We need a test now, not in 6 years, this most defnitely means people are using it to cheat now because if there is no deterent then you can guarantee with the money that is on offer people are doping.
We need a test now, not in 6 years, this most defnitely means people are using it to cheat now because if there is no deterent then you can guarantee with the money that is on offer people are doping.
I am a bit confused. I thought there were test or was to detect blood doping? If not how do they test the tour de france riders and other athletes?
that is a hemocrit level test I think
You sound pretty urgent for a problem that's almost certainly been around since the late 1960s...
maybe that is because the IAAF made us believe it was no longer a problwm, no doubt many of the top performances today are aided by this practice
bloody hell wrote:
maybe that is because the IAAF made us believe it was no longer a problwm, no doubt many of the top performances today are aided by this practice
...and, perhaps, HAVE BEEN for nearly 40 years...
So, is there a solution? If so, what is it?
Don't confuse blood doping with taking drugs. Blood doping (also called blood packing) involves drawing some blood during training to be reinjected during a competition phase. Tyler Hamilton was busted for this practice because he used someone else's blood. This way his training wasn't compromised and his blood donor might have been taking EPO (the effects linger after you can no longer test positive, and a non-athlete blood donor doesn't have to worry about random testing). If you use your own blood for blood doping/packing it is undetectable.
I'm not confusing this with ANYTHING else. As you know, Viren was not-so-secretely accused of blood doping in 1972, and it's pretty clear there was experimentation prior to that. This is an old issue.
So the kind of athlete who is most likely associated with blood doping would dissapear for long periods of time between competitions? In order to have the blood withdrawn, recuperate and then take advantage of the practice... there are not many of them on the world scene although i can think of a few... but there are just as amny who are virtually always racing...
bloody hell wrote:
that is a hemocrit level test I think
That's correct. Unless it's changed w/ the recent test for EPO, the test for blood doping is based on achievement of a crit below 50. Therefore, an athlete could reinfuse to the point where he/she gets to 49.99999 and would be ok.
so the likelyhood is that everybody at the top could be 'cheating' but within parameters.
bloody hell wrote:
so the likelyhood is that everybody at the top could be 'cheating' but within parameters.
Autologous transfusion was the practice of many world class distant runners til the mid-80s when it was legal. It has been documented that almost all eastern block runners practice some kind of transfusion. However, some had argued (on this board) that while it helped cross-country skiers and cyclist, it does little to elite distance runners, just like it did little to help the best swimmers in the world. Steriods is still the most potent and effective avenue of cheating for runners and swimmers.
I think a more accurate statement should be "the likelihood is that everybody at the top in the 70-80s could be 'cheating' but were ignored by IAAF/national association".
I wasn't replying to you old tymer. My apologies.