After doping [please read mode note, post 11]

GT_TDI_150

Ok, not sure what the rules are on this, but the dicussion on the olympic road race has evolved in a conversation on dopers and ex dopers so i thought i'd start this thread.

Btw, mods feel free to shut it down if it is agains the ethos of the cycling forum.

Let me start by saying that i think their is no place for doping in sports, the punishment for people who are caught/proven to be involved in doping should be so severe that you'd want to be mad or commiting career suicide to go juicing!

Currently dopers serve a sentence and can compete again once they complete said sentence. The question has to be: even if they arent doping anymore, are their bodies still benefiting from doping 2-3yrs prior? Have they evolved due to the drugs into a better athlete?


Opinions?

WillyFXP

Does taking pain killers to get rid of a headache make you less prone to headaches? The answer to your question is no, the body does not retain the drugs, so cannot benefit from something if it is not present.

MrCreosote

WillyFXP wrote: »

Does taking pain killers to get rid of a headache make you less prone to headaches? The answer to your question is no, the body does not retain the drugs, so cannot benefit from something if it is not present.

This is rubbish- a totally different scenario.

I believe the effects of some kinds of doping last for years. It's impossible to quantify though. Look at doping- you can cycle faster, train harder, recover better, be less prone to injuries, get better contracts and support and so on. That's to say nothing of the psychological effects- once you know what you can do, and that you can win, you'll be a totally different athlete.

That's why I reckon some forms of doping like EPO/blood doping should have a lifetime ban. They're not things that just get into a bottle at the side of the road.

WillyFXP

MrCreosote wrote: »

This is rubbish- a totally different scenario.

I believe the effects of some kinds of doping last for years. It's impossible to quantify though. Look at doping- you can cycle faster, train harder, recover better, be less prone to injuries, get better contracts and support and so on. That's to say nothing of the psychological effects- once you know what you can do, and that you can win, you'll be a totally different athlete.

That's why I reckon some forms of doping like EPO/blood doping should have a lifetime ban. They're not things that just get into a bottle at the side of the road.

It was a very simple analogy to describe a very simple FACT. NO drug can continue to benefit the body if it is not present, end of story. Doping is used to enhance performance for training to build muscle, endurance and stamina. Once the doping has stopped, the physical attributes provided by it will also decrease, this is why the bans are not permanent, they don't need to be.

dave2pvd

WillyFXP wrote: »

Once the doping has stopped, the physical attributes provided by it will also decrease, this is why the bans are not permanent, they don't need to be.

Oh, is that why the bans are not permanent?

I shall go forth armed with fresh knowledge.

MrCreosote

WillyFXP wrote: »

It was a very simple analogy to describe a very simple FACT. NO drug can continue to benefit the body if it is not present, end of story. Doping is used to enhance performance for training to build muscle, endurance and stamina. Once the doping has stopped, the physical attributes provided by it will also decrease, this is why the bans are not permanent, they don't need to be.

This is just complete bollox. If the benefits of the drug vanish once it's out of your system, then explain why most doping is now done out of competition. By the time the event comes around, dopers will usually have stopped, and the drug is no longer in their system. So they test clean, but the benefits of the doping are there.

Of course the effects will drop over time. But if you take something like EPO which will allow you to train at a higher level for years- you'll reach performance levels that you'd never get to without it.

Another analogy was the use of those new swimsuits a few years ago, now banned. Records tumbled, but once they were banned the times didn't go back to the old ones- they have stayed close to the new records, much faster than before. The swimsuits changed training methods, body position and gave the athletes the knowledge that they could reach certain times. All having effects still years after they were banned.

The bans aren't permanent for many reasons- it's not because of wearing off of the effects of the dope. Why is there a lifetime ban for second offenses then?

Lumen

MrCreosote wrote: »

Another analogy was the use of those new swimsuits a few years ago, now banned. Records tumbled, but once they were banned the times didn't go back to the old ones- they have stayed close to the new records, much faster than before. The swimsuits changed training methods, body position and gave the athletes the knowledge that they could reach certain times. All having effects still years after they were banned

Well that's one explanation.

I'm not sure your question is answerable in any scientific way. How could you arrange a trial to test the effects of doping over a number of years? Ethics aside, there would be too many variables between athletes.

AFAIK banned athletes are not tested during the banned period until they register for competition again. I vaguely remember that they have to be available for testing for six months before they return, but might have misremembered that.

Most training involves some sort of macro-periodisation during which the athlete deliberately loses top end fitness. This combined with a lack of high level racing would probably make it difficult to carry the short term effects of (say) EPO/CERA through a long doping ban, and even for six "clean" months prior to competition.

Empirically, are there any examples of banned athletes coming back super-strong and then tailing off over a period of months/years?

MrCreosote

Lumen wrote: »

I'm not sure your question is answerable in any scientific way. How could you arrange a trial to test the effects of doping over a number of years? Ethics aside, there would be too many variables between athletes.

That's what I think too- the question can't be answered except to say "probably it still has some effect". For some it might have no effect, or even have them worse off coming back, for others the effect might be long lasting.

For sure the short term effects will have worn off, but there's going to be longer-term changes that happen with being able to train, compete and earn money at a higher level than if they were clean. This mightn't just go after 6 months or 2 years
Better safe than sorry and ban them for life for blood manipulation/EPO etc

hardCopy

There will always be benefits of the increased training volumes and intensity that drugs enable.

Base fitness doesn't just go away completely, even if you take a break from training.

Athletes these days don't generally dope during competition, they win of the benefits of doping months in advance of their race.

GT_TDI_150

That was my thinking on it to, if you are able to trained harder, longer, more intensly then surely even when you are 'clean' 2 years later you will have some benefits from this 'better' training?

Captain Havoc

Just gonna throw this in there, any speculation that a rider has doped in this thread will get a minimum of a one month ban. Any person mentioned must be backed up with a link and links to other discussion forums do not count.

Lumen

MrCreosote wrote: »

That's what I think too- the question can't be answered except to say "probably it still has some effect". For some it might have no effect, or even have them worse off coming back, for others the effect might be long lasting.

That's not very scientific. If there is no anecdotal evidence, no hard data, and no related studies then it's not reasonable to say "probably still has some effect".

There was a thread a while back on detraining of elite athletes. They really do lose a lot of fitness very quickly.

RobFowl wrote: »

Generally (and I fear the sports scientists here reaction ...) it takes 2 weeks to lose top end form and after 6 weeks of no training fitness returns to baseline levels. You have to consider that pro cyclists are almost always exceptional physiological specimens so their baseline is still way ahead of the usual Joe Soap could manage.

This last bit is important. The elite cyclist autobiographies I read usually start out with something like "the first time I put my leg over a bike I beat everyone I raced".

w.r.t the Dave Costill reference, "Physiology of Sport and Exercise" (in Google Books) seems to have a chapter on detraining but I can't be arsed to read it.

lazycyclist

Has anyone read "The Doper next door" by Andrew Tillin? He's a US journalist who is also an amatuer road rider. He always had suspicions that some of his fellow competitors were on PEDs and wanted to write about it. He, of course, couldn't find any willing participants, so decided to give it a go himself. He was prescribed Testosterone as part of a hormone treatment program (his wife was receiving therapy for her hormone deficiencies, which seemed to have spurred him on), which in the civil world is legal but obviously not in the sporting world. However, he was a very average Cat 4 racer, so never likely to be caught.

He did notice improvements in his power and his general well being (although towards the end he worries about how his personality is impacted) and when he stopped he noted that he felt more lethargic and muscle tone diminshed. Although this could be attributable to his lack of enthusiasm towards the end of the experiment because of the personality changes. In the end he notified US Cycling and USADA and was given a 2 year ban.

It might be interesting to see when he returns after his ban if the gains he noticed during his doping period (although not using Blood doping products) give him a better platform or if he reverts back to his pre-doping levels.

I know he's not a pro, but probably the best chance of having a doper provide some meaningful feedback, assuming his age and activity levels do not slew the figures too much.

CramCycle

Lumen wrote: »

Most training involves some sort of macro-periodisation during which the athlete deliberately loses top end fitness.

Very true, it is often feared (and by that I have heard people discussing it over a cup of coffee on a number of occasions in the past and at lectures) that is why Ireland never do as well at the Olympics in many sports as other countries have done in the past. In alot of competitions, the Irish are still competing within their own country to be the nominee out of all those who have been put forward up until very close to the start of competition and therefore suffer the inability to go through the full range of cycles in periodization, whereas in other countries, the athlete for that country is usually given the go ahead as the countries representative a year in advance. The idea behind it being not to allow the athlete to over train and also to peak at their perceived physical peak during competition time.

That said, it is also alot more complicated than that depending on the sport, the aims of the athlete, the length of their macrocycle, mesocycle and microcycles, some macrocycles from programs I have seen can last 4 years (although I imagine that to be the longest), but this I imagine this (no proof) is unlikely in this day and age with a yearly macrocycle and the mesocycles adapted to fit in specifically with the main aim of the athlete that year the most likely scenario.

The NCSA do a great book on Endurance training "Essentials of Strength training and conditioning" that admittedly not related to cycling but its principles apply across the board and can be adapted for many sports.

CramCycle

On a side note, for those looking to improve results, CramCycles recommendation (clearly never used myself based on my results in club racing) is Beetroot, lots of beetroot.

Lumen

CramCycle wrote: »

On a side note, for those looking to improve results, CramCycles recommendation (clearly never used myself based on my results in club racing) is Beetroot, lots of beetroot.

I tried it. Didn't work, tasted disgusting and wasn't cheap. I think the idea is fairly obviously nonsense. :pac:

CramCycle

Lumen wrote: »

I tried it. Didn't work, tasted disgusting and wasn't cheap. I think the idea is fairly obviously nonsense. :pac:

I tried it but couldn't stomach it after one day. You can buy the expensive juices or you can buy the cooked beetroot from Dunnes which is on special offer regularly at around 1kg for 3euro. Mix it with Apple Juice (so I have been told) is the way to make it taste better but I just couldn't be arsed. I am already juicing on Insulin so that's enough for now.

Gavin

500ml a day ! Euuuuch !!

MrCreosote

Lumen wrote: »

That's not very scientific. If there is no anecdotal evidence, no hard data, and no related studies then it's not reasonable to say "probably still has some effect".

There was a thread a while back on detraining of elite athletes. They really do lose a lot of fitness very quickly.

There's very little scientific evidence at all about the beneficial effects of doping. Because it's banned the studies are never going to be done.

My point is that we're never going to be able to prove it one way or the other and there's probably a huge individual variation. But the athletes aren't going to be sitting on their asses for 2 years- they'll still be out training. And doping has huge effects beyond the immediate obvious effects, not all of the physical.

Look at Contador- he'll come back from his doping ban as a team leader. Who knows if he would have got remotely to that level without doping. As it is, he did, and now, presumably as a clean rider, he'll reap the benefits.

manafana

CramCycle wrote: »

On a side note, for those looking to improve results, CramCycles recommendation (clearly never used myself based on my results in club racing) is Beetroot, lots of beetroot.

ate a bit in 2weeks before i did the raid, noticed an improvement in preformance in final 2weeks.

GT_TDI_150

I actually wonder, do banned cyclists get tested while out on a x yr ban?

Technically they are not in competition or training for competition so could they 'dope all they want' and not be tested?

Now if that was the case there would be some benefit to doping, getting caught and 'only' receiving a 2-3yr ban.

Simular for those that decide to 'retire' and then make a comeback, do they get tested once 'retired'?

Undercover Elephant

GT_TDI_150 wrote: »

Simular for those that decide to 'retire' and then make a comeback, do they get tested once 'retired'?

IIRC when LA made his "comeback", he was supposed to have been subjected to 6 months of testing, and had to get special dispensation to race.

lazycyclist

http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/08/news/in-search-of-relevance-a-cat-3-turns-to-epo-and-hgh_232611

Another amateur goes extreme. Ironically drug tested in the NYC Gran Fondo. Warning to any would be dopers - Better be careful in the WW200!

petethedrummer

Doping with HGH may leave you with a permanently enlarged skull, jawbone or feet. Not sure they aid performance.