Road Cycling - Tour De France Bars British World Champ

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=547&ncid=755&e=4&u=/ap/20040625/ap_on_sp_ot/cyc_tour_de_france_doping

Wow...........

"The 27-year-old Millar, who has never failed a drug test in his eight-year professional career, is the highest-profile casualty of a decision announced Friday by Tour organizers that all riders investigated or implicated in doping probes will be barred from the event, which starts July 3."

http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/6353.0.html

This is a shame because it forces to you wonder if it's really just about whether you get caught as opposed to whether or not the person is actually doing it.

"The 27-year-old Millar, who has never failed a drug test in his eight-year professional career, is the highest-profile casualty of a decision announced Friday by Tour organizers that all riders investigated or implicated in doping probes will be barred from the event, which starts July 3."

http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/6353.0.html

This is a shame because it forces to you wonder if it's really just about whether you get caught as opposed to whether or not the person is actually doing it.

Is there not a test that can detect EPO? While this proves nothing against any of the other top riders (namely, LA), it sure does hurt the credability of drug tests.

I'm starting to question my belief that the big name riders don't dope. There's not a single rider now that is immune from questions about doping. Lance, Jan, Tyler - they're all suspect.

Is there not a test that can detect EPO? While this proves nothing against any of the other top riders (namely, LA), it sure does hurt the credability of drug tests.



Synthetic EPO can only be detected if the test is given within 3 days of the injection. So as long as you have 3 days where you will not be tested, you are in the clear. This is why the teams go to remote training camps at altitude prior to the tour.

The team doctor will check you the night before competition, and if your Hematocrit count is over 50.00% then you are given a cutting agent, to lower the percentage count. The morning of the tests, the UCI vampires show up at the hotel. The riders with the lowest count go down first, giving anyone with a higher count another 20 min or so with which to temporarily dilute it.


Also in France at the moment, surprise out of competition tests at home are illegal, so riders are free to do what they want, when they want. As long as you don't do anything stupid, you can keep beating the tests.

There are also several substances which cannot be tested for, and EVERYONE knows this, not just cyclists. WADA has announced that they "may" have a test for detecting abuse of Human Growth Hormone. Which has been undectable for over a decade now. Since some athletes are not sure whether or not this is true, some have started using Equine Growth Hormone, (yes, from race horses) because it is not tested for. The Australian Olympic track cyclists are in the middle of a EGH scandal right now.

They test for Testasterone abuse too, but you are allowed up to a certain percentage natually. Anyone who is lacking, or a little less than the norm is free to boost up to the max. It is easily controlled by the team doctor.

I don't think they can detect Repoxygen, IGF-1, or Actovegin either.

You know the drug manufactures could make this very simple by putting a marker in the drugs, so that it would be easily found. But they know that there is a lot of money to be made when it finds its way into pro sports.

Every now and then, the police or investigators find drugs that are still in clinical trials, and not even approved, yet somehow the athletes have them. The Athletes are always several steps ahead of the testers. It's not until someone screws up and leaves something behind, that these drugs are even added to the banned list, and It's not doping , if you don't get caught, and definatley not doping if the substance is not banned. If it's banned, its a drug, If it's not banned (yet) its a "recovery agent"

Do I believe the drug tests catch cheaters? Not at all.

Do I believe that everyone is a doper? I'm starting to think that way.


Look to the past

Delgado, Thenuisse, Merckx, all tested positive. Are we to believe that Todays pros who came through the same systems are clean? Kelme aside, are the spanish clean? The Dutch? what about the Belgians?

Some former pro's who have come clean and talked about it: Fignon, Argentin, Riis Is Fignon the only french champion who doped? doubtful. Delgado tested positive, but are we to believe that only he and not his number one domestique Indurain was doping? Riis wins one year with 58.6% hematocrit, and teamate Jan Ullrich beats him and takes the win the following year.

Modern big name pro's who have been busted, Pantani (RIP) Garzelli, Frigo, Simoni, Virenque, Daufaux, Millar, Vasseur, Vandebrouke, Mazzolini, Gonzalez de Galdeano, Rumsas, And Rumsas is special, cause he got 3rd in the Tour, and his wife was caught with a trunk full of EPO and HGH etc.... guess who went to jail, his wife!! And he kept racing. He finally tested postive a year later (dumbass)


The list of positives starts to look like the G.C. at the Giro. And since the tests don't catch nearly everyone, how many more are managing to stay under the radar?

Wiretaps, Surviellance, Raids and Searches turn up more info than any drug test.

The sport is perforated with this mess, and I don't believe the UCI is doing all it can. It needs the riders as much as they need it. Case in point. the World Anti Doping Agency, or WADA mandated that all sports have to follow its stirct and rigid antidoping code, in order to be allowed in the olympics. The UCI was the VERY LAST organization to sign. The disagreement was over the length of suspension for athletes who tested positive. WADA demands 6 months mandatory, the UCI was lobbying for 2 maximum. The UCI wanted a lower sentance. Instead of saying "doping is bad, and anyone caught should be banned" their response was "not racing will deny the riders their sole source of making a living". basically stating what the truth really is, that its all about the Money.


The UCI knows that everyone is doped, The majority of them are former racers for Gods sake.
And they hope no one gets caught, If you do, they issue statments about how you have tainted the sport, but then after your suspension, you're on another team and back at it again. Just as the U.S. Olympic Commitee covered up positive tests for U.S. Athletes, I'm sure that the UCI does its best to protect its stars. Unfortunatley, the UCI cannot keep the Police out of the picture.

Best post ever, Smoothie. You summed it up perfectly.

Second that on the post Smoothie - great info.

55/Rad

While I like the post overall, I found this comment interesting:


So as long as you have 3 days where you will not be tested, you are in the clear. This is why the teams go to remote training camps at altitude prior to the tour.

Certainly, it wouldn't have anything to do with training, would it?

-murray

Great response! It brings up a couple of other questions...

Do you think it's possible for one or more of the top riders NOT to be doping if his peers are doping?

Assuming all top level riders are doping, do you think this effects the results? Seems if they are all doping, then the results would be the same as if they were all clean.

While I like the post overall, I found this comment interesting:



Certainly, it wouldn't have anything to do with training, would it?

-murray


Sure, they ride while they are up there, except Kelme didn't, According to Manzano, everyone was boosted to 56% or more, then the doctors would remove some enriched blood, and then store it for re-injection later.

Also, being at atitude is a good alibi if someone messes up and tests over 50%, Since after 3 days the blood and urine tests will be negative for EPO, you are simply deemed "unfit for competition"

I don't know how much you can hone your form in 3 to 4 days, but I do know you can hone your blood. It takes roughly 11 days for your body to gain any natural performance benefits from being at Altitude.

"legal ways to raise your hematocrit"

http://www.altitudetraining.com/html/livehigh.html

what a mess and I cant really see a solution to it either :(

I suspect there are a few clean riders, you have to admire them whilst ther peers are riding around drug fuelled

What stake do the team sponsors have in this? I'd be willing to bet that the US Postal Service has no interest in sponsoring a team associating with doping, and I'd bet that their contract with the team has huge penalties and perhaps other assurances that the riders won't be caught doping. If I were the Postal Service, I would write the contract so that the team directors/owners would lose everything they had if they were participating in doping.

Of course, the USPS is in the process of dropping the team. And if the riders don't think they will get caught, then they would think they are safe from any penalties.

I'd describe my self as pessimistic, but not without hope that the majority of pro riders are at least within the letter of the law.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=547&ncid=755&e=4&u=/ap/20040625/ap_on_sp_ot/cyc_tour_de_france_doping

"Police sources, speaking to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity, said investigators found syringes in Millar's home and he confessed to using doping products.."

If he confessed, he should be out.

I go back to the report from last year, something like 150 riders tested in the early spring...a low %, like 3-5% had a high hemotocrit level...near 50. Riders tested again 1 week before the TDF and something like 40% + tested that high. I would love to see some test results that actually show what kind of an improvement can be obtained without drugs. I believe there are some riders that are drug free...I used to believe most were, now I suspect far fewer are. This is a horrible problem for a sport that is losing it's attraction to more Gen X type sports. I find it hard to ask my kids to idolize a drug taker...not what I'm looking for.

I go back to the report from last year, something like 150 riders tested in the early spring...a low %, like 3-5% had a high hemotocrit level...near 50. Riders tested again 1 week before the TDF and something like 40% + tested that high. I would love to see some test results that actually show what kind of an improvement can be obtained without drugs. I believe there are some riders that are drug free...I used to believe most were, now I suspect far fewer are. This is a horrible problem for a sport that is losing it's attraction to more Gen X type sports. I find it hard to ask my kids to idolize a drug taker...not what I'm looking for.

What about integrity? Does this not factor in at all? I can't see the personal value in winning an event if you doped. Or is there no personal value, anyway? Perhaps it's just a "job" - and if doping means more income, then you dope. If sponsor governments were serious about this, they would REQUIRE pharma companies to tag all agents.

Judd

Well, doping is still a small part in the whole work factor to win a race, so I'm sure there is still a lot of personal value in it.
I could see a rider would be able to dope and not think of it as them cheating to win... that they would still feel they 'earned' and 'deserved' the victory.

Brent, you make a good point, especially when the riders either know or feel that everyone else is doing it too.

No one gets signed to a contract becuase they are a nice guy, It's all about results, and if you are losing to guys who are doping, you livelihood is in danger. Most of these guys only marketable skill is to endure hours of extreme discomfort. So they have a choice, they dope, or they go back to working in a factory, mill, mine etc...

And I don't believe any pro who says "I've never been around the stuff" or "I've never seen the stuff" It's rampant, and has been for 100 years. Also racing in Europe as an amateur these guys are exposed to it at a very young age. I've got friends who raced as juniors in Europe, and in the Pro-Ams on the Velodrome. And it's the same story. "If you wanna move up, you gotta go see the doctor"

This country is no different, its just different sports. Highschool kids are on steroids and in the weightroom to get bigger so they can make varsity and bang a cheerleader. They havent even thought of the scholarship money, pro contract etc... yet.

All the Power hitter in Baseball are 20 lbs lighter this year after they made drug tests mandatory, Atkins Schmatkins....

The NFL tests player too, and they even let you know 2 weeks in advance when the test is coming. So thats a sham too.

The NFL needs bigger faster players every year to keep the fans happy, and the money rolling in. You've got kids with maybe a highschool education, coming from mainly average to low income households, Pay them hundreds of thousands to millions a year, and promise them even more if they get faster and stronger than the next guy.

Pro cycling is no different.

And we expect them not to dope, when they see everyone else doing it? When they know that those who came before them did? When they see the next generation doing it and coming to take their jobs?

It's crazy. It's almost at the point where you say, fine EPO is leagl. Everyone will do it and level the field. Then of course, someone comes along with something to beat EPO ... where does it end? That it has been going on for so long and is so widespread means that for the most part it's never going away.

I'm waiting to see the arrival of the Tour de Dope.

Nothing is banned! The only limit is your mortality! How fast can you go?

In addition to the overall leader, there will be jerseys for the following categories:

Green Jersey: (think Incredible Hulk) for best use of anabolic steroids
Red Jersey: Highest hematocrit, by whatever means
Blue Jersey: (think Code Blue) for highest blood level of stimulants..

It can be a new "extreme sport". I can't wait.

I think we should remember that if all the riders have to dope, it still isn't necessarily a dangerous practice.
You know, I don't think they are slaves to the drugs, in the way that they have to harm their bodies to get results.

This is because there are million-dollar cyclists out there that I think would retire if the sport was too dirty and unhealthy... instead they keep riding... Armstrong often talks about how he loves the sport. It can't be that bad.

My point is, if they are all using drugs, it still doesn't mean that they necessarily have to harm their body to be competetive. (If that is true, maybe it still isn't right, but it sure is a hell of a lot better than being a race won by whoever is most willing to put their health and life on the line.)

That is also a big reason why I don't think cyclists talk much about it. It's like they're trying to say, "ignore it, let us dope, it isnt so bad... I mean... I've never used performance enhancing substances".

I think we should remember that if all the riders have to dope, it still isn't necessarily a dangerous practice.
You know, I don't think they are slaves to the drugs, in the way that they have to harm their bodies to get results.

I couldn't care less if someone is stupid enough to endanger their own health, knowingly. That is their choice. As long as it doesn't hurt others.

I do care when the "playing field" is not level due to use of whatever. You know, I am sorry that everyone is not equally talented, genetically abled, psychologically strong, etc. That's why their are winners and losers, and champions. NOT because of using pharmaceuticals, or whatever you want to call them, used SOLELY to enhance performance. At least it should not be that way. Their is no other possible use, for a cyclist, for EPO, steroids, stimulants, etc.

And since when do all the riders "have to dope?"

I couldn't care less if someone is stupid enough to endanger their own health, knowingly. That is their choice. As long as it doesn't hurt others.

I do care when the "playing field" is not level due to use of whatever.

So you care if a rider safely uses a drug to contribute to a win, but you don't care if a rider has to harm themselves to get the winning edge?
The question I have is, why should drug use matter if the drug use is safe?
If safe drug use shouldn't be allowed, I don't see why things like altitude tents should be allowed. IV hydration shouldn't be allowed then.

So you care if a rider safely uses a drug to contribute to a win, but you don't care if a rider has to harm themselves to get the winning edge?

Why do they "have to"? I don't understand your question. If they choose to, by definition, it is their choice and they deserve the consequences. I sure wouldn't lose sleep over it. It's called personal responsibilty. It may be a little different situation if they are pressured, or forced to use something.



The question I have is, why should drug use matter if the drug use is safe?
If safe drug use shouldn't be allowed, I don't see why things like altitude tents should be allowed. IV hydration shouldn't be allowed then.

I disagree with iv hydration, unless in an emergency situation, of course. There really is no reason why iv fluid would be any better than drinking fluids, anyway.
I don't see any problem with altitude, but only if you go there. Your body will make the epo in response. Creating an artificial situation seems wrong to me.

I don't see athlete safety as the issue, as I explained above. Integrity, ethics, and sportsmanship are the issues. Throw a bunch of money in the pot, and everything rots.

i am admittedly pretty unkowledgeable w.r.t. drugs in pro cycling. i know it happens and probably a lot more than most expect, but i don't really know what the different drugs do and all that. my belief on these things(drugs in sports) is that you're never going to get rid of it, so i say let the riders do whatever the hell they want. let them take whatever substances they want. if something will give great results but eventually result in bad health down the line, i'd prefer to let the rider make that decision than some suits in france. i think if everyone is allowed to do what they want, everyone benefits. including the fans. think of the sprints if those guys are on drugs. they'd be absolutely flying. hour records would be like 60+ km on 'eddy merckx' bikes. there are ways to compensate if things get too fast or easy. it would be awesome to go back to 300-400km stages like way back when in the tour.

i guess i think the lines they draw for what's legal and what isn't are capricious and confusing. i think the biggest thing for me though is when some people try to legislate morality for others. saying what's right and what's cheating. i can't stand that. the drugs in the peloton reeks of that to me.

also, does anyone know what the life expectancy of, specifically pro cyclists, generally pro athletes across the board, is? is the profession itself unhealthy(outside of drugs)? is it good for the body to run it to such extremes so often? i keep thinking about tom simpson and when he rode himself to death.

"The 27-year-old Millar, who has never failed a drug test in his eight-year professional career, is the highest-profile casualty of a decision announced Friday by Tour organizers that all riders investigated or implicated in doping probes will be barred from the event, which starts July 3."


Hmmmm.... hasn't LA been implicated AND investigated? Wonder if they're setting the stage for something down the road?

Why do they "have to"? I don't understand your question. If they choose to, by definition, it is their choice and they deserve the consequences. I sure wouldn't lose sleep over it. It's called personal responsibilty. It may be a little different situation if they are pressured, or forced to use something.


I wouldn't worry about a rider doing so either. My point is that it would be unsportsmanlike if things were that way. It would suck, in a sporting sense, if a guy won because he was most willing to risk his life.


think of the sprints if those guys are on drugs. they'd be absolutely flying. hour records would be like 60+ km on 'eddy merckx' bikes. there are ways to compensate if things get too fast or easy. it would be awesome to go back to 300-400km stages like way back when in the tour.


I wouldn't care if they went 20, 40, or 60 mph... as long as the competition is good. But another 'off-topic' issue is that stages and races are too short now. (shorter races may make drug use more effective) I'd love to see a grand tour with every stage being at least 200km. It is fairly obvious that the classics are too short, for the level of performance that the pros have now. I've read riders being quoted as saying that 'overall, I wasn't too tired' after races like Paris-Roubaix.

i am admittedly pretty unkowledgeable w.r.t. drugs in pro cycling. i know it happens and probably a lot more than most expect, but i don't really know what the different drugs do and all that. my belief on these things(drugs in sports) is that you're never going to get rid of it, so i say let the riders do whatever the hell they want. let them take whatever substances they want. if something will give great results but eventually result in bad health down the line, i'd prefer to let the rider make that decision than some suits in france. i think if everyone is allowed to do what they want, everyone benefits. including the fans. think of the sprints if those guys are on drugs. they'd be absolutely flying. hour records would be like 60+ km on 'eddy merckx' bikes. there are ways to compensate if things get too fast or easy. it would be awesome to go back to 300-400km stages like way back when in the tour.
....

No way should doping ever be made legal, just because people keep doing it. We can't stop people from shooting other people, so should that be legal too?

Like I wrote in a post above, we could have a separate series for the "openly-doped", with the Tour de Dope as the final event. You ever been to a freak show? They could show it on FOX, it would fit right in. Just make sure they have some footage of the actual injections, etc. Wouldn't that be pretty sight?

the sky is falling!!! the sky is falling!!!

what's yer aversion to pros on drugs? why does this threaten you? do you really think it would go so far as to become a freakshow? i think it really wouldn't change much, qualitatively.

lemme ask: are you militantly non-smoking as well (not meant to be an inflamatory question).

what's yer aversion to pros on drugs? why does this threaten you? do you really think it would go so far as to become a freakshow? i think it really wouldn't change much, qualitatively.

lemme ask: are you militantly non-smoking as well (not meant to be an inflamatory question).


It doesn't threaten me. It threatens the central ethic of competition. Cheaters shouldn't succeed. Doping is cheating. How hard is that?

Don't mess with my quotes, it ain't nice. I don't understand the smoking question in this context.

No way should doping ever be made legal, just because people keep doing it. We can't stop people from shooting other people, so should that be legal too?

Like I wrote in a post above, we could have a separate series for the "openly-doped", with the Tour de Dope as the final event. You ever been to a freak show? They could show it on FOX, it would fit right in. Just make sure they have some footage of the actual injections, etc. Wouldn't that be pretty sight?

Riders would be launching massive attacks, and blowing their hearts out of their chests. Then the other riders could rifle through the dead guys pockets for more stuff, re mount and keep riding. You could have DS's shooting guys up PCP with like 5 km to go, and add an enforcer to each team like in Hockey, if you Block or won't work in a break, or try and steal the star riders dope, you have to fight the enforcer!

The cops would still raid the hotels, but we could arm the cyclists and let them fight back!

You could have the whole thing sponsored by Amgen, and the other manufactures of these drugs.

But back to reality, the sad truth is that very soon all the doping will be done on a DNA and cellular level, by abusing Gene Therepy. Athletes will soon be changing their DNA and become faster and more stronger without the use of drugs. Scientists have already discovered the Gene responsible for muscle growth and development, and also the Gene for producing a higher level of EPO, "Naturally". Soon Super Athletes will be both born, and made, in a lab.

This will be completely undectable, except through muscle biopsy, and you can't go around punching holes in all the athletes.

It doesn't threaten me. It threatens the central ethic of competition. Cheaters shouldn't succeed. Doping is cheating. How hard is that?


Who says doping has to be cheating? If it was legal, it wouldn't be cheating, would it?

It doesn't threaten me. It threatens the central ethic of competition. Cheaters shouldn't succeed. Doping is cheating. How hard is that?

Don't mess with my quotes, it ain't nice. I don't understand the smoking question in this context.


lighten up, brutha. i figured since i altered your quote so ridiculously, it was ok. sorry if that offends you.

this notion of competition is based on a level playing field, i believe. when someone has an unfair advantage, competition suffers, no? my proposal actually levels the field a little bit more. currently, w/ illegal doping, there are some riders/teams who are better at covering up drug taking. they have an unfair advantage(since it's pretty much a given that there are people taking drugs in the peloton). under my (surely not mine alone, but bear w/ me) proposal, w/ legal drug taking, the field is leveled. better competition. everyone has an opportunity to be on the same level. if you have an argument against this, i'd love to hear it. if all you've got is some derivative of "cheating is wrong", well, that doesn't do me much good.

the smoking question comes about b/c of this whole legislating what is morally ok and what isn't ok issue. i'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you are of the camp which says that no one should smoke b/c it is bad for them. for the record, i am of the camp which says that people know what is best for themselves. i feel this way about doping as well. since it is at best a very merky issue, let the individual decide.

note: i hate to come across as a jerk. i'm just feeling confrontational is all.

There was an article written in Outside Magazine by a cyclist who took the whole package or most of it that we hear aboout. It was facinating...perhaps a net savvy individual could locate and post it. He rode PBP while on drugs and used them throughout the training.

The system is set up to promote cheating and human nature combined with that mean it will always exist. The way to dramatically reduce it is difficult but would require lifetime bans for riders, doctors, DS's, and sponsors.

Athletes are heros whether we like it or not...the idea that we reduce sports to those that have the best drugs and or doctors is unacceptable. Look at Body Building...I think the drugs have taken a good concept to a point of obscenity...they don't even look good or healthy and can't function normally. Drugs allow you to take a sport to the point where it is very detrimental to health. The human body has limits...they should be pushed to the max...but not beyond. Just like I hate the expression " I'm going to give it 110%"...there is no 110%! except with drugs! Just because something is inevitable does't mean we give in to it without a fight...imagine that attitude to war etc.
I know the drugs are rampant, I know some rider that I admire is a drug user, I know it will always be there to some extent...I just wish it wasn't so.

There was an article written in Outside Magazine by a cyclist who took the whole package or most of it that we hear aboout. It was facinating...perhaps a net savvy individual could locate and post it. He rode PBP while on drugs and used them throughout the training.


http://outside.away.com/outside/bodywork/200311/200311_drug_test_1.html

A very interesting read, in my opinion.

In my view, Prohibition simply doesn't work. As soon as 'the government' bans something, it goes underground, the price goes up, the quality goes down, and the 'cartels' ( either in the true sense of the word or as pharaceutical companies ) step in, which means crime or suspect practices increases. It means the people with the most money have the ability to skirt detection and stay one step ahead of the governing bodies. It's a farce and a circus.

People who get self righteous about drug taking are annoying. Everything you do alters your bodies chemistry. Those vitamins and dietary suppliments you take, that beer you're drinking, the cigarette you're smoking, the drugs your government subsidises as part of the PBS - all 'government sponsored' drug taking. Making distinctions based purely on whether your government or a regulator authority deems a drug illegal or not is naive - Marajuana was banned largely due to the Dupont Corporations introduction of Nylon as a competitor to Hemp products, and in the past Opiate based drugs were utilised extensively in often mundane products.

I think with cycling what we have to do is set body chemistry levels or something along those lines that are 'safe for cyclists' and leave it at that. As most sports only exist because corporations sponsor them, we have to consider the competitors health and safety formost. Bans, fines, and treating drug takers as outcasts is pointless. If the regulatory bodies can not, and will not ever be able to stay ahead of the technology and funding of the 'other side of the coin', then the whole charade is a farce and we should accept it as such.

If we shift the paradigm to "regulating health", and accept everyone as a free adult, accept the fact that cycling is a competitive and largely corporate pursuit, then the fundamentals of the legal system will take effect.

Imagine if the UCI or whoever instead of banning someone for drug taking, gave them the choice of them saying 'Okay, you're endangering your life, we cannot insure you - race at your own peril. You have 3 warnings, if you get busted 3 times endangering your own health, your forfeit your legal right to recourse if you die or get injured as a result of your drug taking', or 'Take a 4 month hiatus, get your levels down, and we'll see you again in the Spring'.

It's freaky seeing Millar part of a witch-hunt though. I'm a bit suspicious of the whole thing, especially when hearing things from third parties, and hearing things such as "Another police official said two used syringes...were found in a search of Millar's home in Biarritz". If you're using a banned substance, you don't just throw the evidence in the trash.

Anyway, it's a tough problem, and I don't see any clear one shot solution.

Sometimes the government (or whatever regulatory agency involved) is actually right! Yep, believe it or not.

People are different. Some are better than others at a particular activity. Some get better by working hard. Some have a better day that day. That's the nature of competition. Because someone can't accept that they are less talented, etc, it is OK to artificially enhance with substances that promote performance? Again, my OPINION is no.

Thyalcine: broadening the discussion to include vitamins, beer, whatever, is irrelevant. These substances do not have a specific purpose, and are naturally-occuring in food. EPO, anabolic steroids, amphetamines, etc are NOT naturally-occuring and have only one single purpose. To cheat.


I may be annoying, but at least I'm not morally bankrupt. I hope.

Thyalcine: broadening the discussion to include vitamins, beer, whatever, is irrelevant. These substances do not have a specific purpose, and are naturally-occuring in food. EPO, anabolic steroids, amphetamines, etc are NOT naturally-occuring and have only one single purpose. To cheat.


Having a certain diet and taking vitamins as a cyclist does have one single purpose. To be faster. Same thing with drug use. Drugs are not used to cheat. They are used to make the rider faster. The fact that it is 'cheating' is secondary.

Riders would be launching massive attacks, and blowing their hearts out of their chests. Then the other riders could rifle through the dead guys pockets for more stuff, re mount and keep riding. You could have DS's shooting guys up PCP with like 5 km to go, and add an enforcer to each team like in Hockey, if you Block or won't work in a break, or try and steal the star riders dope, you have to fight the enforcer!

The cops would still raid the hotels, but we could arm the cyclists and let them fight back!

You could have the whole thing sponsored by Amgen, and the other manufactures of these drugs.


Exactly! Wouldn't that be a blast? And no pretense involved. And in a sick way, it would be fair.

Having a certain diet and taking vitamins as a cyclist does have one single purpose. To be faster. Same thing with drug use. Drugs are not used to cheat. They are used to make the rider faster. The fact that it is 'cheating' is secondary.


If you truly believe that-and not just trolling to incite a response- then that is a sad, sad commentary.

If you truly believe that-and not just trolling to incite a response- then that is a sad, sad commentary.

why is that sad sad commentary? you keep claiming that the sky is falling and that stuff is 'bad' but can't seem to offer an argument as to why it's actually bad, other than you incorrectly think it will make the playing field less level. you don't really think racing will be that different, do you? i mean, there are plenty of guys in the peloton on drugs now, and it's not nearly as bad/obvious as you and smothie say it will get.

the article that someone linked to in outdoor life was interesting. it sounded to me like the gains from drugs were actually somewhat subtle, at least for the author. it seemed like they mainly helped him on recovery, and also on his ability to ride longer w/o tiring as much. i don't think he ever mentioned seeing huge speed gains, did he?

If you truly believe that-and not just trolling to incite a response- then that is a sad, sad commentary.

Could you give an actual explanation as to why it is sad sad commentary?

Having a certain diet and taking vitamins as a cyclist does have one single purpose. To be faster. Same thing with drug use. Drugs are not used to cheat. They are used to make the rider faster. The fact that it is 'cheating' is secondary.


I see his point, why has WADA made some subtances legal, like vitamin injections, but others illegal like EPO,or Growth Hormone, Testasterone, etc... your body makes all of those naturally, you are just topping off so to speak. They say it is a safety reason, I know that if it was legal, guys would OD and die like they did, and still do. You can't OD on vitamins i guess.

But no one would OD on Growth Hormone, if you take too much, it becomes bad for your cycling, as you gain too much mass, (both muscle, and a big cro-magnon forehead)

If you give your body extra vitamins, either via diet, or injection and thats legal, why can't you give yourself a little HgH as well?

I assume almost every pro is on it, it is the ultimate recovery agent, and as of today, there is still no test for it.

One thing that WADA is doing is freezing blood and urine samples to test at a later date, once new testing procedures come out. I'm sure that in a few years, they will have a test for HgH, and they will go back, test the old samples, and find out that its use was rampant.

But by then, all the doping will be done by altering the athletes DNA through gene therapy, once again, the testers are lagging behind.

why is that sad sad commentary? you keep claiming that the sky is falling and that stuff is 'bad' but can't seem to offer an argument as to why it's actually bad, other than you incorrectly think it will make the playing field less level. you don't really think racing will be that different, do you? i mean, there are plenty of guys in the peloton on drugs now, and it's not nearly as bad/obvious as you and smothie say it will get.

the article that someone linked to in outdoor life was interesting. it sounded to me like the gains from drugs were actually somewhat subtle, at least for the author. it seemed like they mainly helped him on recovery, and also on his ability to ride longer w/o tiring as much. i don't think he ever mentioned seeing huge speed gains, did he?

He wasnt training for speed gains, but I think the 12 lbs of muscle he put on with out even trying would attest to the ability to go faster over short distances if he wanted too. Thats why the Track guys take Steriods, and Equine Growth Hormone, for pure power. As far as his drug induced ability to recover quicker? Thats what this sport is all about.

Grand Tours aren't won on soley speed, they are won on consistency and superhuman performance day after day after day.

Being able to recover quicker, also helps you train harder, day after day after day.

Imagine the hardest ride you've ever done, and how you felt the next day. Now imagine the shape you could be in if you could recover quick enough to do that ride 5 days a week, every week.

The time trial speed gains are due to studies of effiency, both aerodynamically, and physically. Not so much as increased power output. And while the power output has stayed roughly the same, its the length of time it can be sustained thats responsible for the speeds.

Drag increases exponentially, as speed increases.

Here's a real simple example. A typical family with 180 horsepower can go 125mph, but the same car with twice the power can't go 240. In fact it could probably go 145. Even if you quadupled the power to 720hp, you still couldn't get to 200mph. So chasing peak power is a lot of work, for a little increase in speed.

So in endurance sports, like cycling, endurance is key.

The EPO allows you to do more work, ie put out more power at a lower heartrate.

Going from 42% to 50% hematocrit increases the oxygen carrying capability of your blood by 20%

That's a HUGE Advantage.


Buy yours here: http://www.walgreens.com/library/finddrug/druginfo1.jhtml?id=8621

Interesting thread. The referenced artice on the effects of doping was good too. It points out that the drugs do give an edge. Some one took a survey of young elite athelics and they all admitted that if they could take a pill that ensured winning they would take it even knowing that it would kill them in some specified (short) time.

As usual out lawing things doesn't do anything, but I do wish there was a way to stop the use of the drugs.

Joe