Radcliffe blood values released

rjm33 wrote:

Oh, and I'd add the 14.8 into the conclusion as follows:

So Paula either dominated the best women in the world while severely dehydrated with a hemoglobin level of 12.0 that she increased during the race to 14.8 with her great willpower, or she dominated the best women in the world after increasing her hemoglobin level with an autologous blood transfusion...

Add in the IAAF report of the race and post-race quotes from Radcliffe about it: managed to run away from field in first 10k, then faded from WR pace but still maintained lead and according to her own statement 'picked it up in the last 5k'. Won by 87 seconds, greatest margin in history of the championships at that point. Also note that Radcliffe mentions heat in post-race interview, but no mention of illness, unlike in her autobiography later on which mentions the low hgb scores before the race, food poisoning and antibiotics and feeling weak in the last 4 miles of same race.

The questions may be answerable. But there is clearly a prima facie case for PR to answer if she wants to allay reasonsable suspicions.

idiotPolice wrote:

kal wrote:

If PR is saying she's not a cheater, but openly admits to TAA, she is by simple definition therefore lying about not being a "cheater".

Training at altitude is not cheating "by simple definition" in the same way that training at sea level is not cheating. But by simple definition you are an idiot and by simple deduction I believe your opinions to be worthless.

If an athlete DELIBERATELY goes to high altitude, because they KNOW it will alter their body, in particular their blood, to such an extent that it will then give them a significant performance advantage over someone who has NOT deliberately gone to high altitude, then yes, person A IS cheating because they've DELIBERATELY used a method to "temporarily" increase their level of performance BEYOND what it would normally be, for (insert event).

This severe dehydration Paula claims, does she offer any proof other than she says that's what happened? I've never read her book, and all I have heard are her claims. Did she collapse, need an IV, lose significant weight, receive medical attention? If her post race test results hadn't been sketchy, would she even be making this dehydration claim? Can she offer any proof of her dehydration other than, ironically, her post race blood test?

kal wrote:

If an athlete DELIBERATELY goes to high altitude, because they KNOW it will alter their body, in particular their blood, to such an extent that it will then give them a significant performance advantage over someone who has NOT deliberately gone to high altitude, then yes, person A IS cheating because they've DELIBERATELY used a method to "temporarily" increase their level of performance BEYOND what it would normally be, for (insert event).

This is actually a very good post and you are right. However, altitude training is not strictly cheating per se because it is allowed according to the rules of the sport's governing bodies. Things like altitude training and oxygen tents are definitely unethical but "legal" according to the sport's rules. They should not be allowed but having such a rule may be difficult to enforce and I don't think that the sports governing bodies care that much about the sport being ethical. In fact, as has become clear over the last 12 months they don't even care that much about enforcing their own rules against using PEDs.

So if a guy DELIBERATELY trains really hard because they KNOW it will alter their body to such an extent that it will give them a significant performance advantage over someone who has NOT deliberately trained really hard then are THEY really CHEATING?

Or ARE you an IDIOT?

I believe she's clean now having gone over the new information

I was skeptical but why else would she release the off-scores and the explanations if she was doped

So, for not being considered "cheaters", all the African athletes born, living and training in altitude must go to live at sea level in another Country ?

Why would she have been severely dehydrated before the race? That's B.S.

There is no one version of a story here.

pop_pop!_v2.0 wrote:

I believe she's clean now having gone over the new information

I was skeptical but why else would she release the off-scores and the explanations if she was doped

She finally came to a story that she thought would hold up under the current circumstances of testing.

fred wrote:

pop_pop!_v2.0 wrote:

I believe she's clean now having gone over the new information

I was skeptical but why else would she release the off-scores and the explanations if she was doped

She finally came to a story that she thought would hold up under the current circumstances of testing.

The low budget PR drones are getting creative, registering pop pops username and acting like he's changed his stance.

I take it we won't be seeing paula tooting the anti doping horn any time soon. Even Gatlin is poking fun.

From the south wrote:

I don't know if the how you can obtain blood values from an urine sample...

Then you've never really raced hard.

I dont get you here. When was she tested at 12.00 hgb?

David B wrote:

I dont get you here. When was she tested at 12.00 hgb?

She herself claims that she was at 12 right before the WC HM in which she annihilated the best women in the world. There are many things wrong with that, potentially. Check out Ross Tucker's twitter and his blog post at science of sport on this. I'm starting to learn a little about the science of blood testing - especially tests for EPO and blood doping. And what I've learned is this: Unless Paula has some REALLY unusual numbers that she's withholding from us, she was almost certainly doping in 2003. And, given that, why would she hide the rest of her test results now? I don't buy the whole 'it would help cheaters' argument. 1. Cheaters, like NOP, are already masters of coming in right under critical levels on the tests. and 2. We have the biological passport, which, we didn't for Paula back then, and, which mitigates the danger she's describing (I guess.... she has yet to be specific about how cheaters could go to school on her numbers and thus beat the system).

The next few weeks are going to be very interesting. Either this all gets covered up by her buddy Coe the newly installed IAAF chief who has forcefully pre-judged her case, by the partisan British press, and by Nike Money, or, the WADA leaker can point to some good effect of her (his?) actions.

Link wrote:

The next few weeks are going to be very interesting. Either this all gets covered up by her buddy Coe the newly installed IAAF chief who has forcefully pre-judged her case, by the partisan British press, and by Nike Money, or, the WADA leaker can point to some good effect of her (his?) actions.

Sunday Times tomorrow, could be key to this. First edition since she's been out in the open, if they've got something, anything left to run with, surely they go tomorrow.

Could decide everything if they have and go hard on her.

She will sue.

This business with the world half marathon

is about as fishy as it gets

Even the extract from the book is bizarre,describing the drug testing

"No need to test for epo" wtf

If the test of 12, was right before the HM, how did she get a blood transfusion in time for the race?

Link wrote:

The next few weeks are going to be very interesting. Either this all gets covered up by her buddy Coe the newly installed IAAF chief who has forcefully pre-judged her case, by the partisan British press, and by Nike Money, or, the WADA leaker can point to some good effect of her (his?) actions.

A lot more will probably come out tomorrow

pop_pop! wrote:

This business with the world half marathon

is about as fishy as it gets

Even the extract from the book is bizarre,describing the drug testing

"No need to test for epo" wtf

That's right.

Paula's words now:

"“In all of these three cases referred to by the Sunday Times (as well as on many more occasions) I was EPO (erythropoietin) urine tested at the time, and also in follow up,” Radcliffe claimed.

“All of these three cases followed periods of altitude training. Only one of my blood test scores is marginally above the 1 in 100 accepted threshold, and this is invalid given that it was collected immediately following a half marathon race run around midday in temperatures of approximately 30C.

“None of my blood test scores are anywhere near the 1 in 1000 threshold as was claimed by the Sunday Times and that which is seen as suspicion of doping"

Paula's words in her autobiography:

"They did blood tests before the race and afterwards. The IAFF doctor said they knew from my sample there was no point in testing me for the blood-boosting drug EPO"

I got EPO tested; I didn't get EPO tested.