Why take drugs?

irishmotorist

All the chat in the Lance Armstrong thread has me wondering again something that I've wondered before.

Why does anybody in the peloton (or sport in general) take performance enhancers, such as EPO? The authorities have a test for it but still x number of people were thrown out of the TdF this year for taking it (and last year, and the year before...).

Do the takers have a masking agent that *should* hide it from the testers? Do they take it early in the morning and hope the testable signs of it will be sweated out by test time? Or are they just living in hope that they will win a stage and the authorities will forget to test the stage winner?

Is it not 100% certain that if somebody is using these substances, a test will find them?

Chips Lovell

irishmotorist wrote: »

Is it not 100% certain that if somebody is using these substances, a test will find them?

It isn't, which is why so many riders use drugs. It is getting harder to dodge the testers, but I don't think we're there just yet.

irishmotorist

Do you know why it's not 100% though...is it a timing thing or something else? You might see somebody doing an unexpected attack up some mountains some day after not doing much the previous few days - did he just stick some drugs in his OJ that morning and hope the testable signs will be gone by the time he gets to the doctors tent at the end?

Chips Lovell

irishmotorist wrote: »

Do you know why it's not 100% though...is it a timing thing or something else? You might see somebody doing an unexpected attack up some mountains some day after not doing much the previous few days - did he just stick some drugs in his OJ that morning and hope the testable signs will be gone by the time he gets to the doctors tent at the end?

There are various reasons. Its mostly down to timing and, lately it appears, maintaining a blood profile that appears natural. A very simple example is that EPO is detectable only a few days after administration, but its effects last much longer.

EDIT: I should add that it by all appearances, it is now harder to dope and get away with it and it is probably impossible to dope to the same levels as people were even a few years ago.

penexpers

irishmotorist wrote: »

Is it not 100% certain that if somebody is using these substances, a test will find them?

Ricardo Ricco was tested 12 times during the TdF and only 2 of those tests were positive.

Raam

penexpers wrote: »

Ricardo Ricco was tested 12 times during the TdF and only 2 of those tests were positive.

And he himself has questioned why he didn't test positive for some of them!

irishmotorist

Raam wrote: »

And he himself has questioned why he didn't test positive for some of them!

Really? He put his hands up and admitted it all and then said that they should have caught him more?

It's interesting about the timeline of it - keeping the blood profile at a particular level. There must be as much organisation of that as there is of legitimate training.

Raam

irishmotorist wrote: »

Really? He put his hands up and admitted it all and then said that they should have caught him more?

It's interesting about the timeline of it - keeping the blood profile at a particular level. There must be as much organisation of that as there is of legitimate training.

Well not quite, I think it was more a case of, "if I tested positive on this one, then why not on the other ones".

I'll try dig up the article.

TinyExplosions

This thread explains some of the situation

Essentially, the new test still relies on subjective judgment and interpretation of the results to decide if something is "positive" or "negative" for artificial EPO. It isn't like the EPO is either there or not there. Nearly all the samples give ambiguous, overlapping results; the scientists must then interpret what the data mean and if they lie towards the positive or negative side.

Also here is a little more

It seems from what I have read on the subject (which isn't huge amounts and I may be interpreting it wrong), it is very difficult to isolate artificial EPO form a urine sample, so you are essentially testing for higher than normal levels, or for something that doesn't look usual. This ambiguity could be the reason Ricco only failed on 2 tests -along side the fact that he was using a new generation of EPO that he thought was impossible to test for

As an aside, see here for some interesting reading

Chips Lovell

I think the issue regarding Ricco is that you have to prove beyond all doubt that a test is positive. In some of his tests, I recall reading that there wasn't enough evidence to make them conclusive. That quote from Tiny sums it up nicely really.

Also remember that pretty much all of the riders caught up in Operation Puerto had never tested positive. If it wasn't for the Spanish police investigating Dr. Fuentes most of them would probably still be riding today.

Funkyzeit

Also it was common that riders would dope out of competition for training purposes and then test 'clean' on the event. I can certainly think of 1 rider who springs to mind..... Mind you he sued to ride the Dauphine aswell....;)

petethedrummer

irishmotorist wrote: »

Why does anybody in the peloton (or sport in general) take performance enhancers, such as EPO? The authorities have a test for it but still x number of people were thrown out of the TdF this year for taking it (and last year, and the year before...).

Some do it to get a competitive advantage, some do it just to keep up and some(the domestiques) do it because they have no other way of earning money.

As far as I know, up until the early 90s it was ampehtemeines, corticoids and steroids people in cycling used. It wasn't really frowned upon by the Cycling organisers and I believe you still had to be a good rider to win anything.

But in the early 90's it seems the Spanish and Italian teams started to use EPO and Human Growth Hormone, which evidence suggests can turn a donkey in to a Grand National winner. The speed in the peloton jumped dramatically at this stage that no improvements in equipment, diet or training can explain.

The French teams we're slower on the uptake but by 98 most of them had EPO programs culminating in the Festina Scandal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Festina_affair.

You should read 'Game of shadows', to get an insight into BALCO and drugs in Athlectis and baseball, though cycling doesn't feature in it.
'The Death of Marco Pantani' is another good one.
'Rough Ride' by Paul Kimmage.
And 'In search of Robert Millar' for an insight into how much of a lonely dog-eat-dog sport it is.

Some riders over the years are believe to be absolutely drug free... such as
Christophe Bassons (A huge talent who was bullied in the peloton for speaking out and given a stern talking to by Armstrong himself in 99),
Greg Lemond (is in an on-going row with Armstrong),
Christian VandeVelde (was part of Armstrongs US Postal team, but David Walsh says he's drug free, though I'm am open to being corrected on this),
Chris Boardman (Kimmage states he couldn't imagine him ever doping at the end of his book),
Graeme Obree.

Feel free to add to or subtract from the list.

Vélo

Everyone should be allowed to take drugs, then they'll all be on an equal par. :D

tunney

petethedrummer wrote: »

Some riders over the years are believe to be absolutely drug free... such as

Greg Lemond (is in an on-going row with Armstrong),

Feel free to add to or subtract from the list.

No its believed that he was EPO free.

Chips Lovell

Aquinas73 wrote: »

Everyone should be allowed to take drugs, then they'll all be on an equal par. :D

I know you're only messing, but it's actually a common misconception. Some people respond better to drugs better than others.

Vélo

el tonto wrote: »

I know you're only messing, but it's actually a common misconception. Some people respond better to drugs better than others.

Yeah only havin a laugh if it was the case they'd have to have a jersey for the best Pharmacist!

irishmotorist

Lots of interesting stuff there. I've never known too much about the drugs end apart from the soundbites that you hear, damning them. It's such a pity it's so prevalent. It seems that the fact that there's a chance (and perhaps still a reasonable chance) that they'll get away with it is what makes it so attractive to so many riders.

Is the idea of a blood passport that the regular tests show what standard levels of x, y and z the athlete usually has? Then, if he's tested and it shows x + 20%, something is dodgy?

Chips Lovell

irishmotorist wrote: »

Is the idea of a blood passport that the regular tests show what standard levels of x, y and z the athlete usually has? Then, if he's tested and it shows x + 20%, something is dodgy?

That's more or less it alright. You have to test riders a few times to build up a profile of them though, which means the programme becomes more valuable over time.

I think the blood passports scheme is a bit up in the air at the moment. I'd like to look into it more, but they were saying on Eurosport that it was funded by the pro-tour teams. With the pro tour gone in all but name, funding for it could be in danger.

Furthermore, the passports were of no use to the Tour de France this year. Because it was run outside UCI remit, the UCI refused to give the data to the organisers and they pretty much had to start from scratch.

petethedrummer

tunney wrote: »

No its believed that he was EPO free.

Really? I haven't heard any rumours AT ALL about Lemond. Got any links? Or is it just common knowledge?

Wouldn't be wise for him to take such and anti-drug stance if its known/rumoured he took something. You think he'd be more inclined to take the Sean Kelly approach and just clam up on the subject.

Húrin

Why take drugs? Because professional sports are evil.

Planet X

Maybe wrong, but the Shay Elliot , a few of, were tested last year. Heard that in the club.
Don't think I'm wrong.

petethedrummer

tunney wrote: »

No its believed that he was EPO free.

I'm just getting to the end of the Robert Millar book and it mentions Lemond's association with Francois Bellocq. A practioner of 'Hormone Rebalancing'. Not much else about it on the net though (in english anyways).