JV talks, sort of

[Argyle_Fan]

I am removing numerous of my uninformed comments.

 

[webvan]

Why not...but it's a good thing he didn't give him a job (or RS for that matter) if not we would have never seen the conspiracy brought down.

 

[Argyle_Fan]

Hello again Jonathan,

It does appear that there may have been at least one precedent for ‘delayed off-season bans’ from USADA - see a comment on Gerard Vroomen’s blog:
Random fan comment: “1. I have direct knowledge of at least one case where USADA offered a meaningless six month off-season suspension to a cyclist who was by all accounts clean, but missed a post-race test following a serious accident. A USADA spokesperson confirmed to me personally that they felt it was impossible to ignore the rules about a missed test, but agreed that the missed test was an innocent mistake by a rider who had a totally clean record and not in any way intentional. Thus they offered a punishment that adhered to the rules but had no real consequences. (Said rider contested the missed test offence and won, so he did not serve this suspension.)”

Gerard’s blog comments on the delayed bans:
“I suspect the story is not 100% accurate, in particular the claim that those who admitted to doping have been given a 6 month sentence to be served in the off-season. If that were to be true, it would be a travesty. I can imagine cases where people receive a reduced sentence in exchange for their cooperation, I can even imagine situations where people receive full immunity. But I cannot imagine that an anti-doping agency would pretend to sentence an athlete, yet do it in a way that it doesn’t affect him. That would be so cynical and an insult to the public’s intelligence.”
(in comments: ) “That still is ridiculous to me. Then riders should be given no ban, my problem is with pretending to give a ban when it’s a meaningless one. That’s why I don’t think it’s true.“

Was Juliet Macur aware when she wrote her NYT article that you had previously denied the Dutch press reports? Did you forget to tell the boys to keep quiet?

As an aside - you may well be gratified re. this thread on USPS vs. CA in the 2001 Tour TTT:
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=19116

Finally, any opinions on Millar for UCI President? (see e.g. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19956995 ) Is this any kind of role you’ve ever considered for yourself, or would you simply prefer to concentrate on finding the next Talansky?

 

[Benotti69]

Hey JV do you believe Jens Voight when he says he never saw doping in 20 years racing?

 

[laziali]

Question for JV - why do you think Matt White still has a role in the sport despite his unwillingness to confess to doping until outed in the USADA?

Why are you so unwilling to see dopers removed from professional cycling?

From memory, JV answered that question fairly comprehensively when he criticized Sky for it's new clean declarations policy. Was on CN a few weeks ago

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I'm surprised at your take on Vaughters. What reasons?

In a nutshell:

* a skinsuit provides the same advantage as EPO
* there is significant anaerobic contribution in a 20 minute climb
* hypoxia induced during a 34 minute TT may lead to a 27% spike in reticulocytes 2 hours later
* left over EPO can be used for up to 3 years for doping
* everyone tested high for Hgb/Hct at the start of the 2012 Giro but none of the team managers know, and none of the team managers have a problem with a rival team manager talking to their doctors about their riders' test values
* David Millar is not a GT GC rider because he does not recover and therefore does not experience plasma expansion during a GT
* Trent Lowe was blackmailing JV for $500k
* Bradley Wiggins has a superior (ie low) MAOD for a pursuiter
* Teams should be forced to pay 5x the amount they are paying for testing, despite the fact Team sparkly pristine snow white clean Garmin won the Giro and Team sparkly pristine snow white clean Sky won the Tour .
* Wiggins doing 480W for 18 minute flat gets recounted as "480W for 20-25 minutes" in an interview

 

[Dear Wiggo]

He said it in a TED lecture

17.30 in. I grant you if you're being pedantic he says that the Castelli Speedsuit offers 75% of the benefits of blood doping (15/20W).

Total ****ing bull****.

To be fair, I had just believed what people had written - about the whole JV skinsuit = EPO thing. I had not watched the video, not even that portion of it.

Now that I have...

1. EPO only provides a 20W boost. Sumi is 80kg, and should be able to put out 5W/kg. So 20W is a mere 5%. Pretty sure Ashenden has shown you can dope up 10% without triggering the passport. And that's before you use speedbags or pay off testers or the UCI...

FAIL.


2. The skinsuit = EPO boost claim:

JV's whole schtick is you can win clean. TTT win clean. 2012 Giro win clean. So any reference to EPO etc is going to be in reference to the fact that he and his team don't need it. And anything he says is going to be explaining why they don't need it.

Look at the slide title, "Doing the right thing pays off". Clearly he's contrasting with "Doing the wrong thing", and talking about marginal gains. He even clears his throat before he makes his claim of saving 1000 calories - after an interruption free run - a classic tell in body language. And then the words - noone else wore a skinsuit, everyone had overlooked that possibility, the skinsuit almost gave him the same advantage had he doped.

Johan van Summeran is the tallest rider but it's irrelevant... good grief. JV's talking about aerodynamics and says the height of the rider is irrelevant. Oh man. You'd get more savings from dropping his headstem 2cm.

So we have two claims:
1. [cough = I am about to lie] 1000 calories saved over 7 hours.
2. 15W saved due to skinsuit (vs 20W or a mere 5% for EPO) for a rider traveling at 48km/hr (30 mph).

15W for 7 hours = 7*3.6*15 = 378kj work done. The conversion from kj to calories = ~4, which, if you had 25% efficiency, would be the same conversion, so effectively you convert kj to calories directly. ie To do 378kj of work, @ 25% efficiency, you burn 378/.25 kj = 378 x 4 kj = 378kcal (410kcal @ 22%).

To save 1000 calories over 7 hours, you would need to save 1000/(7*3.6) = 40W @ 25% and 36W @ 22% efficiency. That is 9-10% of 400W, and is more likely the % boost people can get from EPO, as shown by Ashenden.

But definitely not the savings you get from a skinsuit.

Now look at his claim - at 48km/hr, 30 mph, you get 15W savings. But these guys averaged 43km/hr. So definitley not 15W savings. In fact, if you consider power is cubed for speed increases, you will see it's not 10% less than 15W, but significantly more than 10% less.

Finally. How is this 1000calorie / 15W saving calculated, given Summeren only spent the final 15km (22 minutes) on the front solo. The rest of the time he's doing turns or sitting in the bunch. FYI: 15km in 22 minutes is 40km/hr - 20% slower than the required 48km/hr for 15W savings.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/paris-roubaix-2011/live-report

14:09:17 GMT
It's a tailwind on this sector and Van Summeren has gone for it.
...
14:31:06 GMT
He crosses the line with his arms in the air, with Cancellara winning the sprint for second place, just 22 seconds behind.

If JV is prepared to go this hard in a TEDx meeting, talking to scientists and leaders of industry, imagine what he's prepared to spin to the plebs in lala land.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

To be fair, I had just believed what people had written - about the whole JV skinsuit = EPO thing. I had not watched the video, not even that portion of it.

Now that I have...

1. EPO only provides a 20W boost. Sumi is 80kg, and should be able to put out 5W/kg. So 20W is a mere 5%. Pretty sure Ashenden has shown you can dope up 10% without triggering the passport. And that's before you use speedbags or pay off testers or the UCI...

FAIL.


2. The skinsuit = EPO boost claim:

JV's whole schtick is you can win clean. TTT win clean. 2012 Giro win clean. So any reference to EPO etc is going to be in reference to the fact that he and his team don't need it. And anything he says is going to be explaining why they don't need it.

Look at the slide title, "Doing the right thing pays off". Clearly he's contrasting with "Doing the wrong thing", and talking about marginal gains. He even clears his throat before he makes his claim of saving 1000 calories - after an interruption free run - a classic tell in body language. And then the words - noone else wore a skinsuit, everyone had overlooked that possibility, the skinsuit almost gave him the same advantage had he doped.

Johan van Summeran is the tallest rider but it's irrelevant... good grief. JV's talking about aerodynamics and says the height of the rider is irrelevant. Oh man. You'd get more savings from dropping his headstem 2cm.

So we have two claims:
1. [cough = I am about to lie] 1000 calories saved over 7 hours.
2. 15W saved due to skinsuit (vs 20W or a mere 5% for EPO)

15W for 7 hours = 7*3.6*15 = 378kj work done. The conversion from kj to calories = ~4, which, if you had 25% efficiency, would be the same conversion, so effectively you convert kj to calories directly. ie To do 378kj of work, @ 25% efficiency, you burn 378/.25 kj = 378 x 4 kj = 378kcal.

To save 1000 calories over 7 hours, you would need to save 1000/(7*3.6) = 40W @ 25% and 36W @ 22% efficiency. That is 9-10% of 400W, and is more likely the % boost people can get from EPO, as shown by Ashenden.

But definitely not the savings you get from a skinsuit.

Now look at his claim - at 48km/hr, 30 mph, you get 15W savings. But these guys averaged 43km/hr. So definitley not 15W savings. In fact, if you consider power is cubed for speed increases, you will see it's not 10% less than 15W, but significantly more than 10% less.

Finally. How is this 1000calorie / 15W saving calculated, given Summeren only spent the final 15km (22 minutes) on the front solo. The rest of the time he's doing turns or sitting in the bunch. FYI: 15km in 22 minutes is 40km/hr - 20% slower than the required 48km/hr for 15W savings.



If JV is prepared to go this hard in a TEDx meeting, talking to scientists and leaders of industry, imagine what he's prepared to spin to the plebs in lala land.

What do you mean by "to be fair"....

So you exaggerate what someone says based on what someone else says?
You do realize that when you repeat that you are adding to it - someone might say "Ok, that thing I wrote was wrong, but to be fair DearWiggo wrote it...."

The snippet of what I have seen of JV on that piece is certainly eyebrow raising - why not just comment or critique what he actually says rather than exaggerating it.
If JV is as evil or inept as some make out his lies and inconsistencies will shine on their own.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

What

I had you ignored. And stupidly, stupidly decided to look at what you posted. I won't make that mistake again.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I had you ignored. And stupidly, stupidly decided to look at what you posted. I won't make that mistake again.

Pity, that. Then you might not feel so stupid and actually learn some things
as so far you are 0 for 1 and I am your second point now - and without your input I get to pull your point apart like warm chicken.

You 2nd point - there is significant anaerobic contribution in a 20 minute climb

I have used various searches to try and find where he said something resembling that - the best I could find was a tweet!! Which again does not back up your claim.

Here is the full string of tweets - and I will put below the string, with the name of person who posted the tweet in front.

Vaughters - I genuinely hope @Ty_Hamilton s new book will open up understanding into that era -and- will serve as a warning for it to never happen again
Weilso - me too. But if 6.7w/kg was magic for him and riders are still pulling 6.6 I wonder.
Vaughters - I haven't seen data anywhere that shows 6.6 other than for very short periods.
Weilso - would you consider 6.6 for 20 minutes normal? do-able within bounds of clean cycling?
Vaughters - in an extreme case, yes. 20 mins is at the edge of aerobic/anaerobic energy systems. Not all 6.6 could be attributed to o2.
Weilso - just making sure that wouldn't be NOT NORMAL
Conelley - anaerobic is worth up to ~ 90 secs of aerobic , so 20 min is ~ 7% anaerobic: 6.14 w/kg aerobic from 6.6 total
Vaughters I would dispute that. I've seen tests from athletes that show a much higher % of anearobic energy production.
Conelley - Right: from 6.60 to 6.14. Anyway, 90 seconds is just a "typical" number I've seen: Rodriguez isn't typical!
Conelley 6.60 / 21.5 * 20 = 6.14
Vaughters - I think we are speaking different languages here

 

[131313]

In a nutshell:

* a skinsuit provides the same advantage as EPO

If you compare the worst skinsuit to the best and look at a low/medium-responder (say 5% increase), that's actually true. I've seen almost a 200 gram difference in suits, which @ 30mph comes out to about 20W, or 5% @ 400W. So, while you've continually brought this up, it's not really an outrageous claim. Of course, the problem is "what happens when someone's using a fast suit and EPO". The additive gains don't just apply to clean riders...

* there is significant anaerobic contribution in a 20 minute climb

Well, he's right!

* hypoxia induced during a 34 minute TT may lead to a 27% spike in reticulocytes 2 hours later

A 27% spike in retics in 2 hours is more indicative of test error than doping or having blood removed

* left over EPO can be used for up to 3 years for doping

Why couldn't it be used? As long as it's refrigerated, a single-dose vial will retain its efficacy for a long time (measured in decades, not years). Expiration dates are generally a mix of CYA and sell more drugs from the pharmaceutical companies.

* David Millar is not a GT GC rider because he does not recover and therefore does not experience plasma expansion during a GT

I imagine he has more knowledge of Millar's physiology that you or I? But he's certainly right in that there are individual variations in how athletes recover, and plasma volume expansion is one of those variables? I'm not sure what's weird out this one? Long before EPO, you had guys who would do well on an early climbing stage and not do well later?

* Trent Lowe was blackmailing JV for $500k

I think that's a gross misrepresentation of both Vaughter's position and Lowe's. I think Vaughters acted poorly and Lowe got some bad advice on handling the situation. I don't think there's any smoking gun. I have news for you: a lot of former riders (and a couple current ones) aren't really hot on JV. If there were some sorta official doping program going on, he'd have been sold out by now.

* Bradley Wiggins has a superior (ie low) MAOD for a pursuiter

Indications from his results would be that's correct.

* Wiggins doing 480W for 18 minute flat gets recounted as "480W for 20-25 minutes" in an interview

you really seem to be reaching here (as in the points above). I certainly don't have a huge difference between my 18 minute power and 20 minute power, and on a good day I can probably stretch it to 25:00.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

If you compare the worst skinsuit to the best and look at a low/medium-responder (say 5% increase), that's actually true. I've seen almost a 200 gram difference in suits, which @ 30mph comes out to about 20W, or 5% @ 400W. So, while you've continually brought this up, it's not really an outrageous claim. Of course, the problem is "what happens when someone's using a fast suit and EPO". The additive gains don't just apply to clean riders...

Except the example provided the riders were not doing 48km/hr, and were in a bunch. I don't know if you're deliberately trying to defend JV here despite the reality of what's being said, but it looks suspicious.

JV was specifically saying Johan Summeren saved 1000 calories over 7 hours due to a 15W saving from the skinsuit he wore at Paris Roubaix.

I can clairfy my "take" on Jv as it relates to this one claim, but if you don't even know what I am talking about, replying in any way seems just a tad weird.

Well, he's right!

At race pace, significant means what over 20 minutes? 10%? 5%? Here's what a PhD in physiology had to say:

A 4 km pursuit is, typically, 85% aerobic in nature. By the time you get out to even 20 min, the anaerobic contribution is negligible.

A 27% spike in retics in 2 hours is more indicative of test error than doping or having blood removed

Could not agree more. But JV himself said it may have been due to hypoxia. To wit:

Wait! sorry! missed the retic question. I have no idea why retics would bounce a bit before and after the final TT. We could hypothesize that hypoxia created due to the effort of the TT caused some retics to show up. It could also just be the pulsitile nature of all human hormones... it could be a lot of things.

I don't know.

What I do know is that it would do nothing for performance to have a few more retics, short term, so we can eliminate a doping technique from the possible explanations.

Elsewhere he says there was only one lab error day - the tests before the Giro.

Why couldn't it be used? As long as it's refrigerated, a single-dose vial will retain its efficacy for a long time (measured in decades, not years). Expiration dates are generally a mix of CYA and sell more drugs from the pharmaceutical companies.

Seriously. You believe he had enough EPO left over to use for the next 3 years? And didn't move at all - just left it in the fridge, good as gold, all that time? The guy who moved teams for more money had the most expensive doping product in such abundant quantities that he never bought any dope again for the next 3 years? Seriously?

I imagine he has more knowledge of Millar's physiology that you or I? But he's certainly right in that there are individual variations in how athletes recover, and plasma volume expansion is one of those variables? I'm not sure what's weird out this one? Long before EPO, you had guys who would do well on an early climbing stage and not do well later?

He's saying this because Millar's Hgb went UP during a GT. Again. You are going to buy this JV line over the observed physiological response of riders from studies conducted and published? The first time we have ever heard of someone's Hgb legitimately going UP during a GT and you just go "Why not? JV knows someone else's physiology better than you do".

I think that's a gross misrepresentation of both Vaughter's position and Lowe's. I think Vaughters acted poorly and Lowe got some bad advice on handling the situation. I don't think there's any smoking gun. I have news for you: a lot of former riders (and a couple current ones) aren't really hot on JV. If there were some sorta official doping program going on, he'd have been sold out by now.

A gross misreprensentation? WTF? It's exactly what JV told the press. To wit,

http://velonews.competitor.com/2011...ttempt-from-trent-lowes-representative_157108
Slipstream Sports, the management group behind the Garmin team, issued a statement claiming that Lowe had threatened to blackmail the team for €500,000 (US$670,000) over potentially damaging information.

Indications from his results would be that's correct.

Which results? All the results on the road pre-2009 when he was autobussing it? Or the squeaky clean 2009-2012 results where he smashed the peloton in progressively more dominant displays?

you really seem to be reaching here (as in the points above). I certainly don't have a huge difference between my 18 minute power and 20 minute power, and on a good day I can probably stretch it to 25:00.

The fact is, you do have a difference.

 

[131313]

Except the example provided the riders were not doing 48km/hr, and were in a bunch. I don't know if you're deliberately trying to defend JV here despite the reality of what's being said, but it looks suspicious.

JV was specifically saying Johan Summeren saved 1000 calories over 7 hours due to a 15W saving from the skinsuit he wore at Paris Roubaix.

I can clairfy my "take" on Jv as it relates to this one claim, but if you don't even know what I am talking about, replying in any way seems just a tad weird.

Well, you've repeatedly made the claim about EPO=skinsuit, so I had no context. That said, saving 15W in a road race vs. the clothing riders normally wear? It doesn't seem that far-fetched, as typical road clothing is pretty bad.

My intention isn't "defending anyone" as much as trying to look at things logically. Personally, I believe JV's intentions are mostly good, though I think he falls down on the implementation part a bit.

At race pace, significant means what over 20 minutes? 10%? 5%?

About 5-7%. I guess it depends on how you define "significant". What I do know is that lots of guys can do 7-10% for 20 minutes than their threshold power.

As to the rest, to save myself the work from quoting:

-I think it's unlikely he didn't buy any EPO during that 3 year period, just my personal guess. I simply saying that EPO stored in a fridge in a single-dose vial will certainly work 3 years later, because it will...no more, no less.

-My understanding was that JV felt Lowe's advisers were blackmailing him, not Lowe himself. If he said otherwise though, that's fine. It's different that what he's said among his team, though. He never really spoke ill of Lowe among any of the folks on the team, at least from what I heard.

-as far as Wiggins, I've made it clear where I stand before: I don't believe his performance gains from '09 to late '11 are believable. That doesn't change the fact that I think he's demonstrated less MAOD. Compare his results in longer road TT's to someone like Bartko. They're very different riders.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Well, you've repeatedly made the claim about EPO=skinsuit, so I had no context. That said, saving 15W in a road race vs. the clothing riders normally wear? It doesn't seem that far-fetched, as typical road clothing is pretty bad.

Even doing turns in a breakaway?

My intention isn't "defending anyone" as much as trying to look at things logically.

So logically, you're fine with someone saying 15W for 7 hours = 1000 calories? This is not a lightning interview - this is a prepared talk at TEDx.

You're fine with the logic that Millar's Hgb goes UP mid-tour coz he is not a "GT rider"?

You're fine with the logic that a 27% jump in retics can partly be explained by hypoxia induced from a 34 minute TT? Given that hypoxia leads to EPO production, not retics? Given that retics take 6 hours or so to be produced in the marrow from an increase in EPO?

You're fine with the logic that retics are not performance enhancing, thereofore it was most definitely not a performance enhancing reason that increased retics were detected, despite the fact that masking doping is the most prevalent action by dopers after doping itself?

About 5-7%. I guess it depends on how you define "significant". What I do know is that lots of guys can do 7-10% for 20 minutes than their threshold power.

Agreed. It does depend on your definition.

-I think it's unlikely he didn't buy any EPO during that 3 year period, just my personal guess. I simply saying that EPO stored in a fridge in a single-dose vial will certainly work 3 years later, because it will...no more, no less.

His affidavit says "what I had left over" - and is applied to all his doping from 2000-2002.

-My understanding was that JV felt Lowe's advisers were blackmailing him, not Lowe himself. If he said otherwise though, that's fine. It's different that what he's said among his team, though. He never really spoke ill of Lowe among any of the folks on the team, at least from what I heard.

In the media he savaged Lowe. Destroyed him and what was left of his career. After ignoring emails. What JV said to the people in his team is kinda irrelevant, IMO. Not like he's going to go around bad mouthing recently departed riders - that'd ruin morale even more.

-as far as Wiggins, I've made it clear where I stand before: I don't believe his performance gains from '09 to late '11 are believable. That doesn't change the fact that I think he's demonstrated less MAOD. Compare his results in longer road TT's to someone like Bartko. They're very different riders.

I don't believe his 2009 performance either.

Not sure why you're comparing 2 riders like that - fine if they were doing the same 4km times, but Wiggins is 6-8 seconds quicker over 4km.

The only cqranking TT I can see is http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=408 and Bartko was only 2 seconds slower than Wiggins over 12km - 3 months before Brad won the IP Olympic gold medal.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

<snipped to point>

His affidavit says "what I had left over" - and is applied to all his doping from 2000-2002.

Yet again - that is at best gross exaggeration or just willful misrepresentation on your part .

Here is JVs affidavit:

43 - I was surprised to learn how little doping there appeared to be on Credit Agricole, and there was no organised team doping program. I continued to use small amounts of leftover EPO that I had from my Postal Service days but began to evaluate whether I would continue using drugs in order to stay in the sport as a professional rider.

This relates to just after JV left USPS and had just joined CA. He makes no further comment about his doping in his affidavit.

 

[Von Mises]

Pretty sure Ashenden has shown you can dope up 10% without triggering the passport. And that's before you use speedbags or pay off testers or the UCI...

Nope, Ashenden has not shown you can dope up 10% without triggering passport. On the contrary.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Nope, Ashenden has not shown you can dope up 10% without triggering passport. On the contrary.

Ugh. Really? Damn and I was so proud of my English comprehension. Sheeyit.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21336951

Current markers of the Athlete Blood Passport do not flag microdose EPO doping.
Ashenden M, Gough CE, Garnham A, Gore CJ, Sharpe K.
Source

SIAB Research Consortium, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia. heyasho@hotmail.com
Abstract

The Athlete Blood Passport is the most recent tool adopted by anti-doping authorities to detect athletes using performance-enhancing drugs such as recombinant human erythropoietin (rhEPO). This strategy relies on detecting abnormal variations in haematological variables caused by doping, against a background of biological and analytical variability. Ten subjects were given twice weekly intravenous injections of rhEPO for up to 12 weeks. Full blood counts were measured using a Sysmex XE-2100 automated haematology analyser, and total haemoglobin mass via a carbon monoxide rebreathing test. The sensitivity of the passport to flag abnormal deviations in blood values was evaluated using dedicated Athlete Blood Passport software. Our treatment regimen elicited a 10% increase in total haemoglobin mass equivalent to approximately two bags of reinfused blood. The passport software did not flag any subjects as being suspicious of doping whilst they were receiving rhEPO. We conclude that it is possible for athletes to use rhEPO without eliciting abnormal changes in the blood variables currently monitored by the Athlete Blood Passport.

 

[Ferminal]

The problem with that study is they weren't urine tested for EPO. Granted they were "microdosing", so probably not far from the safe limits.

What I got from it is that you're more likely to test positive for EPO than come unstuck via the ABP.

 

[taiwan]

Are the time constraints on testing still in place? Thought that microdosing EPO intravenously at 10p.m. you'd be fine by morning (from Hamilton's book).

 

[Ferminal]

Are the time constraints on testing still in place? Thought that microdosing EPO intravenously at 10p.m. you'd be fine by morning (from Hamilton's book).

It depends on the dose, it sounds like you can inject some EPO and be fine by the morning. Who knows if that is enough to translate into a significant performance gain (I'm sure it would be something otherwise they wouldn't do it). I'd suggest that marginally riskier doses are saved for training camps in exotic locations.

I'm yet to read The Secret Race, was Tyler consistently using EPO for performance enhancement in 03/04/05?

 

[Von Mises]

Ugh. Really? Damn and I was so proud of my English comprehension. Sheeyit.

Your english maybe good, but you should read further. Ashenden & Co have actually made two experiments with "microdosing" of EPO, but the set up of experiments was different. First experiment few years ago started with agressive dosing strategy to pump up haemoglobin, followed by "maintenance" phase of `microdosing’ regimen. Second experiment (what you are reffering) started with microdosing but became gradually more agressive over the weeks (and at the end it was not "microdosing" anymore.)

Point is:
- you cannot achieve 10% only with microdosing

- you regime can be relatively safe during "maintenance" period. From 10 participants only 1 flagged biopassport and 2 were suscpicious in this Ashenden study.

- risks are pretty high during initial phase and/or during ease-off phase.
In fact Ashenden @ Co write: "This
trade-off almost certainly diminished the sensitivity of the
ABP component monitoring OFF-hr score, since it has
been well-documented that a nadir in OFF-hr score is
reached 10–14 days after rhEPO injections cease (Gore
et al. 2003). We assume this signature would have held also
in our subjects, whose OFF-hr scores would have increased
markedly and most likely been flagged by the software as
being abnormal during the weeks after injections ceased.
Similarly, we speculate that the sequence analysis used by
the ABP software, which explicitly evaluates variations in
the data, would have yielded greater sensitivity if washout
data had been included as these data would have varied
substantially from both baseline and treatment phases."

- second risk comes from urine tests. You can diminsh risks with microdosing, though not eliminate at all. But again these risks grow during agressive dosage phase (what is necessary to get results). Ashenden & Co speculate, they did not actually test urine samples, that about 25% of tests from this agressive phase (not so much microdosing anymore) would have given positive results. Even more, they point to couple of other studies, what show even higher % for positive test.

Anyway. Your claim that you can dope up 10% without triggering passport simplifies too much. It is possible, but it is complicated and still with high risks.

 

[goggalor]

Yet again - that is at best gross exaggeration or just willful misrepresentation on your part .

Here is JVs affidavit:

This relates to just after JV left USPS and had just joined CA. He makes no further comment about his doping in his affidavit.

Well, he mentions later that he talked to Lance Armstrong about Aranesp before the 2001 Tour. I find it very hard to believe him when he says all he was using at the time was "small amounts of leftover EPO" (which in Vaughter's world I guess means he was virtually "clean", like Julich was "clean" when he finished 18th in that Tour).

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Pretty sure Ashenden has shown you can dope up 10% without triggering the passport.

The problem with that study is they weren't urine tested for EPO. Granted they were "microdosing", so probably not far from the safe limits.

What I got from it is that you're more likely to test positive for EPO than come unstuck via the ABP.

second risk comes from urine tests. You can diminsh risks with microdosing, though not eliminate at all.
...
Anyway. Your claim that you can dope up 10% without triggering passport simplifies too much. It is possible, but it is complicated and still with high risks.

I didn't say it was without risk. I said he has shown you can do it.

Someone earning $2M / year can afford to pay someone to set up the protocol and there are plenty of companies around to track your profile to make sure you're "clean". Heck. You might even get your team to hire a doctor to make sure you're "clean", who knows right?


Just to reiterate here: pre-competition testing - you know, the day(s) before the racing starts?

When Ryder Hesjedal had his second highest Hgb reading for the season? When JV claimed everyone tested high due to lab error, but then failed to provide any corroborating evidence?

Guess what?

No urine testing. None whatsoever. Zip, zilch, nada, nyet, niente, nessuno.

Not only that, but the number of pre-competition tests was reduced, 2010-2011. I am very much looking forward to the 2012 numbers.
For context, riders in the BP: (848 in 2010 up to 955 in 2011) (107 more).

Testing Statistics 2010-2011
Overall Testing Program
The overall CADF testing program figures are reported in the table 1. The number of tests is
very similar between 2010 and 2011. It is importantto note the reduction of Pre-Competition tests which reflects the emphasis of Quality over Quantity.

 

[JV1973]

I didn't say it was without risk. I said he has shown you can do it.

Someone earning $2M / year can afford to pay someone to set up the protocol and there are plenty of companies around to track your profile to make sure you're "clean". Heck. You might even get your team to hire a doctor to make sure you're "clean", who knows right?


Just to reiterate here: pre-competition testing - you know, the day(s) before the racing starts?

When Ryder Hesjedal had his second highest Hgb reading for the season? When JV claimed everyone tested high due to lab error, but then failed to provide any corroborating evidence?

Guess what?

No urine testing. None whatsoever. Zip, zilch, nada, nyet, niente, nessuno.

Not only that, but the number of pre-competition tests was reduced, 2010-2011. I am very much looking forward to the 2012 numbers.
For context, riders in the BP: (848 in 2010 up to 955 in 2011) (107 more).

Hey, listen up, kids! Let's imagine I was absolutely full of **** when I said that there was high error sampling. He tested at 46% hct, which is, in view of his longterm profile very normal in a rested state. And guess what? You need to rest before a 3 week Tour.

I feel there was an overall upward trend at the start of Giro, as happens very often in blood testing...Just ask your hero, Michael Ashenden. But, I could be wrong. Whatever, it's still not remarkable, even if I am wrong. Just look at the off-score.

Also, Wiggo, Pre comp blood testing is used to target urine testing. therefore, urine testing, which could occur 1 hour after the blood test, would still be classified as in-comp or out of comp.

You really need to stop commenting on things that you have zero knowledge about. It brings down the whole group's understanding of the issues and does not contribute anything worthwhile.

 

[JV1973]

Oh, and Von Mises, thank you for commenting here. You clearly have worked in anti-doping or have a very high level understanding of it. Glad to have you as part of the discussion.