Doping question

[LegendRider]

Everyone's favorite subject...

We all know that a number of riders on the US Olympic cycling team blood doped or boosted at the LA games. It wasn't against the rules, but clearly unethical.

Twenty years later this same technique was being used by Dr. Fuentes. And, apparently it was quite effective (see Tyler Hamilton's results...).

So, the question is - why wasn't it used in the intervening 20 years. Of all the doping scadals uncovered, blood boosting (undetectable at the time) was never one of them. It seems effective and surely less expensive than EPO. Why wasn't it more widespread?

What am I missing?

[toaster]

I'm no expert.

My guess is the dangers involved. EPO is safer from a purely administrative perspective.

[goonster]

I'm sure it was used by many who had access.

There are logistical challenges, i.e. proper secure storage, third parties to administer the procedure, etc. which makes it expensive and creates the problem of involving others. Autologous transfusions are not something a racer can do on his own, with supplies scored in a dark alley.

EPO became available in the mid-late nineties and quickly became the method of choice.

[LegendRider]

I'm sure it was used by many who had access.

There are logistical challenges, i.e. proper secure storage, third parties to administer the procedure, etc. which makes it expensive and creates the problem of involving others. Autologous transfusions are not something a racer can do on his own, with supplies scored in a dark alley.

EPO became available in the mid-late nineties and quickly became the method of choice.

If it was used "by many," then why no cases of riders being busted (especially with the difficult logistics)? Something doesn't add up.

[Richard]

Testing for this form of doping arrived on the scene with the bust of Tyler Hamilton (if i remember correctly). As to how widespread, it was probably pretty widely used until the use of EPO was perfected (remember, until fairly recently, the only evidence of EPO use was the hematocrit level as no test existed for the drug).

If I was cheating, I would opt for EPO as all of the blood handling, transfusions, multiple labs, etc. would render it a more dangerous procedure. When the test for EPO was accepted, I would then consider going back to the future with the transfusions. THis, I assume, was Tyler's modus operandi, but OOOPS there was a test he didn't anticipate.

[cody.wms]

The test was late to the scene. It's the same persons blood, but now you can tell if there are two different blood cell populations somehow.

Until they could see the different populations it was undetectible. I remember reading about cyclists almost dying due to improper infusions. Its scary stuff, and much more dangerous, AFAIK, than other ways of doping. Not that any of them are that safe. It also has to be HIGHLY organized, with blood taken out during the offseason, when the red blood cell count was higher, and store it until, say July. Annnnndd EPO accomplishes the same thing.

See where its going? For the main part, it switched to EPO, then switched back when EPO was detectable. I'm sure people did it the entire time, but it went out of fashion.

[LegendRider]

If blood doping was widely practiced between LA (84) and the onset of EPO (early 90's), it means the code of omerta was upheld. As far as I know, no pro cyclist complained of it - not Kimmage, no LeMond, etc. That's what perplexes me.

[cody.wms]

thats a good question. I'd revise my previous response below in this way - Id think that some did it the entire time, but this might have been a small number of people, and the majority of cyclists were clean.

In general, I think there were two possibilities- 1. since it was legal no one cared, and no one said anything about it, or 2. the majority of cyclists were clean, since to some extent the doping culture didnt have a firm grasp on the peloton.

Id lean towards 2, since you hear alot about how the peloton went to another gear when EPO hit. If many transitioned from blood doping to EPO, id think that the change wouldnt have been as dramatic, since both have the same basic effect.

[goonster]

It's the same persons blood, but now you can tell if there are two different blood cell populations somehow.
Do you have a link for this?

I could be wrong, but that sounds like the test for a heterologous transfusion, not autologous. I was under the impression that there is sill no test for autologous transfusions.

I've also never heard of pro riders using autologous transfusions in the era under discussion here. The practice was always more associated with olympic endurance sports, e.g. the Austrian nordic ski team, various track athletes, etc.

Since the method was known and available, and wouldn't cause an athlete to fail a test (especially prior to the implemenation of hematocrit tests), I wouldn't rule out that there was some use of it in the peloton.

[cody.wms]

I could be wrong, but that sounds like the test for a heterologous transfusion, not autologous. I was under the impression that there is sill no test for autologous transfusions.



Your correct, I was confused, I always thought that Hamilton had used his own blood. There is still no test for autologous transfusions.

[KJMUNC]

In general, I think there were two possibilities- 1. since it was legal no one cared, and no one said anything about it, or 2. the majority of cyclists were clean, since to some extent the doping culture didnt have a firm grasp on the peloton.

Id lean towards 2, since you hear alot about how the peloton went to another gear when EPO hit. If many transitioned from blood doping to EPO, id think that the change wouldnt have been as dramatic, since both have the same basic effect.

The EPO era definitely ushered in a noticable jump in performance, but don't kid yourself that doping didn't already have a firm grasp on cycling. Pro cycling has always been a sport of extremes, and we all know what happens when people go to that limit then to add in money.....oy veh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_cycling)!

[toaster]

Ask Lance. It's not about the bike!

[rwsaunders]

Imagine the stories that could be told if Keith Richards were a cyclist...

[Andreas]

There is still no test for autologous transfusions.

That is incorrect.

Typically for autologous transfusions the "donated" blood is frozen for a period of time and the re-transfused. A practice that has been used since the early 70's (remember Lasse Viren, the Finnish 5k and 10k Olympic winner 72/76).
When you re-transfuse autologous frozen blood the average life span of your red cells is altered (the Gaussian distribution of average RBC life expectancy shifts) - that can be measured.

Used in cycling through the Indurain years until EPO, Lance and Jan hit the scene who then used it throughout their careers, along with basically everybody else. Andy Hampsten moved from one of the best 5 climbers in the world to somebody who couldn't hang crossing a bridge.

Don't have time for more detail.
Follow the trials in German court against the University Hospital in Freiburg that helped to "scientifically" dope some riders - lot's of info to be released to come.