Professional Cycling For the Fans - Doped blood?

Settle an argument for me.

My girlfreind is an RN in a hospital. She says that as long as blood is compatible in type then it's basically all the same.

I wonder then why pro athletes would be having blood transfusions during competitions with their own blood from the off season that they know could possibly test positive for dope? Why wouldn't they just use compatible blood from a bank or something?

It seems to me that an athlete does transfusions with their own off season blood because the blood is packed with red cells or something, I don't know.

Can someone explain?

It's actually not exactly the same. It's same enough for transfusions, but there are differences. The doping tests are able to detect these different types of blood in you. Not being a medical doctor, I don't have the jargon, but I'm sure someone will pipe in.

Ask Tyler Hamilton about that time he tried doping with his twin brother's blood.

"Basically" the same is true, but red blood cells have DNA. There are other minor differences too - fluorescent-activated cell sorting looks at markers on the surfaces of the cells, and quickly indicates whether a sample has more than one source.

Ah, DNA, I should have known. So, the reason they use their own blood is because someone else's blood would show up and they would test positive for a transfusion, correct?

Ah, DNA, I should have known. So, the reason they use their own blood is because someone else's blood would show up and they would test positive for a transfusion, correct?

Here's more information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_doping.

After reviewing, this information is a little out of date, but is correct as far as it goes. For instance, I'm pretty sure any use of needles has been banned to preclude injecting masking agents, etc.

Asside from detection i'd alos wonder if the body to some degree rejects foreign blood. Not enough to matter for normal uses and not enough to make blood from other sources not usefull for doping. But these days with how far the limits are pushed it could be a 5-10% reduction in the advantage could make a difference.

And I sure as heck would not use blood from an unknown source, the donor just might have taken an over the counter cold medicine or some energy drink with the wrong stuff in it.

"Basically" the same is true, but red blood cells have DNA.

Actually only white cells in blood have DNA.

"Basically" the same is true, but red blood cells have DNA. There are other minor differences too - fluorescent-activated cell sorting looks at markers on the surfaces of the cells, and quickly indicates whether a sample has more than one source.


Actually only if you are a bird or a dinosaur will your RBC (red blood cells) have DNA in them. As pointed out above WBC (white cells) do.

There are many more antigen markers on blood cells then they test for in tissue typing for transfusions or ever tissue transplants.

Actually only white cells in blood have DNA. my derp - I should have remembered that from biology.