Define what 'cleaner' means. they take less? or they take something that has less effect. I believe doping in cycling is just the same as it was in the old days. but the products and the effect of the products differ.I don't know what is real. Cycling is still cleaner than in the 90s, but it might be less clean now than 5-7 years ago. I don't know what to believe anymore, but the racing is really fun.
We had a peak in the 90s with EPO and the no limits. Which gave the highest performance increase, but I don't think there were more cyclist using forbidden or performance enhancing drugs compared to the 70 or 80s.
We all consider the Lance years as high dope years, but they were battling with the same products from the 90s, but with a different approach and with limits. (no more Mr 60%). But transformation from the 90s, with Mr 60% are only possible with doping. From donky to one of the best racer in the world... Lance was similar, but he was already a talented rider. We recently had the praying mantis on a bike which started winning GT after being dropped by the peleton on a cat 5 mountain and not holding wheels since joining the pro 5 year earlier.. it is not a possible transformation without doping.
Now we have many talented youngsters coming up, but after joining the profs they start riding at speeds from the doping years. Either means cycling has never had such talented people... and the last 30 years were filled with donkeys that performed due to dope.... or it just means doping is still highly relevant.