McQuaid: 2010 Giro blood tests show cycling is cleaner

[hrotha]

Yes, the point was the comparison with the TdF pattern. The Giro numbers show a steady decline in both hematocrit and hemoglobin, with values of 43.5/14.8 on 5/7/09, ending with 38.2/13 on 5/31.

The experts who have commented on this field (people like Ashenden, not McQuaid) say that you should see this type of decline because of the constant physical stress over a three week stage race.

In the TdF, the numbers start at 42.8/14.3 on 7/2/09, and end at 43/14.5 on 7/25/09 (with ups and downs in between).

I see, thanks!

 

[autologous]

I don't see that as slander. His point is anyone who can say they are a doctor can take his results, misinterpret them, and the journalists will have a field day. Exactly why we are having these discussions over the values he had released...

"Armstrong said he has been tested over 50 times this year, and while he began posting the results on his web site early in the year, he stopped after the Tour de France, when a Danish researcher from the same university at which Damsgaard created his testing program questioned whether Armstrong's Tour values were normal."

Read the context. He was specifically referring to the Danish researcher that questioned the blood values. Instead of explaining why that researcher's interpretation might be wrong, he suggests the researcher was last in his class.

"So we took them down after that because we had put them up all year long in the vein of complete transparency, and to be attacked like that and accused of something is complete nonsense"

again, it's the very fact that he was attacked, and accused, that is complete nonsense, not the substance of the accusation.

Then he makes it seem like the idea that people would question the public values he posted was some shocking new development, and use it as justification for aborting the program. As if they didn't foresee that when making his Catlin-then-Damsgaard transparent testing program one of the cornerstones of his heylookatmeI'mclean comeback.

 

[Nick777]

Provide a link please to this data or statement by UCI.

"Last week Jakob Mørkeberg was quoted by the Danish news outlet DR Sport as saying that he had concerns about blood values posted by Lance Armstrong on the Livestrong.com website (link to external website opens in new window). The Bispebjerg Hospital anti-doping researcher has worked on many scientific studies, including a 2008 paper co-written with Belhage and Damsgaard entitled Changes in Blood Profiles during Tour de France 2007, and stated that expected trends over a three week race were not seen in the Texan’s data.

"What we know from our research is that during periods of hard activity, like in the Tour de France, we normally see a drop in these blood values. We don't see this with Armstrong," he told DR Sport.

He elaborated on this when speaking to Cyclingnews. “His blood profile contradicts what we see and what we know from international studies during the last few decades,” he said in a phone interview. “His blood values are not acting as we would expect, so that is highly unusual.” "

...

He was asked if there were any other possible reasons. “If he had, for example, diarrhoea, and was dehydrated, it could lead to an increase in blood values," he answered. "But the picture is inconsistent with what we normally see. Armstrong's levels are unchanged from the first to the last test, and normally we expect a decrease. We saw this fall in his levels during the Giro d'Italia a couple of months earlier, but not during the Tour."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/analysis-armstrongs-tour-blood-levels-debated

 

[Tubeless]

Stress on body effects bllod values (dehydration, etc.). Exactly what Ashenden says except he generalizes that it must go down when in fact a certain rider could recover differently based on habits or biolical. Which indirectly answers your second question.

As to the next set of questions, he probably did nothing different and the weather was probably not much different. Although a hotter day will lead to more dehydration, etc. my point was the statistical sampling was inadequate and you do not even need to look at these factors since the data does not truly show a statistical trend.

Body stress, hot weather & fuzzy math. That's a compelling rebuttal. The funny part is how McQuaid in his statement about 2010 Giro forgot the reason why Armstrong decided to hide his blood values from public scrutiny last summer. For being at the top of their respective fields, these guys are sure acting like the guy who (really) finished last in his class...

 

[goober]

Body stress, hot weather & fuzzy math. That's a compelling rebuttal. The funny part is how McQuaid in his statement about 2010 Giro forgot the reason why Armstrong decided to hide his blood values from public scrutiny last summer. For being at the top of their respective fields, these guys are sure acting like the guy who (really) finished last in his class...

That was not a rebuttal but an explaination to a response. The point I am trying to make through my posts is that the whole theory of consistant dropping of hemocrit, etc. across a stage race is flawed - the passport has to be applied to the rider and not generalized like Ashenden and others are doing. Their whole basis of dropping hemocrit is based on a study of 7 random riders randomly tested 3 times during the tour. First flaw the riders were not random. Second they were all tested on the same 3 days (WTF does random mean to these guys). Third, the tests were done on riders that freaking lost hours against the top riders. They are not in the top because they cannot recover like the top riders; hence, the hemocrit values you see across the top riders like Armstong. Put me in the TDF and my levels will be 20-30% lower if I am not dead. Now, other factors also play a role in these levels and the study all this dropping hemocrit theory is based on does not account for the factors. Luckily, the UCI/WADA/ETC use the correct methods to analyze the data from the passport and not this rediculous flawed study; hence, why 10+ non-UCI professionals that review the passport (professionals both Ashenden and the original authors of the study state are smarter in this area) have not busted Armstrong. All the top riders have similar blood values kids..... Keep kidding yourself there is something more to the values.... they fall within normal statistical analysis of a bio passport...

 

[Dr. Maserati]

That was not a rebuttal but an explaination to a response. The point I am trying to make through my posts is that the whole theory of consistant dropping of hemocrit, etc. across a stage race is flawed - the passport has to be applied to the rider and not generalized like Ashenden and others are doing. Their whole basis of dropping hemocrit is based on a study of 7 random riders randomly tested 3 times during the tour. First flaw the riders were not random. Second they were all tested on the same 3 days (WTF does random mean to these guys). Third, the tests were done on riders that freaking lost hours against the top riders. They are not in the top because they cannot recover like the top riders; hence, the hemocrit values you see across the top riders like Armstong. Put me in the TDF and my levels will be 20-30% lower if I am not dead. Now, other factors also play a role in these levels and the study all this dropping hemocrit theory is based on does not account for the factors. Luckily, the UCI/WADA/ETC use the correct methods to analyze the data from the passport and not this rediculous flawed study; hence, why 10+ non-UCI professionals that review the passport (professionals both Ashenden and the original authors of the study state are smarter in this area) have not busted Armstrong. All the top riders have similar blood values kids..... Keep kidding yourself there is something more to the values.... they fall within normal statistical analysis of a bio passport...

Ashenden is making his claims on "Seven random riders" tested "on the same 3 days".....

You do realise that the Bio-Passport has been ongoing for 2 years, has spent 13 million and collects data from all athletes in the Pro Tour and many of the ProConti teams?

But all analysis is based on 7 riders????

 

[Kennf1]

That was not a rebuttal but an explaination to a response. The point I am trying to make through my posts is that the whole theory of consistant dropping of hemocrit, etc. across a stage race is flawed - the passport has to be applied to the rider and not generalized like Ashenden and others are doing. Their whole basis of dropping hemocrit is based on a study of 7 random riders randomly tested 3 times during the tour. First flaw the riders were not random. Second they were all tested on the same 3 days (WTF does random mean to these guys). Third, the tests were done on riders that freaking lost hours against the top riders. They are not in the top because they cannot recover like the top riders; hence, the hemocrit values you see across the top riders like Armstong. Put me in the TDF and my levels will be 20-30% lower if I am not dead. Now, other factors also play a role in these levels and the study all this dropping hemocrit theory is based on does not account for the factors. Luckily, the UCI/WADA/ETC use the correct methods to analyze the data from the passport and not this rediculous flawed study; hence, why 10+ non-UCI professionals that review the passport (professionals both Ashenden and the original authors of the study state are smarter in this area) have not busted Armstrong. All the top riders have similar blood values kids..... Keep kidding yourself there is something more to the values.... they fall within normal statistical analysis of a bio passport...

I think you're trying to claim that the superior athletes somehow crank out more blood cells to recover, I guess because they have superior bone marrow. Of course, if that were the case, we'd see a spike in reticulytes in this alleged recovery phase.

Do you have some inside knowledge of the "normal statistical analysis" (whatever that means) of the bio passport? Because as far as I know, the UCI has not disclosed what values will raise a red flag for a disciplinary action.

And the "dropping hematocrit theory" has apparently been adopted by McQuaid. If you are saying he's now full of it, I would agree.

 

[Ferminal]

That was not a rebuttal but an explaination to a response. The point I am trying to make through my posts is that the whole theory of consistant dropping of hemocrit, etc. across a stage race is flawed - the passport has to be applied to the rider and not generalized like Ashenden and others are doing. Their whole basis of dropping hemocrit is based on a study of 7 random riders randomly tested 3 times during the tour. First flaw the riders were not random. Second they were all tested on the same 3 days (WTF does random mean to these guys). Third, the tests were done on riders that freaking lost hours against the top riders. They are not in the top because they cannot recover like the top riders; hence, the hemocrit values you see across the top riders like Armstong. Put me in the TDF and my levels will be 20-30% lower if I am not dead. Now, other factors also play a role in these levels and the study all this dropping hemocrit theory is based on does not account for the factors. Luckily, the UCI/WADA/ETC use the correct methods to analyze the data from the passport and not this rediculous flawed study; hence, why 10+ non-UCI professionals that review the passport (professionals both Ashenden and the original authors of the study state are smarter in this area) have not busted Armstrong. All the top riders have similar blood values kids..... Keep kidding yourself there is something more to the values.... they fall within normal statistical analysis of a bio passport...

Are you suggesting that Armstrong and others were not using autologous transfusions in last year's Tour?

On the subject of the Giro, have Ivan's values been published yet?

Edit: Last about was prior to the Giro.

 

[THISISIT]

On the subject of the Giro, have Ivan's values been published yet?

On the subject of Armstrong doping, since we now know what are probably his reasonably "natural" values, has anyone seen his hct or hemoglobin values from '99 -'05?

Why don't reporters ask to see those?

 

[Anonymous]

That was not a rebuttal but an explaination to a response. The point I am trying to make through my posts is that the whole theory of consistant dropping of hemocrit, etc. across a stage race is flawed - the passport has to be applied to the rider and not generalized like Ashenden and others are doing. Their whole basis of dropping hemocrit is based on a study of 7 random riders randomly tested 3 times during the tour. First flaw the riders were not random. Second they were all tested on the same 3 days (WTF does random mean to these guys). Third, the tests were done on riders that freaking lost hours against the top riders. They are not in the top because they cannot recover like the top riders; hence, the hemocrit values you see across the top riders like Armstong. Put me in the TDF and my levels will be 20-30% lower if I am not dead. Now, other factors also play a role in these levels and the study all this dropping hemocrit theory is based on does not account for the factors. Luckily, the UCI/WADA/ETC use the correct methods to analyze the data from the passport and not this rediculous flawed study; hence, why 10+ non-UCI professionals that review the passport (professionals both Ashenden and the original authors of the study state are smarter in this area) have not busted Armstrong. All the top riders have similar blood values kids..... Keep kidding yourself there is something more to the values.... they fall within normal statistical analysis of a bio passport...

http://www.jssm.org/vol6/n2/16/v6n2-16pdf.pdf

They used non professionals because they knew that professionals doped and would skew the results. Your position is that world class athletes defy physiological reality naturally? I would suggest that your disingenuous responses are very similar to another person posting recently. Sock puppets are soooo 2009. You are a joke as is your obfuscation. You must be getting paid to post this crap.

 

[luckyboy]

I don't remember Lance Armstrong riding this year's Giro?

Just stop responding to Goober.

 

[Tubeless]

That was not a rebuttal but an explaination to a response. The point I am trying to make through my posts is that the whole theory of consistant dropping of hemocrit, etc. across a stage race is flawed - the passport has to be applied to the rider and not generalized like Ashenden and others are doing. Their whole basis of dropping hemocrit is based on a study of 7 random riders randomly tested 3 times during the tour. First flaw the riders were not random. Second they were all tested on the same 3 days (WTF does random mean to these guys). Third, the tests were done on riders that freaking lost hours against the top riders. They are not in the top because they cannot recover like the top riders; hence, the hemocrit values you see across the top riders like Armstong. Put me in the TDF and my levels will be 20-30% lower if I am not dead. Now, other factors also play a role in these levels and the study all this dropping hemocrit theory is based on does not account for the factors. Luckily, the UCI/WADA/ETC use the correct methods to analyze the data from the passport and not this rediculous flawed study; hence, why 10+ non-UCI professionals that review the passport (professionals both Ashenden and the original authors of the study state are smarter in this area) have not busted Armstrong. All the top riders have similar blood values kids..... Keep kidding yourself there is something more to the values.... they fall within normal statistical analysis of a bio passport...

In a grand tour, there are three elements at play that affect blood values. Dehydration is most often mentioned but that's an intra-day fluctuation and not a trend. Control tests for blood are taken in the morning, specifically for this reason. Dehydration lowers the plasma element in the blood, thereby increasing the (relative) Hb and Hkr values - but will recover within a 12 hour period afterwards through hydration & rest.

The second element is plasma volume expansion. During exercise, up to 20% of plasma transfers to surrounding muscle tissue to assist in the metabolic activity. If this state continues for hours at a time, the body will respond by inducing the production of more plasma to restore the base amount in the blood. This is turn will dilute the blood, thereby decreasing Hb and Hkr levels. As noted in the TransAlps study, the body tends to reach its maximum plasma volume after 4-5 days of a multi-stage race, and is not a factor in the blood values beyond this initial impact.

The third factor is the body's ability to continue producing red blood cells under the constant physical stress of a grand tour. Blood iron reserves (Ferritin, a key incredient used to make Hb) become depleted as the tour continues onto the 2nd and 3rd week. It's difficult to ingest as many nutrients as the body is burning through metabolism, sweating and stress. Body's own delicate hormone balance, necessary for the reproducton of blood gets disturbed. The result is that Hb and Hkr levels drop - and this is not affected by hydration or plasma volume expansion in later stages of the race.

The initial use of the biological passport was to detect the practice of periodic analogous transfusion of blood, which would show a spike in most of the blood values. The cheats got around to this by switching to micro-dosing of both EPO and transfused blood. Landis' recent information has helped Asheden & co. adjust their analysis & detection methods. It's a good bet that in future grand tours they will be looking for a lack of a downward trend of blood values as an indication of potential doping. Not the first time the anti-doping control is a step behind the cheats.

 

[goober]

http://www.jssm.org/vol6/n2/16/v6n2-16pdf.pdf

They used non professionals because they knew that professionals doped and would skew the results. Your position is that world class athletes defy physiological reality naturally? I would suggest that your disingenuous responses are very similar to another person posting recently. Sock puppets are soooo 2009. You are a joke as is your obfuscation. You must be getting paid to post this crap.

Actually that is the wrong study that was used to come up with the declining values. Here is the actual study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18513473. Again, the authors of this study (the same that reviewed Lance's values and raised the questions) also clearly state that the values in Lance's profile DO NOT indicate doping but should be looked at BY THE MORE THAN A DOZEN PROFESSIONALS IN THIS AREA THAT REVIEW THE PASSPORTS - this has been done. It has already been noted by the authors of this study that Lance's values we are up in arms about fall within acceptible values when statistically analyzed (the whole bayesian filter analysis). Back to my point, you cannot look at the values and say there is a problem because they do not fall - just want others to understand this point. Again, if you want to know how the values are anaylzed you can look at my post earlier that shows the complexities of the data beyond human eye... Now, maybe Landis does know how they keep the values in check, hopefully we get those answers; but, for know the values are within limits and do not indicate doping. Not getting paid but I will shut up now on this topic.

 

[HL2037]

It has already been noted by the authors of this study that Lance's values we are up in arms about fall within acceptible values when statistically analyzed (the whole bayesian filter analysis).

I would say that you are misquoting, but actually you are not quoting at all.

Mørkebjerg (independent scientist) said that LA's values from tour 09 looked suspicious. Then Damsgård (before: independent scientist, now: payed by several teams) claimed that the data only looked suspicious when analyzed in a standard frequentistic model and not when analyzed by Bayesian methods.

Goober, will you please explain what you mean by "bayesian filter analysis", and why this model is more relevant to these data than a longitudinal normal model? What kind of model control considerations lies behind?

Also, since you seem to know a great deal about how the biological passport works, can you answer this: Which model is used when estimating expected change in blood values under the biological passport?

 

[Darryl Webster]

It often said that pro cycling is a mafia but my expieriance sugests thats to grand a term for it. Any mafia family who was so chaoticly formed would soon fail.
Its more "in group" , "outgroup" than organised crime. Loyalities are extraordinerly fragile and the pelotons are a seathing mass of jelousies , suspitions and double speek.
When your naive , as I was, much can go straight over your head and not be apparent. Even within teams theres a lack of transparancy and not all riders are privy to whats realy going on.
The in group, outgroup breaks down to Director sportifes, team personal "in the know"..and others naive and believing, riders in groups and out groups and relationships between Director sportifes / Race organisers/ commisaires.
The incuruptable are known and worked around and pushed out at the first opertunity or "used" if they work hard and present to public naivity and stary eyes. Believers might a good term for them.
Provided the incuruptables stay silent there tollerated. Speek out and there ostrasised in public but recieve sly words of support from from some within the in groups who realy wish it wasnt the way it is.
Though I often wonder if these "silent supporters" are merely giving plattitudes to cover there own shame or to be "kept in with " as in "keep your enemies close".
Becoming "in group" is basicly via demonstrating you`l play the game and thus have crap of your own to hide. Fessing up when to do so implicates yourself is no easy matter when it`s almost a 100% that your carear will be over. In this respect the mafia anology works.
Naim Chomsky , a world leading linquistic theorist and political commentater describes capitilism as " an unspoken conspirecy"..meaning that the component parts have not entered formal agreement or maybe arn`t even aware of "the con" being perpertrated but as cogs within it keep the machine rolling.
Pro cycling is like that. Bottom line is it`s a cash cow for the great majority within it and pretence to "sport" as many of us would wish to understand it is just that , pretence.

 

[Anonymous]

Actually that is the wrong study that was used to come up with the declining values. Here is the actual study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18513473. Again, the authors of this study (the same that reviewed Lance's values and raised the questions) also clearly state that the values in Lance's profile DO NOT indicate doping but should be looked at BY THE MORE THAN A DOZEN PROFESSIONALS IN THIS AREA THAT REVIEW THE PASSPORTS - this has been done. It has already been noted by the authors of this study that Lance's values we are up in arms about fall within acceptible values when statistically analyzed (the whole bayesian filter analysis). Back to my point, you cannot look at the values and say there is a problem because they do not fall - just want others to understand this point. Again, if you want to know how the values are anaylzed you can look at my post earlier that shows the complexities of the data beyond human eye... Now, maybe Landis does know how they keep the values in check, hopefully we get those answers; but, for know the values are within limits and do not indicate doping. Not getting paid but I will shut up now on this topic.

Oh, I knew precisely which study you were referring to, and I posted another that shows that the suggestion that HCT can increase naturally over the period of a strenuous GT is counter to reality. Your suggestion that they fall within parameters is a technical point and not a point of physiological reality. In reality, his values are exactly what we would expect from someone on a sophisticated doping program. You can keep your head in the sand all you want, but the blood profile Mr Armstrong provided do indicate doping. You simply do not want to see it.

 

[goober]

Oh, I knew precisely which study you were referring to, and I posted another that shows that the suggestion that HCT can increase naturally over the period of a strenuous GT is counter to reality. Your suggestion that they fall within parameters is a technical point and not a point of physiological reality. In reality, his values are exactly what we would expect from someone on a sophisticated doping program. You can keep your head in the sand all you want, but the blood profile Mr Armstrong provided do indicate doping. You simply do not want to see it.

Cool - I did not have time to read the article you had posted so I responded without understanding your point. Remember the 'experts' who brought this whole issue to light indicted the profile 'does not indicate doping' but should be looked at further (that is all I see). Will be interesting to see what the end result is down the road.

 

[Anonymous]

Cool - I did not have time to read the article you had posted so I responded without understanding your point. Remember the 'experts' who brought this whole issue to light indicted the profile 'does not indicate doping' but should be looked at further (that is all I see). Will be interesting to see what the end result is down the road.

In light of the revelations of Mr Landis, it will be interesting to see. It appears that those of us who said the Biological Passport was just a codification of the level to which a rider could dope are being proven to be right.

It is also interesting to note that U23 riders are being busted for full program doping, and yet the UCI line is still that the upper level is clean. Seems that they are trying to live in two worlds, and their duplicity is being exposed almost daily. They are a paper tiger when it comes to doping, and their head needs to step down and turn over the reigns to someone who is actually interested in cleaning up the sport.

 

[goober]

In light of the revelations of Mr Landis, it will be interesting to see. It appears that those of us who said the Biological Passport was just a codification of the level to which a rider could dope are being proven to be right.

It is also interesting to note that U23 riders are being busted for full program doping, and yet the UCI line is still that the upper level is clean. Seems that they are trying to live in two worlds, and their duplicity is being exposed almost daily. They are a paper tiger when it comes to doping, and their head needs to step down and turn over the reigns to someone who is actually interested in cleaning up the sport.

Which riders?

 

[Anonymous]

Which riders?

Sorry, should have said "amateurs." I was referring to the bust in the Girobio - Giro Ciclistico d'Italia.

 

[goober]

Sorry, should have said "amateurs." I was referring to the bust in the Girobio - Giro Ciclistico d'Italia.

Not sure 1000MG IBU, etc. is a full doping program; but, non the less they broke the rules.

 

[goober]

Sorry, should have said "amateurs." I was referring to the bust in the Girobio - Giro Ciclistico d'Italia.

Have to love this quote though: "They're just medicines, prescription medicines. I kept them in my bag, ready to use but only after the team doctor had given me a prescription," Leali claimed in his defence. What a dumb a$$.

 

[Anonymous]

Not sure 1000MG IBU, etc. is a full doping program; but, non the less they broke the rules.

The evidence there of transfusion equipment suggests a full program to me. In today's doping, that is the safest and most effective form of blood manipulation. Obviously, FLandis' revelation that micro doses of EPO are part of the full program suggests that maybe they are just under that, but the bust still suggests that it was organized and done with full knowledge of the entire team.

The excuse was pretty classic though.

 

[HL2037]

Goober, will you please explain what you mean by "bayesian filter analysis", and why this model is more relevant to these data than a longitudinal normal model? What kind of model control considerations lies behind?

Also, since you seem to know a great deal about how the biological passport works, can you answer this: Which model is used when estimating expected change in blood values under the biological passport?

Please!
.

 

[goober]

The evidence there of transfusion equipment suggests a full program to me. In today's doping, that is the safest and most effective form of blood manipulation. Obviously, FLandis' revelation that micro doses of EPO are part of the full program suggests that maybe they are just under that, but the bust still suggests that it was organized and done with full knowledge of the entire team.

The excuse was pretty classic though.

My understanding is that was a media statement and not official statement. I will find the official statement that was translated - did not mention any transfusion and/or riders with drugs on them - only Leali's 'bag' of goods.