Most Telling Aspect of the Lance Armstrong Case and Distance Runners

Gasp! You mean like Albuquerque too?

hmm, this post must beblasphemy

How would this work? Taking any synthetic hormone reduces the natural production of the hormone. No matter how high you are up in the mountains or how much time you spend in an altitude chamber, if you are taking EPO then natural production of EPO will go down.

Apparently, Dr Ferrari found a way to make it work. Considering the resources of these shoe companies, im sure they have top scientists on their payroll who know how to easily defeat the latest drug tests.

Aghast wrote:

How would this work? Taking any synthetic hormone reduces the natural production of the hormone. No matter how high you are up in the mountains or how much time you spend in an altitude chamber, if you are taking EPO then natural production of EPO will go down.

And altitude training doesn't increase red blood cell counts long term anyway. Any benefit is most likely from improved economy, which really is the key to further endurance improvement in well trained athletes.

not if you time it with your ascent to altitude. this way you trick the body into ALSO stimulating natural red cell production, at the same time that the artificial red cells are being stimulated. actually not very complicated at all, sadly~

Aghast wrote:

How would this work? Taking any synthetic hormone reduces the natural production of the hormone. No matter how high you are up in the mountains or how much time you spend in an altitude chamber, if you are taking EPO then natural production of EPO will go down.

I don't think you are reading the original post correctly. It has nothing to do with red cell production. The test looks at EPO is determine the ratio between "synthetic" EPO and natural EPO. Not RBC. So I still stand by my statement:-Synthetic EPO decreases natural EPO production through feed-back inhibition. No amount of altitude training will alter this.

AnonymouseCowherd wrote:

not if you time it with your ascent to altitude. this way you trick the body into ALSO stimulating natural red cell production, at the same time that the artificial red cells are being stimulated. actually not very complicated at all, sadly~

Aghast wrote:

How would this work? Taking any synthetic hormone reduces the natural production of the hormone. No matter how high you are up in the mountains or how much time you spend in an altitude chamber, if you are taking EPO then natural production of EPO will go down.

This may sound incredibly stupid and uninformed, but shouldnt the presence of any synthetic EPO raise a red flag with testing?

As I am reading it, they can't be 100 certain that the "sythetic" isoform is actually synthetic just that it is highly unlikely to appear under normal conditions. They use a ratio cut off to determine the likelihood of cheating.

GEEEET wrote:

This may sound incredibly stupid and uninformed, but shouldnt the presence of any synthetic EPO raise a red flag with testing?

Alberto Salazar has Dr Stray Gunderson, one of the world's foremost EPO experts, on his payroll. Doesn't take much to figure out why.

BGuyJMilleniumXII wrote:

Which begs the question:

Son of a bitch!

Galen Rupps doping passport wrote:

Alberto Salazar has Dr Stray Gunderson, one of the world's foremost EPO experts, on his payroll. Doesn't take much to figure out why.

Here's some of the research that Stray-Gunderson has done on altitude training:

[Author]&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=9216951

Do you have something against altitude training?

OK, consider the following three scenarios:

1) You are at 10000 feet elevation and take a little synthetic EPO.

2) You are at 2500 feet elevation and take a lot of synthetic EPO.

3) You are at sea level and you are clean.

Are you sure that in scenario 1 you produce less natural EPO than in scenario 3?

makes you suspicious of the altitude tent

AnonymouseCowherd wrote:

not if you time it with your ascent to altitude. this way you trick the body into ALSO stimulating natural red cell production, at the same time that the artificial red cells are being stimulated. actually not very complicated at all, sadly~

Aghast wrote:

How would this work? Taking any synthetic hormone reduces the natural production of the hormone. No matter how high you are up in the mountains or how much time you spend in an altitude chamber, if you are taking EPO then natural production of EPO will go down.

How does all this fit in with the workings of the biological passport system? I'm assuming that your baseline results will reflect whatever manipulations you have already achieved, but any future variations will be suspicious. It would be interesting if they were able to access any previous bloodwork you had had done when healthy, before the first passport test. Is training alone sufficient to alter your blood parameters?

Stray-Gunderson is also on record calling for "intensive,unannounced, out-of-competition testing with strict legalfollow up—including, in the case of anabolic agents, aminimum two year suspension for a first major offence andsuspension for life for a second offence" and for a third sample to be taken in tests, to be used in the future to check for currently unknown PEDs.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2644056/pdf/v033p00075.pdfYou can't do scientific training without a scientist on your staff. Stray-Gunderson's published work shows the study of natural (endogenous) EPO production at altitude and sea level. There is no record that he's done any work with injected (recombient) EPO. Basically, his record of research is very different from that of Drs. Conconi, Cecchini, or Ferrari.If you are looking at someone who knows, better than anyone else on earth, how the bodies of elite endurance athletes perform at altitude and sea level, he's on the short list of scientists to call.

asdgfh wrote:

Galen Rupps doping passport wrote:

Alberto Salazar has Dr Stray Gunderson, one of the world's foremost EPO experts, on his payroll. Doesn't take much to figure out why.

Here's some of the research that Stray-Gunderson has done on altitude training:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Stray-Gundersen%20J

[Author]&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=9216951

Do you have something against altitude training?

BGuyJMilleniumXII wrote:

Which begs the question:

per wikipedia: is a type of logical fallacy in which a proposition relies on an implicit premise within itself to establish the truth of that same proposition. In other words, it is a statement that refers to its own assertion to prove the assertion. Such arguments are essentially of the form "a is true because a is true" though rarely is such an argument stated as such. Often the premise 'a' is only one of many premises that go into proving that 'a' is true as a conclusion.

In other words, you meant "which invites the question." As to the question you've invited, I have no idea.

BGuyJMilleniumXII wrote:

Which begs the question: How many runners are using altitude training/altitude tents and EPO in conjunction knowing that it can thwart the EPO readings?

Stop using the phrase "begs the question" incorrectly.

EPO wasn't the key for Lance.

It was a method superior to what his team mates were using.

He had to beat the WHOLE peloton.

His method is untraceable, and it is not what his team mates were led to believe.