A doping detection idea - dogs

[Dear Wiggo]

I realise this does not necessarily support my idea, but found it interesting nonetheless:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-34583642

The woman who can smell Parkinson's disease

He says: "The first time we tested Joy we recruited six people with Parkinson's and six without.

"We had them wear a t-shirt for a day then retrieved the t-shirts, bagged them and coded them.

"Her job was to tell us who had Parkinson's and who didn't.

"Her accuracy was 11 out of 12. We were quite impressed."

Dr Kunath adds: "She got the six Parkinson's but then she was adamant one of the 'control' subjects had Parkinson's.

"But he was in our control group so he didn't have Parkinson's.

"According to him and according to us as well he didn't have Parkinson's.

"But eight months later he informed me that he had been diagnosed with Parkinson's.

"So Joy wasn't correct for 11 out of 12, she was actually 12 out of 12 correct at that time.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

They are going to work on tech to do this detection as part of a diagnosis.

If there were similar smells released due to doping compounds, you wouldn't have to use a dog per se, just smell detection devices, alleviating the potential for allergy complaints.

At the moment tests cost 100s or even 1000 dollars. And are conducted randomly or through some hocus pocus ABP thing where the values fed into the ABP are manipulable.

If you had a device that could detect potential doping products this instant, and test riders as they cross the line, you could potentially select your doping controls in real time based on current physiological parameters.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I mean with the smell Joy can detect, you'd be ready to convict someone of Parkinson's. And her smell detection could be rented out at $100 per hour -- far cheaper than any doping test.

 

[doperhopper]

Re:

Every rider could have their own personal dope dog that follows them everywhere, all year round. And the dog could have cameras, and audio, and live streaming. And there'd be a remote monitor watching everything 24 hours a day . . ..

Hmmm, The Dawg vs dope dog

Now that would be the utmost uroboric circle: personal dope dog named Piti.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Marginal anti-doping gains.

I don't think it should be instantly dismissed but somehow doubt its likely efficacy wrt to doping detection but that's up to a proof of concept. As a way to improve targeting, makes sense if it actually worked with a significantly higher than random chance of positive identification, however it would still mostly be restricted to in-competition testing, which misses the majority who time their doping accordingly.

 

[doperhopper]

Re:

Marginal anti-doping gains.

I don't think it should be instantly dismissed but somehow doubt its likely efficacy wrt to doping detection but that's up to a proof of concept. As a way to improve targeting, makes sense if it actually worked with a significantly higher than random chance of positive identification, however it would still mostly be restricted to in-competition testing, which misses the majority who time their doping accordingly.

Speaking of marginal gains - guess what would be the first countermeasure: team sniffing dogs!

Would love to see Sir Arthur Conan Braylle introducing "The hound of BaSKYrville".

 

[Cramps]

Re:

How about this idea? A binary search for drugs. Split the peloton into two halves. Have each half pee into a trough. Test each for drugs. The half that has less drugs in it, discard. Split the remaining peloton half into two equal parts. Have each half (now a quarter of the total) pee into a trough. Test each for drugs. Discard the less druggy half. Continue. Eventually, you will find a drug user, and you only needed log(n) tests to do it!

My dog this is brilliant.

The problem I foresee however is the amount of pee to be collected over log(n) tests.

 

[blackcat]

Dogs have an acute sense of smell. They can be trained to detect cancer, which I am guessing has a very subtle bouquet.

Have a few dogs interact with the cyclists in the morning, and anyone who gets special puppy attention can get tested then and there. They can do it at the hotel, so it's kept out of the public eye, and you wouldn't need to limit it to GC / jersey wearers, etc, as the dogs would be filtering the testing pool automatically.

You can't train a puppy to detect unknown chemicals, but the drugs commonly tested for would be a good start. You can do targeted testing based on how someone smells rather than a computer system, statistics or otherwise. Not to replace those things, but as a real-time, ad-hoc ping.

I have not looked, but data from drug sniffer dogs at airports could be used as
* a template for training and handling
* source for efficacy data, etc.

I realise
* embrocation smells or similar could mask any exogenous chemical smells in cyclists
* the dogs have human handlers, introducing a corruptible link in the chain
* noone in cycling admin, IOC or anywhere else is actually interested in preventing or stopping doping

However, I am curious on other's thoughts?

#pavlov

what did Cuddles say?

D-Queued knows this off by heart, something to the effect of "step on my dawg and i will cut yer fukcin head off".

for some reason, I dont think he was referring to Froome dawg. but he may have been, who knows, it was cuddles afterall.

three against one, its not a big surprise...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fe79ZuDKfk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FikzgWE3t0A

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/evans-sells-dont-stand-on-my-dog-t-shirts/

http://www.smh.com.au/news/tourdefrance/evans-image-takes-a-battering-after-headbutting-camera-and-dogthreat/2008/07/23/1216492541497.html

yep, no roid rage to see here, nothing to see, carry on. these are not the droids you are looking for. we need the strikethru function and the mods need CN to upgrade the forum code. No "d".

 

[bewildered]

seeing as riders can be 100% scientifically caught taking a banned substance and eg blame a chemist for contamination, I fail to see how a dog's nose can make the current system any more uncircumventable. The doping authorities are too ready to accept lame excuses for supposedly strict liability offences never mind target test the most suspicious riders. Make sample collectors and testers completely independent contractors and incentivise them so they go after the most likely cheats resulting in a ban. I suppose there would have to be strict penalties and disincentives for any fabricated test results at the same time.

The current testing system's full capability has never been determined because the authorities don't want it to work or use it to its full capability, so bringing in dogs under the current governance is not the way to improve it. Even if it were an improvement to the current system, which it wouldn't be imo, they would make sure in practice it would be nothing of the sort.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I get that it's easy to find reasons why it wouldn't work.

I am interested in discussing things that might work.

The non-believers often get asked, "What are you doing about it" and the answers are pretty much "Nothing" or "raising awareness".

This is my attempt to start a discussion that could potentially have a positive impact on the efficacy of doping detection.

Anyone know where I could go to find people interested in brainstorming / discussing ideas / hypotheses / what not?

I find it more constructive and positive than poking at the negative bits alone.

 

[Archibald]

Park this guy near the entrance to the doping controls hut at each stage...

 

[blackcat]

Re:

I get that it's easy to find reasons why it wouldn't work.

I am interested in discussing things that might work.

The non-believers often get asked, "What are you doing about it" and the answers are pretty much "Nothing" or "raising awareness".

This is my attempt to start a discussion that could potentially have a positive impact on the efficacy of doping detection.

Anyone know where I could go to find people interested in brainstorming / discussing ideas / hypotheses / what not?

I find it more constructive and positive than poking at the negative bits alone.

i think the left of field thinking is somehow so stupid it is valid. throw the kitchen sink at it, come up with dogs.

(meant to be a compliment)


I think you have to forget about 99.9% of the peloton, and just focus all resources on the top dogs.

Maybe even forget about all particular specialities, and just focus on GC in the GTs and the classics, and just those who will be a threat for the podium, and harass them like the Stasi. ferkin harass them. Now this does go against some of my libertarian ideals, but I do not seek to indict a man or prevent their physical freedom. just some sportive handcuffery

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Not received as a compliment whatsoever.

The rest of your post essentially ignores the premise of my suggestion and goes on to say what is being done now is perfectly fine and should be done with more vigour.

Ever seen the definition of insantiy?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Consider how long and how much it would cost to test for Parkinsons, vs a person smelling 12 jumpers.

Now go to dope testing and the duration and cost involved there.

 

[King Boonen]

These kinds of things aren't a new idea, but they are a good one. Anyone who is interested can go look up ion mobility spectrometry, differential mobility spectrometry (DMS/FAIMS) in relation to disease detection and explosives/chemical weapons detection. Anyone who is more interested should look up Paul Thomas at Loughborough University, Jorg Baumbach at Hochschule Reutlingen and Wolfgang Vautz at ISAS. Also, read this review:

http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev-anchem-071213-020043?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori%3Arid%3Acrossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%3Dpubmed&



One major point though, there's no way this will get into anti-doping technology until it has been used in the clinic for disease detection for several years, so while it's a great idea, it;s a long way off.

 

[Cramps]

Re:

Anyone know where I could go to find people interested in brainstorming / discussing ideas / hypotheses / what not?

I find it more constructive and positive than poking at the negative bits alone.

I think the place to find some positive energy for this idea is not a cycling list (evidently!), but a group who are already enthusiastic about dog capabilities in medical or forensic applications.

Re constructive brainstorming, what about the idea of doing the log(n) search every competition? The idea of mixing samples is comedic, but it seems to me this might actually be an efficient deterrent in finding a positive sample with a small number of tests? Obviously a single sample is collected from each cyclist and then combined together as needed.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

Anyone know where I could go to find people interested in brainstorming / discussing ideas / hypotheses / what not?

I find it more constructive and positive than poking at the negative bits alone.

I think the place to find some positive energy for this idea is not a cycling list (evidently!), but a group who are already enthusiastic about dog capabilities in medical or forensic applications.

It has nothing to do with dogs. The last thing I posted was about a woman, detecting Parkinsons with her sense of smell.

I'm talking about brainstorming productive ideas for fixing doping issues in professional sport. The primary issues with doping detection are time and money. Taking samples, transporting them and testing them all take time and significant money.

Re constructive brainstorming, what about the idea of doing the log(n) search every competition? The idea of mixing samples is comedic, but it seems to me this might actually be an efficient deterrent in finding a positive sample with a small number of tests? Obviously a single sample is collected from each cyclist and then combined together as needed.

The mixing samples thing doesn't work, primarily due to a number of factors required for a urine sample to be validated. For starters you'd need 200 chaperones. Things like specific gravity and quantity need to be checked, for example. There are no savings availed in having every single person urinate, considering you have to check each sample before then mixing it. Every time.

Further, the testing itself is not conducted on-site. The samples are transported to a laboratory, then tested. The time required to transport even 3 samples (assuming an athlete could generate 3 back to back) would be hours.

200
100
50
25
12
6 ---> this is where you'd consider testing each individual.

That's 6 samples from the final pool of athletes. The time delay would be exorbitant.

I was pretty sure the person suggesting it was trolling. There are no time or money savings availed using this methodology and it indicates a lack of understanding of the testing process itself.

Compared to the phenomenon of smelling someone's jumper and detecting immediately if they have Parkinson's or not, where the result is instant and in Joy's case reliable.

As I suggested to blackcat, it's basically doing what they are already doing (urine tests), but with more vigour (of all riders). And expecting a different outcome (cheaper and quicker testing). ie insanity.

 

[glenmalure]

Every WT Rider does a lie detector test pre-season, one mid season, one post season.

The science on these isn't 100% hence you cant get a conviction from a lie detector test - but every Intelligence agency uses them as a solid indication of whether someone is telling the truth or not. A sports association could legally use these to hand out bans, fines etc.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re:

Every WT Rider does a lie detector test pre-season, one mid season, one post season.

The science on these isn't 100% hence you cant get a conviction from a lie detector test - but every Intelligence agency uses them as a solid indication of whether someone is telling the truth or not. A sports association could legally use these to hand out bans, fines etc.

I was reading some interesting stuff being done by @veloclinic using eye motion detection, from memory. I have his stuff flagged for future reading.

Are there any industries outside law enforcement using this tech?

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Every WT Rider does a lie detector test pre-season, one mid season, one post season.

The science on these isn't 100% hence you cant get a conviction from a lie detector test - but every Intelligence agency uses them as a solid indication of whether someone is telling the truth or not. A sports association could legally use these to hand out bans, fines etc.

I was reading some interesting stuff being done by @veloclinic using eye motion detection, from memory. I have his stuff flagged for future reading.

Are there any industries outside law enforcement using this tech?

Lie detectors?

 

[glenmalure]

Re: Re:

Are there any industries outside law enforcement using this tech?

I don't know really - apart from the entertainment industry - likes of Jeremy Kyle - consistently says the test results are 99% accurate. (take from that what you will)

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

Are there any industries outside law enforcement using this tech?

I don't know really - apart from the entertainment industry - likes of Jeremy Kyle - consistently says the test results are 99% accurate. (take from that what you will)

I only recently became aware of that show.



I still haven't decided if the host is more repugnant, or his guests.

 

[blackcat]

Re:

Not received as a compliment whatsoever.

The rest of your post essentially ignores the premise of my suggestion and goes on to say what is being done now is perfectly fine and should be done with more vigour.

Ever seen the definition of insantiy?

hmmm, nope, u got it wrong. the premise is reversing this red-queen-effect. the inversion of the nuclear arms race. you get the peloton to enforce their own sport. instead of the Insider v Outsider rule, you do the best to reduce the winners dope appetite. then The Patron will attempt to get the rivals to dope to his own restrictions.


completely different to what you attest. completely.

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

I was reading some interesting stuff being done by @veloclinic using eye motion detection, from memory. I have his stuff flagged for future reading.

Are there any industries outside law enforcement using this tech?

so this explains the Radcliffe #crazyeyes interview?

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Re: Re:

I'm talking about brainstorming productive ideas for ....<anything>

Wrong forum.