issoisso said:
Uhh....no. If you're gonna use anything, use the latest. Not something like CERA that's quite a bit older and has been around for 5 years
Given the reply's on this thread I do wonder at times.

Using epo is daft, but believable. Logistics behind epo, it would seem are cheaper than blood doping and more reliable...take blood out, it has to be replaced by the body, epo you shoot up and your body ups the haematocrit and haemoglobin levels, leaving blood volume relatively untouched. Anyone here know how the epo urine test works? The CERA and Dynepo versions cannot be much different, separate the molecules on an electrode plate so you can distinguish androgenous and exogenous erythropoietin. Simple really. You can have recombinant erythropoietin in your system but not be sanctioned. There are thresholds, benchmarks, like the testosterone to epitestosterone ratio that nabbed Floyd and allowed the radio isotope test. If you are under the threshold, you cannot be sanctioned, but it does not mean you aren't juicing.
When any athlete or sportsman/woman says I haven't had a positive, what they really mean is that I have never been sanctioned, ie:gone over the allowable limit. They aren't lying, but unless they say I am not taking anything that is illegal or suspicious then you are hearing and being fed a half-truth. If governing bodies lowered the limits, which they should because rEpo cannot get into your system unless you're using epo (synthetic does not occur naturally), then a lot more athletes/cyclists would be busted. I won't hold my breath. If you have the money and organisational skills you blood dope, if you don't epo is what you'd use for a performance boost.