Systematic Doping in Track and Field

I'm sorry, but I believe in what Renato is saying. What I can't believe is that if he IS doping his athletes, he would discuss the issue openly on a public forum, (unless he is mad). And please don't say his detailed contributions to this site are some kind of 'bluff'. I don't buy it.

Keep up the good work Renato!

To explicitly answer your question.

Assuming Shaheen and Kemboi ran their times with hematocrit below 45. I believe if they asked for my help before the race and i infused two units of red cells. Shaheen could run 7.45 and Kemboi could have the WR.

Concerning other kinds of doping, like steroids, HGH(and its metabolite that is IGF), hormones of thyroidea and insulin it is true that if used correctly can give good long term benefits, enhancing recovery.

But from my experience, for endurance athletes, it is also very easy to destroy yourself with the wrong doses. However the big and immediate gains are from blood doping.

As endurance athlete you dont want much higher than normal values of either HGH or test. And due to negative feedback inhibition there is not so much to gain, and alot to loose from these substances. Of course the situation is completely different in cycling, with 5-6 hour rides each day, depressing your hormone levels terribly. And of course in power and sprint events there is large benefit of high levels.

Blue is pre-EPO, Red is EPO years, 1998-2000 had a number of scandals that probably had people more cautious, or maybe it was courses, temperature...who knows. Blue and red difference is striking.

Alberto, simply I can't believe these can be the REAL results (and may be in theory 25'20" in 10000m).

And, if it is true, the current WR are the practical demonstration that all those performances are clean, and the record holders don't use any doping (I repeat, I have 5 athletes under 26'53" in 10000m).

I have one certainty only : my athletes are clean.

If what you say is true, I could have a lot of athletes under the WR. But many of them are not the most talented in the World in their event. So, what about other more talented ? Or everybody is clean, or blood doping doesn't work like you think (of course, always speaking about this type of athletes).

trollism wrote:

You bust a high profile Ethiopian or a Kenyan, and distance running takes a huge hit.

They realised their mistake with the Lagat situation and by some miracle his B Sample was negative. Nowadays you're not even going to see an A Sample negative, their agent/doctor/manager probably just gets a little note that they ought to be more careful next time. (it's a lot like the Daniel Bailey situation after Berlin).

I think the negligible number of Africans that have been caught is actually more telling to be honest, especially given the ease that EPO can be picked up in Kenya (our friend Raymond can testify to that).

Pure paranoia.

If what you say is true, then you would have to consider that extra oxygen carrying capacity would also mean extra heat production, which would be less efficient.

With training the body will find the optimum carrying capacity.

The reason the distance records fell from the early 90's 2005 was because athletes were training harder.

trollism wrote:

Canova is the same as the rest of these Italians/Spanish that play in the athletics game now. It's all about the money. How they get that money doesn't matter.

It's not about EPO these days anyway is it Renato? You generally use blood transfusions these days. How do you feel about plasticisers? Is it a real threat to you?

Renato works harder than you, he has more success, he makes more money. This makes you desperately jealous, which is why you do the obsessive compulsive trolling against him. Grow up and get a life you loser.

What is worse, cheating or trolling?

Renato: I understand you feel the need to lie to protect yourself and your dirty athletes, but why do it so blatantly?

It will only make your eventual downfall all the more embarrassing and shameful for you AND for them.

Renato, this is YOU:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSDAXGXGiEw

Why not LEARN from him?

lol etc..., you have a great sense of humor.

But I can confirm that never I had sexual relation with Monica Lewinski.

Take care, my friend.

J.O. wrote:

Renato works harder than you, he has more success, he makes more money. This makes you desperately jealous, which is why you do the obsessive compulsive trolling against him. Grow up and get a life you loser.

As for you mate, you're just some mentally ill bloke from North Yorkshire.

I could obsessively troll against you if you want, I like arrogant oddball laughing stocks as much as I like cheats.

Renato after the Armstrong case,

have you changed your view on the effectiveness of blood

doping or do you still insist it has no efect on black east africans?

I still dont understand in what respect are they special, physiologically, in regards to blood doping not working?

The Armstrong case has nothing to do with Renato's theory - he's specifically talking about people who have historically lived at altitude. You can look this up, but people who live at altitude have various adaptations to increase oxygen transport. His theory seems to be that these people will not benefit as much or at all from blood doping, because they already have these advantages built in. I'm not sure if that's true, but it does make sense.

Armstrong was accused of much more than blood doping: EPO, blood transfusions, testosterone, cortisone, and HGH.

If you read Renato's lengthy explanations, he explains that the blood volume of the East Africans naturally increase, as a response to training, something he examined in a study with MRIs.

So by comparison, it would be like autologous re-infusing a bag of blood, but occurring naturally as a response to training.

This would serve to greatly marginize, or eliminate the advantage realized by blood doping.

If you think he's wrong, why don't you explain why?

I would like to see a blood test result for ANY top elite runner that is under 48 HCT or 16 Hemoglobin. A "normal" level would be much lower.

Now for an example:

Runner A trains at altitude and has the access to the best "clean" science available. and runs at 48 HCT and 16 hemoglobin.....he tests clean

Runner B is a poor hard working person that lives at sea level. He works a full time job and trains harder than anyone because he loves it. In his worn down condition he is at 40 HCT and 13.4 Hemoglobin. He knows he is at a disadvantage and takes EPO and runs the same meet with runner A and also runs at 48 HCT and 16 Hemoglobin. Because he does not have good medical guidance he tests positive for EPO.

Who has an "advantages"?

Who is the "cheater"?

....and only the bad dopers get caught....

Open your damn eyes... If it looks like a turd and smells like a turd, then mostly likely it's a stinky piece of $hit...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_athletics

To think that there's no way that there are groups in running like the US Postal Team, you're just an ostrich with your head buried in the sand!

No racism, sexism, or any ism.....

It's obvious - go where the money is - follow the trail, money is the route of all evil!

rekrunner wrote:

Armstrong was accused of much more than blood doping: EPO, blood transfusions, testosterone, cortisone, and HGH.

If you read Renato's lengthy explanations, he explains that the blood volume of the East Africans naturally increase, as a response to training, something he examined in a study with MRIs.

So by comparison, it would be like autologous re-infusing a bag of blood, but occurring naturally as a response to training.

This would serve to greatly marginize, or eliminate the advantage realized by blood doping.

What is so hard to understand?

One person has 5 liters of blood and hematocrit of 40% (40% of the blood volume is red blood cells).

Assume two paths to improvement:

1. The person increases his blood volume to 6liters, but is still at 40% hematocrit. (this will give a large improvement in oxygen carrying capacity)

2. The person keeps hes blood volume constant but goes from 40% to 50% hematocrit. (this will also give a large improvement in oxygen carrying capacity)

Renato claims that through training path 1. can be achieved, this is very reasonable.

What I claim (is normal for a great number of elite runners (also east africans)),

is that after path 1. is achieved you make another trick.

You by artificial means, either blood bag or by erythropoietic drug stimulate to increased number of blood cells. Going to 6liters of blood and 50% hematocrit.

This will give a great advantage, far greater than path 1. alone. Now, if greatly biomechanically talented and very well trained, you are ready for world records.

Renato claims that this path, which we might call path 3.

give no improvement in performance.

I claim this is bullshit, and I can not see Renatos motivation for this highly unscientific claim.

Ps. As a side note some are confused about the benefit of autologous transfusion.

Infusing a blood bag does not increase plasma volume, the extra plasma is quickly excreted through urine.

The net effect is only a increase in hematocrit.

In order to improve plasma volume artificially, you need a plasma expander. Usually some sorth of starch or dextran which increase the osmolarity of the blood. Normal sea salt is also a plasma expander.