Doesn't Russian Doping Scandal Prove Canova is Right about EPO?

I was responding to "solution seeker" and he did not give me any peer reviewed science to address."rjm33" gave a rather voluminous reply with the peer reviewed science. Despite posting as a reply to me, most of it was non-responsive. Sorry I didn't address his post according to your timetable, but he did direct me to read several Pubmed links, including 83 referenced papers, not to mention the lengthy reply itself. Furthermore, we see it is the responsibility of his readers to take the time not to be misled, for example, by unrelated references to cycling history or to studies about levels of natural EPO.I'm sure everyone takes that as seriously as I do, and everyone else has read these links and references by now, to see which parts science has actually confirmed or corroborated, and identified the gaps.Note he was responding in part to my statement "It's clear EPO works to increase red blood cells." I hardly see the need to comment on "science showing these drugs work", given my initial position that it is clear that EPO works.He fails to adequately address my real point "It's less clear how that maps to performance". Record setting running performance isn't measured by Hgb concentration or total mass, or Blood Volume, or VO2max, or cycling time to exhaustion in a lab, but by a stopwatch on a track or on the road.He completely disregards "cycling and running are completely different sports. It hardly makes sense to draw conclusions about one from the experiences of the other", by offering extensive analysis about cycling, and in some cases, studies that show cycling "time to exhaustion" performance. Similarly, I will completely disregard anything in his post, or links, or references, connected to cycling.If you are responding to me, the topic is "Canova is right about EPO" (see the subject line), and my related suggestion that maybe EPO doesn't improve performance for Kenyan elites, because it hasn't significantly improved the running performance of, not only Russian males, but the global population of non-Africans elites, as measured by non-African record progression for the two decades between 1985-2005 (continuing up to 2016).

Mr. Obvious wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

OK let's make this simple.

Yes, let's make this simple.

You were given lots and lots of links to peer reviewed science showing these drugs work.

Instead of addressing those studies, you invent some other hypothesis that you can then "disprove".

Classic misdirection from the Jon Orange, Ghost, J.R. school

rjm33,- You are correct I will find reasons science falls far short of answering the question -- this is something you must already know from previous discussions.- A large part of your post has to do with cycling and the history of cycling, and is therefore non-responsive to the subject of elite running performance. Cycling is a different sport, with different physiological demands, and different limiters to performance. It's telling that you have to borrow so much from cycling, to try to make a case against elite running performance.- While EPO measurably improves VO2max, LT, and aerobic performance, the same can be said for "altitude training", or simply "training".- Running performance is not measured by Hgb concentration, Hgb Total mass, VO2max, LT, time to exhaustion at 80% VO2max, but by a stopwatch over a known distance, in a time trial or a race.- The most relevant studies to running performances are the ones using maximum effort time trials. These studies typically have any number of several flaws: 1) short timeframe of the study, 2) non-elite subjects, 3) previous training or current pre-study level of training not controlled, 4) previous altitude training or exposure not controlled, 5) same training for everyone doesn't produce the same training load, 6) studies not double-blind, 7) time trials typically limited to 3K-5K, or 20-30 min, not representative of longer, slower events, like the marathon. Extending these conclusions to real world elite athletes should be taken for what it is, with a pinch of salt. We cannot assume that what limits "well-trained" or "untrained" non-elite experimental subjects is the same thing that limits highly trained elite athletes.- This thread is specifically about the men.

rjm33 wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

1) I agree with you -- cycling and running are completely different sports. It hardly makes sense to draw conclusions about one from the experiences of the other.

2) It's clear EPO works to increase red blood cells. It's less clear how that maps to performance.

...

You will probably find something wrong with the studies in the article, and reasons why the studies do not apply.

...

In conclusion:

There is nothing to see here.

rekrunner wrote:

I was responding to "solution seeker" and he did not give me any peer reviewed science to address.

No, I gave you pointers to documented cases of elite distance runners in Spain and Portugal (because you inferred that Lombard and Hellybuck were the only 2 examples of EPO working in elite distance runners) who made big improvements but alas that was not enough for you even though you seem to keep requesting "real world" results.

I don't think that there is much point in discussing the science with you on this topic because:

1. You will never have a peer reviewed study on the effects of EPO in elite distance runners until EPO use is made legal in track and field.

2. I don't think that you have the background in biological sciences to have a productive discussion because you see "proof" related to this question in very black and white terms. It is reasonable to question studies and their findings but when you have an unrealistic expectation of what constitutes "proof" then discussion is unlikely to be productive.

I agree. Personally I thing Aragon puts it best (currently on top of this page, until the mods start deleting again): diminishing returns are obvious, but 0 return unlikely.

For anecdotal evidence, look here for a list of over 80 EPO doping bans:

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

The only counterarguments are:

1) Russian male runners are relatively weak.

2) The Europeans improved less than the Africans during the EPO era.

Both observations are easily explainable:

1) a) There is no evidence that other countries use less EPO. (I am surprised that rekrunner did not point this out, as he normally loves to point to missing evidence).

1) b) One could argue that the female Russians performed better than the men, for they gained more from steroid doping. This is supported by similar relatively larger success of the East German women vs. their men in the 80s, i.e. independent of EPO.

2) a) The Africans had lots of other issues before the 80s to keep them from running, so in the 90s and thereafter there was lots of catching up.

2) b) The Europeans had blood doping and steroids during the 80s, the Africans did not. So by just looking at doping, the Europeans improved from blood doping + steroids to EPO + blood doping + (likely fewer steroids), and the Africans from maybe steroids to EPO + maybe blood doping + steroids.

In order to study the REAL situation, I'm very interested to start some collaboration with scientists coming Kenya, controlling TOP ATHLETES FOLLOWING THEIR TRAINING (at the moment NO ONE of them has a vague idea about the training top runners do in altitude, and the same is for Letsrun posters basing everything on their little knowledge of advanced training methodology), and finally understanding the reason because EPO doping with them doesn't work.

I never spoke about other type of doping (steroids) not working, always about EPO only. And, in this case, I continue to maintain the same position : WITH THE MOST TALENTED TOP ATHLETES, BORN, LIVING AND TRAINING IN ALTITUDE, EPO CAN'T PRODUCE ANY ADVANTAGE.

It's funny that somebody shows, as proof that EPO works with Kenyan runners too, a list of athletes which doesn't include ANY of the best, with the only exception of Rita Jeptoo. This means that, according to the mentality of these people, ALL THE TOP ARE DOPED (because somebody worse than them was positive), but are not OFFICIALLY positive only because able to jump or to avoid controls.

Few people have the idea that THE TOP ARE NOT POSITIVE for the simple reason that DON'T USE ANY DOPING, and, if they are the best without using any doping, THE FACT SOMEBODY WORSE THAN THEM IS DOPED CAN'T BE CONSIDERED AS PROOF THAT DOPING (epo) WORKS.

This is a very simple, logic way of thinking. But people approaching problems already having the solution in their mind of course don't use a logic way of thinking.

Since I know athletes still having the WR who were/are completely clean (some of them NEVER taking a supplement or a vitamin in his life), I don't see any reason for thinking EPO can work at that level. Of course, I repeat again, WITH ATHLETES WITH THE BEST TRAINING, LIVING AND ALWAYS TRAINING IN ALTITUDE (so, please, don't speak about Russian that never went altitude, or Maroccan and Spanish born at sea level and training in LOW ALTITUDE (Ifrane or Soria) for part of the year only, or athletes not in top 50 in the world, who are the real elite), and always regarding the advantage of taking EPO only.

Well, first of all, the born-and-living-at-altitude runner is not really relevant in our discussion of the Russians/Europeans/Americans/Australians. That of course was ignored by the thread opener.

Second, in addition to drug cheat Jeptoo, we also have drug cheat Kisorio with a 58 half marathon (steroid doping). And likely the whole Jama group.

Third, we know from Seppelt's data that suspicious blood values were more common among medal winners than among the other Olympians (weaker athletes, statistically speaking).

And last, we all know how ludicrous the drug tests were (only one East German was ever caught, EPO was basically undetectable until at least 2005, and so-called micro-dosing is still possible), and that one could bribe the IAAF to hide positive tests.

Considering all of the above, it is only consequent to suspect that most medal winners are drug cheats.

The Guardian:

"A less than impressive junior, Ramzi appeared to have limited prospects. In 2002, just after his 22nd birthday, he finished 14th in the 1500m at the Stockholm grand prix in 3:44:85. He had endured injury problems but he was no more than an also-ran on the circuit. That year he and two compatriots accepted an offer to join the Bahrain military and improved their training condition. He continued to work with Boulami.

That same year Boulami's brother and protégé Brahim slashed two seconds from his world record in the steeplechase. A couple of weeks later he tested positive for EPO and his record was scratched. A two-year ban ensued but now Khalid could turn his attention to Ramzi. His rise was meteoric.

In 2004 he won a world indoor silver medal over 800m. But then, early in that Olympic summer, he stunned everyone by ending the four-year winning streak of El Guerrouj and lowering his personal best by nine seconds. In Athens, despite being one of the favourites, he mysteriously trailed in 11th in his semi-final. We hardly saw him again until the following year's world championships in Helsinki. He won gold at 1500m and 800m,

unprecedented in the modern era. He almost embarrassed his competitors with his ease of victory. New-found ability in your mid-20s has the odour of North Shields fish quay on a warm day."

Yep, there's no evidence that EPO works on elites. It just works on non-elites, and the non-elites then beat the elites.

Renato says all the Italians stopped blood transfusions when they were banned in 1985 (but with no test for the detection of blood transfusions). Renato stated that Salvatore Antibo did blood transfusions, but stopped in 1985, and did better (Olympic 10k silver medal in 1988) without the transfusions, and used only altitude training.

The 1980's was a golden age for the Italian runners. Gelindo Bordin won the Olympic marathon in 1988 and Boston in 1990. Pizzolatto and Gianni Polli won the NYC marathon in the 1980's for Italy. John Treacy in the 1991 NYT article says that he heard of EPO use in track and running 2 to 3 years before 1991, which makes it the year 1988 or 1989 that he heard that some runners were using EPO.

"I began hearing about EPO two to three years ago through the grapevine in running circles," said John Treacy, a silver medalist in the 1984 Olympic marathon. "The story was there was this new drug that would take over from blood doping, and that it was much better."

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/05/19/us/stamina-building-drug-linked-to-athletes-deaths.html?pagewanted=1

EPO use was banned by the International Ski Federation in 1988, which is the same year Francesco Conconi published his study on serum EPO levels in XC skiers. The IOC banned EPO in 1990. There was no test for EPO until 2000.

Renato has also stated that he believes Wang Junxia was just a great natural talent and was not doping, but maybe some of the other Chinese runners from 1993 were doping.

The 1984 Olympic 10K silver medalist was Marti Vainio. He was banned when he tested positive for the anabolic steroid metenolone, which may have been in his old stored blood that he transfused before the race. That was very bad luck for Marti Vainio.

Were autologous blood transfusions effective for the Italian Alberto Cova when he won the 1984 Olympic 10K gold medal?

Here is some of what Renato Canova had to say about autologous blood transfusions and Francesco Conconi in a 2011 RW article:

"We had the self-transfusion for somebody—for a period, for a period—because it was not out of the law. And also, like at the first finisher, the first way of [Lasse] Viren in 1970, using the self-transfusion, and at that time all the world looked at his [actions] as very advanced science. But not something like doping—[it] became doping only in 1985. It is like now using at sea level, the tent without air [hyperbaric chamber]…So now it is ridiculous to speak about this. But maybe in 10 years somebody says that this is not allowed. But in 2020 you cannot tell who was using this in 2000 and was doped.

“The problem is the mentality, no? In the historical moment it is very important to see what is doping, what is not doping, no? If you are allowed, you suppose it is about science. So we used it, but not all, because somebody refused in Italy. For example, Panetta, Stefano Mei, Bordin always refuse, every type of situation. But Cova, winning Olympics in 1984 and Antibo in 1984, they tried to do this…So, what happened after this? In ’85 was outlawed doping, and nobody used—finished…From ‘80-84, was the Italian Conconi, that won using this system. That was not doping at that time. But I want to tell, was that when Antibo finished using this, he improved a lot, for example…Cova finished his career, practically in ’86 because he had an injury. Maybe also losing some motivation because in ’82 he won European, in ’83 the World Championships, in ’84 won Olympics, in ’85 won both the European Cup 5 and 10. So after this, also his motivation was finished for Alberto Cova. But Antibo continued. For example, in 1988 he was 2nd in the Olympics.”

http://www.runnersworld.com/rt-web-exclusive/renato-canova-speaks

Update Francesco Conconi:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francesco_Conconi

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3384528

Francesco Conconi also published a study in 1986 on the use of the ANABOLIC STEROID stanozolol (Winstrol) at a low 10 mg. per day dose. The conclusion of his study is that a 10 mg. dose of stanozolol did NOT improve athletic performance in well-trained RUNNERS.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3100466

It is just a coincidence.

Right?

Ha ha ha

East European method- steroids on women.

No point getting 30 seconds off a 27:50 male 10,000m runner using EPO.

Even if EPO did not work on elite altitude natives they think it will & some will try and dope. To think otherwise is to ignore human nature.

The recent drugs raid on a hotel with EPO found but not one athlete failing a test shows how hard it is to detect EPO. Of course Aden's athlete running 5 seconds faster than any other clean woman does not need EPO!

I want to answer your points.

About Kisorio, hew was the only kenyan who really asked, directly, for some aid. This happened after his Boston marathon, when suffered a lot during the last 7 km, finishing exhausted, jogging, in 2:18. After that marathon, he started to think his body was not able to accept the increase of mileage needed for running marathons, and this was the reason of his doping.

The reality is that, after taking EPO, Kisorio NEVER was able to better his PB in 10000m and in HM, and ran his WORST competitions (he was caught positive after the National Championships of 10000m on track, when ran the slowest competition of his career).

Of course, you suppose he used doping from the beginning of his career. I know that was not the case. You don't have any proof he was doped before, and I don't have any evidence he was not doped. The difference between me and you is that you suppose he was doped without knowing the athlete and without speaking with him (never in your life), while I had several occasions for speaking with him, and, because he doesn't have any interest and any advantage to lie to me, when his ban is already over and everybody knows he was doped, I believe in what he explained me, because can be part of the mentality of athletes like him.

About Seppelt, what we know is a total bullshit. I already had many times the occasion to explain that the average number of tests considered by Seppelt with the supervision of Ashenden and Parisotto is 2.3 per athlete (about 12,000 tests regarding 5,500 subjects), something that NEVER can show any grafic about the trend of the athletes about their blood. In order to have some credibility in the biological passport, athletes need not less than 8-10 tests : 2-3 tests, part of them in altitude, part at sea level, in different conditions of shape, are only a collection of useless data, and can't have any scientific value (and for that reason, that Ashenden, Parisotto and Seppelt well know, I always considered them not honest, but only looking at a "scoop", while the investigation about Russia was really deep and consistant, also because there was the help of some whistblower).

About the last point, we know there were bribes in order to cover some of the positive tests. But there were bribes for everything with Lamine Diack, for having Championships, for changing citizenship out of the rules, for finding sponsors. This point only shows the corruption inside IAAF, managed by a "magic circle" including part of Diack Lamine family and some friend. This doesn't allow anybody to think that clean athletes were really doped, and their Federations, or their managers, paid bribes for covering them. Or do you think ALL the top athletes were doped ?

Accept the idea that the World records of middle distances are clean, and also that are still far from the human limits. Who works with some freak of nature (maybe, one every 5 years), well knows the difference between TOP ATHLETES and PHENOMEN (the case of Bekele, Komen, Shaheen, Rudisha, for example).

And don't continue to speak of Ramzi as evidence, or of Jama's group.

Ramzi is not part of may discussion : he's not born in altitude, didn't live in high altitude and trained in LOW ALTITUDE only (Ifrane). The same about Jama group : apart the fact nobody of them was positive in the tests IAAF and WADA had with them already in Spain, I want to remind you that they were in Sabadell from long time, and Sabadell is at sea level.... like born at sea level are Souleyman, Balla and all the athletes of the group, with the only ecception of Genzebe Dibaba.

Here is a Kenyan training at high altitude who was in the top 50 in the world:

Wilson Loyanae Ekupe, also known as Wilson Loyanai Erupe, (born 1986) is a Kenyan long-distance runner who competes in marathons. He has a personal best of 2:05:13 hours for the event and has won races in Mombasa, Gyeongju and Seoul.

He ran in his first foreign race in October 2011 at South Korea's Gyeongju International Marathon and he won with a personal best time of 2:09:23 hours.[2] His next outing was again in South Korea, this time at the higher profile Seoul International Marathon, and he managed to continue his winning streak. Beating the more favoured Kenyans, James Kipsang Kwambai and Eliud Kiptanui, he knocked almost four minutes off his best time to set a course record of 2:05:37 hours – a mark which moved him into the top 30 runners of all time.[3][4] He defended his title in Gyeongju with a course record run of 2:06:46.[5] His first race of 2013 saw him place third in the Houston Half Marathon.[6]

Erupe tested positive for EPO in an out-of-competition test in 2012 and was banned from competing for two years in February 2013.[7]

In 2016, he established a new personal best of 2:05:13 to win the Seoul International Marathon.

You coached Rita Jeptoo around the year 1998, before Claudio Berardelli coached her.

You told us that Rita was clean when she won the 2013 Chicago marathon in 2:19:57 and the 2014 Boston marathon in a course record 2:18:57.

You told us she only used EPO when she had a weak mind before she won the Chicago marathon for the second time in 2:24:35, but tested positive for EPO 2 weeks before the race in an OOC test on Sept. 25...which then showed that the EPO did not really work anyway...since she ran slower in Chicago, but was still managed to win the race. Rita would of won a $500,000 World Marathon Majors bonus if she had not had that pesky positive EPO doping test. That was unfortunate for Rita. It was also unfortunate for Claudio Berardelli and Federico Rosa.

Rita had her ban extended to 4 years and all of her results annulled back to April 17, 2014. They have taken Rita's 2014 Boston win and 2:18:57 course record (which made Rita the 5th fastest woman of all time) away from her, in addition to taking away the Chicago win. They also want $175,000 of Boston marathon prize money back from Rita. She has not returned any of the money so far.

Do you think it is fair that they took away Rita's 2014 Boston title and 2:18:57 course record when she did not test postive for EPO until September 25, 2014?

What can explain this injustice? You told us that Rita won Boston CLEAN.

They may have evidence that Rita was seeing the doctor for EPO a lot earlier than September, 2014 and did not WIN CLEAN when she ran her course record 2:18:57 at Boston in 2014. This is an unfortunate situation for Rita.

Please explain this confusing Rita Jeptoo doping ban situation.

Do you think this confusing doping ban situation is fair to Rita Jeptoo?

Renato you say that Kipsorio ran his worst performance over 10k at the National championships, surely after racing at sea-level he might not have acclimatized back to altitude very well, or had an off day etc. Komen in 1996 bombed out at the trials, while being electric at sea-level. Personally, I think it is highly unlikely that he was clean.

The world records for the middle distances (men), all precede 2009, and are now very old and were all set during periods of non-existent drug testing or weak testing with the exception of Rudisha. But the 800m is a different event to the rest (having only improved by 1.4s in 37 years). I keep repeating this, I know someone (through a classmate) who has World & Olympic cycling medals and was on a cocktail of drugs, yet he never failed a test between 2003-2008.

Altitude, I generally agree with you that it helps, but in longer events.

Look at the men's 1500m from Rio, none of the medalists were high altitude natives but they all had trained there but are not permanently based there. Mo seems to be able to beat the altitude natives with ease, he trains at altitude from time to time but there surely is another explanation in this case. But this also explains Algerians & Moroccans and we all know they aren't clean.

Hey, Renato Merry Christmas. You need to smile and relax or we'll introduced you to Calculo.

There is not much point discussing the science -- I already know it is far from testing the conditions of athlete athletes in real world racing, and extrapolating conclusions from laboratory conditions to real world conditions always carry the risk of introducing uncertainty.Did you say your "documented" Spain and Portuguese cases were the same athletes who set these European records -- athletes like Pinto, Jesus, Castro, Silva etc? Or is this a big assumption on your part?My discussion is statistical -- including the Spanish and Portuguese setting national and European records, the *magnitude* of the change is rather small, compared to the *magnitude* of change from East Africans. Therefore the effects of all contributing factors -- which EPO is only one potential candidate -- after 1985 leading to these "small magnitude" changes can only be of "small magnitude". There must be other, much more significant, reasons explaining the large gap between East Africans and non-Africans.Again, the often repeated claim is that EPO works on East Africans, because it works on everybody. If it works on everybody, we should be able to observe working in all elite athletes by the movement of area records. What we see is that it was not a significant factor for non-Africans. If EPO was a game changer in running, like cyclists claimed it was in cycling, we should see have seen a much bigger move of records in non-Africans too, over the course of two decades, over the whole global population of athletes.A powerful, universally available, largely undetectable drug, in a group where everyone is doping, and is so cheap, that hundreds of Kenyans and dozens of Ethiopians can afford it, even as juniors, is a bad explanation for the regional dominance of East Africans.

This would include newspapers and forum dwellers who often repeat that "EPO works".Little point in making the comment "EPO works" unless you have experimented with it yourself. Otherwise these views carry little or no weight.Wouldn't you agree?

cleans wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

It's clear EPO works to increase red blood cells. It's less clear how that maps to performance.

Little point in commenting on it, unless you have experimented with it yourself or with athletes you have trained.

Which is why Canova's views on it carry little or no weight.

Thank you.

All correct. Another difference between you and me is that I don't trust the words of drug cheats. Practically all of them first deny having doped, and then claim to have doped only once or only briefly. That in turn is highly unlikely, considering how easy it is to pass the tests.

Apparently I was correct in the cases of Jeptoo (also doped at least during her Boston course record, according to the court) and Schwazer (caught yet again, after you declared him to be clean now).

Not quite. But I do think most of the top athletes doped (like most top cyclists dope and most politicians lie), because

- they are extremely ambitious

- doping helps

- the risk of getting caught is small

- the rewards can be huge

- they know others are doing it too.

This is particularly true for athletes who suddenly turn into a phenomenon, like Baumann, Radcliffe, Ramzi, and Farah. Yes I know, none of those four was born, lived, and trained at altitude. Yet all of them turn into world beaters, including beating those who were born, lived, and trained at altitude.

"My discussion is statistical -- including the Spanish and Portuguese setting national and European records, the *magnitude* of the change is rather small, compared to the *magnitude* of change from East Africans. Therefore the effects of all contributing factors -- which EPO is only one potential candidate -- after 1985 leading to these "small magnitude" changes can only be of "small magnitude". There must be other, much more significant, reasons explaining the large gap between East Africans and non-Africans."

Gary, congratulations!. This is your best piece of work ever.

Remember XC skier Johann Muehlegg, who dominated in Salt Lake City, while on EPO. I´m sure that without EPO nobody would have heard about Finnish skiers Mika Myllylae (R.I.P.) and Jari Isometsae. Although they got caught of Hemohes, a plasma expander, which was taken to lower the haemoglobin levels. But I also believe that a lot of other XC skiers back then were juiced. There is some interesting data of the haemoglobin levels of XC skiers, I have heard. Also am very suspicious against some of the top moroccan runners, Mohammed Mourhit, probably some Spaniards... But who knows.

I continue that one Finnish national top class XC skier once tested the effects of EPO, and he described something like that suddenly the uphills had declined.