When we speak about the effects of EPO, always we look at one fact very well acclarated : with EPO we can raise the levels of Hg and Hct.
Nobody can confute this point, but it seems a way very superficial for arriving to the conclusion that it can have strong effect on the performance.
We need to think that may parameters are playing a role for running faster, under physiological point o view :
1) The ability to transport Oxygen. This can be identified in the quantity of Hg we have in the blood.
But, if we want to increase the ability to transport something, we can have different solutions :
a) To increase the number of lorries
b) To maintain the same number of lorries, using biggest lorries, able to transport more material per unit
c) To maintain the same size of lorries and the same number, increasing the speed of their circulation in order to go more times to the same "stations", where they can release their material.
2) We need to have the material to transport : also a great float of lorries is useless, if we don't have material enough to transport.
Under this point of view, it's clear that the increase in Hg doesn't have influence on the individual ability to "buy" more Oxygen, extracting it from the air. So, may be that you have great ability to transport Oxygen, but don't have Oxygen enough. This fact can justify the big individual differences there are between athletes able to produce the same performances at sea level, comparing their ability to perform in high altitude (this happens among the same Kenyans or Ethiopians, too).
3) We need to have the "porters" for loading up the Oxygen on the lorries.
We can have many lorries, a lot of Oxygen, but nobody loading up it on the lorries, so every other thing is useless.
4) We need to have the "porters" for unloading the Oxygen from the lorries, giving it to the muscle fibers. Many lorries, very much Oxygen at disposal, good porters able to load up the Oxygen, but nobody able to unload the lorries, everything is useless.
So, you can see how to reduce everything at the level of Hg and Hct is something absolutely superficial, and not scientific.
Not only, but also inside the same value we need to have further investigation, in order to understand what happens.
For example, Hct is the product of the number of Red Cells (RBC) per their volume (MCV). This means we cam have the same number (Hct is a number), for example, with 5 millions of RBC with a MCV of 80 (in this case, Hct can be 40), or with 4 millions of RBC with a MCV of 100.
Are we sure this same number can have the same influence on the performance ?
I think too many people think that the final goal is to enhance Hct and Hg.
Completely wrong : the final goal is to run faster, and it's not Always true that, with higher Hct and higher Hg, an athlete (or a cyclist) can achieve this goal.
In a wide and complicated situation, where a lot of factors are combined together in order to increase the physiological efficiency of the athletes, which is the correlation between one factor and another ?
Which is the role, for example, of TRANSFERRIN, FERRITIN, ALDOLASI in the fluctuation of the shape of an athlete ?
I don't have answers to these questions. The problem is that also physiologists don't have any answer, and, not able to investigate the WHOLE SYSTEM, because is too complicated, give importance only to what is simple to detect : Hg, Hct, number of RBC.
However, they are not able to put in connection these values with the level of performances, but create a false idea in the most part of people, limiting the number of factors intervening in any athletic performance.
What I know, is that the most part of top athletes and WR holders are clean, and I'm not sure they could run faster taking some EPO.
Different is the response of athletes to PEDs with other type of goals, for example to increase the muscle power, or the nervous reactivity.
In this case, I think athletes are not able to reach the same level with their training only, how the list of WR clearly can show : no WR in throwing in the last 25 years (after a more serious antidoping against anabolic steroids), very few in jumping, no WR for women who can have more advantage with steroids. But, in the same period, the WR of long distances continued to be bettered, moving on the events able to produce more economic income.
For this reason it seems the most important doping of today is EPO or blood doping : because the endurance events are, at the moment, the only able to have some improvements.
Many questions are useless : for example, "if EPO doesn't work, why so many doctors continue to give it for doping athletes, and why so many athletes continue to look at it for enhancing their performances".
The answer is very simple : it's not important, for doctors doping athletes, if EPO works or doesn't work for the performance. For them, it's important that EPO works very well for enhancing the level of their money in their pocket, and, if they explain some athlete that EPO doesn't work, nobody goes to pay them several thousands dollars for some training advice only.
And, another thing, is the common mentality. In another thread, the title is
"Testoboost and Androgel - common among American Elite Runners".
Of course, if this is the reality, all people involved think not possible running fast without doping.
Under this point of view, I think to have opposite mentality of Alberto : I strongly think nothing can be effective as the self-confidence of the athlete himself, and for that reason I'm against the assumption of every substance (I don't care if legal or not) coming from external sources.
But, I repeat, I'd like to see some physiologist trying to answers the several questions I put on the table above.