Rumsas fails B test

"Mike Iglesias" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Results of the B sample were the same as the first test, indicating EPO use.

All's well that ends well - for the UCI. It's clear that Rumsas case was extremely embarassing for
the Verbuggen, etc. After all, it's their duty to propagate the illusion that the use of doping
among bicycle racers is not a rule, but an exception. Of course they know quite well the facts are a
little bit different. There are three types of performance enhancing products. The first category
consists of products which are allowed so everybody takes them.The second kind of products is not
allowed but cannot be detected. According to the most conservative estimations about 80 to 90 % of
the riders are using them. In the third place there are products which are forbidden an can be
detected. Quite a lot of riders are taking them allthe same, but usually only if they think they
have a very good chance to get away with it, for instance at training, etc. The possibilities that
this situation can be changed on short term are almost nil. Of course, the UCI is quite aware of it,
but there's nothing they can do about it. They don't have the money, the power or the authority. All
the reproaches that the UCI "is doing nothing against drugs", etc. are in my opinion rather
ridiculous. The only thing the UCI can do is making the best of an impossible situation, that is
protecting the reputation of the sport at all costs. That means: in the first place they have to
reduce the minimize the number of riders getting caught as much as possible. In that respect, they
are doing an excellent job. For instance, several riders have noticed that the UCI-tests of their
hematocrit are almost always two points lower than their own. The UCI is also great in covering up.
The French ex-pro Jean-Cristophe Gurrit has revealed that he tested positive after Paris-Bruxelles
1994. It would have been a disaster for his team which was negociating a new contract with its
sponsor. No trouble, he was completely hushed up. It didn't even cost that much money: somewhere
between forty and sixty thousand francs. Another UCI task is to prevent that too many riders are
breaking the law of silence and decide to be a little too candid concerning the use of drugs in the
peloton. Again the UCI is doing fine. Only two pro's have made some revelations: Filippo Simeoni and
the ex-world champion mountainbike Jérôme Chiotti. Both of them were immediately suspended, enough
reason to discourage others. Third task for the UCI: creating the illusion that an overwhelming
majority of the riders is "clean" and that the guilty are punished. It needs a great amount of
hypocrisy but the UCI is pretty good in it, especially HeinVerbruggen who is really the right man on
the right place. The effects are his policies are very encouraging, especially because many riders
are more than a match to him(Armstrong: "But people are smart. They say has Lance Armstrong ever
tested positive? No.Has Lance Armstrong been tested? A lot!" - as iof he doesn''t know that many
products cannot be detected). For instance, there are many people who believe that riders like
Pantani are exceptions an that his victories are worthless, as if the competition didn't take the
same drugs as he. The Festina case and the revelations of [censored] Voet and others risked to destroy
the illusion, but again Hein Verbruggen rose to the occasion: "Festina was an isolated case". In
short, everything was going pretty well, until Edita Rumsas was caught by the French customs.
Because the theory that the long list of products confiscated were for her mother didn't have many
supporters, more and more people began to ask themself: how is it possible that Rumsas has tested
several times but never positive? To keep the illusions the UCI is cherishing alive, he had to be
caught and in the last few month there is no rider who has been investigated so thouroughly and so
many times as Rumsas. Without the desired results. But suddenly, hosannah, he is caught at the Giro
as the only rider who took EPO. What a miracle. Rumsas denied, but who will believe him? And yet his
arguments are pretty strong: "Everyone knows that I am under special observation. How then could I
take EPO after what happened at last year's Tour de France?" He also said that if he failed the
second test he would suspect his doctors. But why his doctors? Does he really think that the UCI is
not capable of manipulating test results? In short, was Rumsas framed? I woulnd't be surprised at
all. The whole scenario is too good to me.

Benjo Maso

Quoted message said:

From: "benjo maso"

Quoted message said:

There are three types of performance enhancing products. The first category consists of products
which are allowed so everybody takes them.The second kind of products is not allowed but cannot
be detected. According to the most conservative estimations about 80 to 90 % of the riders are
using them.

What are these non-detectable, forbidden "products", by name? How are they administered, and what
particular effects are sought by their users?

Who is making the estimations on percentage of users of above products? --Tom Paterson

no [censored]..... someone slipped epo into that syringe he thought had just vit b12. poor buy. he should
sue the syringe company.....

"Mike Iglesias" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Results of the B sample were the same as the first test, indicating EPO use.

cyclingnews.comnewsOpen ↗

--
Mike Iglesias Email:

[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

University of California, Irvine phone: 949-824-6926 Network & Academic Computing Services FAX:
949-824-2069

In article said:

no [censored]..... someone slipped epo into that syringe he thought had just vit b12. poor buy. he
should sue the syringe company.....

He should have stuck with a more reliable supplier...his wife.

-WG

Tom Paterson said:

What are these non-detectable, forbidden "products", by name? How are they administered, and what
particular effects are sought by their users?

Perhaps if their identities were widely known, they could be tested for. The fact that nobody on
this list can (or is willing to) identify these drugs is not proof that they do not exist.

"Tom Paterson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

From: "Kyle Legate"

Quoted message said:

Perhaps if their identities were widely known, they could be tested for.

Well yeah. So that would "help" the situation, depending on assumption of

harm

Quoted message said:

from "product" use.

Quoted message said:

The fact that nobody on this list can (or is willing to) identify these

drugs

Quoted message said:

is

Quoted message said:

not proof that they do not exist.

Not exactly proof that they do exist, either. Smells like Walsh. --Tom Paterson

The three best known are growth-hormones (increase of muscular mass), "natural" cortisones (effects
same as synthetic cortisones, probaly only usd by the suckers who can't get a prescription for
asthma, hay fever or whatever) and dynEPO (more or less the same effects as EPO). Until a few weeks
hemapure (I know only the French name; it also has more or less the same effects as EPO) was also on
the list, but Verbruggen has annnounced that from now on it can be detected (by the way quite nice
from Hein, such a warning).

Benjo Maso

"Tom Paterson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

From: "benjo maso"

Quoted message said:

There are three types of performance enhancing products. The first
category consists of products which are allowed so everybody takes

them.The

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

second kind of products is not allowed but cannot be detected. According

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the most conservative estimations about 80 to 90 % of the riders are

using

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

them.

Who is making the estimations on percentage of users of above products?

I know it is on the lowish side - most estimations are between 90 and 95 %. Most of those
estimations have been made by ex-pro's, doctors, journalists and soigneurs, from the 1950's on.
There have always been people who didn't believe it - until the Festina case and the revelations
of [censored] Voet and Erwann Menthéour. These revelations have since them conformed by a lot of
ex-pro's (the Dutchmen Rooks, Winnen and Eddy Bouwman for instance). Of course, it would be
theoretically possible that the mentality of the riders has changed dramatically since then, but I
think the Giro of 2001 (when after a police raid 51 men were charged with the possession of
illicit products. And those were only the products they took to the Giro and hadn't hidden well
enough.Allowing for the fact that by far not all riders were investigated, it's quite possible
that my estimation is indeed too low.

Benjo Maso

In article said:

Quite a bit of time elapsed between the moment when the first rumors about EPO doping began
surfacing and that when a reliable test was developed. I have no doubt that riders and teams keep
experimenting with new stuff (whether afficient or not; actogevin anyone?), but the notion that
everybody is on some hot new drug --that we just haven't heard about yet--seems really
far-fetched to me.

jyh.

I know it's really lame to "reply" to oneself, but I just did a little google search on actogevin,
and I came up with this fairly recent news item:

fr.sports.yahoo.com36zya.htmlOpen ↗ Athlétisme: une substance dopante dans une
voiture de Szabo

Babelfish translation: translate.google.comtranslateOpen ↗
etik.de/Dokumente/pressemitteilung_view.asp%3FID%3D3104&prev=/search%3Fq%
3DSzabo%2Bactogevin%250D%250A%250D%250A%2509%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF -8%26as_qdr%3Dall

babelfish translation of a German article (same sources):
translate.google.comtranslateOpen ↗
etik.de/Dokumente/pressemitteilung_view.asp%3FID%3D3104&prev=/search%3Fq%
3DSzabo%2Bactogevin%250D%250A%250D%250A%2509%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF -8%26as_qdr%3Dall

jyh.

--
=====================================================================
jean-yves herve' /\ Department of Computer Science \/ e-mail --> [email hidden] and Statistics /\
University of Rhode Island \/ Tel. --> (401) 874-4400 Kingston, RI 02881-0816 /\ Fax. --> (401)
874-4617 USA \/
=====================================================================

"Tom Paterson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

From: "benjo maso"

Quoted message said:

The three best known

(snip for brev.)

Thank you. I posted elsewhere before I saw this, concerning the

"political"

Quoted message said:

aspects of doping. The idea is to get out of that quagmire and onto some

more

Quoted message said:

solid ground.

What are the masking agents/methods?

DynEPO is much alike to EPO, but it's completely identical to "natural" EPO in human blood, so it
doesn't have to be masked and it's almost impossible to detect. One never knows and it might be that
some day a reliable test will be developed all the same, but even in that case it will probably take
a lot of time.

Benjo Maso

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Until a few weeks hemapure

Do you know something the rest of us don't? Hemopure hasn't gotten FDA approval yet. It is not a
sure bet that it will.
-----------------
Alex __O _-\<,_ (_)/ (_)

I thought that the problem of raising the hematocrit (naturally) had already been solved with the
generalized usage of altitude tents (in different variants). It has been well publisized that Lance
and others use such systems and have complex protocols for their usage. Is not that the reason
Armstrong is paying the big bucks to Michelle Ferrari? ( to prepare his "altitude" trainning?). All
this stuff is currently legit. Is the tent in practice significantly less effective than EPO?

As far as I am concerned the only way that a cyclist could dispel suspicions is by keeping his
medical records on some type of public repository (that could be consulted by some jury or sth like
that). But of course, that is asking them too much, right?

"Alex Rodriguez" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Until a few weeks hemapure

Do you know something the rest of us don't? Hemopure hasn't gotten FDA approval yet. It is not a
sure bet that it will.

The only I know about it is that Hein Verbuggen announced two or three month ago that it could be
detected and that the new testing methods, used for the first time in Paris-Nice (but only in an
experimental way), would be officially used in the Tour. Perhaps his announcement was a little bit
premature?

Benjo Maso

"Alex Beascoechea" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I thought that the problem of raising the hematocrit (naturally) had

already

Quoted message said:

been solved with the generalized usage of altitude tents (in different variants). It has been well
publisized that Lance and others use such systems and have complex protocols for their usage. Is
not that the reason Armstrong is paying the big bucks to Michelle Ferrari? ( to prepare his
"altitude" trainning?). All this stuff is currently legit. Is the tent in practice significantly
less effective than EPO?

AFAIK the effects of low oxygens tents are much smaller than teh use of EPO.

Quoted message said:

As far as I am concerned the only way that a cyclist could dispel

suspicions

Quoted message said:

is by keeping his medical records on some type of public repository (that could be consulted by
some jury or sth like that). But of course, that is asking them too much, right?

It would be a uselful way to get some insight in the possible use of EPO or DynEPO. But they are
certainly not the only performance enhancing products.And most of them don't have any effect on the
hematocrit level.

Benjo Maso

Benjo, I'd be pretty willing to bet that the substances you note do not really enhance cycling
performance to a measureable amount.

EPO and HemaPure are of limited value because the natural levels of hematocrit in a healthy young
individual is some 48% or so and the limit is 50% in testing.

Corticoids are good only for helping to heal specific injuries and then only when injected locally.
This BS about inhalers improving performance is pure bunk. They bring an asthmatic back to near
normal breathing capability and otherwise they jump the heart rate which, quite to the contrary, can
limit performance.

hGH does nothing that I can see. While it does help to put on muscle mass when used in large doses,
muscle mass by itself doesn't improve performance and on the upper body actively decreases climbing
performance.

There are drugs that can temporarily improve athletic performance but all of those can be detected
if they are being looked for.

With constant drug testing the effect of drugs on the sport is losing it's grip. And I think that we
both know that it was the very addictive and easily tested for pot belge which was the real problem.
It was developing an ethic of drug to race and race to drug. Smashing that vicious circle was
necessary.

"benjo maso" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Tom Paterson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

From: "Kyle Legate"

Quoted message said:

Perhaps if their identities were widely known, they could be

tested for.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Well yeah. So that would "help" the situation, depending on

assumption of

Quoted message said:

harm

Quoted message said:

from "product" use.

Quoted message said:

The fact that nobody on this list can (or is willing to)

identify these

Quoted message said:

drugs

Quoted message said:

is

Quoted message said:

not proof that they do not exist.

Not exactly proof that they do exist, either. Smells like Walsh. --Tom Paterson

The three best known are growth-hormones (increase of muscular

mass),

Quoted message said:

"natural" cortisones (effects same as synthetic cortisones, probaly

only usd

Quoted message said:

by the suckers who can't get a prescription for asthma, hay fever or whatever) and dynEPO (more or
less the same effects as EPO). Until a

few

Quoted message said:

weeks hemapure (I know only the French name; it also has more or

less the

Quoted message said:

same effects as EPO) was also on the list, but Verbruggen has

annnounced

Quoted message said:

that from now on it can be detected (by the way quite nice from

Hein, such a

Quoted message said:

warning).

Benjo Maso

EPO is used in massive doses and can be detected fairly easily. In such quantities it forces red
blood cel production so rapidly that they cannot fully mature before being released into the blood
stream. These immature red blood cells have a limited life span comared to normal and they are also
distorted in shape and size and easily detected in the blood.

While they cannot presently definitely declare that it is caused by EPO injections it won't take
much more research to pin it down.

"benjo maso" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Tom Paterson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

From: "benjo maso"

Quoted message said:

The three best known

(snip for brev.)

Thank you. I posted elsewhere before I saw this, concerning the

"political"

Quoted message said:

aspects of doping. The idea is to get out of that quagmire and

onto some

Quoted message said:

more

Quoted message said:

solid ground.

What are the masking agents/methods?

DynEPO is much alike to EPO, but it's completely identical to

"natural" EPO

Quoted message said:

in human blood, so it doesn't have to be masked and it's almost

impossible

Quoted message said:

to detect. One never knows and it might be that some day a reliable

test

Quoted message said:

will be developed all the same, but even in that case it will

probably take

Quoted message said:

a lot of time.

Benjo Maso

"Tom Kunich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Benjo, I'd be pretty willing to bet that the substances you note do not really enhance cycling
performance to a measureable amount.

EPO and HemaPure are of limited value because the natural levels of hematocrit in a healthy young
individual is some 48% or so and the limit is 50% in testing.

EPO has revolutionized bicycle racing, more than any other product. A few days ago I happened to
have dinner with an ex-pro, who at the end of the 1980's was one of the best riders around (in the
Tour as well in the Giro in the top ten). He told me that initially hee took doping "like
everybody", but after he was involved in a doping scandal he promised his wife he wouldn't take
anymore (she was afraid her children would be deformed). At the beginning he thought he could
compensate by training harder, - and he broke all his personal records - but then EPO was
introduced. The result was he couldn't compete anymore. As he said the first year he was suddenly
not capable anymore to be among the first in the mountains. The second year he already lost fifteen
minutes to riders who finished far behind him a year before. The third year he couldn't keep up
anymore with riders he had never seen in the mountains before. And so he ended his career, still in
his twenties. The stories of other riders who for one reason or another didn't want to take EPO,
like Edwig van Hooydonk (two times winner of the Ronde van Vlaanderen), Eddy Bouwmans (best young
rider in the Tour of 1992) and Gilles Delion (winner of the Tour of Lombardy in 1990) are more or
less the same.

Quoted message said:

Corticoids are good only for helping to heal specific injuries and then only when injected
locally. This BS about inhalers improving performance is pure bunk. They bring an asthmatic back
to near normal breathing capability and otherwise they jump the heart rate which, quite to the
contrary, can limit performance.

By taking corticoids - the most popular drug in the 1970's - one doesn't only feel less pain, but
also less fatigue. Very useful.

Quoted message said:

hGH does nothing that I can see. While it does help to put on muscle mass when used in large
doses, muscle mass by itself doesn't improve performance and on the upper body actively decreases
climbing performance.

According to a lot of specialists (it's true they don't al agree) hGH helps a lot. Anyway, riders
believe it does and were already taking it in the 1980's.

Quoted message said:

There are drugs that can temporarily improve athletic performance but all of those can be detected
if they are being looked for.

With constant drug testing the effect of drugs on the sport is losing it's grip.

That should be splendid, but I'm afraid it's not true at all.There is always a time gap between the
introduction of new products and the development of reliable testing methods. Because selling doping
to sportsmen is becoming more and more interesting for criminal organisations, it happens more and
more that riders are taking products which are not yet offciially on the market. Significantly, two
of the performance enhancing products found by the Nas during the Giro of 2001 were not yet known to
the doctors of the doping laboratories.

And I think that we both know that it was the very

Quoted message said:

addictive and easily tested for pot belge which was the real problem. It was developing an ethic
of drug to race and race to drug. Smashing that vicious circle was necessary.

Le pot belge was - and is - very useful for training. Taking it, the many hours of tedious riding
seemd suddenly much more amusing. But it's never been really important.

Benjo Maso

"Tom Kunich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

EPO and HemaPure are of limited value because the natural levels of hematocrit in a healthy young
individual is some 48% or so and the limit is 50% in testing.

Where do you get 48% ? The typical number is lower, and even lower in athletes during say a grand
tour (like 38%).

Even a increase from 48 to 50% is almost a 5% increase, you don't think an increase in oxygen
carrying capacity of about that size is significant among pros ?

-Amit

"benjo maso" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Tom Kunich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Benjo, I'd be pretty willing to bet that the substances you note

do

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

not really enhance cycling performance to a measureable amount.

EPO and HemaPure are of limited value because the natural levels

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

hematocrit in a healthy young individual is some 48% or so and the limit is 50% in testing.

EPO has revolutionized bicycle racing, more than any other product.

A few

Quoted message said:

days ago I happened to have dinner with an ex-pro, who at the end of

the

Quoted message said:

1980's was one of the best riders around (in the Tour as well in the

Giro in

Quoted message said:

the top ten). He told me that initially hee took doping "like

everybody",

Quoted message said:

but after he was involved in a doping scandal he promised his wife

he

Quoted message said:

wouldn't take anymore (she was afraid her children would be

deformed). At

Quoted message said:

the beginning he thought he could compensate by training harder, -

and he

Quoted message said:

broke all his personal records - but then EPO was introduced. The

result was

Quoted message said:

he couldn't compete anymore. As he said the first year he was

suddenly not

Quoted message said:

capable anymore to be among the first in the mountains. The second

year he

Quoted message said:

already lost fifteen minutes to riders who finished far behind him a

year

Quoted message said:

before. The third year he couldn't keep up anymore with riders he

had never

Quoted message said:

seen in the mountains before. And so he ended his career, still in

his

Quoted message said:

twenties. The stories of other riders who for one reason or another

didn't

Quoted message said:

want to take EPO, like Edwig van Hooydonk (two times winner of the

Ronde van

Quoted message said:

Vlaanderen), Eddy Bouwmans (best young rider in the Tour of 1992)

and Gilles

Quoted message said:

Delion (winner of the Tour of Lombardy in 1990) are more or less the

same.

This is a good example that in fact most of the feared "performance enhancing" drugs didn't really
work. EPO did but it is controlled now by hematocrit limitations and actual EPO tests. I don't
believe it is possible to make a recombinant hormone like EPO that is exactly like the human
equivilent. They must have some additions due to processing.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Corticoids are good only for helping to heal specific injuries and then only when injected
locally. This BS about inhalers improving performance is pure bunk. They bring an asthmatic back
to near

normal

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

breathing capability and otherwise they jump the heart rate which, quite to the contrary, can
limit performance.

By taking corticoids - the most popular drug in the 1970's - one

doesn't

Quoted message said:

only feel less pain, but also less fatigue. Very useful.

True enough but corticoids used for specific injury are legal in many cases and used generally are
quite easily detected.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

hGH does nothing that I can see. While it does help to put on

muscle

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

mass when used in large doses, muscle mass by itself doesn't

improve

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

performance and on the upper body actively decreases climbing performance.

According to a lot of specialists (it's true they don't al agree)

hGH helps

Quoted message said:

a lot. Anyway, riders believe it does and were already taking it in

the

Quoted message said:

1980's.

I've talked to body builders and they use a lot of the real thing injected and they think that the
only thing it does it change the muscle/fat ratios by building more muscle. But it isn't specific so
they have to train all the harder. I have been led to believe that most cyclists try to take drugs
as a replacement for training. In that case it simply doesn't do anything.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

With constant drug testing the effect of drugs on the sport is

losing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it's grip.

That should be splendid, but I'm afraid it's not true at all.There

is always

Quoted message said:

a time gap between the introduction of new products and the

development of

Quoted message said:

reliable testing methods. Because selling doping to sportsmen is

becoming

Quoted message said:

more and more interesting for criminal organisations, it happens

more and

Quoted message said:

more that riders are taking products which are not yet offciially on

the

Quoted message said:

market. Significantly, two of the performance enhancing products

found by

Quoted message said:

the Nas during the Giro of 2001 were not yet known to the doctors of

the

Quoted message said:

doping laboratories.

That only means that the cheaters are being limited severely now. That cannot be a goiod sign for
the druggies.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And I think that we both know that it was the very addictive and easily tested for pot belge
which was the real

problem.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It was developing an ethic of drug to race and race to drug.

Smashing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

that vicious circle was necessary.

Le pot belge was - and is - very useful for training. Taking it, the

many

Quoted message said:

hours of tedious riding seemd suddenly much more amusing. But it's

never

Quoted message said:

been really important.

It is important. Pot Belge, from the contents described, must be horribly addictive. That is the
problem. Once you start using that stuff you can't get off of using SOMETHING. When someone says
something like, training becomes "amusing" beware. That is what heroin addicts used to tell me -
that they could stop any time they wanted but why should they? It was amusing.

"Amit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Tom Kunich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

EPO and HemaPure are of limited value because the natural levels

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

hematocrit in a healthy young individual is some 48% or so and the limit is 50% in testing.

Where do you get 48% ? The typical number is lower, and even lower

in

Quoted message said:

athletes during say a grand tour (like 38%).

48% is a number I've been gathering from those who give blood regularly like myself. Athletes
under hard training have their hematocrit drop and indeed it does reach as low as the mid 30's.
However, they should be resting and getting ready for the Tour and be back up to normal if they
are training properly.

Quoted message said:

Even a increase from 48 to 50% is almost a 5% increase, you don't think an increase in oxygen
carrying capacity of about that size is significant among pros ?

There doesn't seem to be a one-to-one correlation with increases in athletic performance until the
values start climbing well above 50%. I note that there were reports of race winners testing at 36%.

I should note that Hemapure is a plastic additive that is claimed to carry oxygen without effecting
the blood composition. In a pigs ear it doesn't. You have to use large quantities of it and it
generates a peak on the LC that looks like Mt. Everest.