Oier Lazkano

[Sciatic]

I think measuring various blood parameters will (can?) detect use of rEPO. Once again, here are the markers tracked under the Haematological Module:

1. ABPS - Abnormal Blood Profile Score
2. HCT - Haematocrit
3. HGB - Haemoglobin
4. IRF - Immature reticulocyte fraction
5. MCH - Mean corpuscular haemoglobin
6. MCHC - Mean corpuscular haemoglobin concentration
7. MCV - Mean corpuscular volume
8. OFFS - OFF-hr Score
9. PLT - Platelets
10. RBC - Red blood cell (erythrocyte) count
11. RDW-SD - Red cell distribution width (standard deviation)
12. RET# - Reticulocyte count
13. RET% - Reticulocytes percentage
14. WBC - White Blood Cells

https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/world-anti-doping-program/athlete-biological-passport-abp-operating-guidelines

Pretty sure presence of rEPO would show up in a number of these markers.

Most will be not be deemed confirmation of EPO if a rider has just returned from altitude.

 

[proffate]

Most will be not be deemed confirmation of EPO if a rider has just returned from altitude.

This is kind of a vague statement. All we need is one or two of them to be inconsistent with altitude. I don't know enough about the details to comment, my only point is that ABP seems to be more sensitive than the "adverse analytical finding" tests, so at what point does it make sense to redirect funding from AAF testing to more comprehensive/frequent ABP testing?

 

[Cookster15]

The issue is if dopers have moved on to substances or methods of doping that are hard for conventional tests to pick up on. My understanding is micro-dosing EPO would be one example of this. We don't know exactly what Lazkano was doing, but presumably it was something along these lines that wouldn't be detectable in and of itself, but would lead to elevated blood values and trigger an investigation via the biological passport.

This too is my understanding. But I also don't understand how micro-dosing EPO helps if they are monitoring all of the 14 markers closely? Micro-dosing EPO will give a more even score over time. But it still results in elevated hemoglobin.

Oxygen is transported to the muscles via the bloodstream in hemoglobin. If the oxygen carrying capacity of the blood isn't boosted there is no performance benefit.

Suddenly elevated immature reticulocyte fraction also suggests autologous blood transfusion.

And synthetic EPO (rEPO) still elevates the total hemoglobin.

Maybe the software used is limited. It doesn't red-light even if doping must be occurring (false negatives). I think I've read that somewhere here before?

 

[Cookster15]

Most will be not be deemed confirmation of EPO if a rider has just returned from altitude.

Most but not all.

 

[Sciatic]

L

This is kind of a vague statement. All we need is one or two of them to be inconsistent with altitude. I don't know enough about the details to comment, my only point is that ABP seems to be more sensitive than the "adverse analytical finding" tests, so at what point does it make sense to redirect funding from AAF testing to more comprehensive/frequent ABP testing?

I've always thought the Off-score and retics would be likely to show blood manipulation. i don't know how they get away with those. However all of the other blood values are likely to change in a similar fashion whether it's from altitude or EPO. So my assumption is that altitude training and EPO use could not be easily distinguished.
All of these can changes due to increased red blood cell production:

1. HCT - Haematocrit
2. HGB - Haemoglobin (1 and 2 are redundant anyways since they will change at same rate))
3. RBC - Red blood cell (erythrocyte) count
4. RDW-SD - Red cell distribution width (standard deviation)

These, I believe, are unlikely to change, whether from altitude or EPO, since they measure the health (in oxygen carrying capacity) of blood cells. Altitude and EPO increase the production of RBCs, not the quality of the blood cells produced:

1. MCH - Mean corpuscular haemoglobin
2. MCHC - Mean corpuscular haemoglobin concentration
3. MCV - Mean corpuscular volume

And these other 2 are a standard part of every CBC but not going to be relevant to the boost in red blood cell production:

1. PLT - Platelets
2. BC - White Blood Cells

That would seem to leave the off-score and retics as difficult to fool the ABP? But I don't know much about those two.

 

[proffate]

I've always thought the Off-score and retics would be likely to show blood manipulation. i don't know how they get away with those. However all of the other blood values are likely to change in a similar fashion whether it's from altitude or EPO. So my assumption is that altitude training and EPO use could not be easily distinguished.
All of these can changes due to increased red blood cell production:

1. HCT - Haematocrit
2. HGB - Haemoglobin (1 and 2 are redundant anyways since they will change at same rate))
3. RBC - Red blood cell (erythrocyte) count
4. RDW-SD - Red cell distribution width (standard deviation)

These, I believe, are unlikely to change, whether from altitude or EPO, since they measure the health (in oxygen carrying capacity) of blood cells. Altitude and EPO increase the production of RBCs, not the quality of the blood cells produced:

1. MCH - Mean corpuscular haemoglobin
2. MCHC - Mean corpuscular haemoglobin concentration
3. MCV - Mean corpuscular volume

And these other 2 are a standard part of every CBC but not going to be relevant to the boost in red blood cell production:

1. PLT - Platelets
2. BC - White Blood Cells

That would seem to leave the off-score and retics as difficult to fool the ABP? But I don't know much about those two.

Very specific statement, thanks!

I would compel riders to provide documentation of their time at altitude (or in a tent). The whereabouts system is already in place for real altitude. Heck I don't think any fan would complain if you just banned tents, so while that may not theoretically stop people from using them, they'd no longer be accepted as an excuse for funky ABP.

 

[HashRouge]

Different tests --- for the presence of rEPO vs measuring various blood parameters.

Seems like you've slightly contradicted yourself here. It hasn't deterred EPO use, only EPO megadosing. Would the EPO megadose not be something that was immediately picked up by the ABP anyway?

Bear in mind that testing for exogenous substances is expensive in both development and application. The money saved by skipping direct testing would theoretically be reallocated to something more effective, such as ABP, i.e. more ABP testing.

But they aren't just testing for EPO though. What about substances that don't affect your blood values, or only stay in your system for a short period of time? The sort of substances that you might use for an in-competition boost rather than during training.

Really I don't know enough about it though, it just sort of made sense in my head that you would do both.

 

[Sciatic]

But they aren't just testing for EPO though. What about substances that don't affect your blood values, or only stay in your system for a short period of time? The sort of substances that you might use for an in-competition boost rather than during training.

Really I don't know enough about it though, it just sort of made sense in my head that you would do both.

It is possible it has deterred EPO use--perhaps it prompted folks to go back to blood bags, which only the ABP could reveal? I don't know.