• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

Official Valverde thread.

Page 30 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jul 16, 2010
16,254
0
0
Re:

Puckfiend said:
Why all the butt hurt? Valverde has never failed a test. Just like our British heroes.
Yes, he has, intent to dope is treated the same as a positive. His DNA was linked to blood bags with EPO and other stuff in it.

Don't play dumb.
 
Mar 14, 2009
2,736
0
0
This old dirty dog just won't go away huh?

Heck, I don't wish anybody anything bad, but it would definitely make me happy if he would get busted again.

Wishful thinking ... this cheat got it down.

Now let's talk about the long-term benefits of EPO usage, shall we?
 
Re:

Jancouver said:
This old dirty dog just won't go away huh?

Heck, I don't wish anybody anything bad, but it would definitely make me happy if he would get busted again.

Wishful thinking ... this cheat got it down.

Now let's talk about the long-term benefits of EPO usage, shall we?
Has there ever been a single study suggesting that there is any benefit long term?

Genuine question btw. I mean you would assume the greater training volume enabled would count for something. But maybe it could also be the opposite - and that coming off EPO makes you worse than before - because your body has become too reliant on it. Would be cool to see a study which suggests long term benefits or negative consequences.
 
Jul 31, 2012
149
0
8,830
Re: Re:

El Pistolero said:
Puckfiend said:
Why all the butt hurt? Valverde has never failed a test. Just like our British heroes.
Yes, he has, intent to dope is treated the same as a positive. His DNA was linked to blood bags with EPO and other stuff in it.

Don't play dumb.
Gee, I seem to remember something about somebody having an astronomical amount of salbutamol in their system. Can't remember who though..............
 
Re: Re:

DFA123 said:
Jancouver said:
This old dirty dog just won't go away huh?

Heck, I don't wish anybody anything bad, but it would definitely make me happy if he would get busted again.

Wishful thinking ... this cheat got it down.

Now let's talk about the long-term benefits of EPO usage, shall we?
Has there ever been a single study suggesting that there is any benefit long term?

Genuine question btw. I mean you would assume the greater training volume enabled would count for something. But maybe it could also be the opposite - and that coming off EPO makes you worse than before - because your body has become too reliant on it. Would be cool to see a study which suggests long term benefits or negative consequences.
Without checking I’m going to say no, because it’s going to be incredibly difficult to set it up and control it, if not impossible.
 
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
DFA123 said:
Jancouver said:
This old dirty dog just won't go away huh?

Heck, I don't wish anybody anything bad, but it would definitely make me happy if he would get busted again.

Wishful thinking ... this cheat got it down.

Now let's talk about the long-term benefits of EPO usage, shall we?
Has there ever been a single study suggesting that there is any benefit long term?

Genuine question btw. I mean you would assume the greater training volume enabled would count for something. But maybe it could also be the opposite - and that coming off EPO makes you worse than before - because your body has become too reliant on it. Would be cool to see a study which suggests long term benefits or negative consequences.
Without checking I’m going to say no, because it’s going to be incredibly difficult to set it up and control it, if not impossible.
Yeah, I guess you're right. It would just be anecdotal stuff from a few ex-pros. Kind of a shame, because it would be pretty interesting. I think there are studies things like test and creatine cause long term negative effects after withdrawal (decreased naturally production), so wouldn't be too surprised if something similar happened with EPO. Whether or not the increased training load benefits and increased capillaries etc.. while on the drug outweighs that would be fascinating to find out.

Valverde's improvement in performances post ban seems a bit of an outlier in terms of riders who were on a full scale EPO program and now probably are on something more reduced. Most seem to gradually fade away or never quite get back to their pre-ban level.
 
Mar 14, 2009
2,736
0
0
Re: Re:

DFA123 said:
King Boonen said:
DFA123 said:
Jancouver said:
This old dirty dog just won't go away huh?

Heck, I don't wish anybody anything bad, but it would definitely make me happy if he would get busted again.

Wishful thinking ... this cheat got it down.

Now let's talk about the long-term benefits of EPO usage, shall we?
Has there ever been a single study suggesting that there is any benefit long term?

Genuine question btw. I mean you would assume the greater training volume enabled would count for something. But maybe it could also be the opposite - and that coming off EPO makes you worse than before - because your body has become too reliant on it. Would be cool to see a study which suggests long term benefits or negative consequences.
Without checking I’m going to say no, because it’s going to be incredibly difficult to set it up and control it, if not impossible.
Yeah, I guess you're right. It would just be anecdotal stuff from a few ex-pros. Kind of a shame, because it would be pretty interesting. I think there are studies things like test and creatine cause long term negative effects after withdrawal (decreased naturally production), so wouldn't be too surprised if something similar happened with EPO. Whether or not the increased training load benefits and increased capillaries etc.. while on the drug outweighs that would be fascinating to find out.

Valverde's improvement in performances post ban seems a bit of an outlier in terms of riders who were on a full scale EPO program and now probably are on something more reduced. Most seem to gradually fade away or never quite get back to their pre-ban level.
While nobody can deny Valverde's talent, perhaps the EPO benefits (recovery etc) and his ban is the reason while he is still able to compete at this level at his age.

So perhaps, if he did not dope, and was not banned, he would no longer be around .... so there is the clear benefit as he was sitting out for a while.

While those like JV would deny the long-term benefits, other cycling unrelated studies have confirmed those benefits.

"Haemoglobin levels during the study
Short-term EPO did not significantly change Hb levels (7.5 (1.2) vs 7.3 (1.0) mmol/l; p=0.061), but significantly increased reticulocyte count (0.066±0.004 vs 0.045±0.003×1012/l; p<0.001) compared to baseline. Long-term EPO significantly increased Hb levels compared to baseline (8.4 (0.8) vs 6.9 (0.8) mmol/l; p =0.012). Patients not treated with EPO remained anaemic at all time-points (7.4 (0.4) baseline, 7.2 (0.8) 18 days, 7.4 (0.9) mmol/l 52 week; p-value not significant between time-points)."


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3002834/
 
Re: Re:

Jancouver said:
DFA123 said:
King Boonen said:
DFA123 said:
Jancouver said:
This old dirty dog just won't go away huh?

Heck, I don't wish anybody anything bad, but it would definitely make me happy if he would get busted again.

Wishful thinking ... this cheat got it down.

Now let's talk about the long-term benefits of EPO usage, shall we?
Has there ever been a single study suggesting that there is any benefit long term?

Genuine question btw. I mean you would assume the greater training volume enabled would count for something. But maybe it could also be the opposite - and that coming off EPO makes you worse than before - because your body has become too reliant on it. Would be cool to see a study which suggests long term benefits or negative consequences.
Without checking I’m going to say no, because it’s going to be incredibly difficult to set it up and control it, if not impossible.
Yeah, I guess you're right. It would just be anecdotal stuff from a few ex-pros. Kind of a shame, because it would be pretty interesting. I think there are studies things like test and creatine cause long term negative effects after withdrawal (decreased naturally production), so wouldn't be too surprised if something similar happened with EPO. Whether or not the increased training load benefits and increased capillaries etc.. while on the drug outweighs that would be fascinating to find out.

Valverde's improvement in performances post ban seems a bit of an outlier in terms of riders who were on a full scale EPO program and now probably are on something more reduced. Most seem to gradually fade away or never quite get back to their pre-ban level.
While nobody can deny Valverde's talent, perhaps the EPO benefits (recovery etc) and his ban is the reason while he is still able to compete at this level at his age.

So perhaps, if he did not dope, and was not banned, he would no longer be around .... so there is the clear benefit as he was sitting out for a while.

While those like JV would deny the long-term benefits, other cycling unrelated studies have confirmed those benefits.

"Haemoglobin levels during the study
Short-term EPO did not significantly change Hb levels (7.5 (1.2) vs 7.3 (1.0) mmol/l; p=0.061), but significantly increased reticulocyte count (0.066±0.004 vs 0.045±0.003×1012/l; p<0.001) compared to baseline. Long-term EPO significantly increased Hb levels compared to baseline (8.4 (0.8) vs 6.9 (0.8) mmol/l; p =0.012). Patients not treated with EPO remained anaemic at all time-points (7.4 (0.4) baseline, 7.2 (0.8) 18 days, 7.4 (0.9) mmol/l 52 week; p-value not significant between time-points)."


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3002834/
Not really sure that is particularly relevant. Data taken from heart disease patients with anaemia is surely not going to compare with highly trained professional athletes.
 
Jan 15, 2013
863
0
0
Surely the Occam's Razor answer is that he just kept doping - there's still no approved transfusion test, it's well-established that you can microdose EPO to performance enhancing levels and still not trip the passport, and new drugs have appeared in the last ten years that it's likely some riders respond better to than others.
 
Re:

vedrafjord said:
Surely the Occam's Razor answer is that he just kept doping - there's still no approved transfusion test, it's well-established that you can microdose EPO to performance enhancing levels and still not trip the passport, and new drugs have appeared in the last ten years that it's likely some riders respond better to than others.
Sure, Occam's Razor would suggest that everyone winning cycling races is still doping. But does Valverde have an additional advantage from having had part of his career in the relative 'free-for-all' doping era, compared with newcomers who have had the more restrictive passport since they started riding as pros?
 
Jan 15, 2013
863
0
0
It's possible that you have an advantage if you were already doping when the passport came in, because you can maintain those artificial levels and look normal. It's possible Valverde is a natural talent and has a higher undoped level compared to others, and has got relatively better as O2 vector doping has become a bit harder. It's possible the opposite is true, and he's a really good responder to a certain drug or drugs. We just don't know.
 
I mean, Valverde spun up a mur that had men 15 years younger paperboying just to stay upright, after 255 km of racing, and after a year of 2 GTs and 78 days of racing, over 12,000 km. What's suspicious about that?
 
Jul 31, 2012
149
0
8,830
Re:

Bolder said:
I mean, Valverde spun up a mur that had men 15 years younger paperboying just to stay upright, after 255 km of racing, and after a year of 2 GTs and 78 days of racing, over 12,000 km. What's suspicious about that?
The new era of clens cycling!
 
Oct 4, 2011
614
0
0
Re:

King Boonen said:
You go from perhaps to clear benefit? Then use a paper about people with cardiorenal syndrome to back it up? Nope.
The logic is sound enough even if its just for the hypothesis of a study on Pro's rather than its intended use.
 
Oct 4, 2011
614
0
0
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
noddy69 said:
King Boonen said:
You go from perhaps to clear benefit? Then use a paper about people with cardiorenal syndrome to back it up? Nope.
The logic is sound enough even if its just for the hypothesis of a study on Pro's rather than its intended use.
No, it isn’t.
Thanks for the detailed reply ! Long term use is more beneficial being part of the hypothesis- why isn't that sound ?
There is evidence to say it is so I think the study would be warranted
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS