How's this for unrepentant?

[JMBeaushrimp]

Think the institutional level of these types of guys may be a problem?

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/matschiner-reveals-blood-doping-techniques

Wow! He actually thinks he's doing a health service.

 

[Oldman]

Think the institutional level of these types of guys may be a problem?

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/matschiner-reveals-blood-doping-techniques

Wow! He actually thinks he's doing a health service.

He is one of the profiteering pieces of sh*t that is worse than the riders. That he, other DS's and their facilitators exist is bad enough. That they feel they provide a service is it any wonder the riders justify PED use?

 

[DirtyWorks]

End Justifies the Means

Wow! He actually thinks he's doing a health service.

If the *only* goal is to make the rider faster (to win), then indeed, the rider is 'healthier.'

I think it's wrong, but it's easy to rationalize doping. Not only rationalize it, sleep well and wake up proud knowing you assisted for a possible win.

Another shining example of wrong is the scene from the movie Bruno where Brüno interviews parents of child models, asking if their children would be ready to lose a lot of weight, undergo liposuction, be near "antiquated heavy machinery" or lit phosphorus, or be dressed in Nazi uniforms. All of which the parents agree to do. Funny, but 100% wrong and the parents didn't even pause to think about to what they were agreeing

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

He is one of the profiteering pieces of sh*t that is worse than the riders. That he, other DS's and their facilitators exist is bad enough. That they feel they provide a service is it any wonder the riders justify PED use?

The riders justify PED use because they want to win. As you said, the fact these 'professional' enablers are not villified and thrown in jail (oh wait, he way be thrown in jail), is another ugly scar on the sport.

Rather than guys like Thor, who have a 'see no evil' attitude, we need to encourage the sh*t-disturbers who actually have the n*ts to stand up and tell it how it is.

Even Kohl had the b*lls to do that, even if his doctor is in denial (or at least deep justification).

 

[Anonymous]

It's a pattern:

"Fuentes sees reverse transfusions of one's own blood as therapeutic treatment for an athlete's overburdened body. In his view, it isn't the treatment that's wrong, but the rules and regulations governing the use of performance-enhancing drugs. Fuentes's principle is that anything that promises to enhance performance should be tried. And anything that can't be detected in tests for these substances should be permitted."

http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,425939,00.html

"Ferrari publicly defended the use of EPO by cyclists, stating that "EPO is not dangerous, it's the abuse that is. It's also dangerous to drink ten liters of orange juice."

http://wapedia.mobi/en/Michele_Ferrari

 

[El Pistolero]

Not a doping expert, but what are the negative consequences for ones health for a correctly done blood transfusion?

 

[hrotha]

Not a doping expert, but what are the negative consequences for ones health for a correctly done blood transfusion?

For what it's worth, when I try to think of a definition of doping I usually come up with "using performance-enhancing substances or procedures (or masking agents) that are bad for your health", and I have a bit of a conceptual problem with blood transfusions, because from an emotional point of view I think they're doping (not because they're banned, I mean, but because I think they should be banned regardless), but from a rational point of view I'm not sure they fit my definition.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

For what it's worth, when I try to think of a definition of doping I usually come up with "using performance-enhancing substances or procedures (or masking agents) that are bad for your health", and I have a bit of a conceptual problem with blood transfusions, because from an emotional point of view I think they're doping (not because they're banned, I mean, but because I think they should be banned regardless), but from a rational point of view I'm not sure they fit my definition.

Not 'bad for your health', but rather in cotravention of doping protocols and procedures.

The 'bad for your health' case doesn't fly because the anti-doping measures in sport are put there to try to keep the 'ideal of sport' alive, not neceassarily to look after the athletes' health.

The lame argument of having proactive doping practices, those monitored by medical professionals etc. to ensure the safe use of banned procedures, erodes what the ideal of sport is. And, what I think we all love about cycling.

Take a look at the UCI protocol, the WADA list, the substances and procedures outlawed by the IOC. THOSE are the rules the athletes need to adhere to. Healthy, or not, those are the rules. Those who contravene them get nailed.

Or, at least they should...

 

[JPM London]

For what it's worth, when I try to think of a definition of doping I usually come up with "using performance-enhancing substances or procedures (or masking agents) that are bad for your health", and I have a bit of a conceptual problem with blood transfusions, because from an emotional point of view I think they're doping (not because they're banned, I mean, but because I think they should be banned regardless), but from a rational point of view I'm not sure they fit my definition.

I agree with your first part, the bolded one. For me it's not a question of whether it's healthy or not. Obviously everything that carries health risks should be banned, but "healthy PEDs" are still PEDs...

It's a pattern:

"Fuentes sees reverse transfusions of one's own blood as therapeutic treatment for an athlete's overburdened body. In his view, it isn't the treatment that's wrong, but the rules and regulations governing the use of performance-enhancing drugs. Fuentes's principle is that anything that promises to enhance performance should be tried. And anything that can't be detected in tests for these substances should be permitted."

http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,425939,00.html

"Ferrari publicly defended the use of EPO by cyclists, stating that "EPO is not dangerous, it's the abuse that is. It's also dangerous to drink ten liters of orange juice."

http://wapedia.mobi/en/Michele_Ferrari

While it's easy to convince yourself that these two guys are merely justifying their horrible trade, I still think that there's valuable discussion in their points:

- That at least some pro riders will try what's available and if not overseen by a professional it will be (more) dangerous than if overseen.

- That as long as a PED or method can't be tested for it's an uneven playing field as, again, some will abuse it.

However, instead of helping riders to dope, they should of course work to make sure that people don't go for it...

 

[pedaling squares]

I expected to dislike the guy after reading that article, but surprisingly I don't think any worse of him. I had the impression that he was somewhat in the know and saw that doping was so ingrained in the sport that his role was merely to ensure that the riders did so safely. I don't like that train of thought but I can understand it. Besides, I appreciate anyone who opens the lid and reveals what is being done. Even if they don't wring their hands and apologize while they're doing it.

 

[hrotha]

Not 'bad for your health', but rather in cotravention of doping protocols and procedures.

The 'bad for your health' case doesn't fly because the anti-doping measures in sport are put there to try to keep the 'ideal of sport' alive, not neceassarily to look after the athletes' health.

The lame argument of having proactive doping practices, those monitored by medical professionals etc. to ensure the safe use of banned procedures, erodes what the ideal of sport is. And, what I think we all love about cycling.

Take a look at the UCI protocol, the WADA list, the substances and procedures outlawed by the IOC. THOSE are the rules the athletes need to adhere to. Healthy, or not, those are the rules. Those who contravene them get nailed.

Or, at least they should...

The legal definition of doping is "using banned substances or procedures", I'm not discussing that. I was attempting to figure out a way to decide what should be banned and what shouldn't. There's many substances that are performance-enhancing but which aren't considered doping, and blood transfusions are a bit of a gray area for me in that regard. I'm against them because they're banned and everyone should play by the same rules, but I'm not entirely sure, from a rational point of view, why they should be banned.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

I expected to dislike the guy after reading that article, but surprisingly I don't think any worse of him. I had the impression that he was somewhat in the know and saw that doping was so ingrained in the sport that his role was merely to ensure that the riders did so safely. I don't like that train of thought but I can understand it. Besides, I appreciate anyone who opens the lid and reveals what is being done. Even if they don't wring their hands and apologize while they're doing it.

[Comments removed by moderator]

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

The legal definition of doping is "using banned substances or procedures", I'm not discussing that. I was attempting to figure out a way to decide what should be banned and what shouldn't. There's many substances that are performance-enhancing but which aren't considered doping, and blood transfusions are a bit of a gray area for me in that regard. I'm against them because they're banned and everyone should play by the same rules, but I'm not entirely sure, from a rational point of view, why they should be banned.

Blood transfusions should be ARE banned because they raise an athlete's hematocrit beyond what would naturally be present due to training, even at altitude. It's the natural EPO, minus a few of the chem benefits.

It's artificially providing athletes with a greater O2 carrying capacity than they would naturally have. Safe, or not, it's cheating.

 

[Oldman]

Not a doping expert, but what are the negative consequences for ones health for a correctly done blood transfusion?

Correctly done, probably no problem. The general rider population could be far from a correct application and that's why IV's are not legal, among other things.

 

[Cloxxki]

He implicated no-one that wasn't already caught, and gets to write his cash collection book about his crimes, in freedom. In the mean time, nothing stands in his way from blackmailing his former clients to keep silent the way he treated THEM towards likely gret performances. His services must have come at a price (although he seems very friendly with many high-level athletes, he may have done it for free), not really something for an amateur runner or cyclist.

Might as well not have goine through the trials, just kept him in pre-arrest. Like he's not guilty or something.

 

[pedaling squares]

removed by moderator...

Well done. My surprise at discovering that I don't dislike the doping doc is equivalent to an acceptance of raping young men. Another well thought out internet rebuttal. Could you have made yourself look more idiotic?

 

[hrotha]

Blood transfusions should be ARE banned because they raise an athlete's hematocrit beyond what would naturally be present due to training, even at altitude. It's the natural EPO, minus a few of the chem benefits.

It's artificially providing athletes with a greater O2 carrying capacity than they would naturally have. Safe, or not, it's cheating.

Good point, but what if transfusions were used just to bring up the hematocrit levels back to where they were when a race started?

(Again, for the record, I'm against blood transfusions, I think they're doping and therefore rightly banned, but I want to have a good enough reason to think so, other than my gut feeling)

 

[hfer07]

Good point, but what if transfusions were used just to bring up the hematocrit levels back to where they were when a race started?

well-that's the very purpose of the blood doping= to maintain the highest allowable values all the way through the race

 

[hrotha]

well-that's the very purpose of the blood doping= to maintain the highest allowable values all the way through the race

Well, yes, but that wouldn't be raising it beyond its natural values.

 

[MarkvW]

The riders justify PED use because they want to win. As you said, the fact these 'professional' enablers are not villified and thrown in jail (oh wait, he way be thrown in jail), is another ugly scar on the sport.

Rather than guys like Thor, who have a 'see no evil' attitude, we need to encourage the sh*t-disturbers who actually have the n*ts to stand up and tell it how it is.

Even Kohl had the b*lls to do that, even if his doctor is in denial (or at least deep justification).

Blood doping is NOT a PED. It's just NOT.

 

[hfer07]

Think the institutional level of these types of guys may be a problem?

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/matschiner-reveals-blood-doping-techniques

Wow! He actually thinks he's doing a health service.

I'm inclined to look at the bright side of it-which is the knowledge of how cheaters do doping and by having that information unveiled, hopefully WADA, UCI & all the anti-doping agencies can take a note and act upon it.

I don't think this is about being repentant or not- he's being punished by his actions-so are many athletes he helped to doping-- I'm honestly sick and tire of those hypocrites out there saying they're sorry- when deep inside they knew how wrong/filthy their activities were but yet crossed the line to make big money out of it.... so to my eyes, he's simply explaining the facts & personally I'm looking forward to read his book

 

[Libertine Seguros]

If the *only* goal is to make the rider faster (to win), then indeed, the rider is 'healthier.'

I think it's wrong, but it's easy to rationalize doping. Not only rationalize it, sleep well and wake up proud knowing you assisted for a possible win.

I'm sure Bruno Neves' family thank his team doctor for helping him stay 'healthy' every day.

 

[Anonymous]

Blood doping is NOT a PED. It's just NOT.

A distinction without a difference.

EPO is a naturally occuring protein hormone, so it could be argued it's not a PED as well.

 

[ChrisE]

Good point, but what if transfusions were used just to bring up the hematocrit levels back to where they were when a race started?

(Again, for the record, I'm against blood transfusions, I think they're doping and therefore rightly banned, but I want to have a good enough reason to think so, other than my gut feeling)

Then why not just allow several days between mountain stages so everybody can get back to their natural levels?

Part of winning a GT is recovery and having the best natural ability to withstand the rigors of multiple stages. If it was just a sprint up a mountain or an idividual timetrial, at everybody's normal levels, then Cancellara and somebody like Boogard who could pull a one-off in the mountains would be the winners.

 

[Rupert]

Altitude tents

What about use of altitude tents? I am not advocating anything either way with regard to them or blood doping, but I see a parrallel here. Blood doping was once legal (not illegal at least), but was later made illegal for whatever reasons. I see altitude tents as similar in that they're (currently) legal, not (properly used) dangerous to health, but could be considered an "unnatural" way of improving performance. On the other hand they are a way of leveling the playing field for those who can't afford to live at altitude or do lengthy training camps at altitude (say, for example, Aspen, Colorado...). If you banned altitude tents would you ban people from living at high elevation or doing training camps there? I think there's a gray area in what is a performance enhancement that's considered excessive or unnatural. After all, just eating and drinking correctly and getting enough sleep enhances performance. I don't think health is the only thing that distinguishes what is/ought to be "legal" or not. Using IVs for rehydration are another gray area (I think they're not allowed per UCI, but I've heard it was common for RAAM riders, and may still be).