Canova was right! EPO does not work on trained athletes

I'm not sure why you've keyed on this word "coincidence", but I can only guess you continually blame me for your inability to make a connected argument. When you bring up a series of disconnected events, and fail to demonstrate any causal connection, this is the very definition of coincidence. My issue is not that these events may or may not be coincidence, but that these gaps in your arguments that cannot "logically" lead to your conclusions without a number of implied assumptions.But since you trolled me on this topic, I don't know, nor much care, about racewalking. It seems it was awkwardly included in the ARD/Sunday Times reports, to inflate the ratio of doping in athletics.In Schwazer's case, it looks like something new, using a "steroid" urine passport program that flagged a more thorough inspection of analysis that eventually found traces of synthetic testosterone. This occurred on Jan. 1st., at a time when Schwazer was still under suspension.I'm not concerned so much about the fate of Alex Schwazer, but concerned about Sandro Donati, who agreed to analyze the comeback, and whether the steroid should have been detected in these analyses.The fact that the quantity was low, and not detected with normal tests, and that testosterone is not useful for racewalking, does raise some questions in my mind, but I'm not inclined now to offer any competing explanations.

casual obsever wrote:

rjm33 wrote:

Do you have any comments on the story about Alex Schwazer?

Good morning. You should read the links: clearly he is innocent, because, I cite, " the newspaper report was “false and unbelievable”."

Soon rekrunner will wake up and explain how this coincidentally happened. Possibly a typo, or 90 degrees somewhere or something.

Some new information and some possible flaws in the Dutch research:- There were apparently five treadmill tests, so there was much more testing than the much touted Mont Ventoux experiment (which due to possible draft effect could've been of questionable value). There has actually been no information released yet on these other tests.- The subjects were apparently not so well trained in the end, as the watts/kg ratio of 4 has been mentioned (famous Dr. Michele Ferrari claimed that Lance and many pros had values around 6.7 W/kg, a figure that was needed to win Tour during early 2000s). Exercise physiologist Guido Vroemen is quoted as saying the following:

I read that had the riders needed an average of 1 hour and 37 minutes to cycle up Mont Ventoux. If I'm going to assume that they were full for and against the threshold at which they went sour reason, it is such a time corresponds to an anaerobic threshold power of 3.2 watts per kilogram. Then you fall for me in the 'reasonable' just above 'untrained'.

Spanish cyclists Iban Mayo holds the Mont Ventoux record of 55:51.49 (2004 Dauphiné Libéré time trial, ie. Mayo cycled only 21.6 km that day, not excess of 120 kilometres).

All information is from this website, perhaps someone fluent in Dutch can correct and give some further details as the site was occasionally very cryptic with google translator.

Draft effect at 13 kmh? Have you ever ridden a bicycle?

4 watt/kg is not untrained if hold for 20min

in fact 4.85 watt//kg is on the border of entering 'pro' or serious amateur level.

As is mentioned in the article "the less good pros often cycle 5 a 6 watt/kg' .

Ok 4 watt is not great but not untrained in my opinion, and if you are 60 years old 4 watt//kg is quite good.

http://i0.wp.com/blog.bikeridr.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/vermogenperkg1lx.jpg

Value of 4 W/kg at lactate threshold level is a good figure, no doubt about it. But we do find the following criticism of the existing studies from a 2013 literature review by Heuberger et all, who supervised the new Dutch experiment:

It is, however, clear that in no study reported subjects are at a ‘competing’ level of cycling performance. This highlights a very problematic aspect, which is that the studies do not use well-trained cyclists, still less elite or world-class cyclists, who would be expected to have Vo2MAX values above 70 ml kg−1 min−1 (5 l min−1) and power outputs above 5 W kg−1.

(emphasis added)

It appears that his own study falls into this same trap of not using well-trained cyclists.

The physiological draft effect would be only marginally above zero during the Ventoux climb (where are heavy winds by-the-way), but when you are looking for differences of a few percentages in absolute speed, the image gets easily very blurry particularly when riding in group gives psychological edge and messes up the voluntarily chosen speed. And the cyclists had ridden some 120 kilometers at flat terrain before the climb so the draft effect had already shuffled the pack somewhat.

It's hard to design a good experiment.

For example, if EPO allows a higher training load, but the study didn't, this could affect the outcome in a way that is unrealistic.

I would be less concerned by the lack of elite status of these athletes (although the study did say that that is a weakness of existing research).

It's one thing to suggest EPO should work on elites because studies show it works on "well trained amateur" subjects, but if it doesn't even work for "well trained amateur" subjects, this argument falls apart.

Amazing stuff.

Remember our discussion on Schwarzer?

You assured me, 100%, that his original doping offence was a complete one-off and he not only won his gold clean, but he was now competing (albeit with a hematologist) completely clean.

Dopers dope, Renato.

Even if we say that EPO has no effect (lol) then what about all the other drugs?

Are you going to tell me that NO drugs affect Kenyan elites? Steroids etc? When there is no testing athletes can use what they like

Lots of great armchair physiologists in this thread who should submit their findings to JAMA and show these PhDs how stupid their little "study" is.

Metric Miler, because it seems that the main argument about doping is EPO, I continue to maintain my position about this kind of doping : for top athletes, with top training, born, living and training ALWAYS in altitude, it doesn't work.

But if you read all my posts, you must remember that ALWAYS I said steroids can bring the body at a level of muscle strength that NEVER can be reached with training only. And, other thing, when an athlete is able to reach a level of muscle strength higher than the "Natural possible level", it's not so difficult to maintain this kind of level, also without doping anymore.

This is one of the incongruences (may be this word doesn't exist and I invented from Italian : this means something that doesn't follow a rational connection analyzing different factors) we have with the different sanctions, regarding different kinds of doping. Supposing the blood manipulation can help (and really helps athletes training at sea level or, in any case, going altitude for short periods only, and not with continuity), the effects of this doping disappear in short time if the assumption of EPO or similar doesn't have continuity (exactly like the effects of altitude training disappear after long periods at sea level). On the contrary, the effects of steroids constitute the base of strength that it's possible to maintain also without further doping, with training only. So, (I don't speak now about ethic sanctions, only about REAL doping effects), while somebody using blood doping has to go back to his basic level short time after quitting the administration, who uses steroids can have benefits for all his career, also after several "clean" years, because in any case his base of strength is higher than the level he could have reached with training only.

About Kenyan runners, 90% of doped athletes were caught for steroids, not for EPO. I know steroids can help a little bit also athletes of long distances, while can help A LOT athletes of short distances. All the best Russian doped athletes were great in 800m and in steeple (where the muscle strength is fundamental factor), less in long distances, because steroids can help the recovery, but don't have anything to do with the AEROBIC ENDURANCE.

But another problem is that, in antidoping, we go to see the PRESENCE of illegal substances only, without looking at the QUANTITY. I strongly think the quantity of steroids in doped Kenyan runners (especially women) is so low, and the quality of these steroids so poor, that the real advantage can be "placebo" only. There are athletes doping themselves with pharmac costing 5 dollars for the all package, when in Europe or US medicine with the same goal costs, may be, 50 or more Euros, and I doubt the effects can be the same.

And don't forget that a Kenyan man running a marathon in 2:12 or 10 km in 28'30", or a woman for 2:27 and 33', are "Amateur", as organization of their life, as knowledge of the rules and as mentality. This means that when of them is a little sick, goes to the doctor and takes what the doctor proposes him, without asking if is doping or not (and in the most part of the cases, also if they ask, the pharmacist is not able to give any answer). Don't think there are in Kenya many pharmacies of high level, especially in small villages, and when some athlete trains and lives in his village, doesn't go to Eldoret for buying a medicine, but asks to the small "duka la dawa" near his house.

So, I never said Kenyan are clean, since I know many takes something illegal. What I EVER said, is that :

1) EPO, specifically, doesn't work with all the top runners (who are top because have more talent, but also more proper training than other runners) born, living and training in altitude

2) The common Kenyan mentality is to go to hospital for every small thing, taking pharmacs for every small symptoms, and in this condition can be very easy to have some illegal medicine, not with the goal to enhance performances

3) In Kenya, when one person has malaria, doctors give him EPO for enhancing the blood values (after malaria we can easy meet people with 8-9 of Hb and 25 of Hct), and this is a COMMON THERAPY for everybody

4) It's not true that Kenyans are not tested OOC. This morning, for example, a doctor from a Dutch agency (hired by IAAF for testing the athletes OOC) came to the camp of Gianni Demadonna testing Thomas Longosiwa after his training, at 12 o'clock (the window of Thomas is between 8 and 9pm, but of course he didn't refuse to have the control at a different time, which was his right). Instead, it's true that the local antidoping agency (AKADA) at the moment is not yet ready. I continue to repeat that last year there were 135 OOC tests for Kenyan runners, making them the most tested athletes in the world (it's not important, under this point of view, if the test comes from the National Agency, from IAAF or from WADA, the difference is... who pays !), but this NEVER can change the situation if some athlete of 2nd/3rd level wants to assume some doping, because IN ANY CASE THESE ATHLETES NEVER CAN BE TESTED, ALSO WITH A WORKING NATIONAL ANTIDOPING, BECAUSE ARE NOT IN THE TOP 30 IN THE EVENT IN KENYA. At least, Kenyan are guilty to be too many, too strong compared with the athletes of other Countries, and able to win international road races also if, inside Kenya, are practically "amateurs"...

But ALL THE TOP ATHLETES are tested a lot of time during one season, when in Kenya, OOC, so be sure that the best who go to compete in Rio are totally clean. It's time to cancel stereotypes about the NO CONTROL of top Kenyans, creating a widespread idea of "everybody doped", that is a total bullshit.

OOC testing is behind in Kenya. Hence the WADA non-compliance rating. 135 tests across all of your athletes is not that impressive, not to mention most British and American athletes have random testing with only a 1 hour window and no prior notification.

You cannot deny that many athletes have been caught in recent years in Kenya, lot's in competition, showing there is a problem. And it is not just low level athletes. The two girls caught in Beijing 2015 were top 400m runners in Kenya, one held the 400m record I believe.

As you know, steroids increase muscle strength and aid recovery. An athlete on steroids can simply run faster than his clean counterpart, this carries through to endurance events.

HGH improves a range of physiological factors. Even stimulants such as caffeine are shown to be beneficial in endurance events.

There are other drugs on the market including melodonium, rumoured to improve endurance. Many other drugs that could improve muscular endurance and stamina, lactic tolerance and all kinds of other phisiological changes that I am certain elite Kenyan athletes born at altitude are not immune to.

The difference between Bekele's 12:37 and Farah's 12:53 is about 2%. We are talking about margins here. 2% could be achieved with illegal drugs, not necessarily EPO. (Not saying Bekele is dirty)

This is why drug testing is so important, and why when you have poor drug testing, such as in Russia's case, you get many athletes at the highest level of sport cheating.

It's not my fight, but something doesn't look quite right about testing positive for a small amount (too small to be detected by the standard "cheap" test) of synthetic testosterone (not the first choice of drug for a 50km walker), on Jan. 1st, four months before his ban ends.If he doped it on purpose, while under the highly publicized supervision of Donati, that would be incredibly stupid at several levels, and very disappointing for all involved.In all the threads where Renato talks about Schwazer (Schwarzer?), it was an example of how Schwazer won in 2008 with low blood values (i.e. not due to benefits from EPO or blood transfusion which would cause high RBC), while failing in 2012 using EPO. Testing positive for synthetic testosterone doesn't change that argument.

trollism wrote:

Amazing stuff.

Remember our discussion on Schwarzer?

You assured me, 100%, that his original doping offence was a complete one-off and he not only won his gold clean, but he was now competing (albeit with a hematologist) completely clean.

Dopers dope, Renato.

rosshm16 wrote:

Lots of great armchair physiologists in this thread who should submit their findings to JAMA and show these PhDs how stupid their little "study" is.

More energy efficient athletes use less total energy to race faster.

Discuss.

You are naive, Doping is viral and present in all countries in the world.

Russia and Kenia are thrown under the bus. Banning a whole county is just lame. IAAF, WADA they are lame, they are just keeping the amount of entertainment hight as otherwise the sport will die they think.

Athletics did not change for a long long time and lost lots of fans.

Has this study been published in a scientific journal yet?

I got my PhD from eBay. wrote:

Has this study been published in a scientific journal yet?

Doesn't matter, Renato said doping doesn't work on top athletes, even though several top athletes have now been caught doping. See, these athletes are just so mentally weak they took unnecessary risks, for no good reason.

TroLLminator wrote:

Doesn't matter, Renato said doping doesn't work on top athletes, even though several top athletes have now been caught doping. See, these athletes are just so mentally weak they took unnecessary risks, for no good reason.

How foolish of them...they could have accomplished their goals on just "bread & water."

TroLLminator wrote:

Doesn't matter, Renato said doping doesn't work on top athletes, even though several top athletes have now been caught doping.

What? You gotta be kidding he doesn't think that doping doesn't work on top athletes after the Rio marathon champion just tested positive for rocket fuel? It doesn't get any better for an athlete than Olympic gold. And many of us thought that it was only Russian & Turkey gold medalists that were doping in women's athletics, lol.

Renato Canova wrote:

Metric Miler, because it seems that the main argument about doping is EPO, I continue to maintain my position about this kind of doping : for top athletes, with top training, born, living and training ALWAYS in altitude, it doesn't work.

But if you read all my posts, you must remember that ALWAYS I said steroids can bring the body at a level of muscle strength that NEVER can be reached with training only. And, other thing, when an athlete is able to reach a level of muscle strength higher than the "Natural possible level", it's not so difficult to maintain this kind of level, also without doping anymore.

Canova's argument about steroids seems to counter his statement about EPO not working, i.e. that drugs don't really provide some magical benefit that can't be attained even more easily without them. However his argument about steriods, began many decades ago with Bob Hoffman selling steroid powder in weightlifting magazines, though totally engrained in power lifting mentalities, is totally false. Steroids do NOT provide magical powers to the muscles.

Rather the results are dependent on body mechanics, natural talent, training and mentality, and same though in different manners as with running.