T-Mobile's new test

Strange test. I know they use CO for measuring the efficiency of the lungs
gas transfer however not sure how doping would come into play there.

Quoted message said:

Velonews has an interesting blurb mentioning T-Mobile's plans to
introduce a new test for blood doping (to administer to their own
team). While reading it, I could not help but wonder if it was April
fools day. They propose having their riders inhale CARBON MONOXIDE and
then take blood measurements afterwards.

Are you sure that's what they said? Maybe they're going to use carbon
monoxide to kill those discovered doping.

Die Endlösung der Dopingfrage. You knew it was coming.

Sounds like they're just doing the testing after a motorpacing session.

-ilan

Quoted message said:

Velonews has an interesting blurb mentioning T-Mobile's plans to
introduce a new test for blood doping (to administer to their own
team). While reading it, I could not help but wonder if it was April
fools day. They propose having their riders inhale CARBON MONOXIDE and
then take blood measurements afterwards.

I'm (obviously) in favor of catching dopers, but seriously, no way
would I submit to such a test.

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

Quoted message said:

I'm (obviously) in favor of catching dopers, but seriously, no way
would I submit to such a test.

And yet strangely the stuff you've written here makes it seem as if you're
for disecting each and every rider in a race to make certain that they
didn't obtain an "unfair" advantage over someone else.

MMan said:

Quoted message said:

Velonews has an interesting blurb mentioning T-Mobile's plans to
introduce a new test for blood doping (to administer to their own
team). While reading it, I could not help but wonder if it was April
fools day. They propose having their riders inhale CARBON MONOXIDE and
then take blood measurements afterwards.

Are you sure that's what they said? Maybe they're going to use carbon
monoxide to kill those discovered doping.

Die Endlösung der Dopingfrage. You knew it was coming.

The final solution.

Ron

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Velonews has an interesting blurb mentioning T-Mobile's plans to
introduce a new test for blood doping (to administer to their own
team). While reading it, I could not help but wonder if it was April
fools day. They propose having their riders inhale CARBON MONOXIDE and
then take blood measurements afterwards.

ilan said:

Sounds like they're just doing the testing after a motorpacing session.

Or a ride in Paris.

Quoted message said:

Velonews has an interesting blurb mentioning T-Mobile's plans to
introduce a new test for blood doping (to administer to their own
team). While reading it, I could not help but wonder if it was April
fools day. They propose having their riders inhale CARBON MONOXIDE and
then take blood measurements afterwards.

I'm (obviously) in favor of catching dopers, but seriously, no way
would I submit to such a test.

The amount of carbon monoxide used is quite small, and thus there is no
real danger.

BTW, this is by no means a new test, as it has been used for decades to
measure total red cell volume (mass), and is still used today (e.g., by
the AIS). I therefore don't really understand is why this is being
bandied about as being something new, or for that matter, foolproof.
Obviously, the way to get around it would be to use EPO or blood dope
prior to any baseline measurements, such that red cell volume (and
hematocrit) was considered normal for you. This tactic would be
especially effective, or at least tempting, for "up-and-comers", for
whom securing a contract with T-Mobile might depend on the results
achieved via doping.

Andy Coggan

Tom Kunich said:

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

Quoted message said:

I'm (obviously) in favor of catching dopers, but seriously, no way
would I submit to such a test.

And yet strangely the stuff you've written here makes it seem as if you're
for disecting each and every rider in a race to make certain that they
didn't obtain an "unfair" advantage over someone else.

Hardly, Tom. I'm just far more willing (than you are) to believe that
positive doping tests are catching actual dopers. I suspect that your
issue has more to do with legalizing dope. Much the same way that "hemp
activists" go on and on about the great rope-making, burlap sack making
and hacky-sack making properties of cannibis (not to mention medical
marijuana crowd)...when we all know their real goal is to be able to
smoke pot recreationally (and legally). You just want to see fast TDF
speeds, and you could care less about how they are achieved.

I'd rather you spend your time arguing the issues you really wish to
argue, instead of "ladder climbing" your way to them through other
build-up issues such as carbon isotope tests.

You question the credibility of all of these tests, all of these
scientists and all of these labs. What the hell are YOUR credentials?

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

Quoted message said:

Tom Kunich said:

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

Quoted message said:

I'm (obviously) in favor of catching dopers, but seriously, no way
would I submit to such a test.

And yet strangely the stuff you've written here makes it seem as if
you're
for disecting each and every rider in a race to make certain that they
didn't obtain an "unfair" advantage over someone else.

Hardly, Tom. I'm just far more willing (than you are) to believe that
positive doping tests are catching actual dopers.

So willing that you're more than willing to believe that a shot of
testosterone would give Landis the power to put 8 minutes on the peloton.

Quoted message said:

I suspect that your issue has more to do with legalizing dope.

Here's a hint - about half of my childhood friends died from overdoses. My
younger brother died from the effects of illegal drugs. My cousin was run
over and killed by a woman on drugs driving 60 mph in the bicycle lane. My
father died at 68 years old from a smoking related lung condition.

Quoted message said:

Much the same way that "hemp
activists" go on and on about the great rope-making, burlap sack making
and hacky-sack making properties of cannibis (not to mention medical
marijuana crowd)...when we all know their real goal is to be able to
smoke pot recreationally (and legally). You just want to see fast TDF
speeds, and you could care less about how they are achieved.

Or much as you go on about my desire to legalize drugs? Or maybe, just
MAYBE, I happen to BELIEVE in the Constitution of the United States. I
believe that you have to prove someone guilty beyond a reasonable doubt
before you condemn them. Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be the case with
you and your butt buddies here.

Let's face it - this is NOT about doping in cycling. This is about control
and that's what you want.

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Velonews has an interesting blurb mentioning T-Mobile's plans to
introduce a new test for blood doping (to administer to their own
team). While reading it, I could not help but wonder if it was April
fools day. They propose having their riders inhale CARBON MONOXIDE and
then take blood measurements afterwards.

I'm (obviously) in favor of catching dopers, but seriously, no way
would I submit to such a test.

The amount of carbon monoxide used is quite small, and thus there is no
real danger.

Err, no real danger of what? After all, if my physiology is correct, every
red cell that absorbs a carbon monoxide molecule dies.

Tom Kunich said:

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

Quoted message said:

Tom Kunich wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Hardly, Tom. I'm just far more willing (than you are) to believe that
positive doping tests are catching actual dopers.

So willing that you're more than willing to believe that a shot of
testosterone would give Landis the power to put 8 minutes on the peloton.

I've never commented on his reasons for taking (or not taking) the
dope. The question is not motive, but rather what's been found in his
system. The rulebook does not address motive. It breaks it down quite
simply. Each rider has a responsibility not to have these substances
in their bodies. Period.

And plenty of qualified experts have addressed the short term effect of
testosterone. It aids in recovery, and when you're as beaten down as
he was, every last bit helps. I never said that the dope was the
reason for his stage 17 performance. Neither did WADA, the UCI or "ze
French". We can't afford to look at "why would they do that?". In
life, people do stupid things.

Also, look in the WADA banned substances list (11 pages long). They
address catheterisation as being prohibited. Why? Because they know
that the riders will head right into the team bus, shove a foley up
their [censored] and replace current urine with stored urine for the sake of
testing. They would not address this if it were not a past problem.
After stage 17, we know that Floyd had no time to clean-up after
crossing the line, and he went to dope control soon afterwards.

Sorry to hear about your friends and family. I have similar experience
as well.

Tom Kunich said:

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Velonews has an interesting blurb mentioning T-Mobile's plans to
introduce a new test for blood doping (to administer to their own
team). While reading it, I could not help but wonder if it was April
fools day. They propose having their riders inhale CARBON MONOXIDE and
then take blood measurements afterwards.

I'm (obviously) in favor of catching dopers, but seriously, no way
would I submit to such a test.

The amount of carbon monoxide used is quite small, and thus there is no
real danger.

Err, no real danger of what? After all, if my physiology is correct, every
red cell that absorbs a carbon monoxide molecule dies.

Your physiology is incorrect.

Andy Coggan

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Velonews has an interesting blurb mentioning T-Mobile's plans to
introduce a new test for blood doping (to administer to their own
team). While reading it, I could not help but wonder if it was April
fools day. They propose having their riders inhale CARBON MONOXIDE and
then take blood measurements afterwards.

I'm (obviously) in favor of catching dopers, but seriously, no way
would I submit to such a test.

The amount of carbon monoxide used is quite small, and thus there is no
real danger.

BTW, this is by no means a new test, as it has been used for decades to
measure total red cell volume (mass), and is still used today (e.g., by
the AIS). I therefore don't really understand is why this is being
bandied about as being something new, or for that matter, foolproof.
Obviously, the way to get around it would be to use EPO or blood dope
prior to any baseline measurements, such that red cell volume (and
hematocrit) was considered normal for you. This tactic would be
especially effective, or at least tempting, for "up-and-comers", for
whom securing a contract with T-Mobile might depend on the results
achieved via doping.

Andy Coggan

On principal, shouldn't one avoid the inhalation of toxic substances?
"No real danger" sounds like "acceptable risks"

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Velonews has an interesting blurb mentioning T-Mobile's plans to
introduce a new test for blood doping (to administer to their own
team). While reading it, I could not help but wonder if it was April
fools day. They propose having their riders inhale CARBON MONOXIDE and
then take blood measurements afterwards.

I'm (obviously) in favor of catching dopers, but seriously, no way
would I submit to such a test.

The amount of carbon monoxide used is quite small, and thus there is no
real danger.

BTW, this is by no means a new test, as it has been used for decades to
measure total red cell volume (mass), and is still used today (e.g., by
the AIS). I therefore don't really understand is why this is being
bandied about as being something new, or for that matter, foolproof.
Obviously, the way to get around it would be to use EPO or blood dope
prior to any baseline measurements, such that red cell volume (and
hematocrit) was considered normal for you. This tactic would be
especially effective, or at least tempting, for "up-and-comers", for
whom securing a contract with T-Mobile might depend on the results
achieved via doping.

Andy Coggan

On principal, shouldn't one avoid the inhalation of toxic substances?
"No real danger" sounds like "acceptable risks"

Well, a very large number of institutional review boards around the
world *have* deemed the risks acceptable, at least relative to the
value of the information gained for clinical or research purposes. In
that regard, use of CO to determine total red cell volume (mass) is no
different from other techniques that have been used and continued to be
used, e.g., labeling of red cells with radioactive chromium. Now would,
or should, the risks be considered acceptable when using the test for
anti-doping purposes? That's for others to decide, but personally, I
wouldn't hesitate to have my red cell volume measured that way (just
like I didn't hesistate to have it measured using radioactive
chromium).

Andy Coggan

I agree, I don't think Armin Tamzarian would approve.

-ilan

Quoted message said:

On principal, shouldn't one avoid the inhalation of toxic substances?
"No real danger" sounds like "acceptable risks"

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

Quoted message said:

Tom Kunich said:

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

Quoted message said:

Tom Kunich wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Hardly, Tom. I'm just far more willing (than you are) to believe that
positive doping tests are catching actual dopers.

So willing that you're more than willing to believe that a shot of
testosterone would give Landis the power to put 8 minutes on the peloton.

I've never commented on his reasons for taking (or not taking) the
dope. The question is not motive, but rather what's been found in his
system. The rulebook does not address motive. It breaks it down quite
simply. Each rider has a responsibility not to have these substances
in their bodies. Period.

And yet strangely enough, why would he take drugs that wouldn't help? Why
would they be tested in a lab with ties to L'Equipe? Why would the lab be so
irresponsible to "leak" information on - gee only American riders - and
still be used by L'Equipe and the Tour organizers who are - SURPRISE -
connected to l'Equipe.

Testosterone is also a material that doesn't change inside of the human
body. The stuff in the urine looks almost identical to the stuff on the
patch. So close that unless you are entirely competent you can't tell the
difference.

And my experience is that MOST labs aren't particularly competent with GCMS
or HPLC.

Quoted message said:

And plenty of qualified experts have addressed the short term effect of
testosterone.

By "qualified experts" I assume you mean people who have never published a
scientific paper nor even ran experiments that could be considered worthy of
a paper?

Quoted message said:

It aids in recovery

And yet the published papers on testosterone effects say precisely the
opposite - that testosterone has essentially NO short term physiological
effects. That is in fact is useful for converting body fat to lean body mass
and that takes weeks and not hours.

Quoted message said:

Also, look in the WADA banned substances list (11 pages long). They
address catheterisation as being prohibited. Why? Because they know
that the riders will head right into the team bus, shove a foley up
their [censored] and replace current urine with stored urine for the sake of
testing.

I suggest you try catheterizing yourself sometime and see if you can do
that. Until them just pretend you knew what you were talking about like some
of the rest of the idiots here.

Quoted message said:

Sorry to hear about your friends and family. I have similar experience
as well.

Yet that doesn't seem to stop your suggestions that people want to legalize
performance enhancing drugs virtually ALL of which have been shown to have
highly dangerous side effects.

"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Tom Kunich said:

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

Quoted message said:

> Hardly, Tom. I'm just far more willing (than you are) to believe that
> positive doping tests are catching actual dopers.

So willing that you're more than willing to believe that a shot of
testosterone would give Landis the power to put 8 minutes on the
peloton.

I've never commented on his reasons for taking (or not taking) the
dope. The question is not motive, but rather what's been found in his
system. The rulebook does not address motive. It breaks it down quite
simply. Each rider has a responsibility not to have these substances
in their bodies. Period.

And yet strangely enough, why would he take drugs that wouldn't help? Why
would they be tested in a lab with ties to L'Equipe? Why would the lab be
so irresponsible to "leak" information on - gee only American riders - and
still be used by L'Equipe and the Tour organizers who are - SURPRISE -
connected to l'Equipe.

You are recycling the same old wrong arguments. It is Phonak who put the
name to the anonymous sample. And in Lance's case it was Lance himself who
had given his labnr from his record to a journalist who then connected the
dots.
Can you provide info which scientist has ever announced a name? And also,
where can I buy those Phonak cell phones you mentioned?

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

Quoted message said:

Tom Kunich said:

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

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:
> Velonews has an interesting blurb mentioning T-Mobile's plans to
> introduce a new test for blood doping (to administer to their own
> team). While reading it, I could not help but wonder if it was April
> fools day. They propose having their riders inhale CARBON MONOXIDE
> and
> then take blood measurements afterwards.
>
> I'm (obviously) in favor of catching dopers, but seriously, no way
> would I submit to such a test.

The amount of carbon monoxide used is quite small, and thus there is no
real danger.

Err, no real danger of what? After all, if my physiology is correct,
every
red cell that absorbs a carbon monoxide molecule dies.

Your physiology is incorrect.

Then perhaps you'd like to explain to me what happens when a red corpuscle
absorbs a carbon monoxide molecule?

As I recall it binds to hemoglobin about 100 times stronger than carbon
dioxide. This locks up the metabolism of the red blood cell which can no
longer transport (or USE) oxygen which causes the death of the cell. The
death of the cell can release the carbom monoxide molecule which then binds
with another cell. That's why minute amounts of carbon monoxide cause death
in rather short order.

One tenth of a percent of carbon monoxide in the air can kill a full grown
man in less than two hours.

The time for recovery from carbon monoxide poisoning is - gee - the
REPLACEMENT time of the red blood cells.

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Tom Kunich' cyclintom@yahoo. com said:

As I recall it binds to hemoglobin about 100 times stronger than carbon
dioxide.

Carbon dioxide does not bind to hemoglobin.

--
Michael Press