Dear friend
T Harman
To whom it may concern,
Drugs are prevalent in racing. It is accepted, but not discussed in the
upper echelon of racers. How else could you ride 2800 miles in 24-28
days? Incredible training?
Your are first introduced to performance drugs as a top amateur. The
potency and the frequency at which you take them increases as you ascend
the racing ladder. I'm not going to justify it, just admit that it
exists.
From personal experience as a top US amateur cyclist. .
M. Hanseen (L76966)
Tom Gargulak
In article <3504fu$b...@u.cc.utah.edu>, th1...@u.cc.utah.edu (T Harman) writes:
>
> To whom it may concern,
>
> Drugs are prevalent in racing. It is accepted, but not discussed in the
> upper echelon of racers. How else could you ride 2800 miles in 24-28
> days? Incredible training?
Yes, smart training.
> Your are first introduced to performance drugs as a top amateur. The
> potency and the frequency at which you take them increases as you ascend
> the racing ladder. I'm not going to justify it, just admit that it
> exists.
>
> From personal experience as a top US amateur cyclist. .
First, I don't believe it. Sure some probably do, but not all and I
doubt a majority.
So what drugs are being used that consistently get by the drug
screening process?
Patrick Mannion
screening process?<<
The problem is not "What drugs"....but the screening process itself.
You'd be suprised how truly rare it is that they do the screening,
simply due to the cost of it. Also, thanks to those great scientists
in East Germany, who were dedicated to beating the testing process,
cyclists have learned tricks to beat it. Also, there are many
variants of these drugs that the tests simply don't look for. There
are things in your kitchen that will mask your drug use, or produce
negative results in drug tests.
Perhaps not too any of our American cyclists,,except for the upper
echelons, use drugs, but the drug use is rampant in Europe, Many
major pros I know of, have tested positive for something at least
once, but all of the allegations seem to go away too
easilly...Perhaps right after a bank transfer. I remember when Sean
Kelly tested poistive. Nothing EVER became of it. They always have
some fancy appeal. Look at Grewal, he clearly took illegal drugs in
84, but snaked his way through the appeal with desperation on his
mind. He'd say anything to get back on that olympic team.
Just read Allan Peiper's articles for WINNING and BICYCLING. He was
a euro-pro who got caught up in the drug scene, and decided to write
about it. He is a very credible source.
--
"Only dead fish swim *with the stream*."
Bruce Hildenbrand
I am not going to deny your personal experiences, but to make the blanket
statement that all Tour de France racers use drugs is simply not true.
Yes, Virginia, there are members of the pro peleton that compete in
major stage races that do not use illegal drugs.
Bruce Hildenbrand
Bruce Hildenbrand
>
>Drugs are prevalent in racing. It is accepted, but not discussed in the
>upper echelon of racers. How else could you ride 2800 miles in 24-28
>days? Incredible training?
Try "incredible athletes".
Bruce Hildenbrand
Paul B. Anders
>
>So what drugs are being used that consistently get by the drug
>screening process?
>
Getting around the screening process is an art that has been practiced for
years in sport. There are two basic approaches. The first is to train using
drugs, but not compete. You can handle a greater workload and make more
gains in your training. Then, as you taper, you go off drugs and use a
cleansing agent (hopefully, not Comet or Drano) to clear your system of all
residual traces. You then go and compete and blow away your competition.
I'm pretty sure that's what the US swim coaches believe the Chinese women
are doing who won 12 of 16 events at the recent World's, after their
acquisition of a former East German coach a few years ago.
The other approach is to use a masking agent to cover up the presence of
an illegal drug. Some masking agents are detectable, and as a result are
often banned. Others aren't and are quite effective. I'll admit I have no
idea of what they are, but perhaps others more well informed on medical
matters can comment on the possibility of non-detectable masking agents.
A third approach is to take a drug which is undetectable. EPO seems to
fit the bill, and so does low-level testosterone.
Out-of-competition drug testing helps catch the first type of offender.
Some of the Chinese runners were caught in this manner, and the German
track star Katrin Krabbe was caught in this way after she tried to switch
urine samples with a training partner while training in South Africa. But
unfortunately, dealing with masking agents and naturally occurring hormones
like testosterone or HGF is more difficult, especially if a clever doctor
is administering the drugs.
Face facts, people: athletes take drugs! Not all of them, but it's more
frequent than you'd like to believe. The pressure to succeed is great and
when you feel you are at an unfair disadvantage to those taking drugs, the
temptation is there. Better testing and proceedures will help combat this
problem, but it is not likely to go away in the future.
--
****************************************
* Brad Anders * Sunnyvale, CA *
* ban...@netcom.com * *
****************************************
Bici
<72614...@CompuServe.COM> writes:
:Perhaps right after a bank transfer. I remember when Sean
:Kelly tested poistive. Nothing EVER became of it. They always have
:some fancy appeal. Look at Grewal, he clearly took illegal drugs in
:84, but snaked his way through the appeal with desperation on his
:mind. He'd say anything to get back on that olympic team.
Now wait just a god darned minute!!!! Alexi is an acquaintance (not a
friend, an acquaintance) of mine, and I can assure you that the '84 drug
charges were bogus. It appears that he drank an herbal tea which
contained small traces of a banned substance (it's been so many years I
can't remember what). It was given to him by a female masseuse he was
kind of hot on (and of course you never refuse herbal tea from a woman
you're trying to impress). Anyway he was found positive the next day at a
dope control and it was positively traced back to the tea. He was
defended by John Bartko of San Francisco (who also defended Imelda Marcos
against the bad old US of A and recently lost a $6.7 million sexual
harassment suit that saw heavy coverage on Court TV).
Alexi is by far one of the strangest human beings I've ever met, but he
ain't a doper. Hey, I don't like the guy, but I guarantee he did nothing
illicit back in '84. He deserved that medal.
And while we're on the subject of God and Lemond, Alexi IS a born again
Christian (at least he was last I spent any real time with him two years
ago). He told me he'd found God and that he was finally at peace. I
kinda rolled my eyes and said, "uh yeah right, Alexi, what's Jasjit think
about it?" Jasjit Grewal, Alexi's dad is a Sikh. Who'da thunk it, the
man who spit in the ABC camera during the '86 (?) Tour de France is now a
Bible thumper, although if Watergate conspirator Chuck Colson can find
God, why not the bad boy of cycling?
One last Alexi story and I'll quit. The '86 Coor's Classic. The
Lemond/Hinault feud is even bigger than in the Tour. Hinault is on a
suicidal breakaway towards Breckenridge when he bonks big time. Alexi is
first to pass him on the last climb. Alexi slows along side Hinault and
says, "Hey Bernie, ya really fucked up today pal." Classic Grewal.
Ciao
-Bici
Tom G
In article <bandersC...@netcom.com>, ban...@netcom.com (Paul B. Anders) writes:
> [snip]
> I'm pretty sure that's what the US swim coaches believe the Chinese women
> are doing who won 12 of 16 events at the recent World's, after their
> acquisition of a former East German coach a few years ago.
This thread in rec.sport.swimming went bonkers. People kept claiming
that the tremendous success of the Chinese Women as opposed to the
limited success of their male counterparts was evidence of illegal
activity. To me this seemed evidence that drugs were not being used,
so I asked.
Well someone claimed the rumour is that the women are being impregnated
every couple of months then given an abortion. Many medical people
believe pregnancy is an anabolic event which enhances muscles and
circulation. (Remember that Scottish runner who kicked butt after
having her baby. Can't remember her name; Mary something I think.)
Anyways, this is a rumour of course. But has anyone heard about this
type of "enhancement" procedure for women?
BTW: I am NOT saying I believe this is happenning in China.
Just what I heard.
Thomas H. Kunich
>
>To whom it may concern,
>
>Drugs are prevalent in racing. It is accepted, but not discussed in the
>upper echelon of racers. How else could you ride 2800 miles in 24-28
>days? Incredible training?
You are saying that all professionals use drugs? Even Andy Hampsten
and Greg LeMond and Lance Armstrong? How is it that these guys managed
to ride 2800 miles in 24-28 days? Incredable training?
>Your are first introduced to performance drugs as a top amateur. The
>potency and the frequency at which you take them increases as you ascend
>the racing ladder. I'm not going to justify it, just admit that it
>exists.
>
> From personal experience as a top US amateur cyclist. .
Oh, I see, a pandywaste that can't keep up without drugs wants to tar
everyone else with the same brush.
You know, all society is the same, either you can refuse to cheat or you
can cheat. Most people refuse to cheat. You apparently didn't.
Thomas H. Kunich
Paul B. Anders <ban...@netcom.com> wrote:
>Getting around the screening process is an art that has been practiced for
>years in sport. There are two basic approaches. The first is to train using
>drugs, but not compete. You can handle a greater workload and make more
>gains in your training. Then, as you taper, you go off drugs and use a
>cleansing agent (hopefully, not Comet or Drano) to clear your system of all
>residual traces.
Thankfully you aren't an expert so you can make such claims. Most drugs that
allow training gains leave indelible evidence that cannot be "cleansed".
>I'm pretty sure that's what the US swim coaches believe the Chinese women
>are doing who won 12 of 16 events at the recent World's, after their
>acquisition of a former East German coach a few years ago.
The papers published privately and reported on by the old east germans
were said to focus on developing drugs -- mostly steroids -- ahead of
the banning process.
>
>Some masking agents are detectable, and as a result are
>often banned. Others aren't and are quite effective. I'll admit I have no
>idea of what they are, but perhaps others more well informed on medical
>matters can comment on the possibility of non-detectable masking agents.
_All_ masking agents are detectable -- that is the whole idea. They are
suppose to place an identifiable peak over the area that the drug peak
is suppose to lie. Furthermore, separation science is still pretty much
an art form and people who are good at this art cannot be fooled. They
can identify any component if they have sufficient sample, time, money
and equipment. Since that is economically illusive there are standard
tests that are performed. It is relatively easy to design masking
agents for these specific tests since most of the cheap methods use
liquid chromotography instead of gas chomotography/mass spectroscopy.
>A third approach is to take a drug which is undetectable. EPO seems to
>fit the bill, and so does low-level testosterone.
Both of these hormones leave telltale traces -- EPO in particular, when
abused thickens the blood to dangerous levels. Used in a non-abusive
manner it would offer no more training advantage than 6 weeks at high
altitude. Since I cannot go to high altitude anyone that can carries
an automatic advantage on me that I cannot rectify with simple and safe
drug treatment.
Not that I want to, mind you, but I am pointing out this drug crap is
way off base.
>Face facts, people: athletes take drugs! Not all of them, but it's more
>frequent than you'd like to believe. The pressure to succeed is great and
>when you feel you are at an unfair disadvantage to those taking drugs, the
>temptation is there. Better testing and proceedures will help combat this
>problem, but it is not likely to go away in the future.
Face facts, because there are drugs there doesn't mean that LOTS of people
are taking them. Where do you get yoru facts? This reminds me of the
Doonesbury cartoon on the conspiracy theorists: all you have to do is say
that drugs are out there and that everyone is taking them and anyone that
doesn't agree or anyone that _could_ catch them and doesn't is part of
the conspiracy.
Greg LeMond addressed drugs in his book, effectively he said that those
who use drugs are generally the losers, not the winners.
Paul B. Anders
>In article <bandersC...@netcom.com>,
>Paul B. Anders <ban...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>Getting around the screening process is an art that has been practiced for
>>years in sport. There are two basic approaches. The first is to train using
>>drugs, but not compete. You can handle a greater workload and make more
>>gains in your training. Then, as you taper, you go off drugs and use a
>>cleansing agent (hopefully, not Comet or Drano) to clear your system of all
>>residual traces.
>Thankfully you aren't an expert so you can make such claims. Most drugs that
>allow training gains leave indelible evidence that cannot be "cleansed".
No, I don't represent myself as an expert. Are there any out there that can
comment on the possiblity of testing negative after having trained while
using anabolic steroids, and taken time off before competition?
>>Some masking agents are detectable, and as a result are
>>often banned. Others aren't and are quite effective. I'll admit I have no
>>idea of what they are, but perhaps others more well informed on medical
>>matters can comment on the possibility of non-detectable masking agents.
>_All_ masking agents are detectable -- that is the whole idea. They are
>suppose to place an identifiable peak over the area that the drug peak
>is suppose to lie. Furthermore, separation science is still pretty much
>an art form and people who are good at this art cannot be fooled. They
>can identify any component if they have sufficient sample, time, money
>and equipment. Since that is economically illusive there are standard
>tests that are performed. It is relatively easy to design masking
>agents for these specific tests since most of the cheap methods use
>liquid chromotography instead of gas chomotography/mass spectroscopy.
Again, I defer to the experts out there (if any). Is it possible that
within the constraints that real drug testing is done (limited time,
limited money, limited sample, limited equipment) that masking agents
can work?
>>A third approach is to take a drug which is undetectable. EPO seems to
>>fit the bill, and so does low-level testosterone.
>Both of these hormones leave telltale traces -- EPO in particular, when
>abused thickens the blood to dangerous levels. Used in a non-abusive
>manner it would offer no more training advantage than 6 weeks at high
>altitude. Since I cannot go to high altitude anyone that can carries
>an automatic advantage on me that I cannot rectify with simple and safe
>drug treatment.
I again defer to the experts here. Is it possible to take EPO such that one
can maintain a high but "normal" hematocrit without detection? Is the advantage
offered by a higher hematocrit from EPO the same as six weeks of altitude
training? Do the effects of continual EPO administration in low-level dosages
to elevate hematocrit have longer-term beneficial effects than single or
multiple sessions of high-altitude training?
>Face facts, because there are drugs there doesn't mean that LOTS of people
>are taking them. Where do you get yoru facts? This reminds me of the
>Doonesbury cartoon on the conspiracy theorists: all you have to do is say
>that drugs are out there and that everyone is taking them and anyone that
>doesn't agree or anyone that _could_ catch them and doesn't is part of
>the conspiracy.
I never said LOTS of people are taking drugs. But I also don't think it's
just one or two athletes, and I don't think it's just the backmarkers.
I personally despise those that unjustly accuse individuals (like those
who were after Pantani here) of taking drugs when they have no evidence.
But to ignore that there is a problem with drugs in cycling is wrong, too.
I'd suggest that 24-hr notice, out-of-competition testing be instituted
on a random basis to address the problem.
Les Earnest
Now wait just a god darned minute!!!! Alexi is an acquaintance (not a
friend, an acquaintance) of mine, and I can assure you that the '84 drug
charges were bogus.
"Not proven" is the correct term. Not at all "bogus."
It appears that he drank an herbal tea which
contained small traces of a banned substance (it's been so many years I
can't remember what). It was given to him by a female masseuse he was
kind of hot on (and of course you never refuse herbal tea from a woman
you're trying to impress). Anyway he was found positive the next day at a
dope control and it was positively traced back to the tea.
This was not proven. If it had been, he would have been suspended and
could not have competed in the 1984 Olympics.
He was defended by John Bartko of San Francisco (who also defended
Imelda Marcos against the bad old US of A and recently lost a $6.7
million sexual harassment suit that saw heavy coverage on Court TV).
If he was defended by as alleged, I wonder why Bartko didn't appear at
the appeal hearing?
--
Les Earnest (L...@cs.Stanford.edu) Phone: 415 941-3984
Computer Science Dept.; Stanford, CA 94305 Fax: 415 941-3934
Patrick Mannion
suicidal breakaway towards Breckenridge when he bonks big time.
Alexi is
first to pass him on the last climb. Alexi slows along side Hinault
and
says, "Hey Bernie, ya really fucked up today pal." Classic Grewal<<
Bravo...Thats a great one!
--
Reasonable men see the world around them, and adapt themselves to
it. Unreasonable men expect the world to adapt to them. All progress
in the world is made by unreasonable men. --G.B. Shaw
SMac69
"Anyways, this is a rumour of course. But has anyone heard about this
type of "enhancement" procedure for women?"
Jeannie Longo was reported to have done this.
ilan vardi
>
>One last Alexi story and I'll quit. The '86 Coor's Classic. The
>Lemond/Hinault feud is even bigger than in the Tour. Hinault is on a
>suicidal breakaway towards Breckenridge when he bonks big time. Alexi is
>first to pass him on the last climb. Alexi slows along side Hinault and
>says, "Hey Bernie, ya really fucked up today pal." Classic Grewal.
That must have really impressed Hinault who doesn't understand a word
of English. Wasn't Grewal signed up to ride with RMO? In that case,
this might explain his demise on that squad.
SMac69
[snip mostly accurate guess about drug usage among elite amateurs and
professionals in cycling]
As a current pro who spent 2 years on the international amateur scene, 2
years pro in Europe with 7-Eleven and Motorola, and 3 years pro in the
States, I feel obligated to offer up the sum of my observations about drug
use in cycling.
I have seen directors of small kermesse teams making jokes while sticking
needles into their riders in the dressing rooms. I have seen riders inject
themselves during races. In the small races during the summer in Belgium
and Holland, this practice was not uncommon when I raced there. These
events took place at the smaller races, the ones Kimmage wrote about in
his book, the bread-and-butter races that announce the presence or absence
of drug-testing weeks before, to warn the riders. I remember the first
summer I raced the pro kermesse circuit, in 1989 with 7-Eleven. Nathan
Dahlberg and I were doing 4 or 5 kermesses a week and suffering to finish
each one. Then suddenly the weather got a little hotter, and our results
begin to improve. Nathan said to me that the heat ruins the effect of
amphetamines, which was why all the riders suddenly seemed human. When the
weather cooled again, all those guys with the thousand-yard stare who
you've never heard of and who can ride tirelessly at the front for their
leaders for 80k at 50kph reappeared. Hmm, I thought.
Anyway, as of 2 years ago, that was the scene in Northern European,
small-caliber races. It was a bad scene. Well-known pros readily admit
that kermesses are often harder than the real races.
This is not to say that the real races are exempt from drug abuse. What it
means is that in races in which there is NO testing, riders use a whole
different kind of drug; amphetamines, generally, which make you ride
completely differently than other drugs.
Amphetamines, from what I've seen, make people do things that border on
the superhuman. These are restricted to the working-class pro, and to some
degree, amateurs. The only use they have among the elite pros, as far as I
know, is limited domestique usage (when you know you probably won't be
tested) and for training, to replicate racing better.
The untestable drugs such as: EPO, steroids when timed correctly, human
growth hormone, cortisone, etc, have a much more subtle effect. These are
what Tour-caliber riders use, if they use at all. Generally the program is
very carefully monitored by a doctor or hospital, and there are usually no
mistakes. The deaths in the early days of EPO were almost certainly
because of careless, unsupervised usage.
These are the drugs. Add to them the third category of borderline drugs
that are legal under a certain limit, such as caffeine, ephedrine, and
inhaled salbutamol, and you have a pretty good idea of the entire scope of
performance-enhancing drugs (to the best of my knowledge).
Now, who uses them? What is the percentage of abuse? The problem is that
no one really knows except the athletes and the doctors or soigneurs.
Even among the athletes themselves there is little discussion. Drug use
tends to be a discreet arrangement between an individual and his doctor.
So if we go by the iceberg-tip philosophy that only the mistakes are
caught, we can safely assume that a lot of people in the sport are using
drugs, based on the 8 or 10 positives every year. Still, it is hard to
point the finger unless there is a definite positive drug test. My
conservative, educated guess is that among the elite of the sport, at
least half use banned performance-enhancing drugs and most of them get
away with it. I think Lance and Andy really may be the clean exceptions
among the top-50 riders in Europe, and even that may be wishful thinking.
Unfortunately, it is simply impossible to say whether a rider is 'clean'
or not, no matter what your opinion of that person's character is or how
vehemently he defends himself. Only he knows for sure.
Scott McKinley
Tom Gargulak
Sorry, who is Jeannie Longo? Where is she from?
Patrick Mannion
Mz. Longo is a French cyclist, who has won several world titles, in
several different events, and also the Tour de Feminin'. A very
tough cookie indeed. Doesn't get along too well with human beings,
though.
Pat
Patrick Mannion
use in professional cycling. Scott, I raced with you a bunch of
times when we were juniors, in 1985. Congratulations on your
successes. Actually, I think I met you even earlier on "The river
ride" when I was visiting my brother in Sacramento once. Have fun.
Patrick Mannion
Patrick Mannion
>Do you ever wonder how much of this drug talk is just a way of
>rationalizing never having been as successful as we should have
>been?
Roger,
I don't think so bud. I may not have raced as much, or seen as much
in racing as you have, but believe me, I have seen my fair share.
Heck, I did most of my racing as a junior, and it appears that I've
seen more drugs in my 6 years of racing than you have in over 20
years. When I raced track, I saw many an amphetimine pill being
passed around, and many over the counter stimulants, such as "Up
Time". I have no sour grapes, because I beat many of these riders
who were using, and I was doing it clean. Most of the drug use I
witnessed, personally, was amoung "Trackies". Actually, most of the
people I knew of who took drugs, were exactly the kind of people who
would have been taking them out of cycling. I think the cycling
community is really like a microcosm of the outer world. Good
people, bad people, people who are squeaky clean, and people who
take drugs. There are cyclists who will steal your wheels out of the
follow vehicle, and those who will fetch em for ya. Bike racing
mirrors life. Just because I happened to race, does not mean I
believed everyone was living up to the same standards in life.--Pat
Patrick Mannion
>For example, why did Ken Carpenter skip the training camp where
>drug testing was going to happen?
I remember that. Both Ken and I are from San Diego, and raced
together as juniors on the road. Ken was actually told to report to
camp AND submit to a drug test (it was random, and his name came
up). He skipped camp, and the USCF gave him a teenie weenie ity bity
suspension (that didn't even affect his racing season). They are
supposed to treat a refused test THE SAME AS A POSITIVE RESULT.
He tried to say he didn't know there wasa test waiting for him, so
he didn't skip camp because of it.
I knew Ken, and he was always a very tall kid, at 16 and 17....and
he was by no means a "stellar" junior...But he was SKINNY. He was
often dropped in local criteriums (and he had not even chosen to be
a pure track rider yet)....but Ken's body mass grew exponentially
during the next 4 years, which had always stunned me. When he
refused to go to the camp (the year before, he had begged to be let
in!), I KNEW he was on them. No doubt in my mind. He did not get
THAT big from weights and cycling. No way. NO WAY.
Bruce Hildenbrand
>In article <bandersC...@netcom.com>, ban...@netcom.com (Paul B.
>Anders) writes:
>
>[snip mostly accurate guess about drug usage among elite amateurs and
>professionals in cycling]
>
>As a current pro who spent 2 years on the international amateur scene, 2
>years pro in Europe with 7-Eleven and Motorola, and 3 years pro in the
>States, I feel obligated to offer up the sum of my observations about drug
>use in cycling.
Thanks to Scott for his comments, my own personal experience parallels
closely with the observations made by Scott.
I would just like to vouch for Andy Hampsten and say that I have spent
1-2 months a year, since 1979, with Andy doing various things in
and out of season(including visits to the Team doctor). From my
observations, he is completely clean. Heck, he gets mad at me for
taking anti-inflammatories when my knees act up!
Bruce Hildenbrand
Roger Marquis
>I never said LOTS of people are taking drugs. But I also don't think it's
>just one or two athletes, and I don't think it's just the backmarkers.
Having been a cat. 1 for 18 years, a NORBA pro (Ritchey) for 2, coach
for 14, manager of US teams abroad, resident of more CO Springs and TX
training camps than I like to remember I cannot for the life of me ever
recall seeing or even hearing about drugs other than caffeine (in
various forms), occasionally diet pills, some talk of amphetimines
(twice in 20 years), and a few riders who used inhalers regularly. I
remember a few track riders who used to smoke pot before workouts, and
I was once on a Mexican team in the Tour of Baja where they did vitamin
B injections, and I've seen a couple of riders in Europe who were
definitly "on", but you'd think that if drugs were really as rampant as
some in this forum claim, I would have seen more than this in 21 years
of racing.
Do you ever wonder how much of this drug talk is just a way of
rationalizing never having been as successful as we should have been?
Roger Marquis
Roger Marquis
>Try "incredible athletes".
Not to mention years, sometimes decades, of full time training, racing, and
dedication to the sport.
Roger Marquis
ilan vardi
Roger Marquis <mar...@netcom.com> wrote:
>
>Having been a cat. 1 for 18 years, a NORBA pro (Ritchey) for 2, coach
>for 14, manager of US teams abroad, resident of more CO Springs and TX
>training camps than I like to remember I cannot for the life of me ever
>recall seeing or even hearing about drugs other than caffeine (in
>various forms), occasionally diet pills, some talk of amphetimines
>(twice in 20 years), and a few riders who used inhalers regularly. I
Did you ever hang out with track sprinters? A couple of years back it
was known that you could only go so far without taking steroids. For
example, why did Ken Carpenter skip the training camp where drug
testing was going to happen? Why did the Australians test positive
after coming 1st and 3d at '91 worlds?
Steven L. Sheffield
Jeannie Longo is a French cyclist (female, of course) who has won more
races than any other woman. She is known for her prickly personality
(i.e. she's a major bitch).
--
Steven L. Sheffield Disclaimer? I don't need no
(BOB #1765/IBOB #3) stinking disclaimer.
Internet: biki...@netcom.com __o
Voice: (415) 296-9893 _`\<;
Fax: (415) 597-9849 (*)/(*) Cars suck. Ride yer bike.
Paul B. Anders
>In article <355hag$1...@crchh518.bnr.ca> to...@bnr.ca (Tom Gargulak) writes:
>>
>>In article <355blt$1...@search01.news.aol.com>, sma...@aol.com (SMac69) writes:
>>> In article <352v79$q...@crchh518.bnr.ca>, to...@bnr.ca (Tom G) writes:
>>> "Anyways, this is a rumour of course. But has anyone heard about this
>>> type of "enhancement" procedure for women?"
>>>
>>> Jeannie Longo was reported to have done this.
>>
>>Sorry, who is Jeannie Longo? Where is she from?
>
>Jeannie Longo is a French cyclist (female, of course) who has won more
>races than any other woman. She is known for her prickly personality
>(i.e. she's a major bitch).
While I don't argue that Longo has had some outbursts and well-known
episodes of "prickliness", I've also talked to some people who have
met her casually and they report she's pretty nice. Maybe it's that
damn bike that affects her personality...
Bruce Hildenbrand
>Bruce Hildenbrand writes:
>
>> Thanks to Scott for his comments, my own personal experience parallels
>> closely with the observations made by Scott.
>
>> I would just like to vouch for Andy Hampsten and say that I have spent
>> 1-2 months a year, since 1979, with Andy doing various things in
>> and out of season(including visits to the Team doctor). From my
>> observations, he is completely clean. Heck, he gets mad at me for
>> taking anti-inflammatories when my knees act up!
>
>for anything but naive or blinded by hero worship after reading Scott
>McKinley's thoughtful and well stated words. You probably haven't
>witnessed several other things that Andy does and we all do in private
>that no one can state with certainty whether or how we do them or not.
>
>I think, with the state of today's competition, making any statement
>about a bicycle racer's use of banned substances must be left to
>chemical analysis rather than to any social perceptions.
OK. Fair enough! Andy Hampsten has never tested positive for any banned
substance.
Enough said,
Bruce Hildenbrand
Thomas H. Kunich
>As a current pro who spent 2 years on the international amateur scene, 2
>years pro in Europe with 7-Eleven and Motorola, and 3 years pro in the
>States, I feel obligated to offer up the sum of my observations about drug
>use in cycling.
Scott we all know and admire your abilities. Or at least those of us
who actually follow racing instead of just writing about it. :-)
>I have seen directors of small kermesse teams making jokes while sticking
>needles into their riders in the dressing rooms. I have seen riders inject
>themselves during races.
This is pretty shocking -- how does one inject themselves with drugs
in the peloton? It would seem that the sanctioning body doesn't care
and the riders certainly aren't in the upper half of the intellect scale.
>When the
>weather cooled again, all those guys with the thousand-yard stare who
>you've never heard of and who can ride tirelessly at the front for their
>leaders for 80k at 50kph reappeared. Hmm, I thought.
You also get that thousand yard stare from doing very long training rides
into the wind -- you know, like the dutch riders do -- start at 5:00 am
and end the ride at 5:00 pm with eating on the bike.
>The untestable drugs such as: EPO, steroids when timed correctly, human
>growth hormone, cortisone, etc, have a much more subtle effect. These are
>what Tour-caliber riders use, if they use at all. Generally the program is
>very carefully monitored by a doctor or hospital, and there are usually no
>mistakes. The deaths in the early days of EPO were almost certainly
>because of careless, unsupervised usage.
Again, EPO's 'performance enhancing' abilities are probably very overrated
and certainly high altitude trained riders like the Coloradoans, the
Columbians and the Swiss don't need and couldn't safely take this drug
and wouldn't extract any gain from it.
Most steroids are fairly easily detectable even long times from their
use. Steroids effectively screw up the body's chemistry and that is
detectable too.
Human Growth Hormone doesn't seem to have any 'performance enhancing'
effects that I know of after a short period during juvenile growth. After
this is it doesn't seem to do anything except give you brow ridges and
make you walk mostly on your knuckles.
Oh boy, I'd certainly let someone inject _me_ with testosterone. I always
wanted bigger breasts and a higher percentage of body fat.
I've been trying to point out that most of these drugs that you mention
and most of the rest of the drugs on the list don't have significant
performance enhancing effects. Most CERTAINLY amphetamines do and
injected as you say you saw have several pretty ugly side effects
both long term and short. That would certainly change if a few riders
sued their previous teams and wanted compensation for ruined health.
>Now, who uses them? What is the percentage of abuse? The problem is that
>no one really knows except the athletes and the doctors or soigneurs.
>Even among the athletes themselves there is little discussion. Drug use
>tends to be a discreet arrangement between an individual and his doctor.
>So if we go by the iceberg-tip philosophy that only the mistakes are
>caught, we can safely assume that a lot of people in the sport are using
>drugs, based on the 8 or 10 positives every year. Still, it is hard to
>point the finger unless there is a definite positive drug test. My
>conservative, educated guess is that among the elite of the sport, at
>least half use banned performance-enhancing drugs and most of them get
>away with it. I think Lance and Andy really may be the clean exceptions
>among the top-50 riders in Europe, and even that may be wishful thinking.
>Unfortunately, it is simply impossible to say whether a rider is 'clean'
>or not, no matter what your opinion of that person's character is or how
>vehemently he defends himself. Only he knows for sure.
All of this makes me think that you're on the edge of saying that you
used drugs.
My thoughts are these: riders in the top 50 have way too much to lose by
taking drugs. It's pretty obvious that the few real performance enhancing
drugs have convinced people that any claim is serious and drugs that have
minute or no effects are being banned. So, is aspirin banned? It is one
of the few real performance enhancing drugs on the market and it appears to
be freely usable.
Jobst Brandt
> Thanks to Scott for his comments, my own personal experience parallels
> closely with the observations made by Scott.
> I would just like to vouch for Andy Hampsten and say that I have spent
> 1-2 months a year, since 1979, with Andy doing various things in
> and out of season(including visits to the Team doctor). From my
> observations, he is completely clean. Heck, he gets mad at me for
> taking anti-inflammatories when my knees act up!
I don't see how you can make such a statement and expect to be taken
for anything but naive or blinded by hero worship after reading Scott
McKinley's thoughtful and well stated words. You probably haven't
witnessed several other things that Andy does and we all do in private
that no one can state with certainty whether or how we do them or not.
I think, with the state of today's competition, making any statement
about a bicycle racer's use of banned substances must be left to
chemical analysis rather than to any social perceptions.
Jobst Brandt <jbr...@hplabs.hp.com>
Keith Erskine
: In article <355eht$2...@search01.news.aol.com>, SMac69 <sma...@aol.com> wrote:
: >The untestable drugs such as: EPO, steroids when timed correctly, human
: >growth hormone, cortisone, etc, have a much more subtle effect. These are
: >what Tour-caliber riders use, if they use at all. Generally the program is
: >very carefully monitored by a doctor or hospital, and there are usually no
: >mistakes. The deaths in the early days of EPO were almost certainly
: >because of careless, unsupervised usage.
: Again, EPO's 'performance enhancing' abilities are probably very overrated
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What is your basis for this claim? It increases oxygen available to muscle
tissue, a direct benefit to the cardiovascular system.
: and certainly high altitude trained riders like the Coloradoans, the
: Columbians and the Swiss don't need and couldn't safely take this drug
: and wouldn't extract any gain from it.
: Most steroids are fairly easily detectable even long times from their
: use. Steroids effectively screw up the body's chemistry and that is
: detectable too.
: Human Growth Hormone doesn't seem to have any 'performance enhancing'
: effects that I know of after a short period during juvenile growth. After
: this is it doesn't seem to do anything except give you brow ridges and
: make you walk mostly on your knuckles.
HGH speeds muscle growth, allowing faster recovery from workouts and
long term greater muscle mass and strength.
: Oh boy, I'd certainly let someone inject _me_ with testosterone. I always
: wanted bigger breasts and a higher percentage of body fat.
You're mistaking testosterone with a female hormone such as estrogen.
Higher testosterone levels result in faster recovery times, more muscular
mass, more aggresive behavior. The root of the term is from "testes", or
testicles, which women certainly don't have.
: I've been trying to point out that most of these drugs that you mention
: and most of the rest of the drugs on the list don't have significant
: performance enhancing effects. Most CERTAINLY amphetamines do and
: injected as you say you saw have several pretty ugly side effects
: both long term and short.
Anabolic steroids, EPO, human growth hormone, and testosterone most
certainly improve performance significantly.
Keith Erskine
Bill Cutts
|>
|> >In article <bandersC...@netcom.com>,
|> >Paul B. Anders <ban...@netcom.com> wrote:
|>
|> >>Getting around the screening process is an art that has been practiced for
|> >>years in sport. There are two basic approaches. The first is to train using
|> >>drugs, but not compete. You can handle a greater workload and make more
|> >>gains in your training. Then, as you taper, you go off drugs and use a
|> >>cleansing agent (hopefully, not Comet or Drano) to clear your system of all
|> >>residual traces.
|>
|> >Thankfully you aren't an expert so you can make such claims. Most drugs that
|> >allow training gains leave indelible evidence that cannot be "cleansed".
|>
|> No, I don't represent myself as an expert. Are there any out there that can
|> comment on the possiblity of testing negative after having trained while
|> using anabolic steroids, and taken time off before competition?
|>
|>
|> Again, I defer to the experts out there (if any). Is it possible that
|> within the constraints that real drug testing is done (limited time,
|> limited money, limited sample, limited equipment) that masking agents
|> can work?
|>
|>
|> I again defer to the experts here. Is it possible to take EPO such that one
|> can maintain a high but "normal" hematocrit without detection? Is the advantage
|> offered by a higher hematocrit from EPO the same as six weeks of altitude
|> training? Do the effects of continual EPO administration in low-level dosages
|> to elevate hematocrit have longer-term beneficial effects than single or
|> multiple sessions of high-altitude training?
|>
|> I never said LOTS of people are taking drugs. But I also don't think it's
|> just one or two athletes, and I don't think it's just the backmarkers.
|> I personally despise those that unjustly accuse individuals (like those
|> who were after Pantani here) of taking drugs when they have no evidence.
|> But to ignore that there is a problem with drugs in cycling is wrong, too.
|> I'd suggest that 24-hr notice, out-of-competition testing be instituted
|> on a random basis to address the problem.
|>
I'm not an expert but I did spend a lot of time around weightlifting and
powerlifting where drug use is rampant. I think the best response to the
question of evading testing was the remark that it is an art. This is
basically like any other type of cheating that someone tries. The folks who
are trying to catch the rules breakers are always playing a game of catch-up.
A test is used which begins to catch people using proscribed drugs and the
drug users switch their drugs/methods. There is some time lag and the rules
enforcers will catch up again.
A dramatic example of this was in the Pan-Am games ten or fifteen years ago.
At that time it was thought that if you discontinued use of anabolic
steroids six weeks before competition you would test safe. A new testing
procedure was introduced and an American weightlifter, who had stopped his
steroid intake about six weeks previous to the competition, tested positive.
In an interview he said that they told him the drugs he was taking, the
dosages he was using and when he quit. He didn't appeal. The interesting part
was that immediately after he tested positive, large numbers of
weightlifters, shot putters, etc. suddenly pulled muscles, withdrew from the
competition and flew home.
As the testing procedures improve and, just as importantly, are made less
expensive, new drugs are tried. Thus, in the weightlifting arena, people
moved from anabolic steriods to human testosterone to human growth hormone to
whatever they're using now. I've never competed in bicycle racing but I'm
sure it's much the same with those who wish to use performance enhancing
chemicals; the game is to know what the testers can do and do something else.
--
Bill Cutts | INET : bi...@atl.mcd.mot.com |
Systems Sales Manager | UUCP : emory!motatl!billc |
Motorola Computer Group | #include <disclaimer.h> |
SMac69
writes, (in response to my original post about drug use in Europe):
>You also get that thousand yard stare from doing very long training rides
>into the wind -- you know, like the dutch riders do -- start at 5:00 am
>and end the ride at 5:00 pm with eating on the bike.
No, I don't know. Suddenly I wonder if this is flame bait. No pro I have
ever known has trained like this. Granted, you can get very tired doing a
lot of things. The 'thousand yard stare' comment was meant to be taken in
context.
>Again, EPO's 'performance enhancing' abilities are probably very
>overrated
>and certainly high altitude trained riders like the Coloradoans, the
>Columbians and the Swiss don't need and couldn't safely take this drug
>and wouldn't extract any gain from it.
Though neither of us have the knowledge to accurately discuss the true
effects of EPO, the general concensus is that it is a significant
performance enhancer. Dr. Ferrari, Tony "the Swiss" Rominger's doctor made
public laudatory statements about the value of EPO for endurance athletes.
Your arguments are sadly obsolete, including:
>Most steroids are fairly easily detectable even long times from their
>use. Steroids effectively screw up the body's chemistry and that is
>detectable too.
[snip totally unsubstantiated stuff about how useless Human Growth Hormone
is as a performance enhancer]
What are you talking about!? The only steroid users who get caught are the
ones who do not time it right. If you were correct about this there would
be no steroid abuse.
>All of this makes me think that you're on the edge of saying that you
>used drugs.
Please watch your wild accusations. I have educated myself about drugs in
cycling simply to know what I am up against. I _choose_ to race in the
States because the sport is still very clean.
>My thoughts are these: riders in the top 50 have way too much to lose by
>taking drugs. It's pretty obvious that the few real performance enhancing
>drugs have convinced people that any claim is serious and drugs that
>have
>minute or no effects are being banned.
Very confusing sentence structure here, Thomas.
Regarding the benefits of EPO et al, I'm sorry I can't name names, but
while training in Italy last season I visited a popular Italian sports
doctor for a routine AT test whose clientele included Adriano Baffi, Max
Sciandri, and a host of professional Italians and Russians. He told me and
the person I was there with that getting on his full "program" (EPO, etc)
would show a improvement of _up to_ 30%, depending on the physiology of
the athlete. He offered this program to us matter-of-factly, the way an
American nutritionist would offer a vitamin program. Needless to say, I
declined. Presumably, it is this 30% difference that many riders in the
peloton publicly reacted to when they saw the extraordinary early-season
feats of the Italian teams. (And to ward off future flames, a 30% increase
in strength is an approximate figure that does not translate literally to
60kph or some ridiculous abstract figure. It takes a nearly exponential
increase in power to realize only 1 or 2 more kph at racing speeds. Quite
frankly, I believed the doctor.)
To have a productive discussion all parties must have a basic knowledge of
the topic. Regardless of what you believe and how much you want everyone
else to believe it, at least try to back up your statements with fact or
support to give them a little credibility! For anyone who wants to know
the FACTS of performance-enhancing drugs, read a book called Optimum
Sports Nutrition by Dr. Colgan, available at the better health food stores
and bookstores. It covers the entire range of performance-enhancers, from
aspirin and vitamin C to EPO and anabolic steroids.
Scott McKinley
Patrick Mannion
You just dont wanna believe that cyclists use drugs more than people
think. Trying to imply that Scott McKinley uses them, just because
he was blatantly honest enough to comment to us about it, is
absolutely uncalled for. Have a little more respect, thank you.
Pat
Patrick Mannion
>For anyone who wants to know
>the FACTS of performance-enhancing drugs, read a book called
>Optimum Sports Nutrition by Dr. Colgan,
This was written by my nutrition instuctor, and I highly suggest
that people read it.--Pat
Brian Lafferty
>My thoughts are these: riders in the top 50 have way too much to lose by
>taking drugs. It's pretty obvious that the few real performance enhancing
if it helps them to win. Bernard Thevenet immediately
comes to mind. Could he have won in 1975 without
the steroids?
Brian Lafferty
Thank you for an open and very informative posting.
Perhaps you have some info on this. L'Equipe reported
the death of Dr. Bellocq, the GAN team doctor, during the
1993 Giro. They noted that he was a proponent of "hormonal
adjustments." Does this refer to adjusting a testosterone
level to the upper legal limit. If so, how wide
spread is the practice?
Thanks.
Thomas H. Kunich
>I think, with the state of today's competition, making any statement
>about a bicycle racer's use of banned substances must be left to
>chemical analysis rather than to any social perceptions.
Well, that's the problem Jobst -- you and I seem to be saying the same
thing and what I'm hearing is that the testing is fixed. We can either
believe that or not.
David Leahy
I find it interesting that you are hearing that the testing is fixed.
Having been through the process of documentation for drug testing for
USPRO I find that difficult to believe.
Officials (or medical inspectors) take the samples, seal them, complete
documentation, and mail them to the lab. If my memory serves me
correctly, the lab tests the samples without knowledge of the
individual's name (I believe a number code was used). A positive would
be reported to USPRO which would compare the code to the documentation
to determine the rider in question. (Les Earnest might be able to supply
additional details)
What USPRO does with it at that point is another matter.
If you were referring specifically that European testing is fixed, I
wouldn't know.
: thing and what I'm hearing is that the testing is fixed.
Is this an informed source or the normal rumor mill?!?
--
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* David Leahy "All I ever needed in Life, *
* dle...@netcom.com I learned at a Stage Race!" *
* Portland, Oregon *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bud Noren
[thoughtful discussion of drug use in pro peloton deleted for brevity]
We ought to archive this. It's the most informed essay on the subject that
we in r.b.r. are likely to ever see.
-Bud
Thomas H. Kunich
John Frampton <jfra...@lynx.dac.neu.edu> wrote:
>
>Could you explain to me why it made you think that? All I could get out
>of it was that he said that maybe 50% of the riders used drugs and that
>you can't tell whether a particular rider uses drugs in any reliable way
>except by drug testing.
For those of you who are unaware, Scott McKinley is a rather talented
cyclist in his own right. I would rate him as successful in European
racing. Others that spring to mind are LeMond, Hampsten, Phinney, Armstrong
and others. Scott has chosen to question even those people who are
unlikely to have used drugs.
In any case, my whole point is that Scott claims essentially that drugs
are necessary to be successful in Europe. He is living proof that that
isn't at all the case UNLESS he used drugs himself.
Contrary to Scott's claims, steroids work by changing the bodies biochemistry
and this is detectable long times from the steroids actual use. I don't know
much about drug use but I have designed state of the art separation
instruments while at Beckman. A good analytical chemist who knows what he's
doing can detect and identify complex compounds in parts per billion and
you can believe that no body can get rid of hormones so fast that that can't
be detected over weeks.
So, people use steroids in the off season and then ride drug free the
rest of the racing season? OK. Is that why the Italians dominated the
beginning of the season but have dropped off considerably later? Then
how do you explain the other riders who have held constant performance
throughout the year? Highs, yes, lows, yes, but the same as always.
Why is everyone complaining about how much training you need just to
start eh season? Because they are busy using drugs to boost their
performance?
No, there _are_ performance enhancing drugs, but most of the banned
drugs are not performance enhancing any more than coffee, tea or aspirin.
And these drugs do not stack so using several doesn't give you several
perfromance increases together.
My idea is that you use REAL research to provide REAL information to detect
REAL performance enhancing drug. THESE drugs are banned. Anyone found
positive for them is simply kicked out of racing forever -- not
suspended. That makes the price higher than the possible gain.
EPO is readily detectable by it's effects: If used in safe doseages it
simply increases the red bloodcell count to that of someone training
at high altitude, abused and it greatly increases the cell count. If
your count is over the limit (and this is one of the most common tests
performed) you're out. If you aren't over the limt, whose business is
it whether you spent 12 weeks in Vail or 2 weeks in EPO treatment?
Most of this stuff isn't magic. Steroid use leaves long term health
hazards. It would only take a few pissed off riders to sue teams for
shattered health due to the team's injecting them with such things ans
that would be the END of teams doing that sort of stuff.
And if there are no performance enhancment from drugs then let the
jackasses who use them go right ahead. Do we stop smokers? Does
Roger Marquis stop us from riding on Alma? (:-))
John Frampton
: >Now, who uses them? What is the percentage of abuse? The problem is that
: >no one really knows except the athletes and the doctors or soigneurs.
: >Even among the athletes themselves there is little discussion. Drug use
: >tends to be a discreet arrangement between an individual and his doctor.
: >So if we go by the iceberg-tip philosophy that only the mistakes are
: >caught, we can safely assume that a lot of people in the sport are using
: >drugs, based on the 8 or 10 positives every year. Still, it is hard to
: >point the finger unless there is a definite positive drug test. My
: >conservative, educated guess is that among the elite of the sport, at
: >least half use banned performance-enhancing drugs and most of them get
: >away with it. I think Lance and Andy really may be the clean exceptions
: >among the top-50 riders in Europe, and even that may be wishful thinking.
: >Unfortunately, it is simply impossible to say whether a rider is 'clean'
: >or not, no matter what your opinion of that person's character is or how
: >vehemently he defends himself. Only he knows for sure.
: All of this makes me think that you're on the edge of saying that you
: used drugs.
Could you explain to me why it made you think that? All I could get out
of it was that he said that maybe 50% of the riders used drugs and that
you can't tell whether a particular rider uses drugs in any reliable way
except by drug testing.
John Frampton
S.P. Scott
What Scott stated came pretty close to my experience racing amateur in
France. Alot of the guys charge over there. It is just accepted
practice. (if you are good enough) You can't make a race horse out of an ass.
It is common knowledge/speculation that most pros charge, to some degree.
I remember a conversation with my DS where I gave him shit for smoking a
cigar. His response...."I was a pro for ten years and I have taken alot
worse than this....." I might add that most if not all of my team mates
found this funny. (inside joke I guess)
It seems to me that it is basic human nature to want to be the best,
fastest or whatever. The ancient Greek athletes used to take arsenic (rat
poison) to run faster, throw farther etc. This is not a new deal. I am
not saying I agree with the guys who charge. You have to make a decision
and live with it. If you dwell on it too much you crack. Just remember
that most pros would still be pros with or without drugs.
later,
Sean
Jobst Brandt
>> I think, with the state of today's competition, making any statement
>> about a bicycle racer's use of banned substances must be left to
>> chemical analysis rather than to any social perceptions.
> Well, that's the problem Jobst -- you and I seem to be saying the same
> thing and what I'm hearing is that the testing is fixed. We can either
> believe that or not.
No I don't believe we are saying the same thing, considering that the
above quote is not at all from the same context. Besides, I don't
wish to be included in your 'shoot from the hip' approach to net
topics that strike me as generally abrasive, especially your comments
to Scott McKinley.
Jobst Brandt <jbr...@hplabs.hp.com>
Don Demuth
|> In article <tomkCw...@netcom.com>, to...@netcom.com (Thomas H. Kunich)
|> writes, (in response to my original post about drug use in Europe):
|> >Again, EPO's 'performance enhancing' abilities are probably very
|> >overrated
|> >and certainly high altitude trained riders like the Coloradoans, the
|> >Columbians and the Swiss don't need and couldn't safely take this drug
|> >and wouldn't extract any gain from it.
|>
|> Though neither of us have the knowledge to accurately discuss the true
|> effects of EPO, the general concensus is that it is a significant
|> performance enhancer. Dr. Ferrari, Tony "the Swiss" Rominger's doctor made
|> public laudatory statements about the value of EPO for endurance athletes.
Just a quick look through the literature to see if we could attach some
real numbers to the alleged performance enhancing properties of EPO resulted in
the following:
Berglund and Ekblom, J. Intern. Med. 229:125-130. 1991.
- treated healthy males with 20-40 Units EPO per kg bodyweight, 3 times a
week for 6 weeks. After this time they found:
- increase in red cell count, small but significant decrease in white
cell count
- hemoglobin concentration increased from 152 to 169 grams/litre
- hematocrit (measurement of blood iron) increased from 44.5 to 49.7
- no change in resting blood pressure
- heart rate when exersizing at 200W decreased from 144 to 136
- systolic blood pressure increased from 177 to 191 when exersizing at
200W
Summary: study shows an increase in red cells, hemoglobin and blood iron
of greater than 10% after 6 wks of EPO treatment. Also, the decrease in heart
rate when exersizing suggests that EPO treatment enhances overall cardiovascular
efficiency. The alarming result is the jump in blood pressure in EPO treated
individuals when exercizing.
Braumann et al., Nephron 58:129-134. 1991.
Looked at the effects of EPO in patients with renal anemia. Treatment
was 40 - 120U EPO. I can't recall at what frequency or for how long. The
relevent measurements in this study were total hemoglobin content and aerobic
threshold (defined as muscle lactate = 2mM) when exersizing at a heart rate of
130bpm.
- hemoglobin content increased from 73 to 119 g/l
- aerobic threshold shifted to higher workloads (sorry, no specific
values for workload were given in the abstract)
Although far from being an exhaustive review of the literature, both of these
studies show that EPO has beneficial effects in individuals when exersizing.
Increases in red cell counts, hemoglobin levels and hematocrit suggest an
increase in the oxygen carrying capacity, and that would certainly be of benefit
to a cyclist. However, one could always argue that the effects above might not
large enough to significantly benefit an endurance athlete. You'll have to find
a physiologist to answer that one.
DRD
_________________________________________________________________________________
dem...@biochem.dental.upenn.edu
tim...@news.delphi.com
I'm not sure whether there's special concern about an endurance sport, i.e.,
whether steroids cause greater gains in performance in a sport like bike
racing than in a sport like wrestling. Using substances to enhance perfor-
mance is certainly nothing new, as was previously pointed out.
Drugs in sports have some definite risks:
1. Creating an unfair advantage for the drug user through making it possible
to make greter gains in strength & endurance than would be possible without
the drug;
2. Chronic risks to the health of the athlete;
3. Acute risks to the health of the athlete (adverse reaction, overdose);
4. Increased injury risk (connective tissue injuries in steroid use, for
example) through the increase in intensity or duration of exertion.
There are probably other risks. Both Freddy Maertens and Paul Kimmage have
publicly stated that doping is common in the peloton; Maertens, who is
rather infamous for allegations of drug and alcohol use, even accused Eddy
Merckx of drug use. Maertens also alleges that he was the victim of being
given a tampered bidon to cause a positive test so that he'd be DQ'd from
a race. There have been rumors of Dutch teams using EPO, resulting in the
premature deaths of several young and previously healthy riders.
If this sort of thing is true (and I suppose it certainly might be), I find
it inexcusable. The therapeutic use of drugs, even those on the banned
lists, might be defensible, but the use of substances such as EPO which
are used simply to enhance performance (even at the cost of a life) is not.
Bicycling is certainly not the only sport in which this happens (meaning
viewing the athlete as a tool or commodity rather than a person): football
has many similar stories of athletes essentially crippled by being forced
to compete on injured knees, etc., the severity of which was masked by the
team doctor through the use of analgesics, steroids, etc.
In discussing grug use in the peloton, we must not only look at the riders
but also the directeurs sportifs, team doctors, soigneurs, etc. Perhaps
it should be *those* people who get suspended rather than the riders.
Food for thought, I hope!
-Tim
Patrick Mannion
>>In any case, my whole point is that Scott claims essentially that
>>drugs are necessary to be successful in Europe. He is living
>>proof that that isn't at all the case UNLESS he used drugs
>>himself.
Your arguing technique is juvenile. If A is true, and B is true, you
assume C must also be true. Your technique of emailing people who
disagree with you, and calling them "dipshits" just shows how much
of a child you really are. I'll bet you've rolled lots of tires in
your time. Best to stick to a nice set of clinchers, and a sane
argument.
Pat
Patrick Mannion
You just said "I don't know much about drug use...etc"...yet you
found the need to comment on how much drug use you feel is taking
place in the European peloton....SO how the hell would YOU know? You
just admitted to us that you know little about drug use.
You best stick to chemical fuckin separation. You don't know shit
about racing.
John Frampton
: For those of you who are unaware, Scott McKinley is a rather talented
: cyclist in his own right. I would rate him as successful in European
: racing. Others that spring to mind are LeMond, Hampsten, Phinney, Armstrong
: and others. Scott has chosen to question even those people who are
: unlikely to have used drugs.
: In any case, my whole point is that Scott claims essentially that drugs
: are necessary to be successful in Europe. He is living proof that that
: isn't at all the case UNLESS he used drugs himself.
You are wrong. There is no way you could read McKinley's post carefully
and conclude that all successful European pros use (illegal) drugs. I
think it is fair to say that one can conclude that many do. Given the
social implications of suggesting that an athelete uses illegal drugs,
it seems to me that your carelessness (self-serving) in reading his post
was quite wrong.
JF
Les Earnest
[. . .]
I find it interesting that you are hearing that the testing is fixed.
Having been through the process of documentation for drug testing for
USPRO I find that difficult to believe.
As do I.
Officials (or medical inspectors) take the samples, seal them, complete
documentation, and mail them to the lab. If my memory serves me
correctly, the lab tests the samples without knowledge of the
individual's name (I believe a number code was used). A positive would
be reported to USPRO which would compare the code to the documentation
to determine the rider in question.
Correct, though a positive in this country would now be reported to
USCF, given that USPRO is no longer in business. If a positive result
is found, then the identity of the rider may become known to the lab
in conjuction with the mandatory test of the second sealed sample
because the rider or his representative has the right to observe the
testing process.
[Regarding an allegation that the testing is fixed]
Is this an informed source or the normal rumor mill?!?
Just more bullshit, I believe.
--
Les Earnest (L...@cs.Stanford.edu) Phone: 415 941-3984
Computer Science Dept.; Stanford, CA 94305 Fax: 415 941-3934
ilan vardi
S.P. Scott <u921...@muss.cis.McMaster.CA> wrote:
>
>It seems to me that it is basic human nature to want to be the best,
>fastest or whatever. The ancient Greek athletes used to take arsenic (rat
>poison) to run faster, throw farther etc. This is not a new deal. I am
>not saying I agree with the guys who charge. You have to make a decision
>and live with it. If you dwell on it too much you crack. Just remember
>that most pros would still be pros with or without drugs.
Just look at other disciplines. Can you imagine Nobel prize winners
having to pee into a cup after receiving their award? How about:
``Proof of Fermat's Last Theorem discredited because Mathematician
took a banned substance.''
pulone joseph
Well, that's the problem Jobst -- you and I seem to be saying the same
thing and what I'm hearing is that the testing is fixed. We can either
believe that or not.
I don't think that they're so much fixed as the fact that for every
test, there is way around it, and by the same token for every method
of getting around a test, there's a test that will catch you.
An excellent book to check out on the subject is "Optimum Sports
Nutrition" by Dr. Colgen
-Joe
pulone joseph
Keith,
Don't act like such a know it all.
Anabolic steriods WILL cause what bodybuilders call 'Bitch Tits".
It's not hard to spot with alot of the amateur contests that are shown
in magazines. Soft tissue forms at the base of the pecs even after
cutting up for a contest.
HGH and Steriods both can cause internal organs to enlarge. It's easy
to spot on bodybuilders.....there stomachs sort of stick out. Sounds
like some pretty good side effects to me.
Joe
ilan vardi
pulone joseph <jpu...@umbc.edu> wrote:
>
>An excellent book to check out on the subject is "Optimum Sports
>Nutrition" by Dr. Colgen
Didn't he also do those lip enlargements?
Thomas H. Kunich
>test, there is way around it, and by the same token for every method
>of getting around a test, there's a test that will catch you.
I think that the whole point that I've been trying to make is getting
lost in this string. I don't think we need limitations on every drug that
can be inhaled, injected, ingested or shoved up your backside.
MOST of the drugs that are banned are NOT perfomance enhancement drugs.
Some of them are _rumored_ to be performance enhancers -- such as
Salbutomol. France simply bans the stuff and to hell with any asthmatic
who wants to race. I can tell you from personal experience that anti-asthma
drugs can barelu get you back to normal let alone enhance you. What BS!
Many banned 'drugs' were banned because they could be used to 'mask'
detection of other drugs when using cheap and dirty analysis methods.
More sophisticated detection methods renders these banned drugs totally
harmless.
Other drugs have completely legitamite medical uses that are supressed
strictly for the convenience of the drug detection processes. You are
a professional rider and you injure a tendon etc. As a normal person
you could be offered steroids to help speed the healing process but as
a cyclist that is banned because you _could_ misuse the drugs.
These limits are getting a little philosophically stratopheric don't you
think?
As I've already said, let's use REAL research to fine true performance
enhancers and limit their use by TOTAL banning. One positive test and
POOF, no more license -- ever.
Allow, even encourage, riders to sue their past teams for health empediments
caused by illegal drugs forced on them by the team management.
I can absolutely guarantee you that these teams would then be _squeeky_
clean. I would bet that in order to guarantee that they wouldn't get
sued, sponsors would insist on frequent and highly accurate drug testing
of their own. Inside of a year no rider would dare use drugs.
Robert J Schwartz
ez04...@dale.ucdavis.edu
: pulone joseph <jpu...@umbc.edu> wrote:
: >
: >I don't think that they're so much fixed as the fact that for every
: >test, there is way around it, and by the same token for every method
: >of getting around a test, there's a test that will catch you.
: I think that the whole point that I've been trying to make is getting
: lost in this string. I don't think we need limitations on every drug that
: can be inhaled, injected, ingested or shoved up your backside.
: MOST of the drugs that are banned are NOT perfomance enhancement drugs.
: Some of them are _rumored_ to be performance enhancers -- such as
: Salbutomol. France simply bans the stuff and to hell with any asthmatic
: who wants to race. I can tell you from personal experience that anti-asthma
: drugs can barelu get you back to normal let alone enhance you. What BS!
Highlights from the USCF rule book:
Rule 5A5. Use of inhaled beta 2 agonists is banned except that
salbutamol and terbutaline may be used for inhalation only with written
notification from the prescribing physician sent prior to competition to
"USCF Drug Control Program" giving the athlete's name, diagnosis and
medication prescribed.
Rule 5A6. The use of corticosteroids such as cortisone and prednisone is
baned except for topical use (in the ear, eye, or on skin), inhalation
therapy (asthma, allergic rhinitis) and local or intra-articular
injections [three months suspension]. When any inhalation thereapy,
local or intra-articular injections of corticosteroids are used, a letter
of notification giving the athlete's name, diagnosis, medication, dose,
site of application and date of adminstration must be sent immediately to
"USCF Drug Control Program" at the Federation office.
It seems to me that as long as you are careful, an athlete should be able
to take care of themselves without getting in trouble. If you have a cold,
read the labels, don't take Sudafed, take something that doesn't have
pseudoephedrine, etc.
While Salbutamol may just barely make an asthmatic feel normal, what does
it do for somebody who doesn't have asthma? That's the question they are
concerned with.
: Other drugs have completely legitamite medical uses that are supressed
: strictly for the convenience of the drug detection processes. You are
: a professional rider and you injure a tendon etc. As a normal person
: you could be offered steroids to help speed the healing process but as
: a cyclist that is banned because you _could_ misuse the drugs.
See rule 5A6 above.
: As I've already said, let's use REAL research to fine true performance
: enhancers and limit their use by TOTAL banning. One positive test and
: POOF, no more license -- ever.
: Allow, even encourage, riders to sue their past teams for health empediments
: caused by illegal drugs forced on them by the team management.
From reading Paul Kimmage's book, A Rough Ride, most of the drug use is
between a riders and without input from the team. The teams of course
don't mind if you take drugs, they just get a little mad when you get
caught. The team keeps itself distant from the doping process except to
point out races where there will be no dope control. The "Grand Prix des
chaudres" as Kimmage's RMO team mates called them. Loosely translated as
"The hot races".
Kevin Metcalfe
metc...@smdis01.mcclellan.af.mil
Davis, CA
Robert J Schwartz
[ A parrot of Tom Kunich's post. Let me try this again while I try to
[ resolve this bug with our admins.
Thomas H. Kunich (to...@netcom.com) wrote:
: I think that the whole point that I've been trying to make is getting
: lost in this string. I don't think we need limitations on every drug that
: can be inhaled, injected, ingested or shoved up your backside.
: MOST of the drugs that are banned are NOT perfomance enhancement drugs.
: Some of them are _rumored_ to be performance enhancers -- such as
: Salbutomol. France simply bans the stuff and to hell with any asthmatic
: who wants to race. I can tell you from personal experience that anti-asthma
: drugs can barelu get you back to normal let alone enhance you. What BS!
That would be a valid argument if all athletes were asthmatic. I believe
the use of such drugs will enhance the performance of an athlete not
so afflicted. I base that on your personal experience, they improve your
condition from a weakened state.
: Many banned 'drugs' were banned because they could be used to 'mask'
: detection of other drugs when using cheap and dirty analysis methods.
: More sophisticated detection methods renders these banned drugs totally
: harmless.
If the banned masking agents have no legitimate use in sport, I see
nothing wrong with their prohibition.
: Allow, even encourage, riders to sue their past teams for health empediments
: caused by illegal drugs forced on them by the team management.
: I can absolutely guarantee you that these teams would then be _squeeky_
: clean. I would bet that in order to guarantee that they wouldn't get
: sued, sponsors would insist on frequent and highly accurate drug testing
: of their own. Inside of a year no rider would dare use drugs.
While drug use at the professional level gets the most attention, much of
the worst abuse occurs among aspiring athletes. Highly accurate drug
testing ain't cheap, and very few clubs have the resources to do this.
Not that it would matter. Proving *forced* drug use would be next to
impossible. In many cases, it would be a great challenge to prove that
*forced* drug use didn't occur in the off-season, or while the athlete
was with preceding or subsequent teams.
Bob Schwartz
bsch...@cray.com
Patrick Mannion
>>Allow, even encourage, riders to sue their past teams for health
>>empediments caused by illegal drugs forced on them by the team
>>management.
B.S. Thomas,
No rider is ever *forced* to take drugs by their team
managers....Those riders simply didn't have the guts to stand up and
be MEN, and say "Fuck off" to those teams...and then walk away.
What we really need are more professional cyclists with integrity,
who are willing to be men, and tell those teams to go to hell.
THAT'S when pro teams will be "squeaky clean". I'm sure if Banesto
were to pressure Indurain to take drugs, and he told them to go to
hell, they'd surely change their act.
Don't EVEN try to put the blame on team managers. Thats like trying
to blame a cocaine or ciggarette habit on "peer pressure".
Pat
ilan vardi
Patrick Mannion <72614...@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
>
>No rider is ever *forced* to take drugs by their team
>managers....Those riders simply didn't have the guts to stand up and
>be MEN, and say "Fuck off" to those teams...and then walk away.
>
>What we really need are more professional cyclists with integrity,
>who are willing to be men, and tell those teams to go to hell.
I think you are talking from the perspective of U.S. racing where most
riders come from middle class backrounds. This is substantially
different from the European scene, where many riders are either
cyclists or factory workers, e.g., de Schoenmaker, Merckx' first
lieutenant who lost his hands in a factory accident after quitting
cycling. Take Freddy Maertens who dropped out of the Giro one year.
His coach forced him to ride the rest of the race in front of the
peleton, otherwise he would have been off the team, i.e., back in
Flanders working in some dump. (By the way, this was pretty standard
procedure in those days.) The situation has definitely improved for
the top riders, but due to world cup points, no one has an assured
place anymore and domestiques are forced to sprint for 20th place.
This makes the life of a mediocre pro even more marginal than before.
I read an article in Mirroir about the attrition rate among neo pros
and they described how they would do anything to stay in the bunch and
would be in tears if they abandoned, usually because it would mean
having to go back home to relive their parents' horrible lives.
By the way, the fact the fact that U.S. racing is a middle class sport
favored by college graduates was obvious even when I raced in Quebec.
There most racers were 2nd generation Italians (some races were
announced in Italian only) who went straight up from junior ranks. As
a matter of fact, there weren't even senior categories, since no one
ever started riding as a senior! Bicycle racing was a way of making
money, and losing a prime meant losing wages (I got punched by some
guy after he lost a prime because I was in his way). The whole time, I
only met one racer who had gone to college (not that it made any
difference though).
-ilan
Lisa Alvis
-snip-
> Allow, even encourage, riders to sue their past teams for health
>empediments caused by illegal drugs forced on them by the team management.
> I can absolutely guarantee you that these teams would then be _squeeky_
> clean. I would bet that in order to guarantee that they wouldn't get
> sued, sponsors would insist on frequent and highly accurate drug testing
> of their own. Inside of a year no rider would dare use drugs.
I doubt your lawsuit proposal could work. I know of more than one rider
who did not have their contracts renewed simply because they refused the
team's "medical assistance". The riders can't really sue on this basis: I
was discriminated against because of my medical preference? So they would
have to be offered the product, refuse to take it, then have it forcibly
administered before they'd have any suit at all. Most teams could justify
their non-renewal of contracts just by saying the rider didn't win enough
races, or whatever.
--Lisa Alvis
Maj.Taylor
I don't really recall the genesis or digressions of this thread, but since
this concerns doping, you might find it interesting -- see an article in
the Wall Street Journal (p. A12), 23 Sept 94 for the full text.
Summary: Many questions are being asked about the performance of the
Chinese women in the recent World Swimming Championships. They won 12 of 16
events. They had never placed in the top-ten before 1988. Most suspicious.
Passing dope tests is pretty simple these days, and might be for a while to
come.
Other points:
1. None of the Chinese medal winners from the 1992 Olympics participated in
the '94 Worlds.
2. That fact implicates the possible use of human growth hormone (HGH). It
has steroid-like effects, but is currently undetectable.
3. However, a person can't use it form more than a couple years before
experiencing *very* serious side effects.
4. Given that, expect to see none of this year's winners competing in
another year's time.
5. In an L'Equipe interview a little while back, a source (Chinese defector
& lab technician) revealed that the Chinese laboratory accredited by the
IOC actually develops masking agents.
6. Also, steroid doping is so sophisticated these days that
between-competition tests must be adopted -- cleanliness can be guaranteed
for event testing.
7. Serious research into these issues is lagging due to inadequate
resources, primarily funding.
Bruce Hildenbrand
>
>I am also tired of hearing about the immorality of taking drugs. Do
>you think that Wordsworth's poetry is immoral because he was on opium?
>Do you refuse to use Apple computers because the company's founders
>took a lot of drugs? Drugs are chemicals, just as sugar and water are
>chemicals. As a matter of fact, these two chemicals are the most
>important performance enhancing chemicals--they just happen to be
>legal. The only thing wrong with taking illegal drugs is that it is
>illegal, i.e., cheating. I consider taking steroids to be cheating
>exactly like taking an illegal water feed is cheating. It's just
>breaking a rule and so gives you an unfair advantage over your
>competitors who don't break the rule. As for the dangers of drug use
>in sport, all the side effects are less dangerous than smoking, and
>that's socially acceptable (not by you probably, but luckily you're
>not king of the world).
You might want to talk to some of the Belgians and Dutch cyclists who
were some of the first cyclists to experiment with EPO. Unfortunately,
at last count, over 10 of them had died from heart attacks in the prime
of their lives when they were incredibly fit.
Or how about Tom Simpson.
Or even closer to home, how about Cindy Olivarri. Her health related
problems brought on by the abuses of fat soluble steroids have been
well documented in the cycling magazines in the late 1980's.
Bruce Hildenbrand
Patrick Mannion
>>This is substantially different from the European scene, where
many riders are either cyclists or factory workers,<< ETC.
I do get a bit sick of hearing how in Europe, you are either a good
pro, or a coal-shoveler. It vaguely sounds like a rationalization as
to why drugs should not be eradicated from sport. Are we to believe
that European racers are not capable of being educated?...That
Euro-pros have no future if they do not make it in cycling, and that
drugs are more acceptable if the cyclist comes from a working class
family? If this is all true, then there are a whole lot of miserable
failed cyclists in Europe, slaving away in the factories, shoveling
coal.
Last time I watched the news, it appeared that Europe was up with
the times, and a very modern continent. They even have TV these
days.
I'm sure a European cyclist has just as many chances at a good life
as an American does.
cheers,
Pat
Patrick Mannion
>>1. None of the Chinese medal winners from the 1992 Olympics
participated in
the '94 Worlds.<<
One of the characteristics of many of the communist sports programs
has been the very short careers of MOST (not all, of course) of
their athletes. One of them will win a world medal one year, and we
never hear from them again. The attrition rate is high. One note:
The East German cycling team always impressed me the most. One may
say that they were riddled with drugs, but I have never met more
dedicated athletes then they. They just worked THAT much harder then
everyone else. Truly amazing at their craft.
Mark Heinicke
In article <36hcnd$l...@nntp.Stanford.EDU>, il...@leland.Stanford.EDU (ilan vardi) writes:
>
>
>It seems to me that these cases are comparable to the effects of of
>the original birth control pill. Doctors had no problems pumping up
>females with hormones or steroids. It took them 20 years to realize
>that they only needed 1/10 the dose for it to work. Yet the pill was
>hailed as one of the most important sociological advances of the 60's.
>
>-ilan
>
>
The health dangers of pregnancy are well documented. The adverse
social impact of unwanted pregnancies is obvious. I don't
see similar negative effects from the failure of racing cyclists to
ride their bikes faster.
Mark Heinicke
mhei...@Glue.umd.edu
ilan vardi
Patrick Mannion <72614...@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
>
>I do get a bit sick of hearing how in Europe, you are either a good
>pro, or a coal-shoveler. It vaguely sounds like a rationalization as
>to why drugs should not be eradicated from sport. Are we to believe
>that European racers are not capable of being educated?...That
The difference is that Europeans who go into cycling come from the
same social group as people who go into boxing in the U.S. I would
think that most professional boxers in the US were not capable of
getting an adequate education due to their low economic backround.
I am also tired of hearing about the immorality of taking drugs. Do
you think that Wordsworth's poetry is immoral because he was on opium?
Do you refuse to use Apple computers because the company's founders
took a lot of drugs? Drugs are chemicals, just as sugar and water are
chemicals. As a matter of fact, these two chemicals are the most
important performance enhancing chemicals--they just happen to be
legal. The only thing wrong with taking illegal drugs is that it is
illegal, i.e., cheating. I consider taking steroids to be cheating
exactly like taking an illegal water feed is cheating. It's just
breaking a rule and so gives you an unfair advantage over your
competitors who don't break the rule. As for the dangers of drug use
in sport, all the side effects are less dangerous than smoking, and
that's socially acceptable (not by you probably, but luckily you're
not king of the world).
-ilan
Mark Heinicke
In article <36hgiq$m...@nntp.Stanford.EDU>, il...@leland.Stanford.EDU (ilan vardi) writes:
>
>
>Well steroids don't seem to have hurt Arnold Schwarznegger's career,
>he even became head of the president's council on health and fitness.
>
And of course Arnold is a model for us all.
Breast implants didn't hurt Brigit Neilsen's (sp?) career either,
but there are a lot of women who've suffered mightily from them.
Mark Heinicke
mhei...@Glue.umd.edu
ilan vardi
ilan vardi <il...@leland.Stanford.EDU> wrote:
>
>I am also tired of hearing about the immorality of taking drugs. Do
>you think that Wordsworth's poetry is immoral because he was on opium?
I meant Coleridge.
-ilan
ilan vardi
Bruce Hildenbrand <bhi...@stelvio.eng.sun.com> wrote:
>
>You might want to talk to some of the Belgians and Dutch cyclists who
>were some of the first cyclists to experiment with EPO. Unfortunately,
>at last count, over 10 of them had died from heart attacks in the prime
>of their lives when they were incredibly fit.
>
>Or how about Tom Simpson.
>
>Or even closer to home, how about Cindy Olivarri. Her health related
>problems brought on by the abuses of fat soluble steroids have been
>well documented in the cycling magazines in the late 1980's.
It seems to me that these cases are comparable to the effects of of
ilan vardi
>Bruce Hildenbrand <bhi...@stelvio.eng.sun.com> wrote:
>>
>>Or how about Tom Simpson.
As long as you're talking about isolated incidents, what about Jocelyn
Lovell, Alan Kingsbery, Mary Jane Reoch? All these people were struck
by trucks and seriously injured or killed. Page 3 of Velo News is a
regular obituary of cyclists killed by vehicles. In general, your risk
of injury is much higher driving a bicycle or car, than taking some
illegal drug.
>>Or even closer to home, how about Cindy Olivarri. Her health related
>>problems brought on by the abuses of fat soluble steroids have been
>>well documented in the cycling magazines in the late 1980's.
Well steroids don't seem to have hurt Arnold Schwarznegger's career,
he even became head of the president's council on health and fitness.
Do you think magazines are going to print articles on how someone took
steroids and lived happily ever after? As Nabokov wrote there are some
subjects that are considered taboo by American publishers. In his day
it was: "a Negro-White marriage which is a complete glorious success
resulting in lots of children and grandchildren; and the total atheist
who lives a happy and useful life, and dies in his sleep at the age of
106."
-ilan
Patrick Mannion
>>Or even closer to home, how about Cindy Olivarri. Her health
related
problems brought on by the abuses of fat soluble steroids have been
well documented in the cycling magazines in the late 1980's.<<
Now this is news to me. I have never heard that Olivarri was ever on
drugs. I'd like to know your source on that one. I could see the
suspicion, though, like how she supposedly became ill with
mononucleosis just a week or so before the games in 84. I read all
the magazines, and have never heard of Olivarri doing such stuff.
please elaborate....thanks
Patrick Mannion
With the power vested in me by the universe...It is my pleasure to
present you with the "Extreme FRED" award.
With your messed-up values, you should have no problem getting a job
as the drug control supervisor for the world wrestling
federation...or possibly the USCF. Perhaps even the Tour de France.
Perhaps also, a medical expert for the tobacco industry.
Patrick Mannion
As your posts become even more abscurd, I somehow still feel the
need to respond. You are one sick little puppy.
You are certainly the first one I'd ask to pee in a jar. I hear the
ACLU is accepting applications. Go get em tiger!
ilan vardi
I would enjoy meeting you in a court of law. The above gratuituous
hominem attack indicates that you are unable to respond rationally to
my dispassionate intellectual arguments, and that I could easily win
my case.
Brian Lafferty
>I would enjoy meeting you in a court of law. The above gratuituous
>hominem attack indicates that you are unable to respond rationally to
>my dispassionate intellectual arguments, and that I could easily win
>my case.
cross-examination!
Brian Lafferty
>Now this is news to me. I have never heard that Olivarri was ever on
>drugs. I'd like to know your source on that one. I could see the
>suspicion, though, like how she supposedly became ill with
>mononucleosis just a week or so before the games in 84. I read all
>the magazines, and have never heard of Olivarri doing such stuff.
she wrote in Bicycle Guide (?) several years ago. Anyone
remember the cite or have the article?
Alex D Rodriguez
I read about Olivarri in one of the Bucycle mags a few years back. She may
have written a book. She admitted to having used drugs when she was racing.
------------------------
Alex Rodriguez
D.A.
I never saw the mention article, but I heard Cindy Olivarri give a
talk at the House of Delegates meeting in Los Angeles about 4 years
ago. She talked about her use of steroids, how she was sent home
from the Seoul olympics because of her drug use, and the physical
problems it caused.
-------------
Dick Anderson
Minneapolis
Patrick Mannion
>>you are unable to respond rationally to
my dispassionate intellectual arguments<<
That, sir, is strictly a matter of opinion...and one that I happen
to disagree with. If your arguments were dispassionate, or for that
matter, intellectual, I might give you some slack....but you seem to
ADVOCATE that people should be able to take whatever performance
enhancing drug they wish! What kind of response did you expect?
Applause?
Brian Lafferty
>matter, intellectual, I might give you some slack....but you seem to
>ADVOCATE that people should be able to take whatever performance
>enhancing drug they wish! What kind of response did you expect?
use whatever they wand and ilan sort of hit on this when
he ranted about the morality thing and chemicals being life.
this would reqire that pros be fully informed of the drugs they are
being offered and ALL the risks. Consent to administration
of them would have to be knowing and voluntary. Also, the same drugs would
have to be available to all other pros. Herein lies the cheating problem which
is the same as what we have now with prohibited substances. Riders cheat
by trying to get a leg up on the competition. Thus, either was way, you have to
test, test, test.
C. Michael McCallum
: I never saw the mention article, but I heard Cindy Olivarri give a
: talk at the House of Delegates meeting in Los Angeles about 4 years
: ago. She talked about her use of steroids, how she was sent home
: from the Seoul olympics because of her drug use, and the physical
: problems it caused.
"Drugs and Redemption"
Bicycle Guide, April 1989.
(guess which is the only mag I keep for more than a year?)
--Mike
--
|
C. Michael McCallum | Operating Instructions:
mmc...@uop.cs.uop.edu | 1) Pour in Double cappuccino.
UOP Chemistry | 2) Place on bicycle.
(209) 946.2393 (voice) | 3) Kick to start.
(209) 946.2607 (fax) | 4) Toss back into bed.
Bruce Hildenbrand
The article about Cindy Olavarri is:
"Drugs and Redemption" by Christopher Koch in the April 1989 issue of
Bicycl Guide magazine.
Bruce(never trust your memory) Hildenbrand
Les Earnest
I never saw the mention article, but I heard Cindy Olivarri give a
talk at the House of Delegates meeting in Los Angeles about 4 years
ago. She talked about her use of steroids, how she was sent home
from the Seoul olympics because of her drug use, and the physical
problems it caused.
Actually it was just before the 1984 Olympics in L.A., when the U.S.
Olympic Committee caught her on a pre-race screening. The U.S. team
manager (Mike Fraysse) then concocted the phoney story that she had
mononucleosis, which was released to the media.
--
Les Earnest (L...@cs.Stanford.edu) Phone: 415 941-3984
Computer Science Dept.; Stanford, CA 94305 Fax: 415 941-3934
Patrick Mannion
>>I never saw the mention article, but I heard Cindy Olivarri give a
talk at the House of Delegates meeting in Los Angeles about 4 years
ago. She talked about her use of steroids, how she was sent home
from the Seoul olympics because of her drug use, and the physical
problems it caused.<<
Cindy Olivarri wasn't racing at the time of Seoul. She retired just
before the 84 games (in a very mysteriuos manner)...If she did go to
seoul, she must have been training secretly leading up to it..
Perhaps you meant to say Los Angeles?....anyhow, thanks fellas, it
seems well documented that Cindy was using. I am very saddened,
because of all the women cyclists at the time, Cindy was the one who
I thought had the most integrity, and was most worthy of being a
role model (besides Connie, of course).
Patrick Mannion
>>>>>Actually it was just before the 1984 Olympics in L.A., when the
U.S. Olympic Committee caught her on a pre-race screening. The U.S.
team manager (Mike Fraysse) then concocted the phoney story that she
had mononucleosis, which was released to the media.Actually it was
just before the 1984 Olympics in L.A., when the U.S. Olympic
Committee caught her on a pre-race screening. The U.S. team manager
(Mike Fraysse) then concocted the phoney story that she had
mononucleosis, which was released to the media.<<<<<<<<<
Les,
Was Cindy banned from the sport? Why did Mike Fraysse give a bogus
story? Also, did the USCF bother looking into others (perhaps in the
USCF) who were possibly involved?
That kind of pisses me off. I was a USCF racer at the time, and
thought the world of the integrity of the federation leadership. I
know now that I should've thought different. It seems the coaching
staff has a tendency to be a little overzealous in their cravings
for victory
Thomas H. Kunich
Patrick Mannion <72614...@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
>Now this is news to me. I have never heard that Olivarri was ever on
>drugs. I'd like to know your source on that one. I could see the
>suspicion, though, like how she supposedly became ill with
>mononucleosis just a week or so before the games in 84. I read all
>the magazines, and have never heard of Olivarri doing such stuff.
Oh wow, how can you have missed that? Rather than ask Bruce why don't you
just get ahold of Cindy? She does school appearances on request I hear.
Her health is seriously impared and I can only hope that she can reach some
level of satisfactory health again.
Cindy is the MAIN reason that I think that law suits could easily do
away with drugs in the sport. Last I heard most of her joints were
seriously damaged leading to continuous pain.
Now Cindy has admitted that she got the drugs herself and avoided letting
the coaches know about it. So she doesn't have anyone to blame but
herself. In one interview she said that it was taking her _30_minutes_
to pop pills and inject herself with all of the stuff she was using!
But the Pro's are being jacked-up by team doctors as a matter
of course and in the U.S. this is highly actionable. What if Castorama
rides in the Tour DuPont and one of their riders takes action? Some
domestique that knows he is going to be let go can clear a lifetime's
income on such an action and it doesn't take much pushing to get those
sort of paybacks looked into.
As I said before, only ban the drugs proven as performance enhancers
take serious and permanent action to eject drug users and advertise
the rewards of civil actions against teams who use drugs on their members.
Brian Lafferty
>Now COME ON. Could you imagine the logistical nightmare of pro's
>screaming at each other because they don't think the drugs are being
>distributed fairly? Who the hell would be responsible for seeing to
>it that each team is getting the same EPO? "No fair, Indurain is
>being given a better grade of testosterone than me!"
Quite right but you are making the mistake of assuming
that I advocate that position. Idon't. Never have--never will.
The position does exist even with the problems of testing for a an
unknown substance. Of more concern to me is the issue of voluntarily
taking drugs when there is pressure from all other pros to do so.
I guess one would even have to question how voluntary a decision would be
to even enter the pro ranks.
I seem to have a vague recollection the that Mirroir du Cyclisme
has from time to time presented some interesting positions on
unlimited drug use. Anyone remember the details of the late
Dr. Bellocq's views on doping. He was faily open towards anything goes if under
a doctor's supervision.
Patrick Mannion
>>Also, the same drugs would
have to be available to all other pros.<<
Now COME ON. Could you imagine the logistical nightmare of pro's
screaming at each other because they don't think the drugs are being
distributed fairly? Who the hell would be responsible for seeing to
it that each team is getting the same EPO? "No fair, Indurain is
being given a better grade of testosterone than me!"
ilan Vardi's talk is just a bunch of tripe. There would then be
another vehicle added to the tour caravan. The "charge" wagon...it
would, instead of a broom, have a big syringe on top...every rider
who needed a shot would know where to go.
Brian Lafferty
>>actionable. What if Castorama rides in the Tour DuPont
>>and one of their riders takes action? Some domestique
>>that knows he is going to be let go can clear a
>>lifetime's income on such an action and it doesn't
>>take much pushing to get those sort of paybacks looked
>>into.
who has been injured by the actions, actionable action that is,
of another choses to sue when it is advantageous to him, and sthe statute
of limitations has not run, more power to him. This is not suggesting that
one invite injury to create a suit--you are correct that an
attor{ey who did that could be disbarred.
As I understand team practices, many of the riders do not even know
what they are being given. Their right to recover may be limited in
jurisdictions that consider comparative negligence but there
may also be a viable action against the team member
administering such "medication" for an intentional tort like
assault{ N Much will depend upon the knowledge and understanding
of the rider--that old consent issue again.
Brian P. Lafferty, Esq.
Sue Broque
to...@netcom.com (Thomas H. Kunich) wrote:
>Cindy is the MAIN reason that I think that law suits
>could easily do away with drugs in the sport. Last I
>heard most of her joints were seriously damaged
>leading to continuous pain.
>
>But the Pro's are being jacked-up by team doctors as a
>matter of course and in the U.S. this is highly
>actionable. What if Castorama rides in the Tour DuPont
>and one of their riders takes action? Some domestique
>that knows he is going to be let go can clear a
>lifetime's income on such an action and it doesn't
>take much pushing to get those sort of paybacks looked
>into.
Some days it doesn't pay to be a lawyer or to deny being one.
So here goes.
The idea that all of society's wrongs are _meant_ to be
addressed in a court of law (and only in the US) is a real
crock. Stupid people will continue to do stupid things even if
they are illegal. Looking to line someone's pockets to teach a
lesson is very much in mode with the members of the bar who
believe that all risks which are taken are always taken by
somebody else, never the client. If you were a lawyer, the
remarks you make would be considered enough to have you
disbarred - inviting someone to be injured in order to seek
money damages. Dummmb. Unscrupulous. I hope it doesn't
reflect your on course racing style, too.
Samuel M-M Broque, Esq. (Sandy)
(accessing through my wife's gateway)
D.A.
>Dick Andersen writes:
>> She talked about her use of steroids, how she was sent home
>> from the Seoul olympics because of her drug use, and the physical
>> problems it caused.
> Cindy Olivarri wasn't racing at the time of Seoul.
...
> Perhaps you meant to say Los Angeles?
L.A., not Seoul. I stand corrected.
-------------
Dick Anderson
Minneapolis
Thomas H. Kunich
Sandy Broque <subr...@pipeline.com> wrote:
>
>The idea that all of society's wrongs are _meant_ to be
>addressed in a court of law (and only in the US) is a real
>crock. Stupid people will continue to do stupid things even if
>they are illegal. Looking to line someone's pockets to teach a
>lesson is very much in mode with the members of the bar who
>believe that all risks which are taken are always taken by
>somebody else, never the client. If you were a lawyer, the
>remarks you make would be considered enough to have you
>disbarred - inviting someone to be injured in order to seek
>money damages. Dummmb. Unscrupulous. I hope it doesn't
>reflect your on course racing style, too.
Have you been following this string Sandy? The general trend of the
conversation was that there are domestiques, even star riders who
are being 'doped' at team orders. Most of these people are not in
a position to refuse the 'medical supervision' and in the past this
sort of thing has led to health and career injury. Can you say PDM?
If you think that that sort of thing shouldn't be addressed in a
tort action I suggest that you get into another business.
When a domestique faces either unemployment in his career choice
or taking drugs administered by team officials that isn't a choice.
Maybe making a decent living off of other people's woes has made
you forget that there are people in the world that work their entire
lives and can't afford the 'simple' pleasures you take for granted.
I hope that this doesn't reflect on your attitude towards your clients.
SMac69
writes:
>The general trend of the
>conversation was that there are domestiques, even star riders who
>are being 'doped' at team orders. Most of these people are not in
>a position to refuse the 'medical supervision' and in the past this
>sort of thing has led to health and career injury. Can you say PDM?
I don't believe this is completely true. That is quite an allegation -
that pro teams 'dope' their riders in some kind of "take it or get axed"
thing. Maybe it happens. There is the case of Ampler, I think, who is
suing Telekom over such an incident.
The thing that everyone keeps forgetting is that aside from the relatively
few positive drug tests every year (8-10 positives vs 1000's of tests),
there is NO WAY of knowing if any rider takes drugs! You can SAY or THINK
whatever you want - that the testing procedures are 100% accurate and drug
use is not a problem, or that the whole sport is corrupt and no one is
clean - but the truth is that only that rider and his doctor knows if he's
doing drugs!
But I digress from the point, which is that I think that for the most part
taking drugs is a personal choice that an athlete in any sport makes. Of
course there are exceptions; innuendos from a manager or coach, maybe even
an isolated "you better do it or else", but I think these are isolated
incidents.
The pressure of being a professional athlete is enormous. The more
precarious and expendable your position is (domestique), or the more money
you're making (star), cheating is certainly a temptation. Neverthelesss,
regardless of pettt, finger-pointing suspicion and unsubstantiated
allegations, taking drugs is NOT a requisite act of being a professional.
Not everyone cheats, just as not everyone is clean. It's entirely possible
that the true numbers might suprise all of us.
Scott McKinley
__(Fill in Blank)__ Cycling Team
RafeEvans
safety and morality of performance enhancing drug use and rarely question
the inherently dangerous nature of bike racing itself, with crashes,
collapses, and other injuries that dwarf the drug problem, and are paid
for by a passive "excitement" hungry public and performed by "glory"
hounds. Maybe drug controversy is just in the nature of the beast.
Bruce Hildenbrand
Speak for yourself, when I was making my living as a freelance journalist
I wrote a few articles about the subject of the dangers of being a cyclist,
enough to raise the blood pressure of more than one race director.
Maybe the sport is changing(for the bad, I might add) in that drugs are
becoming commonplace. However, while the dangers of the sport were in
the job description when most of the current pros signed up, I don't
think that drug use was also part of that job description.
If the future of the sport includes medical programs for all riders,
I know of a number of racers that will hang up their cleats and do
something else. For these riders, using drugs was not part of the
job description they were given when they signed on.
Bruce Hildenbrand
ps - it may be remembered that in his first season as a pro, Greg LeMond
was in a 3-man breakaway that was run over by an errant car on the course.
One of the riders lying on top of Greg was dead when they pulled him off.
George S. Riedesel
to take drugs to improve a mental/emotional condition but not ones that
improve a physical one. Hmmmm.
GSR
Patrick Mannion
However, one must distinguish the difference between the words
"Theraputic" and "Enhancement"....Drugs used for emotional states
(such as prozac) are meant to get the person where he or she is
"supposed to be", as opposed to drugs such as EPO which are taken to
take a rider "beyond" his or her regular physical state. There is a
difference.
Those who need drugs such as prozac are at a distinct disadvantage
to begin with. Those who use EPO and steroids, are seeking to
improve a normal physical state. Big difference
Mark Heinicke
that dying from drugs is an inferior way to go.
Mark Heinicke
mhei...@glue.umd.edu
Jobst Brandt
>>> It is interesting to ponder the double standard morality that
>>> makes it OK to take drugs to improve a mental/emotional condition
>>> but not ones that improve a physical one. Hmmmm.
> However, one must distinguish the difference between the words
> "Therapeutic" and "Enhancement"....Drugs used for emotional states
> (such as Prozac) are meant to get the person where he or she is
> "supposed to be", as opposed to drugs such as EPO which are taken to
> take a rider "beyond" his or her regular physical state. There is a
> difference.
I didn't thinking of Prozac when I read that. How about alcohol and
coffee or tea, cigarettes and the like? However, performance enhancing
drugs have equally ugly side effects besides not being in the allowed
equipment list of the sports that ban them. It's like a crib sheet in
an exam. Cheating.
Jobst Brandt <jbr...@hpl.hp.com>