Sunday Mail Has More Details on Paula's Blood Values and Off Scores + News She'll Put up £1m for an MRI lie detector

Leaving aside Martial Saugy and the fact that there is more holes than swiss cheese in her statement

The whole vilamora episode is extremely fishy.I mean what athlete gets to be told "there is no point testing a sample for EPO" when competing at a race,along with all the other discrepancies in the story

Rojo, Wejo and Coe will always cover-up Paula's doping. No matter if they witnessed the injections firsthand, they will always cover for Paula.

There has never been anyone as obviously guilty as Radcliffe. Look at the outrageous times and the cheating blood values. For some reason the Johnsons have been thorougly duped by this con artist. Granted, they aren't brightest bulbs, you might even call them the dimmest. Coe is obviously corrupt and on the Nike take, thus his stance is understandable.

I didn't bring EPO effectiveness into this thread.I don't doubt EPO increases HGB. But HGB is not performance.Anecdotes are interesting, but not enough.BTW, there are way more cycling anecdotes than running anecdotes.I would love it if someone could show my claims are wrong with something more than a shallow contradictory declaration.No one has actually contributed new knowledge to this discussion.I think I have often explained why I say what I say. Please feel free to ask me to clarify anything.I am interested in changing my viewpoints, especially with rational discussion. My opinions can change, but just not with simple declarations of beliefs or tabloid gossip.I don't ignore "accepted conclusions", so much as express my doubts about what conclusions the data actually supports, and for whom.

Clerk wrote:

I suggest that everyone stops feeding the troll.

If rekrunner wants to be oblivious and be unable to support his claims in the face of opposing evidence (well known literature of EPO increasing HGB in elite athletes, anecdotal evidence of elite athletes claiming a performance effect, inability to show that elite athletes "max out" parameters in a way which cannot be overcome by drugs) then let him wallow in his own ignorance.

He is contributing nothing to the conversation in the form of new knowledge, but only shouts that the accepted evidence isn't applicable (but cannot explain why). He is not interested in changing viewpoints with rational discussion, but only ignoring accepted conclusions and rattling off his ideas and responses anyway.

wejo wrote:

As Paula told me, "You only know about yourself".

Of course it's perfectly normal to have a page in your autobiography describing the circumstances around drug testing and your blood scores for a specific event. I trust she documented all her performances in a similar fashion and it's purely a coincidence that a detailed version of events is described around a specific race that has subsequently been shown to have fallen under suspicion.

janshr khan wrote:

Of course it's perfectly normal to have a page in your autobiography describing the circumstances around drug testing and your blood scores for a specific event. I trust she documented all her performances in a similar fashion and it's purely a coincidence that a detailed version of events is described around a specific race that has subsequently been shown to have fallen under suspicion.

You're right my friend!

Autologus transfusions is the name of the game!

Is Radcliffe's silence deafening?

Paula also says in an interview that the 2003 Half Marathon World Championships was an important race for her. Her explanation for her huge increases of hemoglobin( from 12 to 14.8 in 2days!) and OFF scores( from 82 to 114.9 in 2days!) have changed from "I was sick" to.... "I won the race while anemic with a hemoglobin level of 12g/dl while simultaneously developing a level of dehydration that has possibly never been seen ever before in humans tested in running labs, with results published in medical journals(and her "expert" Dr. Martial Saugy says her results are "obviously hemoconcentration due to dehydration").....to "It must be a lab error".....

A typical female who is anemic with a hemoglobin level of 12.0g/dl would take at least 2 months taking iron supplements to increase her hemoglobin level up to 14.8, and she might never get that high. Paula went from anemic to the upper range of normal of 14.8g(normal range for females is 12-15g/dl) in 2 days, which is basically impossible in a normal person....unless they had a blood transfusion.

It is either an autologous blood transfusion or "it must be a lab error". Maybe Paula justified it because it wasn't EPO cheating, it was just her own blood being put back into her after all, a bit of a top off, and her top OFF scores weren't outrageous 160 or 180 numbers like some of the people she competed against, and most of all, because she knew she could never be caught, then or now. The blood tests with reticulocyte scores and hematocrit scores as well, could answer these questions, but Paula doesn't release these scores. Reticulocytes, which are new RBCs, will go down fairly soon after a blood transfusion, but this is just suggestive evidence. There was no specific test for blood transfusions back then, and no ABP, so blood transfusions could be done with 0% chance of getting caught. GO PAULA!

Today we can test for serum plastic levels from the plastics in the IV bag, but that only tells you that an IV was done, not what was in it, such as blood or saline. However, today with a suspicious OFF score, the blood could then be tested with a more sophisticated specific test(if the IAAF was actually interested in really catching people cheating) that can measure the relative ages of the RBCs in the blood sample. In a normal sample the RBCs will show a stable range of RBC age, while a recent blood transfusion of a blood bag that has been stored for months will then show an abnormal increase of "old" RBCs, and then you are busted for cheating by autologous blood transfusion. I believe several pro cyclists may have been busted this way, but I am not sure.

Paula can clear all this up, and remove a lot of doubts, by releasing all of her pre and post race blood scores from before and after her 2:15 and 2:17 marathons. If those are non-suspicious, it really helps her case. If they are suspicious....then it is over....She must know this....

If Paula has nothing to hide, and knows she is clean....why does she refuse to release the results people are most curious about, the blood results before and after her best races.....Paula?

Where are the frozen samples, Paula?

EPO cheats out.

janshr khan wrote:

Of course it's perfectly normal to have a page in your autobiography describing the circumstances around drug testing and your blood scores for a specific event. I trust she documented all her performances in a similar fashion and it's purely a coincidence that a detailed version of events is described around a specific race that has subsequently been shown to have fallen under suspicion.

Whomever prepared her statement could not be bothered to check her biography.

And then they double down with $1 million pounds AND a lie detector test. Anyone recall the last IAAF athlete to do a lie detector test? Anyone at all?

Paula is in a terrible spot now as there is a broader realization of how her statements just don't fit with other facts.

I'm sure Coe is telling her to stay the course. The tension must be unbearable for Ms. Radcliffe unless she is as crazy as Armstrong.

The Radcliffe fantasy performances are slowly being crushed by too many facts.

EPO cheats out Paula.

Transfusion cheats out Paula.

Ashenden and Prisotto know what they're talking about!

Don't releasing all the data set simply means she's filty!

autologus madness wrote:

Ashenden and Prisotto know what they're talking about!

Don't releasing all the data set simply means she's filty!

Ashenden is a former WADA blood doping expert hired by federations to analyze samples as was Parisotto.

Hillariously, the IAAF then claims they are know-nothing hacks.

Yeah. That happened.

The Brojos are delusional!

The Brojos and Lord Coe worship the drug cheat Paula.

Actually Ashenden is THE expert that devised the blood passport. Might as well call Lydiard a "so-called coach".

pop_pop!_v2.1.1 wrote:

autologus madness wrote:

Ashenden and Prisotto know what they're talking about!

Don't releasing all the data set simply means she's filty!

Ashenden is a former WADA blood doping expert hired by federations to analyze samples as was Parisotto.

Hillariously, the IAAF then claims they are know-nothing hacks.

Yeah. That happened.

Lord Coe referred to Ashenden as a "so called expert-give me a break". I would trust Ashenden a lot more than Dr. Martial Saugy!

Paula has told us this is much too complex for us little people, to understand, but actually it isn't hard at all. The sportssciencetists.com website has a whole article on OFF scores, and what happens to blood tests with blood transfusions. Check it out. Here is the formula to calculate an OFF score...

OFF score= Hemoglobin score x 10 - 60(square root of reticulocyte%)

So, for example, Paula's score before her World half win was hemoglobin score of 12.0 x 10=120-60(square root of 0.4% reticulocytes) =120-60(0.6324555)=120-37.947332= 82.052669 =an OFF score of 82. See how easy it is to calculate, an easy math problem for Wejo and Paula to ponder.

Applying the same formula for Paula's results after the World half win, we can solve for the reticulocyte scores which she refuses to give out. By having the OFF score and the Hemoglobin, we can solve the math problem for reticulocyte score. OFF score post race =114.9 =Hemoglobin score of 14.8 x 10 =148-60(square root of x% of reticulocytes), so 148-114.9=33.1

33.1=60(square root of x% of reticulocytes)

33.1/60=square root of x% of reticulocytes

0.5516666=square root of x% of reticulocytes

(0.5516666)squared=0.3043361=0.3043361% of reticulocytes after the World Half win 2 days later.

As a physician, I can tell you that the normal range for reticulocytes is 0.5%-1.5% of RBCs. Paula's reticulocyte score of 0.3% after the race is outside of normal range and is highly suggestive of an autologous blood transfusion, which makes reticulocyte scores decrease. The fact that her OFF scores went from 82 to 114.9 in two days is highly suggestive of an autologous blood transfusion.

Too much data has been released now Paula, as people like Ashenden and me can figure out some of the unreleased reticulocyte scores by forensic lab mathematics, as all we need is the OFF score and Hemoglobin values to solve for reticulocytes,... a simple algebra problem....and your "doping expert" Dr. Martial Saugy is NOT HELPING your case at all. I think his involvement just brings more suspicion to your already suspicious blood test results.

We are still waiting for all of the blood tests around your 2:15 and 2:17 marathons....They will show everyone your true innocence, right??? You have nothing to hide....right??? GO PAULA!

Here we go!

The autologous blood transfusion angle is interesting because it sits right in the grey zone of "how to do something dodgy but be able to convince yourself that it's not cheating".

It's not drugs, it's nothing "foreign" entering her system, it's different to rivals who cheated in a different way and so on.

Interesting

rjm33 wrote:

Paula also says in an interview that the 2003 Half Marathon World Championships was an important race for her. Her explanation for her huge increases of hemoglobin( from 12 to 14.8 in 2days!) and OFF scores( from 82 to 114.9 in 2days!) have changed from "I was sick" to.... "I won the race while anemic with a hemoglobin level of 12g/dl while simultaneously developing a level of dehydration that has possibly never been seen ever before in humans tested in running labs, with results published in medical journals(and her "expert" Dr. Martial Saugy says her results are "obviously hemoconcentration due to dehydration").....to "It must be a lab error".....

Amazing. Great summary. Thanks.