Random Drug Testing Program

I don't disagree with any of your suggestions. The problem as I see it is that the riders have moved away from some performance drugs and are now using blood doping techniques where blood transfusions are increasingly used to take haematocrit levels to just below 50%. In this case, performance levels are enhanced but the rider doesn't fail the dope test.

I've heard that the UCI is working on a test for this but it faces a difficult task.

I think that every cycling fan out there wants to rid this sport of drugs. However, I am becoming increasingly disenchanted with the sport and wonder just how many riders really are clean?

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by philoakley
I don't disagree with any of your suggestions. The problem as I see it is that the riders have moved away from some performance drugs and are now using blood doping techniques where blood transfusions are increasingly used to take haematocrit levels to just below 50%. In this case, performance levels are enhanced but the rider doesn't fail the dope test.

I've heard that the UCI is working on a test for this but it faces a difficult task.

I think that every cycling fan out there wants to rid this sport of drugs. However, I am becoming increasingly disenchanted with the sport and wonder just how many riders really are clean?

I just read an interesting article about hematocrit levels versus altitude. If you live at altitude, your hematocrit blood levels adjust upward. In fact, the result is so dramatic that the blood doping you describe wouldn't even be nearly as effective as sleeping in a hypo oxic environment for increasing blood hematocrit levels without doping.

Here is the link http://spot.colorado.edu/~gamow/research/zinn_article.html

In this case, it seems that perhaps this type of doping may be made obsolete by these oxygen tents that are now commonly used. I can see how many would get the misconception that someone might be doing drugs when they see such a dramatic improvement in aerobic performance after only a short period of time, as little as two weeks, of sleeping in a hypo oxic tent.

I'm pretty sure those tents are safe for the athletes. But I bet that blood transfusion technique has quite a bit more risk, not to mention that that clearly violates the rules.

I wonder if they would still blood dope even if they were using the tent at simulated altitude of 15,000 feet.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by gntlmn
So many people complain that doping is still overwhelmingly prevalent in the sport today. The riders know when the drug tests will be, and therefore they know when to back off on the drugs and beat the tests.

I am thinking that perhaps the riders should be randomly tested for drugs. This is done for corporate employees the world over depending on your occupation. I participated in such a random drug testing program for many years. It works very well, actually. And it doesn't cost much to administer. Whereas previously employees would take drugs and get away with it in the workplace, after the random testing program went into effect, it didn't take long to clear up the problem. Many employees received 6 month suspensions for either failing the tests or for not showing up for the test. If you didn't show up, this was automatic grounds for suspension. Even some people who never failed the tests after they began seemed to have a change in behavior afterwards. I suspect that they kicked the drugs they were taking because they knew they would fail the test. This is the best effect that the program would have--to scare the drug takers into going clean.

The UCI could designate the labs which would qualify across Europe and even in the USA and other countries. It wouldn't take much to require the riders, when they aren't racing, to carry a cell phone so that they can receive calls. If they had a few alternate numbers of others who could reach them, it wouldn't be hard to administer this program. I can't remember exactly how long they give you to show up to the test after they call you to say you're number came up and you are required to test, but I think it was not longer than 2 hours. I don't think I ever took longer than 30 minutes.

If you wanted to be a tour rider, you might have to designate yourself as such and submit to this random testing for a certain length of time before the event. Perhaps this would be 6 months or a year. Then after you began tour racing, you would always be subject to the random testing program. Your number could come up any time. It doesn't matter whether you were tested the day before and came up clean. The next day, month or year, you would still have as much likelihood of being called for a test as any other rider in the circuit. If you were taking performance enhancing drugs, you would be playing with fire and would have no advance warning of being called for a random drug test.

The technology exists to virtually eliminate drugs from the sport of cycling without too much expense. Do you think we should do this to make the sport clean?

I’ve discussed this subject on other threads within this site however I am happy to repeat my views here.

It seems to me that the UCI do not have the political will to tackle the issue of doping within our sport.
It is important to look at the chronology in our sport to ascertain the level of UCI ‘willingness’ to deal with doping.
If you recall, all of the major doping scandals in our sport have been uncovered by either civil/legal forces within countries uncovering drug smuggling (Festina, Giro 1999 and Cofidis) or when a cyclist voluntarily confesses to doping (Manzano and several French cyclists who returned their medals and records, I can’t think of their names as I write this).

The salient point being, is that all of these scandals occurred under the watch of the UCI.
If none of these scandals had been uncovered, the cycling public and the general public would be none the wiser.
If the civil/legal authorities concerned had not uncovered these cases of drug abuse,
the fans of the sport would still be operating under an illusion.
So the question has got to be asked is – are the UCI/cycling authorities interested in actually uncovering doping/cheating in our sport ?
My belief is that they are not interested in uncovering doping/cheating because :

(1)If a series of drug cases are uncovered, sponsors will not be attracted to the sport.

(2)In order to retain and increase interest in our sport, it’s important for the standards in the sport to be seen to be increasing – if this is due to undetected drug use, so be it.

(3) The UCI’s unwillingness to impose more harsh punishments on those found to be
guilty of drug abuse indicates they’re ambivalent attitude to what is, considered by other sports to be extremely serious, problems.
Look at the sport of rowing, anyone found to have used drugs is banned for life.
Look at athletics, athletes found to have used drugs are banned for two years.
The UCI claim that they cannot impose more punitive bans on cyclists found to be guilty because of European employment law.
Is the relationship between cyclists and sponsor, any different than athlete and the respective national athletics federations relationship?
Is the relationship between cyclists and sponsor, any different than the rower and
respective national rowing federations relationship?
It is my belief that the UCI use European employment law as a flag of convenience so as not to impose more harsh punishments.

(4) The UCI, fundamentally, has no respect for cyclists !
If the UCI did respect the practitioners of the sport, it would adopt a more pro-active stance upon doping, to protect the integrity of race performances and those who have lost out and will continue to lose out to riders known to be doping.
Not only are the cheats depriving clean riders of their place on the podium – they
are effectively putting their hands in to the clean riders pockets and robbing their
wallets (prize money, potential endorsements for winners).
(Note www.bradmcgee.com “the inner world of the peleton knows who is and who isn’t doping” February 2004: Paul Kimmage’s “Rough Ride” 1989, Festina
court testimonies etc).

I could go on with more reasons as to why the drug culture in our sport will not be tackled.
Like the other posters here, as time goes by, professional cycling is becoming more and more unappealing to me.
It’s getting to stage where I doubt what my eyes tell me.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by limerickman
I’ve discussed this subject on other threads within this site however I am happy to repeat my views here.

It seems to me that the UCI do not have the political will to tackle the issue of doping within our sport.
It is important to look at the chronology in our sport to ascertain the level of UCI ‘willingness’ to deal with doping.
If you recall, all of the major doping scandals in our sport have been uncovered by either civil/legal forces within countries uncovering drug smuggling (Festina, Giro 1999 and Cofidis) or when a cyclist voluntarily confesses to doping (Manzano and several French cyclists who returned their medals and records, I can’t think of their names as I write this).

The salient point being, is that all of these scandals occurred under the watch of the UCI.
If none of these scandals had been uncovered, the cycling public and the general public would be none the wiser.
If the civil/legal authorities concerned had not uncovered these cases of drug abuse,
the fans of the sport would still be operating under an illusion.
So the question has got to be asked is – are the UCI/cycling authorities interested in actually uncovering doping/cheating in our sport ?
My belief is that they are not interested in uncovering doping/cheating because :

(1)If a series of drug cases are uncovered, sponsors will not be attracted to the sport.

(2)In order to retain and increase interest in our sport, it’s important for the standards in the sport to be seen to be increasing – if this is due to undetected drug use, so be it.

(3) The UCI’s unwillingness to impose more harsh punishments on those found to be
guilty of drug abuse indicates they’re ambivalent attitude to what is, considered by other sports to be extremely serious, problems.
Look at the sport of rowing, anyone found to have used drugs is banned for life.
Look at athletics, athletes found to have used drugs are banned for two years.
The UCI claim that they cannot impose more punitive bans on cyclists found to be guilty because of European employment law.
Is the relationship between cyclists and sponsor, any different than athlete and the respective national athletics federations relationship?
Is the relationship between cyclists and sponsor, any different than the rower and
respective national rowing federations relationship?
It is my belief that the UCI use European employment law as a flag of convenience so as not to impose more harsh punishments.

(4) The UCI, fundamentally, has no respect for cyclists !
If the UCI did respect the practitioners of the sport, it would adopt a more pro-active stance upon doping, to protect the integrity of race performances and those who have lost out and will continue to lose out to riders known to be doping.
Not only are the cheats depriving clean riders of their place on the podium – they
are effectively putting their hands in to the clean riders pockets and robbing their
wallets (prize money, potential endorsements for winners).
(Note www.bradmcgee.com “the inner world of the peleton knows who is and who isn’t doping” February 2004: Paul Kimmage’s “Rough Ride” 1989, Festina
court testimonies etc).

I could go on with more reasons as to why the drug culture in our sport will not be tackled.
Like the other posters here, as time goes by, professional cycling is becoming more and more unappealing to me.
It’s getting to stage where I doubt what my eyes tell me.

In short, the UCI doesn't want to "bite the bullet". They let a relatively small problem keep getting bigger and bigger, their testing program mainly just paying lip service to the authorities to make it appear that they are fighting the problem when in fact they are doing little to stop the cheating.

I don't know where the groundswelling of revolt will come from, but I suspect that this fraud will not perpetuate forever. Maybe the lobbying must begin with the authorities you mention--the civil/legal authorities of the various countries which exist to fight drug trafficking and usage of illegal drugs. It may be that these authorities would eventually put the pressure on UCI to institute a real drug testing program instead of one that might be just a sham. Clearly, if UCI has not been responding to the problem, then they must be part of the problem. Perhaps many of these officials will be fired and replaced.

That seems like the most effective way to begin such a random drug testing program--by making an appeal to the governments of the various countries, not the UCI. Once the program is in place, it can be tailored to include testing of all banned performance enhancing doping, not only the ones which are illegal to the general public. The illegal ones would be the ones which would force UCI's hand to institute the program. The others would be included because the program would already be in place.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by gntlmn
In short, the UCI doesn't want to "bite the bullet". They let a relatively small problem keep getting bigger and bigger, their testing program mainly just paying lip service to the authorities to make it appear that they are fighting the problem when in fact they are doing little to stop the cheating.

I don't know where the groundswelling of revolt will come from, but I suspect that this fraud will not perpetuate forever. Maybe the lobbying must begin with the authorities you mention--the civil/legal authorities of the various countries which exist to fight drug trafficking and usage of illegal drugs. It may be that these authorities would eventually put the pressure on UCI to institute a real drug testing program instead of one that might be just a sham. Clearly, if UCI has not been responding to the problem, then they must be part of the problem. Perhaps many of these officials will be fired and replaced.

That seems like the most effective way to begin such a random drug testing program--by making an appeal to the governments of the various countries, not the UCI. Once the program is in place, it can be tailored to include testing of all banned performance enhancing doping, not only the ones which are illegal to the general public. The illegal ones would be the ones which would force UCI's hand to institute the program. The others would be included because the program would already be in place.

Yes, I think that some sort of pressure has to be brought to bear upon the UCI : and I hope that this type of fraud is stopped because it will ultimately destroy the sport we all love and support

Doping is endemic and epidemic, organised by the teams.

I believe it would be much more effective to target doctors and managers as well as, or even instead of, the riders. This would help attack the coercive victimisation of riders - they nowadays either take what the team prescribes or they're out.

Blaming the team not the rider if one fails a test would also turn team doctors, managers and fellow riders from co-conspirators to watchers; fellow riders because if the team is penalised, all would suffer.

If the UCI are as supine as the opinions on this thread indicate, it's all over anyway 🙁 .

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Roy Gardiner
Doping is endemic and epidemic, organised by the teams.

I believe it would be much more effective to target doctors and managers as well as, or even instead of, the riders. This would help attack the coercive victimisation of riders - they nowadays either take what the team prescribes or they're out.

Blaming the team not the rider if one fails a test would also turn team doctors, managers and fellow riders from co-conspirators to watchers; fellow riders because if the team is penalised, all would suffer.

If the UCI are as supine as the opinions on this thread indicate, it's all over anyway 🙁 .

Sometimes I wonder whether team sports doctors might slip riders something, perhaps in an energy drink or a presumed vitamin tablet, without even the knowledge of the rider. That sounds like a good idea--to target the teams too. The broader the target, the harder it is to perpetuate the fraud. It would be better to have them all running scared instead of sitting in the background reaping financial gain without fear of financial ruin if the scheme is exposed.

I noticed a newspaper article which is from an interview with a former cycling team manager. He discusses the need for change in the sport regarding doping. Check it out here:

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_sports/view/81417/1/.html

You do realise that random testing is already done, both in and out of season.

Well, something needs to be done.
The guilty should be stopped from cheating their way to success.
Even more seriously than that, don't you find it unusual in a sport of super fit youngsters that at least 2-3 teenagers/20 something's mysteriously die each year after their heart just stops?

Found this on a local Tri Forum:

From: ABC News Online: http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200505/s1367796.htm

Fake penis raises drug test objections

A life-like prosthetic penis called the Whizzinator and other products promising to help illegal drug users pass urine tests provoked US lawmakers on Wednesday to take legal action with subpoenas of manufacturers.

Lawmakers objected to attempts to circumvent drug tests with products such as The Whizzinator, a fake penis that can provide a flow of clean urine "again and again, anytime, anywhere you need it!" according to the website www.whizzinator.com.

A congressional subcommittee voted to subpoena the owner of Puck Technology of Signal Hill, California, the company that makes the Whizzinator.

The panel also voted to subpoena the owners of Health Choice of New York City and Spectrum Labs of Cincinnati, two companies that lawmakers said also were suspected of selling products aimed at circumventing drug tests.

The owners were required to provide financial and operational records by Monday and to appear at a congressional hearing on Tuesday.

"These companies seek through deception to make a buck by violating our trust and compromising our security," said Representative Ed Whitfield, a Kentucky Republican who chairs the House Energy and Commerce Committee's oversight and investigations panel.

- Reuters

The top five GC riders should be tested 60 minute BEFORE and immediately after all time trials in stage races.

They should be tested for only what we can test:

1) copies of all TUEs
2) corticosteroids
3) Clomid & hCG
4) stimulants (ephedra, cocaine, caffeine, meth)
5) ephoria drugs (hroin, morphine)
6) Vasodilators (viagra, etc...)
7) a blood sample (hct and profile contrasted with out-of-competition profile)

Insofar as newer EPO-like drugs, or hGH or testosterone or renal failure kidney function booster drugs---WADA is SOL. Athletes may continue to abuse w/o compliance consequences.

btw: see my Whizzinator Post (w/ powdered urine)

[quote="gclark8"]Found this on a local Tri Forum:

From: ABC News Online: abc.net.aus1367796.htmOpen ↗

Fake penis raises drug test objections

A life-like prosthetic penis called the Whizzinator and other products promising to help illegal drug users pass urine tests provoked US lawmakers on Wednesday to take legal action with subpoenas of manufacturers.

Lawmakers objected to attempts to circumvent drug tests with products such as The Whizzinator, a fake penis that can provide a flow of clean urine "again and again, anytime, anywhere you need it!" according to the website www.whizzinator.com.

A congressional subcommittee voted to subpoena the owner of Puck Technology of Signal Hill, California, the company that makes the Whizzinator.

The panel also voted to subpoena the owners of Health Choice of New York City and Spectrum Labs of Cincinnati, two companies that lawmakers said also were suspected of selling products aimed at circumventing drug tests.

The owners were required to provide financial and operational records by Monday and to appear at a congressional hearing on Tuesday.

"These companies seek through deception to make a buck by violating our trust and compromising our security," said Representative Ed Whitfield, a Kentucky Republican who chairs the House Energy and Commerce Committee's oversight and investigations panel.

ZERO TOLERANCE and lifetime bans! It will help clean the sport---but wreck it commercially. This is the paradox.

Watch ad revenues plummet as Teams will not be able to Guarantee Absolute doping compliance---a la Hamilton, Millar, Camenzind, Zulle, Museeuw or even lesser names Luca De Angeli (Selle Italia).

Insurers will NOT underwrite stars like Lance Armstrong----not SCA's claim dispute with USPO/Tailwinds. They suspect Lance is a fraud and they will not pay the bonuses until dispositions can be fully obtained from key witnesses.

BomoSammo said:

Well, something needs to be done.
The guilty should be stopped from cheating their way to success.
Even more seriously than that, don't you find it unusual in a sport of super fit youngsters that at least 2-3 teenagers/20 something's mysteriously die each year after their heart just stops?

I believe that riders should have probes inserted into all their orifices as well as their limbic systems and spinal columns which provide continous readout to a terminal in Flyer's 'home office' (parents' basement).

Only then will I rest irenic in eternal contentment and sanctimony.