Radcliffe blood values released

Altitude is where dopers go to dope. The change in altitude throws scores out of normal, then you dope.

If the IAAF ever tests you after an altitude doping cycle and someone somewhere decides to notify you that your parameters are abnormal, the answer is always the same and 100% iron clad, " I was at altitude."

Part of doping well is staying on the dope with maintenance dosages so as not to have too many variances in your parameters.

We have some reason to believe at this point there is very detailed blood parameters in Seppelt's data if Paula's biography is true.

If Paula were clean, it would be a matter of permitting public discussion of her scores and that could have happened months ago.

If you're keeping score at home, around that race in Portugal:

- Paula was on antibiotics.

- Paula was at altitude before.

- Paula was extremely dehydrated.

- Paula was tested right after the race.

- Paula won the race by over 90 seconds, and much of that lead she built in the first 10k.

Given all the evidence... yeah, she's probably clean...

EPO cheats out, Paula.

Coach Cookie wrote:

If you're keeping score at home, around that race in Portugal:

- Paula was on antibiotics.

- Paula was at altitude before.

- Paula was extremely dehydrated.

- Paula was tested right after the race.

- Paula won the race by over 90 seconds, and much of that lead she built in the first 10k.

Given all the evidence... yeah, she's probably clean...

EPO cheats out, Paula.

Bitter much? You still don't have even a scintilla of evidence she was on EPO.

Four Minutes wrote:

Isn’t it entirely possible that Paula Radcliffe had micro-dosed and pre-tested to see how much would keep her below the legal limit? I say pre-testing as in conducting her own testing with a doctor of choice before being officially tested. Remember Alberto Salazar and the testosterone with his son. He tested how much could be applied to trigger a positive test. I’ve heard of this constantly with cycling as well, but with testing testosterone to stay in the legal T/E ratio. What if Paula did the same thing, but while micro-dosing EPO, and pre-tested to ensure her values stayed just below the legal limit? She does seem suspiciously close to the top of the legal allowance on all of the suspicious tests… almost conveniently close to the top.

It's worth pointing out that none of these values we're talking about constitute "legal limits". Not at the time she was tested...not today.

Paula also says that her hemoglobin level was 12.0 when she was tested before the race, with her normal level usually 14.0-14.5. So she dominated the best women in the world while low on B vitamins, severely dehydrated, and with a hemoglobin level of 12.0! I find that hard to believe, as she would be at a huge disadvantage to her competition.

If Paula was only tested once, then she may no be telling the truth about when the test took place.

However, I think she was tested before the race, with a hemoglobin level of 12.0, and again after the race, with a hemoglobin level of 14.8(which she doesn't mention in the autobiography), with dehydration, and subsequent hemoconcentration, as the explanation of the large increase of hemoglobin of 2.8 in just a few days. This is a very large increase in a short period of time(epo does not work this fast) to be explained by just dehydration. Of course, another explanation for such a large increase would be an autologous blood transfusion.

So Paula either dominated the best women in the world while severely dehydrated with a hemoglobin level of 12.0, or she dominated the best women in the world after increasing her hemoglobin level with an autologous blood transfusion...Pick which explanation you think is more likely or the one you like best....

Four Minutes wrote:

Isn’t it entirely possible that Paula Radcliffe had micro-dosed and pre-tested to see how much would keep her below the legal limit? I say pre-testing as in conducting her own testing with a doctor of choice before being officially tested. Remember Alberto Salazar and the testosterone with his son. He tested how much could be applied to trigger a positive test. I’ve heard of this constantly with cycling as well, but with testing testosterone to stay in the legal T/E ratio. What if Paula did the same thing, but while micro-dosing EPO, and pre-tested to ensure her values stayed just below the legal limit? She does seem suspiciously close to the top of the legal allowance on all of the suspicious tests… almost conveniently close to the top.

If doping you would never administer testosterone via a cream. Same with steroid creams, they are designed to work topically for skin problems and not designed to penetrate further.

Similarly anti inflammatory creams are a waste of time as they don't penetrate far enough into the muscle which is why athletes take them in tablet form

JAXDUKE wrote:

It would help some of us who have followed doping with EPO over the last few decades if Radcliffe's Hematocrit levels were released. In the books I have read about Armstrong he seemed obsessed with raising his Hematocrit levels. I believe lab work for for Hem. levels was the first method used for identifying dopers. If anybody could explain what exactly Reticulocytes

are and provide some historical perspective of the evolution of this type of lab

work/testing it would be appreciated. The magic number for Hematocrit

seemed to be 50. I recall some XC skiers not being allowed to compete

because their Hem. was over 50.

Also would be curious to know what Shobukhova's hematocrit levels were?

The 50 hematocrit (HCT) limit was in cycling,

There has also been limits in cross-country skiing, biathlon and speed skating, but there for hemoglobin (HGB), and numbers like for instance 17.5 g/dl for males or 16 g/dl for females (biathlon)

Here is an article that might be of help:

I don't think Shobukhova's hematocrit values has been released, only the OFF-score. The OFF-score data Shobukhova, Farah, Pavey, Goumri etc. was published here:

Not at all what do you think the "cream" was in the BALCO scandal

Not like Lance wrote:

I would say to everyone comparing Paula to Lance, that you really don't know the Lance saga.

We are all boiling wrote:

Her protests are cut-and-past straight from the Lance saga.

Some things are like Lance:

"Great liar Lance Armstrong, I never doped, I passed every test and any one who challenges me I'm currently suing and am proving they're lying."

Jeffery M. Tillotson

Attorney - Dallas Texas

SCA Promotions Lawyer in Lawsuit Against Lance Armstrong

Radcliffe to ST: "You print it and I sue you (and) you won't be getting any money back in future like Lance Armstrong - I promise you that."

Paul Kimmage ‏@PaulKimmage · Sep 8

Ross Tucker ‏@Scienceofsport · Sep 10

So to sum up #Radcliffe's position: "I want this to stop, it's unfair. My blood data would clear me. No, I won't release it. Your problem"

https://twitter.com/Scienceofsport

Wada has analyzed her blood, so we aren't talking about the IAAF anymore. There is a very clear cut off point and she didn't even come close to it, meaning if she were running today, they would classify her blood samples in question as needing no further follow up.

Steps:

Normal results

abnormal results- meaning nothing really, but further testing is the protocol or

Not possible results- meaning banned without further testing

pop_pop!_v2.0 wrote:

Again, this is false. She's not released anything to anyone.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/athletics/34204775

Radcliffe said she would not release her data because she wanted to "protect a lot of other innocent athletes"

She wants the IAAF to declare her non-positive. Because, you know, Seppelt just got done with a story where 1/3 of all podiums had dopers.

EPO cheats out Paula.

Well they already have, because you couldn't even convict someone today with that load of garbage. Every single professional runner has an off score of 109 at some point in the year, its part of periodization, cycling and tapering program. In the scientific studys leading up to the biopassport, the test subject had off scores of 111 at altitude and 103 just training.

pop_pop!_v2.0 wrote:

dwightarm wrote:

IF these alleged Paula values are true then this would make me believe her, especially comparing those values to Shobukhova.

Except there's a reason she doesn't want Ashenden or Parisotto discussing her values. She's fine with the IAAF declaring her non-positive like so many other dopers the IAAF did not sanction.

EPO cheats out.

Her blood has been analyzed by WADA and they would classify it as needed no further testing. WADA and the IAAF are not the same thing. Ashenden? The scientist who performed the studies and developed the criteria for the biopassport would classify her as normal.

>? wrote:

the biopassport would classify her as normal.

Fair enough, I always thought that a female born and raised at sea level in the north east of England who was over three minutes faster than a doped up Kenyan born and raised at altitude (1999mt/6555ft) and over three minutes faster than a doped to the gills Russian was normal.

What's normal? wrote:

a female born and raised at sea level in the north east of England

North west actually. Just down the road from where I live.

pop_pop!_v3.0 wrote:

pop_pop!_v2.0 wrote:

I'm actually having a change of mind on this after weighing up the accumulated evidence

It does appear that she may actually be clean

Yeah, that's not me. Good times.

Register your name already dummy!

Then you will be one of us.

WADA wrote:

Wada has analyzed her blood, so we aren't talking about the IAAF anymore. There is a very clear cut off point and she didn't even come close to it, meaning if she were running today, they would classify her blood samples in question as needing no further follow up.

Steps:

Normal results

abnormal results- meaning nothing really, but further testing is the protocol or

Not possible results- meaning banned without further testing

that's not true. They had no bio passport back then. Ashenden is using modern techniques to analyse old samples. his point is the IAAF is not referring to them, now al sorts of legal terminology like statute of limitations come into play, however the levels are the levels.

You think Ashenden is just making stuff up. Weird how folk come in and try and whitewash with incorrect information. See the "cream" just a bit further up.

rjm33 wrote:

However, I think she was tested before the race, with a hemoglobin level of 12.0, and again after the race, with a hemoglobin level of 14.8(which she doesn't mention in the autobiography), with dehydration, and subsequent hemoconcentration, as the explanation of the large increase of hemoglobin of 2.8 in just a few days. This is a very large increase in a short period of time(epo does not work this fast) to be explained by just dehydration. Of course, another explanation for such a large increase would be an autologous blood transfusion.

So Paula either dominated the best women in the world while severely dehydrated with a hemoglobin level of 12.0, or she dominated the best women in the world after increasing her hemoglobin level with an autologous blood transfusion...Pick which explanation you think is more likely or the one you like best....

Good summary. Add to this the studies shown by Ross Tucker yesterday... namely that running for 80 minutes at 24 C does not increase heme.

Oh, and I'd add the 14.8 into the conclusion as follows:

So Paula either dominated the best women in the world while severely dehydrated with a hemoglobin level of 12.0 that she increased during the race to 14.8 with her great willpower, or she dominated the best women in the world after increasing her hemoglobin level with an autologous blood transfusion...

Re Coe not wanting to authorise releases etc.

Given that he is said to have suffered from a blood disorder, could Coe have been a doper himself ?? In which case it could be a case of a black kettle calling another black kettle white.

Also, in a BBC documentary earlier this year when the Salazar accusations surfaced, a journalist micro dosed on EPO for a number of weeks, sent his values off to get tested, and came back as being clean. So are elite endurance athletes STILL doping on EPO, probably, absolutely 100% if microdosing REALLY does let you get away with it.

As for "cheating" etc. Training at altitude IS cheating ffs, it's STILL using an artificial method to try and boost your body's performance, particularly, trying to change how much blood and oxygen you can pump around your body at lower altitudes.

If PR is saying she's not a cheater, but openly admits to TAA, she is by simple definition therefore lying about not being a "cheater".

Her adamance about not releasing a full set of data that she and/or her team have, data that would clear the whole matter up and restore her precious name, immediately makes the scene from the 1st (Chris Reeve) Superman film spring to mind, you know the one, the scene a few minutes in where a number of faces are on the screen and in turn just utter "guilty", "guilty", "guilty", "guilty".