JV talks, sort of

[Dear Wiggo]

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.

You've said that twice now "Imagine I was full of ***". Why do you continue to present "maybe I lied" as a hypotehtical. Either you can supply proof, or you lied. Not once have you offered or even suggested you could show proof. So the only other alternative....

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.

You feel? Seriously? Some kind of intuitive dopemeter installed in your brain?

Off-score is a joke - it's the simplest thing to beat. In fact it's almost impossible to trigger it. And Ryder's retics are nice and high a lot of the time, even when he's maxed out on Hgb.

Hint: the red numbers are the threshold:

Ashenden is far from being my hero. As much as you like to belittle people, I'm actually older than you and not a child.

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.

Really? So it's 2 days before the comp (May 3rd when Ryder was tested - Giro starts May 5th), 1 hour after the blood test, and the result of that blood test is used to target urine testing. But it's still 2 days before the comp - but considered IN COMP testing. Weird.

And the blood test results are available an hour later. But at the end of the Giro, the morning blood test sample is left on the bench all day, affecting the retic count.

Man so many scenarios to keep straight.

And apparently you weren't even there. So you're saying all this based on.... what someone told you? What happened before?

Do you have any corrorbating evidence that a urine test conducted one hour after the pre-comp blood test (2 days before the race starts) is considered "in competition" or in fact even happens?

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.

That's my definition of omerta. You have lots of fans here, JV, so chapeau on pointing the finger at me. But only moderators are going to shut me up, so flag my posts and get in line.

As for zero knowledge? Well you can claim that all you like but you're the one claiming 7 hours at 15W savings is [cough] 1000 calories. Or that hypoxia induced in a TT can lead to any sort of spike in reticulocytes 2 hours later.

 

[JV1973]

You've said that twice now "Imagine I was full of ***". Why do you continue to present "maybe I lied" as a hypotehtical. Either you can supply proof, or you lied. Not once have you offered or even suggested you could show proof. So the only other alternative....



You feel? Seriously? Some kind of intuitive dopemeter installed in your brain?

Off-score is a joke - it's the simplest thing to beat. In fact it's almost impossible to trigger it. And Ryder's retics are nice and high a lot of the time, even when he's maxed out on Hgb.

Hint: the red numbers are the threshold:

Ashenden is far from being my hero. As much as you like to belittle people, I'm actually older than you and not a child.



Really? So it's 2 days before the comp (May 3rd when Ryder was tested - Giro starts May 5th), 1 hour after the blood test, and the result of that blood test is used to target urine testing. But it's still 2 days before the comp - but considered IN COMP testing. Weird.

And the blood test results are available an hour later. But at the end of the Giro, the morning blood test sample is left on the bench all day, affecting the retic count.

Man so many scenarios to keep straight.

And apparently you weren't even there. So you're saying all this based on.... what someone told you? What happened before?

Do you have any corrorbating evidence that a urine test conducted one hour after the pre-comp blood test (2 days before the race starts) is considered "in competition" or in fact even happens?



That's my definition of omerta. You have lots of fans here, JV, so chapeau on pointing the finger at me. But only moderators are going to shut me up, so flag my posts and get in line.

As for zero knowledge? Well you can claim that all you like but you're the one claiming 7 hours at 15W savings is [cough] 1000 calories. Or that hypoxia induced in a TT can lead to any sort of spike in reticulocytes 2 hours later.

useless conversation with someone who has already made up their mind. but thanks for providing a chart that perfectly demonstrates my points.

have fun misleading people for personal gratification.

xoxo, JV

 

[Dear Wiggo]

have fun misleading people for personal gratification.

Have fun misleading people for personal wealth and power.

 

[JV1973]

Have fun misleading people for personal wealth and power.

It's what evil and shadowy monsters like myself do. Along with trying to take over the world!!!

Btw - as I've asked before, please do some research on reticulocyte variations before commenting. Your comments on the topic, as usual, demonstrate ignorance.

 

[pmcg76]

Have fun misleading people for personal wealth and power.

One thing is I don't understand is your constant harping about possible hypoxia.
You keep saying that JV is using this as some sort of explanation for a variation in reticulytes when his actual response was he didn't know the reason for the variation and then gave the example of hypoxia as a possible hypothesis along with a few other hypothesis' before finishing with another 'I don't know'.

Maybe you have a different view of what a hypothesis is to me, but on more than one occasion now you have presented the hypoxia comment as if it was the actual explanation JV was putting forward when his actual answer was 'I don't know'.

It is this bending and selective usage of his words that make it obvious that you clearly have an agenda.

I don't know much about the scientific stuff so I don't get involved but you also seem to have no scientific background but are googling stuff on the internet and then trying to present yourself as more knowledgeable about this stuff than actual scientists.

 

[TubularBills]

It's what evil and shadowy monsters like myself do. Along with trying to take over the world!!!

Btw - as I've asked before, please do some research on reticulocyte variations before commenting. Your comments on the topic, as usual, demonstrate ignorance.

Remember, for some... Ignorance is bliss... Ignore them.

Transcend.

Insight has power.

 

[gatete]

It's what evil and shadowy monsters like myself do. Along with trying to take over the world!!!

Btw - as I've asked before, please do some research on reticulocyte variations before commenting. Your comments on the topic, as usual, demonstrate ignorance.

For what is worth JV regardless of what people may think of you, in my book you're the only one that comes and discusses stuff from time to time, facing these people is tough and I appreciate it.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Btw - as I've asked before, please do some research on reticulocyte variations before commenting. Your comments on the topic, as usual, demonstrate ignorance.

Point out one post - just one - on reticulocyte variations, where I demonstrate ignorance.

Then perhaps you can explain to everyone how a 15W saving for 6 hours equates to 1000 calories.

Go.

 

[Merckx index]

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."

Well, which is it? A nadir or a marked increase? After EPO injections cease, retics decrease, which means off-score increases. A nadir would occur during the beginning of EPO treatment, when retics are maxed and HT/Hb is still just beginning to increase. I don’t know how this error got past the reviewers of this paper.

Anyway, to the point, there are ways to avoid this off-score increase, including a) dilution to reduce HT, and b) continuing to microdose EPO occasionally to keep retics slightly elevated.

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.

MA also notes, though:

during out of competition testing in 2009, the UCI’s Biological Passport Programme collected 6165 blood samples but only 2165 accompanying urine samples were tested for rhEPO.

In fact, he goes on to point out that his study was designed to mimic conditions where only the ABP would be used. So there clearly has been a window for riders to avoid urine tests for EPO. The 25% estimate is based on testing within two days of injection.

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.

JV, while I admire what you are trying to do, or say you are trying to do—not to mention having the ***** to come on this forum with your real ID and have it out with posters who may severely criticize you--you have not addressed DW’s claims. He’s saying that it is possible to get away with a 10% increase in HT. Not that it is a sure thing, but that it is possible. I’ve seen nothing in Ashenden’s work or in this thread that rules that out. You and von Mises may argue that it is riskier and more complicated to try this now than it was prior to the passport, and I would agree, but it doesn’t mean no one is trying. After all, we still get riders busted for EPO, and for every one caught, we all know there are likely to be several or more doing it who are not caught.

Bottom line: I don't agree with extreme critics/pessimists who think nothing at all has changed, that all the winners of major races are on major doping programs, but I think this kind of criticism is needed as an incentive to remind us that major improvements in anti-doping are still needed.

Btw, though Ashenden was supposedly surprised by learning that Ferrari quickly thought up the IV administration method of EPO to avoid testing positive, MA’s 2011 paper cites a twenty year old study that had demonstrated this.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

One thing is I don't understand is your constant harping about possible hypoxia.
You keep saying that JV is using this as some sort of explanation for a variation in reticulytes when his actual response was he didn't know the reason for the variation and then gave the example of hypoxia as a possible hypothesis along with a few other hypothesis' before finishing with another 'I don't know'.

Maybe you have a different view of what a hypothesis is to me, but on more than one occasion now you have presented the hypoxia comment as if it was the actual explanation JV was putting forward when his actual answer was 'I don't know'.

It is this bending and selective usage of his words that make it obvious that you clearly have an agenda.

I don't know much about the scientific stuff so I don't get involved but you also seem to have no scientific background but are googling stuff on the internet and then trying to present yourself as more knowledgeable about this stuff than actual scientists.

All valid questions - but just so that you know what you are dealing with, here is a post from them less than a month ago:

My interest in doping began in July, 2012, when Wiggo said I or people like me were bone idle lazy w*nkers.

You'll have to forgive me only following contemporary riders to date, as there's so much to catch up on.

Feel free to correct my mistakes.

I have no problem with a new comment - (some low time posters are the best) - or with someone with DWs enthusiasm, however I find that the way they present their argument is more to win the internet than make any sort of objective contribution.

 

[sniper]

useless conversation with someone who has already made up their mind. but thanks for providing a chart that perfectly demonstrates my points.

have fun misleading people for personal gratification.

xoxo, JV

To be fair, JV, it was you who had made up his mind a long time ago. Miraculously, you somehow knew for sure that Wiggo 2009 and Hesjedal 2012 were clean.
That's clearly misleading. How can you know for sure? Indeed, you can't, so hearing you say that with such conviction, one is led to assume it is merely more PR-minded talk.

 

[sniper]

It's what evil and shadowy monsters like myself do. Along with trying to take over the world!!!

the conspiracy argument again.
sounds like an attempt to deflect from questions you can't answer.

somehow i feel the USADA file undermines your claim of clean cycling.
somehow the top 10 names of the TdF 2009 seriously undermine your claim of a clean wiggo.
but i might be wrong

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

useless conversation with someone who has already made up their mind. but thanks for providing a chart that perfectly demonstrates my points.

have fun misleading people for personal gratification.

xoxo, JV

Perhaps you could explain what the 'correct' reading of the figures in and enlighten those of us who do not spend hours reading blood profiles.

Walk us through RH's numbers explain to us what is happening and why (and why it is natural and not the result of doping).

It would make a good case study, and it would aid transparency.

 

[Cycle Chic]

Perhaps you could explain what the 'correct' reading of the figures in and enlighten those of us who do not spend hours reading blood profiles.

Walk us through RH's numbers explain to us what is happening and why (and why it is natural and not the result of doping).

It would make a good case study, and it would aid transparency.

And herein lies the problem Mrs Murphy...it is Cycling News or any other Cycling journalist who should be asking him this question.

 

[Benotti69]

How much would it cost to pay someone like Ashenden to review a teams biological passport and team blood test values for a a season?

If a team was interested in transparency then they would do this and let someone like Ashenden publish a report.

But the top teams are working hard to 'control' blood values. Hence the need for so many doctors and so called sports scientists on teams.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

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

In the articles I saw, there wasn't much of an explanation from JV of his position. (I may have missed the article you are talking about so if you have the link that'd be great).

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Perhaps you could explain what the 'correct' reading of the figures in and enlighten those of us who do not spend hours reading blood profiles.

Walk us through RH's numbers explain to us what is happening and why (and why it is natural and not the result of doping).

It would make a good case study, and it would aid transparency.

Captaintbag already did an analysis - the original analysis. He accepted JV's explanations without question: http://captaintbag.tumblr.com/post/31367299894/expert-analysis-ryder-hesjedal-2012-giro-blood

I am questioning things Captainbag did not query - like the final day static Hgb with increasing retics.

And the "everyone tested high" claim that Captain accepted, but I queried - does JV have corroborating evidence, as there were 8 other riders in the race who are employed by him.

And how did he know everyone else tested high - the story goes (upthread a few 10s of pages) like this:
1. JV talked to the medical staff of other teams
2. team managers wouldn't know - only JV is interested in these little details.

Twice now when I question the veracity of this process (primarily because if I was a team manager,
1. I wouldn't want another team manager poking around my medical staff, talking about my rider's blood values and
2. I would definitely want to know if all my riders were testing high), JV has said "let's pretend I made it all up".

Which seems like an admission of lying to Captainbag in the analysis dialog linked above, where Captainbag writes:

6. may 3rd hgb 16.0

or hgb just before giro start
nearly equals his season high 16.1
not normal
(at this point in the season , yuh’d expect some volume expansion and a lower hgb)
explanations
a. Altitude camp ?
vaughters says no
b. lab error
vaughters says yes
hct at giro start was high across the board

The reason I am harping on about it, is because someone so willing to allow Captain's analysis to stand, and pretty much use that analysis as a clean pass

I think the Captain gave this profile a clean bill of health. of course there are questions he needs to raise. that's the way hematology is. IT IS NOT BINARY.

But why the f I would give anyone an anomalous profile is beyond me. I wouldn't. Id fire the guy.

(note the use of "I think..." - plausible deniability at its finest) when it's partly founded on a lie (everyone tested high) basically stinks.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Does the good captain type by hitting the keyboard with his face? - I am sure that the analysis is interesting but that is not understandable.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

And herein lies the problem Mrs Murphy...it is Cycling News or any other Cycling journalist who should be asking him this question.

I think if anyone was drilling this hard (like I dunno me, for example), JV would walk out of the interview and block their twitter account. Just hazarding a guess.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Does the good captain type by hitting the keyboard with his face? - I am sure that the analysis is interesting but that is not understandable.

Persistence pays dividends.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Persistence pays dividends.

can you translate what he is saying into english?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

can you translate what he is saying into english?

Oui, oui, monsieur. Parlez vous tecate?

Someone else was deriding his "schtick" and saying you can't take anyone who writes like that seriously. I would strenuously disagree - content trumps style for me any time. But that's a subjective thing, obviously.

It took a post before I could understand it and now I read fluent Captainbag.

Read it phonetically:

uv = of
gahd = god
thissus = this is
fer = for
whater = what are
yuh = you

etc.

 

[workingclasshero]

Does the good captain type by hitting the keyboard with his face? - I am sure that the analysis is interesting but that is not understandable.

personally I love the style.

let’s have at it

hct at giro start was high across the board

so did the lab screw up ?

ie not good

or was the entire peloton doped ?

hehe

also not good

that is poetry man

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Oui, oui, monsieur. Parlez vous tecate?

Someone else was deriding his "schtick" and saying you can't take anyone who writes like that seriously. I would strenuously disagree - content trumps style for me any time.

Always content over style. That is why CN is so worthless.

You need to expand the dictionary a bit more

 

[python]

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

he did...

but what seems to be missing from all the comments i read so far, is that the role of epo as a performance enhancer (at the most sophisticated level) - and this is a well known fact to ashenden - the role was evolving from epo being the main blood doping element of a programme (through the 90's up to 00) to the one being a supplemental element being used in combination with blood transfusions from '00-'01 and on. there are a couple of reasons. one, of course, being the epo test introduction in 2000 (2001 in cycling).

the term epo micro-dosing needs to be qualified. it existed both before and after the epo test intro.

prior to the epo test, the riders only had to beat the 50% hct limit. they'd try to quickly build hct with the relatively large subcutaneous epo doses prior to the major races and then maintain their hct - again subcutaneously - (thus the therm a maintenance dose) during a major grand tour. tyler suggests that he was using 2000 iu every 3d day. this was micro-dosing then. it was easy to beat the 50% limit b/c each self-respecting team had spinners.

then around 2000-'01, epo doses (micro-doses) and the injection schedules changed correspondingly because they had to be incorporated into the overall blood doping programme relying on blood transfusions during the major races.

tyler did describe the phenomena in his book though he lacked many technical details he communicated to usada/wada. for example, he described a sophisticated doper advised by ferrari had to stop subcutaneous 2000 i u twice a week and go to a 500-1000 i u every day or 2 intravenously. again, this was required to beat the urine epo test as prior to 2008 the passport at least formally) did not exist.

ironically, according to ashenden et al, this 10 year old (!) epo schedule designed to beat the urine test appears to be also relatively safe today against the fully implemented blood passport.

i freely admit that i did not read the whole ashenden paper referred to by von mises and don't know the doses he used (would like to know though), but reading the abstract the paper appears to have missed the most important - trying to replicated the behavior of a sophisticated doper trying to beat the system.

that the bio-passport failed to catch a twice-a-week micro-dose as opposed to even a smaller dose daily is alarming.