Doping in mountaineering ?

[hmronnow]

Not sure this is the right forum, but there seems to be a number of people knowledgable about doping.

I have been wondering whether there is doping in mountaineering. High-altitude mountaineering is a lot about endurance and dealing with the lack of oxygen up there. Someone replied to an earlier post of mine that EPO not only increase the oxygen carrying capacity in the blood system, but also increase oxygen uptake efficiency in the lungs. If he was correct, then EPO might be very effective for mountaineers.

I guess there could be other types of drugs that enhance mountineerign performance too - other than gorp.

Now, there is probably less money at stake in mountaineering, but on the other hand, as far as I know, zero controls either.

Does anybody know something?

 

[WD-40.]

Not sure this is the right forum, but there seems to be a number of people knowledgable about doping.

I have been wondering whether there is doping in mountaineering. High-altitude mountaineering is a lot about endurance and dealing with the lack of oxygen up there. Someone replied to an earlier post of mine that EPO not only increase the oxygen carrying capacity in the blood system, but also increase oxygen uptake efficiency in the lungs. If he was correct, then EPO might be very effective for mountaineers.

I guess there could be other types of drugs that enhance mountineerign performance too - other than gorp.

Now, there is probably less money at stake in mountaineering, but on the other hand, as far as I know, zero controls either.

Does anybody know something?

I fully believe that EPO use is common with mountaineers but of course why should it be discouraged with those who will benefit from its proper use? No need to take it away from them.

 

[Animal]

I doubt that there is much abuse of PEDs in mountaineering. Sport climbing probably, because it's a whole different set of demands, and largely a different mindset.

But there are no multi million pound contracts and high profile careers to be had in mountaineering. Generally, the motivation is to have a personal feeling of accomplishment rather than win for a sponsor. And that feeling just won't be there if you know that you cheated.

 

[hmronnow]

Generally, the motivation is to have a personal feeling of accomplishment rather than win for a sponsor. And that feeling just won't be there if you know that you cheated.

Then why is mount everest littered with oxygen bottles?

I can think of two situations:
- Someone who pays 100-200k$ in fee and expedition costs to climb everest really wants to succeed, or his life savings will have gone towards a failure.
- A number of people try to make a living as professional mountaineers, with sponsorships etc. What they need to do to get sponsorships, TV-deals etc is to do stuff that others haven't been able to do before.

In cycling or other competitions between athletes, it is possible to lower the playing field. Mountaineering is largely a 'beat the records' kind of sport.

 

[Animal]

Chomolungma has been littered with all kinds of things. Oxygen, corpses, dumped equipment.

This was due more to the mindeset of the culprits. Nowadays it's known that you have to haul your trash out.

 

[Animal]

Another issue is that there is no "omerta" in mountaineering.

The whole sport of climbing is divided into "games". These range from "bouldering" which is climbing small 10 foot boulders on holds of miniscule size, using moves of utmost difficulty, right up to trudging up 8000 metre peaks.

Each has its set of rules which are guided by no official body, but by the constant peer pressue of the climbing community.

So in bouldering, you use no artifice apart from your climbing slippers and a chalk bag. It's you against your own limits.

As the challenges become larger, more artificial aids are accepted.

But this is an ongoing process as to what is acceptable. The concept of "ethics" is central to the climbing world. People with dodgy ethics are discussed and known about. "Styles" of ascent are discussed in detail in the climbing community, and people found wantnig in the ethics area are vilified.

And breaches of the unwritten code are remembered for years. For example Egger and Mastri's claim on Cerro Torre was doubted and talked about for years, and the "ascent" was never accepted by the worldwide community. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerro_Torre

 

[python]

drugs certainly can help mountaineers. but i don’t think epo is necessarily the drug of choice. in fact epo may be deadlier to climbers than to cyclists. epo raises vo2 max but some of the best mountaineers had very unremarkable sea level vo2 max. for ex messner the world’s most famous climber had vo2 max of only 48.

the set of physiological attributes necessary for a top climber is not the same as in the elite endurance athletes at sea level . check the thread on hematocrit - too many rbcs may even promote altitude sickness.

what drugs would benefit climbers? i’m not aware of special studies but diamox for ex is routinely prescribed by climbing schools for attitude sickness.

If the prominent sports physiologist tim noakes is right, theoretically any substance that improves oxygen transport across the lung membranes into the blood, would be a ped of choice for climbers. drug that increase the capacity of exercising muscles to use oxygen are of little use to climbers.

 

[WD-40.]

I wasn't refering to mountaineering as a sport or competition.

Another issue is that there is no "omerta" in mountaineering.

As the challenges become larger, more artificial aids are accepted.

But this is an ongoing process as to what is acceptable. The concept of "ethics" is central to the climbing world. People with dodgy ethics are discussed and known about. "Styles" of ascent are discussed in detail in the climbing community, and people found wantnig in the ethics area are vilified.

But who says for instance that climbing Mt Everest on EPO is cheating? If it is safer by means of having more oxygen getting to the brain and therefore being able to think more clearly and having a lower chance of getting yourself killed as a result is that wrong? Or how about the evidence that having a low hematocrit level can cause brain damage at high altitude because the brain isn't getting enough oxygen?

I don't believe that EPO use should be outlawed in instances like I have described above.

 

[WD-40.]

what drugs would benefit climbers? i’m not aware of special studies but diamox for ex is routinely prescribed by climbing schools for attitude sickness.

If the prominent sports physiologist tim noakes is right, theoretically any substance that improves oxygen transport across the lung membranes into the blood, would be a ped of choice for climbers. drug that increase the capacity of exercising muscles to use oxygen are of little use to climbers.

What drugs would benefit climbers? EPO, if they are at high altutude. You do not need to be exercising hard to benefit from it.

EPO has been used very successfully by freedivers and the like where oxygen use is very low and not just athletes in sports like rowing, cycling, XCskiing, swimming, running etc where oxygen use is very high.

 

[Animal]

I wasn't refering to mountaineering as a sport or competition.

Of course not. It's not a competition, and not really a sport. There is no "governing body", there is no codified body of rules.

 

[Animal]

An interesting article which examines the elements of climbing "style" (as in the ethical style of the ascent). It also has nice references to the climbing "games" I mentioned.

http://outside.away.com/outside/features/200509/mountaineering-reform-1.html

The author talks about climbing without supplemental O2 as a personal choice, and using the clean "alpine style" of mountain ascent instead of the messy, resource-intensive "siege" game.

 

[python]

What drugs would benefit climbers? EPO, if they are at high altutude. You do not need to be exercising hard to benefit from it.

EPO has been used very successfully by freedivers and the like where oxygen use is very low and not just athletes in sports like rowing, cycling, XCskiing, swimming, running etc where oxygen use is very high.

you do not need to exercise hard to die at altitude from a heart attack or a stroke due to epo thickened blood and dehydration. once again, given that messner's vo2 was only 48, i'd think it's no coincidence they prefer breathing external oxygen at altitude to carrying more more oxygen in their vessels.

 

[Cobblestones]

To answer the OP: there's no doping in mountaineering, because it's not a sport with anti doping rules and a governing body. If you want to give it a name, call it prescription medication abuse. But why should anyone care? People who try to ascent a 8000+ m high lump of rock risk their lives anyway. A little extra risk from EPO abuse or whatever adds little.

I looked it up on Wikipedia. Apparently including 2008, there have been 4100 ascents by about 2700 individuals (so some of them going multiple times), while around 210 people have died so far. So the risk is pretty substantial. Almost 1 in 10 on an individual basis.

 

[WD-40.]

you do not need to exercise hard to die at altitude from a heart attack or a stroke due to epo thickened blood and dehydration. once again, given that messner's vo2 was only 48, i'd think it's no coincidence they prefer breathing external oxygen at altitude to carrying more more oxygen in their vessels.

I understand very well that one does need to be exercising hard at altitude to die from a heart attack or a stroke due to EPO thanks. The rest of what you are saying makes no sense at all, seriously. What is there to say they are not using both EPO and external oxygen supplies, now that makes perfect sense.

As this is cycling forum and has members with strong feelings on anti-doping the subject of high altitudes causing possible brain damage (with the more than likely possibility of EPO being able to prevent it to some extent) will be largely ignored. Well at least until I mentioned that.

To answer the OP: there's no doping in mountaineering, because it's not a sport with anti doping rules and a governing body. If you want to give it a name, call it prescription medication abuse. But why should anyone care? People who try to ascent a 8000+ m high lump of rock risk their lives anyway. A little extra risk from EPO abuse or whatever adds little.

It isn't prescription medicine abuse if it is beneficial to them and their safety IMO.

 

[python]

I understand very well that one does need to be exercising hard at altitude to die from a heart attack or a stroke due to EPO thanks. The rest of what you are saying makes no sense at all, seriously. What is there to say they are not using both EPO and external oxygen supplies, now that makes perfect sense.

As this is cycling forum and has members with strong feelings on anti-doping the subject of high altitudes causing possible brain damage (with the more than likely possibility of EPO being able to prevent it to some extent) will be largely ignored. Well at least until I mentioned that.



It isn't prescription medicine abuse if it is beneficial to them and their safety IMO.

what makes no sense is your assertion that you know they are using epo. provide evidence or studies that they do. the fact that they are using supplemental oxygen is a proven fact. what climbers could do is your speculation. i am not aware of any sources that mountaineers abuse or use epo. i only stressed the likelihood that epo is very dangerous as it is. using it w/o the proper medical supervision for performance enhancement in high altitude climbing is probably more dangerous than beneficial. as cobbles indicated mortality among the climbers is high and the wisest of them probably know of dangers of thick blood, dehydration, lack of artery flexibility (most climbers are not spring chickens). etc etc. if you want to make sense, provide evidence or say you are speculating like everyone else.

 

[WD-40.]

what makes no sense is your assertion that you know they are using epo. provide evidence or studies that they do. the fact that they are using supplemental oxygen is a proven fact. what climbers could do is your speculation. i am not aware of any sources that mountaineers abuse or use epo. i only stressed the likelihood that epo is very dangerous as it is. using it w/o the proper medical supervision for performance enhancement in high altitude climbing is probably more dangerous than beneficial. as cobbles indicated mortality among the climbers is high and the wisest of them probably know of dangers of thick blood, dehydration, lack of artery flexibility (most climbers are not spring chickens). etc etc. if you want to make sense, provide evidence or say you are speculating like everyone else.

Never actually asserted that were using EPO, however I do fully believe that it is a common practice for many mountaineers. Now I have no evidence to back me up but it makes sense that if EPO benefits them then it is probably being widely used period. Does that not make sense?

Until 1998 not many people would have known about EPO use in cycling and anyone who brought up the subject would have been ridiculed. The days I think it is safe to say that EPO use was rampant in cycling pre 1998 though I had no evidence to show this or studies to back me up.

 

[python]

Never actually asserted that were using EPO, however I do fully believe that it is a common practice for many mountaineers. Now I have no evidence to back me up but it makes sense that if EPO benefits them then it is probably being widely used period. Does that not make sense?

Until 1998 not many people would have known about EPO use in cycling and anyone who brought up the subject would have been ridiculed. The days I think it is safe to say that EPO use was rampant in cycling pre 1998 though I had no evidence to show this or studies to back me up.

you gave a fair explanation of your opinion. and i appreciate you state you have no evidence of epo use just like i don't have proof that it is not being used.

but the comparison of epo use in cycling and mountaineering is not a good one. mountaineering is a personal achievement endeavor for most who chose to be involved. the few who take it extremely seriously are seldom motivated by profits, contracts or glory. they are obsesses fanatics in a good sense of the word. professional cycling otoh is totally different. the pressure to use whatever to get an edge is tremendous. compare that with survival in mountaineering and rather limited budgets of those involved. im a mediocre climber but have done some climbing to 7,000 meters. i know some folks like myself. because there is no anti-doping regulation i've heard open discussions about various chemical alternatives. epo was never discussed and the one time i asked it was discouraged. sure it's all anecdotal and i'd like to hear others stories. as we know, cycling omerta is way different. peloton was full of knowledge that epo was abused in late 90s

 

[firstrider]

Yes it's used and common

I know several high altitude mountain climbers and they all use some form of PED. 2 primary reasons
1: life and death situation. Mt. Everest is no joke. They want the best possible chance of success and life
2: money. It's not cheap to climb Mt. Everest. Upwards of $100K. Nor is it something you can simply try again year-in and year-out.

Those are their stated reasons and it makes sense. "cheating" is highly subjective in the sport. some feel supplemental O2 is cheating while others do not. it's a subject that goes way back even to the parody book "The Ascent of Rum Doodle" where they joke that wearing clothes could be considered cheating as it's not "natural"

 

[Le breton]

drugs certainly can help mountaineers. but i don’t think epo is necessarily the drug of choice. in fact epo may be deadlier to climbers than to cyclists. epo raises vo2 max but some of the best mountaineers had very unremarkable sea level vo2 max. for ex messner the world’s most famous climber had vo2 max of only 48.

This is my first message on this forum, sorry if I mess it up.
Your claim of a 48 ml/min.kg VO2 max for Messner is what compelled me to register in order to reply.
First I would like to give a ref. on the subject which claims among other things that 49 ml could be an absolute minimum to reach Everest without supplemental O2.

Next, I would like to stress the fact that Messner is known for introducing fast ascent of summits, a "technique" which of course reduces considerably the risks inherent to high-altitude exposure.

I assumed that you did not pull that figure of 48 ml out of the blue and indeed I found it quoted on the Internet in a couple of places.

It is possible to estimate Messner VO2 or VO2 max from training climbs he did in the Alps over the years and I remember reading one of his books where I probably could find some figures of altitude gain per hour, but that would take some time and effort. Anyway, with 48 ml, on a good terrain, he could only gain something like 900m/h without any load ( I did just under 1200 m/h over 1hr when I had about a VO2 around 65 ml and about 1600 m/h over 10 min with a slightly higher VO2 max).

I know I read an article a number of years ago, written I believe by Di Pamprero, the well-known psysiologist, who quoted an estimate of Messner VO2 max by another scientist (it could have been Conconi) who had arrived at a figure in the neigbourhood of 80 ml/min.kg for Messner.

Given Messner outstanding high altitude achievements, I would definitely be more ready to believe the 80 ml figure than the 48 you quote.

Now, of course, I have no way of knowing iwhether he used EPO or not. If he did, that might not be as dangerous while he would be at high altitude but more so on his return to sea-level.

You might be interested to know that Bernardo, XXX???, the first Bolivian ever to climb Everest, suffers from chronic mountain sickness, polycythemia, and had at the time a Hct of about 69%! A more normal value for a Bolivian living at about 3500-4000m. would be 52-55% I guess.

Cheers

 

[WD-40.]

you gave a fair explanation of your opinion. and i appreciate you state you have no evidence of epo use just like i don't have proof that it is not being used.

but the comparison of epo use in cycling and mountaineering is not a good one. mountaineering is a personal achievement endeavor for most who chose to be involved. the few who take it extremely seriously are seldom motivated by profits, contracts or glory. they are obsesses fanatics in a good sense of the word. professional cycling otoh is totally different. the pressure to use whatever to get an edge is tremendous. compare that with survival in mountaineering and rather limited budgets of those involved. im a mediocre climber but have done some climbing to 7,000 meters. i know some folks like myself. because there is no anti-doping regulation i've heard open discussions about various chemical alternatives. epo was never discussed and the one time i asked it was discouraged. sure it's all anecdotal and i'd like to hear others stories. as we know, cycling omerta is way different. peloton was full of knowledge that epo was abused in late 90s

7,000 meters is good going Python! I have never climbed much above 7,000 feet.

Cheers

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Some years ago I used to be into climbing, but mostly technical mountaineering and ice. I was never at the level being discussed here, but can comment, though I don't see much of a point, aside from curiosity.

First, it’s fairly common for Acetazolamide, or Diamox to be used to help acclimate to high altitude. I never used Acetazolamide, but went climbing in the high Andes with a few climbers who did. Another drug that’s often used for climbers in distress suffering from pulmonary or cerebral edema is dexamethasone, a potent steroid. But I know of no one using it to enhance performance, only survival. Some climbers have also used amphetamines, which is probably the closest to what one would consider a PED, but it’s as often as not used to stay awake during crucial times. I never once heard of anyone using EPO, not that it hasn’t been attempted.

Sport climbers are probably the most apt to use steroids or HGH.

 

[hmronnow]

though I don't see much of a point, aside from curiosity.

Curiocity was the reason for starting the thread. I meant PED, not doping as in violation of some rule. Thanks for the various inputs.

I know several high altitude mountain climbers and they all use some form of PED.

May I ask which PEDs and for what kind of mountaineering/climbing?

Concerning the discussion of VO2max, this is highly non-sicentific: For some reason I have very low iron, and hence haematocrit - often below 40. I have a friend who outruns me easily any day at sea level. Every time we get above 4000m, I seem much stronger than him - be it running, rock, ice or ski. So this non-quantitative, statistically feeble anecdote would imply that haematocrit is not so important for altitude performance.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

I also know high altitude climbers who use Diamox, but have never heard of any alpine climbers trying EPO.

 

[kiwirider]

As someone who is a lapsed mountaineer - although admittedly not high altitude Himalayan type stuff - I would be really surprised if EPO was used for a number of reasons.

First off, most climbers are dead broke. It's a lifestyle thing and doesn't pay that well. As for the stereotypical wealthy clients of the guiding companies, they may try it - but then some of the other points I'll make come into play.

Second, if you're climbing regularly you don't need it. By definition with climbing you're getting altitude training and are building up the oxygen carrying capacity in your blood anyhow. I still remember a bike race after 14 days climbing - I was riding at race speeds but my heart was only beating like I was riding to the shops ... it was an awesome feeling.

Third, I believe there's a simple equation: EPO + climbing = death. OK, so I'm not a doctor, so will stand to be corrected, but the logic is this ... Climbing dehydrates you badly - due to the effort, the altitude and the climate (cold, usually dry air). This causes the blood to thicken anyhow as you get general reductions in body fluids. EPO also thickens the blood. Put the two effects together in an uncontrolled way (or, more correctly, in a situation where you have no control over the environment you're functioning in) and the potential for a fatal result is huge. Mountaineers are actually a strangely cautious bunch (in a put your life on the line every time you go out kind of way), so are unlikely, when there are already enough objective dangers around (avalanche, weather, etc) to add another which has little benefit.

Fourth reason, as others have said, is that climbing is strangely non-aerobic, so there's no benefit there either. It's more about the ability to beat the **** out of yourself day in and day out and to just chug away at a constant pace. Hard to explain unless you've been there ...

To the OP - thanks - this is an interesting thread to have started ... and good one to get you thinking in the morning ...

 

[Le breton]

http://www.nationalacademyofkinesiology.org/AcuCustom/Sitename/DAM/129/TAP_18_LimitsofHumanPerformance_03.pdf

I just learned yesterday that Diamox is on WADA's list of doping substances (diuretic). Wanting to see what was posted in the forum on the subject, I found this thread in which I had posted on the forum for the 1st time, prompted by the fact that Python had mentioned a VO2 max of 48 ml/min.kg for Messner.
Having heard Di Prampero mention an estimated value of 80 ml, I decided this time to look for the root of that estimate.

And I found it, see 1st line.
80 ml for someone able to climb 1000 m in 34 min. in training seems consistent.