This is assuming that the Russians went to zero blood doping after the introduction of the ABP, which, knowing the Russians’ state-sponsored doping program, is very unlikely. I think what’s far more likely is that they just began doping more carefully (i.e., microdosing, which we know to be effective). This study found that microdosing homologous blood transfusions (of only 135 mL) can improve performance by 4.7%:
https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=9141573
In other words, all the Outside magazine article is measuring is pre-ABP era vs ABP-era doping. It’s not actually comparing performance of blood doping vs. no blood doping so the title and conclusions drawn are misleading.
As usual, one shouldn't equal faster running times (what Iljukov researched) with different "performance boost", because it is far from evident how much the measured 4.7 % boost in cycling watt output of the blood doped anemic subjects in the Danish study would be in actual faster running speed.
Here is a Finnish article from a week ago on the same topic that should readable with GoogleTranslate:
https://www.iltalehti.fi/yleisurheilu/a/ead00360-8d4b-4983-87fb-36fd56735ead
This study indicates that the blood doping effect for women may be commensurate with the cheaterfly effect. It also suggests an explanation for the dominance of the top distance runners over the very hard working, talented non-dopers.
For instance, a 4% improvement in women would allow a clean 15:00 5000m runner to drop 36 seconds to 14:24, which is in the neighborhood of a lot of East African runners. With altitude training, a clean runner from BTC might well run sub 14:50, like Fraser did recently, and then that would suggest how a woman could use training, altitude and blood doping or EPO to get to the 14:11/14:12 range.
On the men's side, the advantage is said to be less. Taking a 2.4% improvement brings a drop of 18.72 seconds from 13:00 for the 5000m, getting you within range of the world record at 12:41.28. In the 10000m, a 2.4% drop would take a clean 27:00 runner down to 26:21, and it would take a 2.65% drop to go from 27:00 to the world record of 26:17. My conclusion is that if you take away the drugs and blood doping, you get a level playing field between East Africa and the rest of the world, as there used to be in the 1970s and 1980s.
So how fast does this make Coe w/out blood doping assistance?
zxcvxczv wrote:
My conclusion is that if you take away the drugs and blood doping, you get a level playing field between East Africa and the rest of the world, as there used to be in the 1970s and 1980s.
Ummm, no, that would be assuming that the rest of the world doesn't dope.
Here, again, is what we just learned from the last paper about blood-doping of endurance athletes at world championships:
Country 2011 2013
Ukraine 89% 25% wow
Ethiopia 19% 30%
Kenya 19% 13%
USA 14% 17%
GB 4% 18%
Australia 0% 4% very nice
Japan 0% 0% awesome!
For context, average was 18% in 2011 and 15% in 2013.
That means that both Kenya and US were average.
LoneStarXC wrote:
This is assuming that the Russians went to zero blood doping after the introduction of the ABP, which, knowing the Russians’ state-sponsored doping program, is very unlikely. I think what’s far more likely is that they just began doping more carefully (i.e., microdosing, which we know to be effective).
...
In other words, all the Outside magazine article is measuring is pre-ABP era vs ABP-era doping. It’s not actually comparing performance of blood doping vs. no blood doping so the title and conclusions drawn are misleading.
Very important point!
Though "micro-dosing", lol, 135 mL instead of 1000 mL...
We can now....haha as if people didn't know how much of an effect it had already. It's fairly simple math.
quehoares wrote:
So how fast does this make Coe w/out blood doping assistance?
I was hoping this would be rehashed again to take my mind of coronavirus/lockdown worries.
If you read the article, it points out the oddness of how the Eastern Bloc women did so well at middle-distance compared to their men. The conclusion is that not only steroids but blood doping benefits women more than men.
Yet according to people (mostly Americans) here, Coe, Ovett, Cram were all roiding and blood doping (all three with different coaches), and yet the best we could do as far as middle-distance female running was concerned in the 80's was Kathy Cooke - a terrific runner and one of our best of all time, but clearly one of the most feminine and natural talents there has ever been in women's middle-distance.
Coe ran low 1:43 in 1989 when he was nearly in his mid-thirties, and 3 years after he had successfully lobbied to have blood doping outlawed by the IAAF. The difference between his speed in 1989 and his athletic prime in 81 is about what you would expect, especially with all the injury and illness he had suffered in the intervening years, including being injured for much of the previous two seasons.
I think going to Loughborough aka steroid uni probably helped. Did Kathy Cooke go there?
Why just "blood doping"? What about the "Duchess Cocktail", a mixture of three steroids?
For those wanting more detail on Iljukov's work on doping, just type "Iljukov doping" into Google Scholar and you'll find links that give you access to all his recent work. Plenty of educational reading for the lockdown...
By the way, where are we with a test for homologous blood doping (reinjecting stored samples of your own blood) these days? I had an email exchange with an Australian expert years ago who said it would be ready for the Peking olympics, ha.
Look at those times from the top three. Probably the pinnacle race for old school blood doping.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1978_European_Athletics_Championships_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_10,000_metres
Coevett wrote:
Hopefully the mods have more time on their hands during these lock downs and can delete your obscene homoerotic posts more quickly over the next few weeks.
Lol, what? That's embarrassing for you to advertise your insanity so openly.
Alan55 wrote:
By the way, where are we with a test for homologous blood doping (reinjecting stored samples of your own blood) these days? I had an email exchange with an Australian expert years ago who said it would be ready for the Peking olympics, ha.
I don’t know if this is the same test you’re referring to, but they were planning on testing for plasticizers, specifically, DEHP (used in IV bags), in the blood, but it didn’t work because the widespread use of plastic (in food wrappers, containers, bottles, etc), means that 98% of people have some traces of DEHP in their blood anyway. This test was discontinued in 2011 for that reason.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/widespread-plasticizer-clouds-doping-tests-cyclists/quehoares wrote:
Coevett wrote:
Hopefully the mods have more time on their hands during these lock downs and can delete your obscene homoerotic posts more quickly over the next few weeks.
Lol, what? That's embarrassing for you to advertise your insanity so openly.
Homoerotic posts? WTF?
Anyway, I would be interested to know more about this.
vc xc wrote:
quehoares wrote:
Lol, what? That's embarrassing for you to advertise your insanity so openly.
Homoerotic posts? WTF?
Anyway, I would be interested to know more about this.
I mean the blood doping, not homoerotic posts...
covid-19 wrote:
We can now....haha as if people didn't know how much of an effect it had already. It's fairly simple math.
Umm have you ever been rekked? Lolz
Another invitation -- thanks.
Staying on topic, does anyone understand why these researchers think steroids played no role for Russian women?
RIP: D3 All-American Frank Csorba - who ran 13:56 in March - dead
RENATO can you talk about the preparation of Emile Cairess 2:06
Running for Bowerman Track Club used to be cool now its embarrassing
Hats off to my dad. He just ran a 1:42 Half Marathon and turns 75 in 2 months!
Great interview with Steve Cram - says Jakob has no chance of WRs this year
Rest in Peace Adrian Lehmann - 2:11 Swiss marathoner. Dies of heart attack.