www.athleticsweekly.com/featured/doping-walkealex-schwazer-eight-year-ban-48366

Alex Schwazer can return in the year 2024 to show the world that he can WIN CLEAN.

http://gentevip.it/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/kostner-caso-schwazer.jpg

Are you excited about the return of Alex Schwazer in 2024?

I am very excited about the return of the Italian-Doper-Cheater-Racewalkerâ„¢.

Ha ha ha