that Ms. Frigo has a bunch of epo in the car during the tour and apparently admits under intense questioning (as reported by cyclingnews.com) that they were for Dario yet he has yet to test positive? Either he didn’t take them for fear of being caught or he took them in such small amounts they were undetectable (and probably useless) or the tests are useless.
How can this be explained?
My armchair assessment is that they have their doses dialed in so that they can get hematocrit levels to 48-49% and mask the EPO. I’m not a chemist and don’t know what it would take to do this, but someone has surely thought out a system.
“Allowance” for the Haematorit is 50 (?). So everybody does anything to get as close to that threshold value as possible without looking suspicious. Too bad if they overshoot the dosage: Generally first tests are for the haematocrit only. However, if they are close to 50 or even over they may take a closer look (the test for artificial EPO are very expensive and I doubt they test everybody for artificial EPO).
Just 2 cents…
“Allowance” for the Haematorit is 50 (?). So everybody does anything to get as close to that threshold value as possible without looking suspicious. Too bad if they overshoot the dosage: Generally first tests are for the haematocrit only. However, if they are close to 50 or even over they may take a closer look (the test for artificial EPO are very expensive and I doubt they test everybody for artificial EPO).
Just 2 cents…
So, if the hematocrit is normal, where is the advantage? I suspect they are testing for epo in races like the TDF. Perhaps not in the local criterium but in the big ones, yes. I mean, they got Tyler for autologous transfusion. You can bet the French have tested Lance with every test available and some not.
“…that Ms. Frigo has a bunch of epo in the car”
they weren’t for dario. they were for her boyfriend.
Personally, I think they should just let them all do epo and peg it at 49.999%. If you are over, you sit out. I don’t see a difference between using epo and an altitude tent. Both are artificial ways of jacking up red blood cell count. I do think that living at altitude is different. You don’t get the benefit of jacked up Red Blood Cell counts, with the intensity of training at sea level. It takes 3 weeks at altitude before you can get back to sea level training intensity so there is a penalty of going to train at altitude. Not so for epo or altitude tent.
So then everyone that lives in Deer Valley and can train in Salt Lake is at a huge advantage then. So we should geographically limit people? Why? There are plenty of places where sea-level → altitude is a drivable daily distance, especially for elite athletes who will go down in the AM, do their training, and return in the early evening to altitude. Why punish those athletes who are not fortunate enough to have access to such topography?
EPO has serious side-effects if abused. You can’t abuse altitude training…
Personally, I think they should just let them all do epo and peg it at 49.999%. If you are over, you sit out. I don’t see a difference between using epo and an altitude tent. Both are artificial ways of jacking up red blood cell count. I do think that living at altitude is different. You don’t get the benefit of jacked up Red Blood Cell counts, with the intensity of training at sea level. It takes 3 weeks at altitude before you can get back to sea level training intensity so there is a penalty of going to train at altitude. Not so for epo or altitude tent.
EPO: chemically induce your body to produce more RBC.
Altitude tent: apply a stress to your body, and cause it to react to said stress and produce more RBC (possibly).
You don’t see the difference? Substitute “train hard” for “EPO” and “Altitude tent” in the above sentences and see which still make sense.
“Allowance” for the Haematorit is 50 (?). So everybody does anything to get as close to that threshold value as possible without looking suspicious. Too bad if they overshoot the dosage: Generally first tests are for the haematocrit only. However, if they are close to 50 or even over they may take a closer look (the test for artificial EPO are very expensive and I doubt they test everybody for artificial EPO).
Just 2 cents…
So, if the hematocrit is normal, where is the advantage? I suspect they are testing for epo in races like the TDF. Perhaps not in the local criterium but in the big ones, yes. I mean, they got Tyler for autologous transfusion. You can bet the French have tested Lance with every test available and some not.
The hematocrit for someone taking EPO is not “normal” for that person, it is elevated. Just because it’s is similar to that of others doesn’t make it “normal”.
And you wonder why TH is fighting his case? I personally don’t think WADA has their act together based on what I’ve read on the net and in the cycling publications.
I almost believe WADA and the UCI use selective testing to catch certain people.
no one has…the TdF org neither…do you realize that because of the TH case and the Ferrari case which were still active cases early january, so in 2005, according to the rules of the TdF, both Phonak and Disco should not be allowed to start…this was widely discussed in french newspapers…with all of them saying it would be a shame to apply the rule in this case…
so much for the french trying to prevent Lance from winning…they would have had to just apply the rule in this case 
AFAIK, the UCI does not test for EPO specifically; they only test for a hemocrit threshold of 50%. And I do not think the UCI has signed up with WADA yet. The UCI is the last major international sport not to do that.
Then why would TH have tested positive for blood doping using a WADA test at the Vuelta last year? Wasn’t the Vuelta a UCI event?
Not playing Devil’s advocate, just curious.
Blood doping is completely different than EPO drug use.
Again, I’m not an expert on these things, but from what I’ve read, he got caught because he had 2 different types of blood (not exactly sure what that entails). And I think his defense was that he had an un-born twin, hence the 2 types of blood. (If I’m way off on this let me know, but I think that’s what I read some where, some place.)
Correction on the UCI/WADA thing: UCI has signed up with WADA.
Understood that the tests are different. My question/post goes back to Frank’s original question about how come Frigo wasn’t busted for EPO (using the Assumption that since his wife had it and said he was using it) during testing.
I was just stating my opinion that as more comes out about the testing procedures and protocols (whether it be EPO, Blood Doping, HGH), I have less faith that everything is on the up and up. I believe WADA is out to prove a point and don’t care about the consequences and are going about applying their testing in a ‘rogue’ manner.
As for the whole vanishing twin thing. The media has played this up much more than they should have. TH has to prove his innocence and one possiblity is the vanishing twin theory. The vanishing twin is documented scientifically and lawyers offered it up as a possible explanation for the test results. The only catch is that there isn’t a test to prove the Vanishing twin existed. Imagine being in TH’s shoes. He has to explain the test results and prove that he didn’t blood dope, yet WADA’s test says he did. It’s a no win situation for TH. All WADA has to do is say look at the test results (which in doing so, we broke our own procedures to find TH guilty and had vested interest in finding someone guilty to prove out test), but we don’t have to prove that our test is valid to the scientific community.
And if the USADA is so sure that TH is guitly, why did they ask for an extension in his appeal to CAS? If they had a locked tight case, they should have been chomping at the bit to present thier case to CAS. And with CAS overturning the recent ruling against Mark French (the Aussie Track rider), I bet USADA and WADA are more nervous than ever.
Probably similar to some of the X Country skiers at Salt Lake, who had their own testing apparatus so they could stay just under the limit. One was DQ’d because she delayed her official test until she was under the magic number.
they don’t actually charge you with ‘doping’ if your h.crit goes over 50; they ask you to sit out due to ‘medical risk.’ a nice loophole, since you can nail people who have done stuff you can’t test for, but on the other hand i know i’ve had my h.crit above 50 without doping, so what’s a guy with rich blood supposed to do?
-mike
Didn’t you mean " boyfriend"? or, by now, it could even be " ex-boyfriend".
apparently (I just read this), EPO in very small doses is only detectable for 24 hours.
apparently (I just read this), EPO in very small doses is only detectable for 24 hours.
It either wouldn’t be effective at very small doses or, if it were, use should also be detectable through an abnormal reticulocyte (immature rbc) ratio, which should persist beyond 24 hours.