The Most Effective, Fundamental Doping Products as Revealed by #USPSConspiracy

[joe_papp]

I never felt like my explanations were not being accepted, but it is "refreshing" to see the USADA charging letter confirm that the most-effective, fundamental doping products for a road cyclist since 1998 have been:

1) EPO
2) Testosterone
3) HGH
4) Corticosteroids

and

5) Blood-doping (prohibited method) w/ various related prohibited methods for masking

 

[ElChingon]

You left out:

6) Conspiring.
7) Denial.
8) Lying.

 

[TechnicalDescent]

1) EPO
2) Testosterone
3) HGH
4) Corticosteroids

At last we have Dr Ferrari's secrets revealed!

 

[DirtyWorks]

Forget the drugs! You guys are thinking small.

An sports federation ready and willing to cover up positive(s) and permit limited doping. Somehow, that has become the essence of the Olympics organization.

 

[TexPat]

Hey Joe. What do you know about androstenedione?

 

[Berzin]

I never felt like my explanations were not being accepted, but it is "refreshing" to see the USADA charging letter confirm that the most-effective, fundamental doping products for a road cyclist since 1998 have been:

1) EPO
2) Testosterone
3) HGH
4) Corticosteroids

Let me ask a pragmatic question (actually, two questions)-

1) If these are the products pro riders use as the best method to dope, why is it that we've heard stories of guys being administered all types of other stuff?

Were they just being used as guinea pigs by team doctors?

2) I am well aware of the products listed as used on the amateur level (minus blood doping, as that involves a whole set of logistical issues that many amatuers cannot access for obvious reasons), but usually cortico-steroids are deemed redundant as HgH has similar effects with much better results.

What's your take on this?

 

[dopingectomy]

I never felt like my explanations were not being accepted, but it is "refreshing" to see the USADA charging letter confirm that the most-effective, fundamental doping products for a road cyclist since 1998 have been:

1) EPO
2) Testosterone
3) HGH
4) Corticosteroids

and

5) Blood-doping (prohibited method) w/ various related prohibited methods for masking

You should have said effective AND hard to detect. Because all are naturally produced by the human body as well. Other synthetic substances can be more effective (eg nandrolone) but they are not used because easily detectable.

 

[yourwelcome]

I just read the letter. I'm glad they listed some of the negatives otherwise it would have been a great how-to manual, not an accusation.

 

[mastersracer]

The USADA letter also indicates Armstrong was using these well prior to 1996. It again raises the question, did his doping contribute to his cancer? There is only one review paper I've come across on the general topic of doping with these agents and cancer, but makes mechanistic links among all these agents:

Doping with growth hormone/IGF-1, anabolic steroids or
erythropoietin: is there a cancer risk? Pharmacological Research 55 (2007) 359–369

 

[DirtyWorks]

The USADA letter also indicates Armstrong was using these well prior to 1996. It again raises the question, did his doping contribute to his cancer?

This has been covered before. It's quite possible. Some of Wonderboy's former USAC teammates sued Carmichael and Wenzel because they ran USAC's doping program. Greg Strock, Erich Kaiter both were mysteriously ill after being doped as minors. Clearly they felt it was as a result of the doping.

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500164_162-284958.html

You might want to try looking for critical research by using some of the brand names. The fundamental problem with this kind of research is there is little or no funding for it.

 

[joe_papp]

Hey Joe. What do you know about androstenedione?

That it doesn't work, but that andriol does - and yet andriol metabolizes into what looks like you've had andro' in your system. Ultimately I think my positive for metabolites of testosterone or its precursors (6α-OH-androstenedione 6β-OH-androsterone) may have been due to unintentional (at that time) consumption of andriol.

Let me ask a pragmatic question (actually, two questions)-

1) If these are the products pro riders use as the best method to dope, why is it that we've heard stories of guys being administered all types of other stuff?

Were they just being used as guinea pigs by team doctors?

2) I am well aware of the products listed as used on the amateur level (minus blood doping, as that involves a whole set of logistical issues that many amatuers cannot access for obvious reasons), but usually cortico-steroids are deemed redundant as HgH has similar effects with much better results.

What's your take on this?

1) just because those are the fundamental doping products doesn't mean the cyclist only limits himself to them. Rather, they are the staple products, and yet the doping cyclist must look for an advantage over his competitors then w/ other, more exotic drugs - witness the use of Actovegin for awhile.

2) I would draw more of a distinction b/w HGH and cortico's and the thinking behind their use: cortico's are used for their ability to suppress the body's inflammatory response, and basically suppress pain and stifle the feeling of sore legs (they also have a secondary effect of reducing body mass by catabolizing muscle, which can be detrimental if you're losing more power than mass); HGH is desired b/c it anecdotally improves recovery, stimulates the immune system, increases strength, enhances muscle growth and protein synthesis, and promotes fat-burning.

 

[my username is flish]

Re Actovegin, or Actovision as this guy called it...

"SPIEGEL: Was there a regimen of sorts?
Heredia: Yes. I always combined several things. For example, I had one substance called actovison that increased blood circulation – not detectable. That was good from a health standpoint and even better from a competitive standpoint. Then we had the growth factors IGF-1 and IGF-2. And epo. Epo increases the number of red blood cells and thus the transportation of oxygen, which is the key for every athlete: the athlete wants to recover quickly, keep the load at a constantly high level and achieve a constant performance."

From here...

http://www.pendlayforum.com/showthread.php?t=6611

 

[zigmeister]

I'm going to have to say that they are missing a few well known things. For example, GHRP-6, or CJC-1295.

Those and variants stimulate your pituitary to release GH. They don't suppress your pituatary like direct GH injections. Since there are still no known inexpensive and reliable bioidentical GH test used, these are even further removed, and nobody knows if they are even tested for, or detectable? I never heard of any testing for them.

They spend so much time on the development of a reliable urine/blood GH test, and they may not even be looking at something like this.

They are banned substances, but I would like to know if these are actually detectable today, and who can detect it and how reliably?

 

[zigmeister]

Let me ask a pragmatic question (actually, two questions)-


2) I am well aware of the products listed as used on the amateur level (minus blood doping, as that involves a whole set of logistical issues that many amatuers cannot access for obvious reasons), but usually cortico-steroids are deemed redundant as HgH has similar effects with much better results.

What's your take on this?

cortico steroids and HGH are not alike in what they do. Cortisol is needed by your body for basic functions. Cholesterol is the mother hormone, which then in converted down the various pathways to other hormones, to include cortisol, test, estrogen, pregnenolone (another mother hormone) etc.. Each has its own unique properties and purpose and how it gets to that point.

HgH like Joe wrote, muscle growth, fat burning, faster recovery time, overall strength, tendon/ligament benefits etc..essential for basic growth of your body as you mature through puberty and declines as you get older, IGF-1 is the test/marker to determine that level. Direct GH injections are still expensive and difficult to prove as of last year, maybe they got a better method, but last I knew, they still couldn't get a reliable, inexpensive urine/blood test to prove bio-identical GH injections were performed. Correct me if I'm wrong on that test.

 

[joe_papp]

I'm going to have to say that they are missing a few well known things. For example, GHRP-6, or CJC-1295...

I definitely agree that there are countless and innumerable doping products that can confer some kind of advantage. EPO, HGH, Test., Corticos and Blood-doping, however, would be the fundamental building-blocks of a doping program for pro cycling, contingent upon a reasonable likelihood of their not being super-easily detectable.

GHRP-6 I would consider to be not so much a fundamental, but a product like semerolin and other peptide hormones that one would turn to if in doubt about their ability to continue using HGH.

But of course time waits for no man, so what was possible through 2010, for example (or maybe 2009), isn't necessarily possible now so perhaps you delete HGH from the list and replace it was a growth-hormone releasing factor or some other exotic peptide you buy from http://www.peptidelabs.com.

My original point in starting the thread was to say, "hey! these are the primary doping products no doping cyclist would be w/o during the time of the #USPSConspiracy!"

But your input is certainly valuable and helps inform all of us as to just how sophisticated the catalog of natural and synthetic doping products becomes...

 

[joe_papp]

I definitely agree that there are countless and innumerable doping products that can confer some kind of advantage. EPO, HGH, Test., Corticos and Blood-doping, however, would be the fundamental building-blocks of a doping program for pro cycling, contingent upon a reasonable likelihood of their not being super-easily detectable.

GHRP-6 I would consider to be not so much a fundamental, but a product like semerolin and other peptide hormones that one would turn to if in doubt about their ability to continue using HGH.

But of course time waits for no man, so what was possible through 2010, for example (or maybe 2009), isn't necessarily possible now so perhaps you delete HGH from the list and replace it was a growth-hormone releasing factor or some other exotic peptide you buy from http://www.peptidelabs.com.

My original point in starting the thread was to say, "hey! these are the primary doping products no doping cyclist would be w/o during the time of the #USPSConspiracy!"

But your input is certainly valuable and helps inform all of us as to just how sophisticated the catalog of natural and synthetic doping products becomes...

cortico steroids and HGH are not alike in what they do...

Thanks for going into greater detail on the differences and what they're actually capable of, per the original poster's question.

 

[Le breton]

Thanks for going into greater detail on the differences and what they're actually capable of, per the original poster's question.

If I read the USADA document correctly, L.A. would have stopped using HGH after his cancer. Willing to take chances, but not playing Russian roulette.

 

[PotentialPro]

The USADA letter also indicates Armstrong was using these well prior to 1996. It again raises the question, did his doping contribute to his cancer? There is only one review paper I've come across on the general topic of doping with these agents and cancer, but makes mechanistic links among all these agents:

Doping with growth hormone/IGF-1, anabolic steroids or
erythropoietin: is there a cancer risk? Pharmacological Research 55 (2007) 359–369

This has been covered before. It's quite possible. Some of Wonderboy's former USAC teammates sued Carmichael and Wenzel because they ran USAC's doping program. Greg Strock, Erich Kaiter both were mysteriously ill after being doped as minors. Clearly they felt it was as a result of the doping.

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500164_162-284958.html

You might want to try looking for critical research by using some of the brand names. The fundamental problem with this kind of research is there is little or no funding for it.

I have one simple question in regards to these two aspects:

Who was paying?

When Armstrong was a junior, or up onto the national team, who was paying for the supplements?

It would be interesting to get Mom on the stand, and ask her if she paid.

 

[DirtyWorks]

I have one simple question in regards to these two aspects:

Who was paying?

When Armstrong was a junior, or up onto the national team, who was paying for the supplements?

It would be interesting to get Mom on the stand, and ask her if she paid.

The quote I recall is Greg Strock retelling it as he's on the massage table and then Wenzel and his cohort produce the syringe with the PED and he gets the injection. I also recall it being a Carmichael's way or the highway. It read, as I recall, just like an enforced team-wide doping program, pre EPO so at best it might have been the equivalent of Pot Belge. Given Carmichael's reputation, it seemed to be little more than uncontrolled human experimentation. Cool, right?

Finally, I recall that the parents weren't made aware. Now, was word getting back to parents via the kids that they were getting injections of unknown provenance? Don't know. I have a feeling some forum participants could fill this in better, perhaps not from that specific era though.

 

[PotentialPro]

I do find it an interesting subject. I was up there prior to this happening, and never saw anything like it at all. This isn't to say it didn't happen. I remember how it was hard enough to get a spare tube to go on a ride, you would go across the street to a bike shop, instead of being supplied at the OTC. I remember this scandal going down, but it was kept fairly quiet. However, where did that kind of money appear from to pay for drugs? Assistant coaches didn't make much. For them to pay out of pocket doesn't seem logical. Which brings an obvious question, did USCF fund that?

I remember going to several races in CA, one for instance where Armstrong and his mom attended. My memory might not be great, but it seemed he spent more time on his own away from the national team. For him to have his own program at this point, in the very early to mid 90's, it would seem to be self funded. It wasn't the same as the powerbars and cytomax that I was on.

 

[hwyrngr]

I have no reason to doubt Stock's allegations but find it interesting that nobody ever brings up that fact that he raced one or two season for the Banesto amateur team....in SPAIN!!

 

[Polish]

I never felt like my explanations were not being accepted, but it is "refreshing" to see the USADA charging letter confirm that the most-effective, fundamental doping products for a road cyclist since 1998 have been:

1) EPO
2) Testosterone
3) HGH
4) Corticosteroids

and

5) Blood-doping (prohibited method) w/ various related prohibited methods for masking

Yes, it is refreshing to see tha EPO/Testosterone/HGH/Cortcosteroids are effective. Wow, thanks for that. Profitable too. Blood doping works. Wow again. Does the USADA need you to mention any other effective Cycling drugs? Maybe benotti69 can name some too.

If I ever create a sockpuppet, I am going to name her Toni Carbone. Maybe call her Carbone69. Good times, good times wink wink.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

It's well known that what made Lance great was 2 drops of excellence in his olive oil teaspoon. And high cadence.

Ferrari just wrote down some intervals for Lance to do. He apparently inscribed them on stone tablets in gold, hence the $465k price tag.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Hey you guys, look over there, Unicorns.

Say what? ....

 

[ultimobici]

Say what? ....

Good one! Thank you.