Additives that make a significant performance difference, but not doping

[pataphysician]

Banned:
-Performance enhancing substances/procedures that are health damaging (i.e. EPO and blood transfusions)

Not banned:
-Performance enhancing substances/procedures that are not health damaging (i.e. vitamins B-12 and massage)
-Non-performance enhancing substances/procedures that are not health damaging (i.e. orange juice and haircuts)
-Non-performance enhancing substance/procedures that are health damaging (ie, cigarettes-smoking and leg amputations)

Does that sum it up? So the cheater is the one who is willing to damage his health to go faster?

The main reason substances get banned is because they will have a negative affect on the athletes health. Its a misconception that a substance gets banned because it'll make you faster. If that were so then there would be a case for banning training!!

This is not at all how WADA creates the banned list. im sure WADA doesn't want athletes to hurt themselves, but the prohibited list is about performance enhancing not health. it is mostly about unfair advantage, for instance beta blockers are banned in accuracy sports because blocking adrenaline is a big advantage when you require fine motor control. it is not going to affect the athletes health, it just makes them a better archer or golfer.

on an semi related topic, i've never understood why hydrocodone isn't on the list. taking a vicodin(hydrocodone) is pretty much the same as taking a percocet(oxycodone). the only real difference is the percocet will get you suspended.

 

[Cloxxki]

Cloxxki, in all honesty I think you are making assumptions about these "additives" when you really don't understand how and if they affect performance at all.

Also it seems that you are heavily influenced by the placebo effect too. Many of the substances you quoted have without doubt no positive effect at all... unless you believe they do.

Not wanting to start an argument but just pointing out the obvious, please keeps facts straight and stick to reality.

Over and out.

(a lengthy reply got lost in cyberspace)

No offence taken at all WD40.
Thanks for reminding me, I did intend to write on placebo effect in this thread.
And I'll tell ya: I'll take a powerful placebo over EPO any day! Cheaper, and healthier to boot!

Riders who know their body well, and have a serious dope-itch, really need to consider one of the non-dope combined products, which offer something of multiple supplements. I once used a 10-cocktail with many sups in there selected by my friend, and I did seem to perform way better than was to be expected. I was out of shape, hadn't trained or raced, yet competed with the really serious high season racers for a long time.
Someone about nutricion and health will better try those sups seperately, to isolate what works, and what doesn't. Analysis of attributed working will learn you more about your body and training.

Intelligent riders (IQ, education) I expect to be more serious with this, and the lower educated ones to resort to easier, proven, illegal options. But, personal influence is a huge factor of course. If dad says it's OK to dope, and he was there all your cycling life...

 

[Cloxxki]

This is not at all how WADA creates the banned list. im sure WADA doesn't want athletes to hurt themselves, but the prohibited list is about performance enhancing not health. it is mostly about unfair advantage, for instance beta blockers are banned in accuracy sports because blocking adrenaline is a big advantage when you require fine motor control. it is not going to affect the athletes health, it just makes them a better archer or golfer.

on an semi related topic, i've never understood why hydrocodone isn't on the list. taking a vicodin(hydrocodone) is pretty much the same as taking a percocet(oxycodone). the only real difference is the percocet will get you suspended.

Hi pataphysician,
You seem to be better informed than most of us can dream to ever will be.
Would you consider sharing some strong alternatives to bad-doping, which racers could look at, to at least not be lured into the real cheating and sports ruining stuff? Some things seem to be pretty general, work for nearly everyone, some at hit-and-miss.
Some must-tries, if you will?

thanks,
J

 

[Ex-trackie]

This is not at all how WADA creates the banned list. im sure WADA doesn't want athletes to hurt themselves, but the prohibited list is about performance enhancing not health. it is mostly about unfair advantage, for instance beta blockers are banned in accuracy sports because blocking adrenaline is a big advantage when you require fine motor control. it is not going to affect the athletes health, it just makes them a better archer or golfer.

While I think saying that WADA is only interested in protecting athlete health is naive, I think the reality is that it is a combination of protecting the athlete and protecting the fairness of the sport. Many, if not most, of the doctors and scientists involved in antidoping work are motivated primarily by the health reprecussions of doping in sport and protecting athletes from making, or being coerced into making bad decisions.

 

[brianf7]

Asprin the new wonder drug now prevents many cancers prevents heart atacks and strokes.

What will the drug companys do with WADA banning everything and the old time asprin taking over the new wonder drugs.

Surely they will pay WADA to ban it

why not have some stainless stents put into your arteries it will improve blood flow and enhance performance .

And WADA cant find a test to find that in your urine.

 

[forty four]

i agree with cloxxci i have used what he mentioned as well as some others and the one big significant difference was recovery for the next ride and also repeatable hard efforts were done easier with more power. sadly i cannot afford to use what i have in the past but there is a difference in performance when you have supps in your training program. that said there is also a lot of useless crap.

 

[_frost]

Maltodextrin is a starch derived sugar used mostly as a food additive. Maltodextrine on the otherhand is an artifical sweetener.

I am not a native english speaker so, please forgive me. My point though was that it's basicly "bread and water" not really a high tech nutritional aid to have an epo-like boost. (obviously carbs, complex or not are crusial for exercise and if your died is totally missing them then I could imagine adding malto would make a huge difference for endurance athlete)

 

[jpowell]

Sure-fire Additives

Try adding a few more miles and a bit more effort - works wonders!

 

[red_explosions]

Eat a mixed healthy diet and you'll get everything you need. Additional supplements are pretty much a waste of time in my book. What's the point of taking lots of Vitamins A-Z if it's surplus to your body's requirements and just gets eliminated?

It's like all these fancy energy drinks, pretty much a gimmick. What do you need to make energy? Glucose. You might as well drink chocolate milk. Doesn't burn a hole in your pocket and tastes a whole lot better.

No supplement will get you anywhere near the boost given by blood doping. You can take as much as this, that and the other as you want, but if you run out of oxygen nothing will save you.

 

[workingclasshero]

Calcium Pyruvate

how do you recommend taking these? thinking of giving them a go, but it appears you take three pills before training then one after? shouldn't it be the other way round if you want better recovery?

also, should one be on it for a month, then sit down and evaluate?

 

[DomFab1]

Pure Power Mouthguard

Although this is a device and not an additive, a few cyclists here in Trinidad are wearing a mouthguard, which is purportedly giving them additional strength, endurance and co-ordination.

Check it out

http://www.makkaradvantage.com

 

[Ripper]

You might as well drink chocolate milk. Doesn't burn a hole in your pocket and tastes a whole lot better.

I would love to see people drinking chocolate milk in the middle of an intense race. It would be a pukefest!

I agree that drinks do not need to be high tech ... go to a home brewing store and buy your own dextrose. But milk don't go down to good when you're on the rivet

 

[Cloxxki]

how do you recommend taking these? thinking of giving them a go, but it appears you take three pills before training then one after? shouldn't it be the other way round if you want better recovery?

Also, should one be on it for a month, then sit down and evaluate?

Don't take dosing recommendations from anyone other than a pharmacist well-read into the substance.
My dosing was simple, and not exersize-related. There is also a race-related effect, of greatr dosing, in the hours leading to a race.
I had it in capsules, and took like 8 of them over the day. Important to time it well relative to meals, calcium doesn't jive with every type of meal.
I typically bought a month's worth of it, and this was then a great support (mentally or physically, you be the judge) in changing me from an out-of-shape, off-seasoner to a lean and mean, sooner ready than others for the March XC races, near top shape self.
As my dosing instructions advised to not use it longer than a month due to unknown effect that might become a factor, I didn't. And really, unless you're really serious about your sport, it's a bit of a waste of money anyway. CP for me seemed to complement my training efforts well, although I did not time it relative to such efforts.
The report I gave of the lady friend who had such huge improvements from longer-term use of CP, dates from after the time that I was using it. Now, I might give 2-3 months a go, when I'm really working towards a major event.

I always felt like CP was a bit of a body toner. It seemed to do what dangerous stacker were claiming to do, less the weight loss. I was in it for the lean muscle more than loss of fat. If I want to lose fat, I'll have to suffer and do some boring longer rides.

 

[beroepsrenner]

Interesting to read some of the posts on this thread. While some of the posters who consider themselves anti dopers are quite enthusiastic about experimenting with supplemets to find the one that works for them. When the stakes are higher and the morality is not a consideration then the psychology of what drives you is no different than those that dope.

There are those that believe that supplements are not required if your dietry intake is sufficient. This is true for the average cyclist who is only operating at the average healthy fitness level. If you are a top end amateur or pro you are pushing yourself way beyond what is normal. Supplements are definitely neccessary for health and recovery.

in my pre doping days, B group and C injected was normal as well as iron. another product called creatine was used to counteract the effects of lactic acid. I'm not sure of this one and maybe someone more knowledgeable than me can elaborate on it.

 

[ChrisE]

I read where the current light-heavyweight champ of the UFC drinks his own urine. I assume autologous oral urine chugging is not on the banned list. What about non-autologous? Would Tom Boonen urine supplements help us on short cobbled climbs?

What about animal urine? Would cheetah urine help our sprint? I see on those nature shows how those wild dogs can run for miles and not get tired. Maybe some of their urine would help with endurance.

Cloxxki should experiment and report back with his findings.

 

[Cloxxki]

I read where the current light-heavyweight champ of the UFC drinks his own urine. I assume autologous oral urine chugging is not on the banned list. What about non-autologous? Would Tom Boonen urine supplements help us on short cobbled climbs?

What about animal urine? Would cheetah urine help our sprint? I see on those nature shows how those wild dogs can run for miles and not get tired. Maybe some of their urine would help with endurance.

Cloxxki should experiment and report back with his findings.

Processed or straight up urine? Some good stuff is in there for sure, but some poison as well.
I would say processed urine (filetered, heated, etc) would be doping. Straight up, 37ºC fresh urine : just gros and obscene.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Processed or straight up urine? Some good stuff is in there for sure, but some poison as well.
I would say processed urine (filetered, heated, etc) would be doping. Straight up, 37ºC fresh urine : just gros and obscene.

I think both you guys are taking the piss.....

 

[Digger]

I hate when people **** on this forum.

 

[ChrisE]

Processed or straight up urine? Some good stuff is in there for sure, but some poison as well.
I would say processed urine (filetered, heated, etc) would be doping. Straight up, 37ºC fresh urine : just gros and obscene.

For sure, I see some issues.

I think if the urine undergoes some type of processing then the effect may be dulled. But, you would need to screen the urine for PEDs or other things on the banned list. For example, I wouldn't suggest blindly drinking Tom Boonen's urine after a night out at the strip club.

I don't agree with filtered/heated being doping. Why somebody would want to heat it above 98F is beyond me, and filtering out any suspended solids should not be frowned upon. If I was so inclined I would prefer the urine chilled.

After reading all of the stuff you take, I think you could probably market your urine so others would not have to take all of that stuff. I would suggest some type of additive for taste/smell.....with everything you take it probably smells like concentrated bathroom tile cleaner.

 

[ChrisE]

I hate when people **** on this forum.

Me too. If people would just stick to the topics being discussed instead of going off on wild tangents things would be much more enjoyable.

 

[Anonymous]

I hate when people **** on this forum.

Digger if you don't have anything to further this discussion I have a suggestion for you.

Go back to Notre Dame and figure out the Triangle offense or the 2 / 3 zone.

There is a serious discussion going on here regarding additives and the benefits from non-autologous urine chugging.

 

[ChrisE]

Digger if you don't have anything to further this discussion I have a suggestion for you.

Go back to Notre Dame and figure out the Triangle offense or the 2 / 3 zone.

There is a serious discussion going on here regarding additives and the benefits from non-autologous urine chugging.

Now now. We really don't know what Digger is saying because it was ****. I assume it was derogatory, but then again I don't know why he went off topic to say something like that. I am sure he will contribute something relevant soon.

Is this guy really Digger Phelps?

 

[hfer07]

(a lengthy reply got lost in cyberspace)

No offence taken at all WD40.
Thanks for reminding me, I did intend to write on placebo effect in this thread.
And I'll tell ya: I'll take a powerful placebo over EPO any day! Cheaper, and healthier to boot!

Riders who know their body well, and have a serious dope-itch, really need to consider one of the non-dope combined products, which offer something of multiple supplements. I once used a 10-cocktail with many sups in there selected by my friend, and I did seem to perform way better than was to be expected. I was out of shape, hadn't trained or raced, yet competed with the really serious high season racers for a long time.
Someone about nutricion and health will better try those sups seperately, to isolate what works, and what doesn't. Analysis of attributed working will learn you more about your body and training.

Intelligent riders (IQ, education) I expect to be more serious with this, and the lower educated ones to resort to easier, proven, illegal options. But, personal influence is a huge factor of course. If dad says it's OK to dope, and he was there all your cycling life...

I share the same approach as you do, and I also use most of the supplements you have mentioned with great results so far.
As you mentioned before, the supplements should have an specific purpose, and should be taken under specific conditions, schedules & dietary regiments to avoid undesired side effects.
the most common mistake from people seeking/choosing/taking supplements is the hope for dramatic changes in a near future-which only translates in frustration. the results offered by supplements are in "the long term" (one to two years)
the second one is the brand selection: it comes down to a simple principle: you get what you paid for. Sometimes generic formulas are only that-simple, basic and won't generate any improvement at all. on the flip side -some brands offer to the customers products with more that their bodies need to add- and there is where a lot a people get unwanted muscle & weight gain, muscle cramps & nasty physiological alterations.
the last one is how your own body react to the supplements and the dosage use for training/recovery. as Cloxxki mentioned, some of the supplements just won't work for you, based on medical history, training intensity, body type, etc. based on what has been addressed before- this is a "program" -but a clean a safe one that can give you good results-if it is "professionally & carefully costumed" for you.

 

[Cloxxki]

I share the same approach as you do, and I also use most of the supplements you have mentioned with great results so far.
As you mentioned before, the supplements should have an specific purpose, and should be taken under specific conditions, schedules & dietary regiments to avoid undesired side effects.
the most common mistake from people seeking/choosing/taking supplements is the hope for dramatic changes in a near future-which only translates in frustration. the results offered by supplements are in "the long term" (one to two years)
the second one is the brand selection: it comes down to a simple principle: you get what you paid for. Sometimes generic formulas are only that-simple, basic and won't generate any improvement at all. on the flip side -some brands offer to the customers products with more that their bodies need to add- and there is where a lot a people get unwanted muscle & weight gain, muscle cramps & nasty physiological alterations.
the last one is how your own body react to the supplements and the dosage use for training/recovery. as Cloxxki mentioned, some of the supplements just won't work for you, based on medical history, training intensity, body type, etc. based on what has been addressed before- this is a "program" -but a clean a safe one that can give you good results-if it is "professionally & carefully costumed" for you.

Thank you for this fine on-topic response.
You perfectly illustrate reasons why supplements are for die-hard, experienced riders, who have great medical understanding talent or at least long-term support from one and the same trainer/physician.
Someone like Ricco, is not expected to have a top notch supplements program doing. He didn't even microdose, just used what he was promised to be very illegal, yet undetectable, the perfect crime. Yeah, right.

Great intellect and especial;y determination is required to even get to long-term results as hfer refers to. I've only come to short-term effects, as I never had the budget (apart from many high-end bikes) to invest in supplements. Determination was also lacking. Document your supplements performance makes watching paint dry seem a pretty exciting way to spend your spare time.
Supplement programs are supplementary to a rider's mental focus, commitment and fair-play heart. I this makes it almost a given that when someone comes to a well balanced sups program, his results will show for it. Of course, the rider will prefer to call it "a good day", "god-given talent", "great team support", "luck to have no setbacks", etc. Who wants the competition to realize that some good attention to sups can take away the need for illegal dope to get results, at near zero chance to "positive"?

 

[fpcyclingn]

It's funny to watch retards who don't have a PhD in bio-chemistry sit around and talk about this stuff. Thanks for giving me a laugh.