Apparently EPO Does Not Work! - Page 2 - CyclingNews Forum

Go Back   CyclingNews Forum > Road > The Clinic

The Clinic The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 12-06-12, 16:29
lean,mean,&green's Avatar
lean,mean,&green lean,mean,&green is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 736
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aleajactaest View Post
True if we are sure that it works. It does raise the interesting question of how they decided to ban EPO if such testing has not proven that it provides an advantage. If a drug testing program is to have validity you need to have something more than a hunch that a given PED works before it should be banned.
WADA code and it's list of banned substances is not arrived at casually or by hunches. this assumption is silly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aleajactaest View Post
Clenbuterol is an example. During the Contador situation there was a lot of discussion on what advantage it actually provides. Adderall is another in that kind of situation. Some ban it, some do not. In some places you can use if diagnosed with ADHD but not if you don't have ADHD. Doesn't that provide an advantage to someone with ADHD?

Some drugs are flat out banned but others can get a TUE. Why?

If the CCN guys want to prevail, all these issues and tons more need to be answered.
your questions are fair but most, if not all, of them have been answered here, in the professional literature, and all over the internet many times before. try the search feature and happy hunting.
__________________
"In great attempts it is even glorious to fail" -V Lombardi
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-06-12, 16:36
DirtyWorks's Avatar
DirtyWorks DirtyWorks is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 6,426
Default

Is there any chance at all the study was funded by Amgen? The IOC? Ed Coyle?

The tobacco industry in the U.S. used to manufacture research like this too.

What is known, is that there is a range of responses to taking EPO depending on the athlete. You have super-responders like Wonderboy and according to a JV1973 post, he claimed it didn't help him much.

We have other anecdotal evidence from confessed dealers that it is very much like a puzzle. You have to find the combination that generates the biggest response for each athlete. David Anthony's interview confirms this. When he sorted out the combination that worked, it was a big benefit.

None of this has been presented as "testing research" but that's not the point. The point is to pretend EPO isn't the be-all end-all drug it really is for many endurance athletes.
__________________
Wefunk Radio: funkify your life!
http://www.wefunkradio.com/radio/

Last edited by DirtyWorks; 12-06-12 at 16:39.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-06-12, 16:37
Kennf1 Kennf1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 918
Default

Well that proves it. All those cyclists from the early '90s through today took epo only for the placebo effect. That's gotta really upset the clean riders who dropped out of the sport.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-06-12, 16:49
Aleajactaest Aleajactaest is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 212
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lean,mean,&green View Post
WADA code and it's list of banned substances is not arrived at casually or by hunches. this assumption is silly.



your questions are fair but most, if not all, of them have been answered here, in the professional literature, and all over the internet many times before. try the search feature and happy hunting.
The list says what is banned but I don't see details on how they built the list. Also, certainly, there are a wide variety of effectiveness within that list. As I noted earlier, some of the drugs were not universally banned by everyone. Now most just accept the WADA list which unifies the list but really just allows the governing bodies to skip the step of actually seeing if the drugs actually do the same thing for their sport. e.g. drugs that assist Vo2 are much less important to weight lifters than to cyclists and other drugs aide some sports more than others.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-06-12, 16:53
Aleajactaest Aleajactaest is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 212
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kennf1 View Post
Well that proves it. All those cyclists from the early '90s through today took epo only for the placebo effect. That's gotta really upset the clean riders who dropped out of the sport.
As with all sports, cyclist rely on what they hear from others. In the early days there was some really silly stuff going on. They were all positive that it helped them but now we KNOW for a fact that it did nothing.

e.g. blood letting and use of leaches was state of the art medicine at one point but not so much anymore. Additionally, it is medically proven that due to different genetics some drugs have ZERO effect on one person but are tremendously effective for others.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-06-12, 16:58
Trond Vidar Trond Vidar is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 166
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nilsson View Post
Very interesting. Do you have any further information about this?

I believe some historical climbing times are clear enough to attribute some performing enhancing effects to EPO. I think there could be some kind of optimum, on a personal level, if you push it to the edge. Nevertheless, in general I guess it's often to unclear to really differentiate the (positive) effects and know for sure if they outweigh the negatives. The fact that we almost never (at least in recent years) without any doubt can say if a performance is clearly doped, says enough about the uncertainty and vagueness of this topic.
Kaggestad is on Twitter. I'll ask if it was ever published anywhere.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-06-12, 17:14
Trond Vidar Trond Vidar is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 166
Default

Quick response! Prof Roald Bahr at NIH (Norges Idrettshøyskole) is the Guy to Google.

@Mads_Kaggestad: @trond_vidar da må du ta kontakt med professor Roald Bahr på NIH. Jeg vet ikke om studien av #epoprosjektet er gutt ut?
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-06-12, 17:29
Tom375's Avatar
Tom375 Tom375 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 277
Default conspiracy theory

Is this some sort of sly attempt by pharmstrong to get back his 7 titles, rep etc.??
He can finally admit to using EPO AND POINT TO THE FACT THAT IT GAVE HIM NO ADVANTAGE WHATSOEVER - IN FACT (oops caps are on) he managed to win his 7 titles with a handicap because his blood was clotted etc.
This could be a supreme tactic!! He's so devious I have to admire it sometimes!
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-06-12, 17:42
mountainrman mountainrman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 375
Default

One issue which is really important in this is the proven power of placebo.
The mind is a complex machine. The belief of benefit of a drug can indeed sometimes simulate the benefit believed

That is why "anecdotal" evidence is largely useless.

The only thing that proves efficacy is double blind trial which is why it forms the basis of all drug regulatory systems.

This is not a comment on EPO per se, only the reliability of statements based on limited numbers of people who knew or thought they were taking it at the time.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-06-12, 18:01
Le Baroudeur Le Baroudeur is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 429
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DirtyWorks View Post
The tobacco industry in the U.S. used to manufacture research like this too.
They used to fund research to show us tobacco has no benefits and is bad for you?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:02.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.