"PRO" Cycling Discussion

[wingguy]

You can think it, but you're wrong

[Pharmstrong]

He's not.

[HammerTime2]

wow, first time i heard about it:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/cas-rules-uv-light-blood-treatments-in-germany-were-not-doping

if it means anything, it's that athletes won't stop pursuing currently legal doping practices in order to win. funny how this news emerges in the heat of discussion whether Tour's been won cleanly

the answer most probably is: it's been won legally

I seem to be missing something here. Leaving aside the effect, if any, of the UV treatment*, does this not describe an autologous blood infusion, and hasn't that practice been banned for quite some years prior to 2007? Or does the ban only apply to infusion at certain points in time (shortly before a stage, race, etc.)?

*

I see that on January 14 2012 CN said, "This is said to help the oxygen in the blood. It was practised in East German sports in the 1980s." A close squeak for Kittel then, even if the decision is justified. Lucky he doesn't ride for Sky or we wouldn't hear the last of it!

[pastronef]

Stuart O'Grady announces his retirement. He previously agreed to ride for OGE until Tour 2014, but now he decided to leave after this Tour.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/ogrady- ... retirement

[djconnel]

In other news, 1998 Tour (where O'Grady had an excellent race) positives to be released....

I think the the key on the blood treatment is it was removed then immediately re-injected, not removed in bulk, stored, then replaced. So it didn't count as a "transfusion".

[xnavalav8r]

A few random shots from the Tour...

[jmilliron]

can't hotlink from facebook. I recommend imgur.com.

[ricerocket]

You can hotlink from Facebook...you just have to link the image URL, not the page.

[ghisallo2003]

As DB said, what can we do? Well he has not done many of the things along the way that were asked of him, and is not doing so now.

The thing is top level sport is as much business as it is competition. Sky are clearly preparing their athletes better, so for Sky to answer every question, to reveal every method is tantamount to doing their competitors R&D for them.

Well riders do move between teams - how long would these secret Sky methods remain secret ? It is my personal belief that the Sky advantage in training, if any, goes nowhere near explaining the marked differential in performance.

And indeed as you point out, this is a business, so the incentives to cheat or turn a blind eye to cheating are significant. Athletes and managers have made the risk-benefit calculation for many years, with the vast majority in recent tour history plumping for the short-term win of doping.

As I said, show me the contrary. Talk about Yates, release the power and blood data. Stop the relentless PR battle and actually answer the hard questions from a wider audience. One embedded journalist does not openness make.

[djconnel]

You can hotlink from Facebook...you just have to link the image URL, not the page.

Like this:

[woz9683]

I seem to be missing something here. Leaving aside the effect, if any, of the UV treatment*, does this not describe an autologous blood infusion, and hasn't that practice been banned for quite some years prior to 2007? Or does the ban only apply to infusion at certain points in time (shortly before a stage, race, etc.)?

Would imagine this more closely resembles dialysis than a blood transfusion.

[tymon_tm]

tymon_tm - I'm curious what UV blood treatment was supposed to do, considering that they ruled that it does not increase oxygen transfer.

I seem to be missing something here. Leaving aside the effect, if any, of the UV treatment*, does this not describe an autologous blood infusion, and hasn't that practice been banned for quite some years prior to 2007? Or does the ban only apply to infusion at certain points in time (shortly before a stage, race, etc.)?

i've really no idea what it does, nore do i care much. what it shows (for me at least), is that they were on to something that was supposed to enchance one's performance. i call that attempted doping, no matter whether the specific method used was allowed under any rules at that given time or not

might be legal, but is it ethically OK? and what about the PR angle of the story, you know, given all the post-2006 dope-free aura - "Kittel tries something, but thankfully it doesn't work, neither is banned, so we're still in the clean racing territory"

b

[djconnel]

It reminds me of ozone treatment described in this excellent CyclingNews article:

The next case also involves cycling and is credited to Jacques Anquetil, who was, as we all know, a vocal defender of the rider's right to medicate. While Anquetil did engage in a form of blood manipulation, it would probably be incorrect to refer to it as a transfusion. What he was actually playing with was super-ozone therapy, whereby a small amount of blood is extracted, treated with ozone and immediately re-injected. The ozone is said to increase the amount of oxygen carried in the blood. Some people believe it does. Others believe it's baloney.

That Anquetil was using this treatment is no secret, Pierre Chany, in a couple of articles in Miroir des Sports during 1967, wrote about it, and how Anquetil had used the treatment during the Giro d'Italia and intended using it during his assault on the Hour record later that year. A doctor, Jean Bidet, had written to Anquetil's directeur, Raphaël Géminiani, and explained the process. Gem was intrigued enough to find out more and, after using himself, Anquetil and Jean Stablinski as guinea pigs, was able to convince Maître Jacques of the benefits of the procedure.

So, each day during the Giro, before and after each stage, Anquetil had an injection of ozone-treated blood. It didn't help him win the 1967 corsa rosa: Felice Gimondi and Franco Balmamion finished ahead of him. And, while Anquetil did set a new distance for the hour later in the year, the UCI refused to recognise the record following Anquetil's refusal to submit himself to dope control.

[TiG]

Does no one else find Kittel's anti doping advocacy extremely disappointing? Here is a rider that is the first to scrutinise any other rider however was happy to accept treatments that were later deemed to be doping...I don't buy into it, pretty pathetic facade which is all too common. It seems nowadays rules are there to be pushed by modern riders, not broken.

[djconnel]

He was freakin' 18 years old, and the procedure was legal. I'd cut him some slack.