Italian cyclist Marta Bastianelli tested positive for a banned stimulant. She tested positive for the diet drug fenfluramine in a doping control conducted by the International Cycling Union (UCI) at the “Under-23 World Championships” in Verbania, Italy on July 5, 2008.

Bastianelli claims she never knowingly ingested a banned substance. She admitted to her obsession with weight control stating “I wanted to lose weight, like any girl.” She consulted with her doctor to find weight loss products that were not on the WADA banned substance list. Her doctor prescribed the drug Benfluorex. Benfluorex is an anti-diabetic drug that improves insulin sensitivity and glycemic control; as such it is often prescribed for weight loss. Benfluorex is not on the WADA banned substance list but it is structurally similar to Fenfluramine (which is listed) (“Bastianelli tests positive for diet product,” July 28).

“I’m disgusted with my trusted chemist for preparing a mix of herbs for me aimed at weight loss.

“Like always I wanted to read the list of products used and amongst them was benfluorex, which doesn’t figure among the list of banned substances.

“However, laboratory analysis demonstrated that this product contains the ingredient responsible for my positive test.

“But how could I know that?”

Today, she provided a sample of the Benfluorex product to prosecutors for analysis to support her contention that she unknowingly consumed a banned substance.

On Tuesday she said she had given the product to the prosecutor so that it could be analyzed. She expressed regret at not being able to take part in the Olympics and said she hoped to take part in the next world championships to defend her title.

Italian officials are unsympathetic. She will no longer represent Italy in the Beijing Olympics.

Italian Cycling Federation President Renato Di Rocco spoke critically of Bastianelli’s positve fenfluramine test stating that she ”committed an incredible act of naivity.” 

“She was positive for flenfluramine, that is in dieting products. She’s obsessed about her weight. She only eats salad.”

Italian Olympic Committe (CONI) president Gianni Petrucci was even more “unyielding.”

“Marta Bastianelli has betrayed Coni, the (Italian Cycling) federation and the world of cycling.”

It is truly unfortunate that the complexities of WADA/IOC testing result in such mistakes by athletes.

Bastianelli and/or her physician would have to be very familiar with the pharmacology of Benfluorex and Fenfluramine to appreciate the structural similarities and the risk for an adverse analytical finding. This just emphasizes the requirement that athletes must perform thorough research into any substances that they utilize.

Benfluorex (RN: 23602-78-0)

• 2-((alpha-Methyl-m-(trifluoromethyl)phenethyl)amino)ethanol benzoate (ester)
• Ethanol, 2-(alpha-methyl-m-trifluoromethylphenethylamino)-,benzoate
• N-(2-Benzoyloxyethyl)norfenfluramine

Fenfluramine (RN: 458-24-2)

• Benzeneethanamine, N-ethyl-alpha-methyl-3-(trifluoromethyl)-(9CI)
• Phenethylamine, N-ethyl-alpha-methyl-m-(trifluoromethyl)-

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.

Roche Pharmaceuticals quickly rejected claims that Roche planted secret molecule in Mircera which allowed for detection of the CERA class drug at the 2008 Tour de France. John Fahey, WADA president, told the Australian Broadcasting Company about the addition of the molecule that made it easy for drug testers to detect use of the performance enhancing drug.

Roche Pharmaceuticals spokesperson, Martina Rupp, strongly denied the addition of any special molecule to Mircera in an email response made within hours of Fahey statements.

“The information that a special molecule has been added to Mircera is wrong,” Rupp said in an e-mail.

Roche explained to CyclingNews.com that the extent of their cooperation with WADA involved providing samples of Mircera and assay reagents.

Roche has provided samples of Mircera and assay reagents to the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) to help ensure that WADA laboratories will be able to carry out reliable anti-doping testing.

Roche further clarified its relationship with the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) in an official statement sent to Bloomberg News.

Roche is aware that a leading competitor in the Tour de France is reported to have tested positive for Mircera, Roche’s new erythropoiesis stimulating agent (ESA) approved a year ago in the European Union. Roche has worked in collaboration with the World Anti-Doping Agency since 2004 to assist in their aim of controlling the illegal use of ESAs and specifically Mircera. Roche has provided the information to WADA and to a WADA- accredited laboratory to detect its new ESA. We are pleased that this collaboration has been productive.”

A WADA spokesman subsequently contradicted the WADA president’s statements to ABC Radio suggesting that Fahey’s comments were misconstrued or misinterpreted.

No marker was inserted in the substance,” the WADA spokesman said. “Thanks to the fruitful cooperation of the manufacturer of this substance (Roche) and of WADA-accredited laboratories, which started in 2004, WADA received the molecule well in advance and was able to develop ways to detect it, including through the current EPO detection method.”

Yesterday, I was shocked that a drug company would even consider secretly adding molecules to consumer drug products; it was disturbing to think that a drug company was intentionally failing to disclose ingredients to consumers (and possibly even regulators).

I am relieved to hear that the pharmaceutical giant did not conspire with WADA, an organization known for their anti-steroid and anti-doping witch hunts, to covertly manipulate drug products.

I was surprised that few bloggers had any problem with such a plot. Apparently, legal, health, privacy, and regulatory concerns fall by the wayside when it comes to catching athletes who dope. I read on Trust But Verify that one blogger felt that this was actually the proper way to go after dopers.

This is the right way to catch drug cheats; not witch hunts.

Steroid Nation was disappointed that Fahey’s “good idea” was not implemented by Roche.

So apparently no stealth molecule in the CERA drug allowing detection.  A good idea not implemented.

But it was good to see Rant agree that planting secret molecules would be “problematic.”

Adding special markers to drugs may be problematic, in that it runs the risk of further unintended consequences. All drugs have side effects. Any drug maker worth their salt would want to minimize the possibilities of those side effects. Adding extra stuff into the drug, merely for the convenience of the anti-doping agencies could, conceivably, expose legitimate users of the medication to extra risks. Not a good business model, especially in our litigious age.

The WADA and Roche dance today was very interesting. John Fahey’s comments about the planted molecule are baffling in retrospect. Why would he pull something out of his ass that was so misleading and (allegedly) false? What if there really are secret trojan molecules in our drugs? What is Fahey accidentally let the cat out of the bag?! What is today’s events were an organized coverup?

No – it couldn’t be true! I am not in the habit of believing statements from WADA (especially when they talk about the foolproofness, accuracy and fairness of their tests); so why should I start believing Fahey today?

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.

John Fahey, president of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), has revealed they are cooperating with Roche Pharmaceuticals to secretly add a “traceable molecule” to drugs likely to have performance enhancing effects in athletes. This was how AFLD was able to detect the previously-undetectable Mircera (CERA) in Riccardo Ricco’s sample at the 2008 Tour de France. Roche manufacures at least two PEDs used by cyclists – Mircera and NeoRecormon. Drug-tested athletes have been given notice to avoid using products manufactured by Roche Pharmaceuticals.

It seems that WADA is no longer interested in developing anti-doping tests that actually detect performance enhancing drugs (PEDs); this is understandable since serious flaws in their anti-doping tests are revealed again and again. Instead, WADA apparently believes the future of anti-doping efforts lies in anti-doping agencies cooperation with pharmaceutical companies to secretly add “traceable molecules” and “trojan molecules” (“Ricco caught by secret doping molecule: WADA chief,” July 23).

In the development of that particular substance, close cooperation occurred between WADA and the pharmaceutical company Roche Pharmaceuticals so that there was a molecule placed in the substance well in advance that was always going to be able to be detected once a test was taken,” Mr Fahey said.

Wow. I wonder what is more deplorable – athletes using performance enhancing drugs OR multi-national pharmaceutical companies secretly adding traceable molecules to consumer products and intentionally hiding this ingredient by failing to disclose it on the label?

Mr Fahey said such cooperation with drug companies was the way forward in fighting drug cheats.

“There’s more and more of this occurring,” he said.

“The more cooperation the scientists can have with the drug companies in the detection of performance-enhancing drugs the greater the likelihood is they will be detected when tests are undertaken.”

I can not imagine regulatory agencies such as the FDA looking favorably upon pharmaceutical products that have undisclosed, secret ingredients which are not essential to the action of the drug. After all, the traceable molecules have absolutely no benefit to the patient.

Certainly, this will upset quite a few people; the fact that Roche Pharmaceuticals is committing resources to non-therapeutic anti-doping efforts is, at the very least, bad public relations coming only a fews weeks after abandoning HIV/AIDS research.

The privacy, legal and regulatory obstacles to WADA’s latest approach to doping detection seems to make it a non-starter. FAIL!

Even if some pharmaceutical companies conspire with WADA in their anti-doping efforts, there are probably hundreds of pharmaceutical companies around the world, particularly in Southeast Asia, that would likely resist the extra expense of adding “traceable” anti-doping molecules to their products. The innumerous pharmaceutical companies have already given WADA problems with all the undetectable biogeneric and biosimilar EPO variants commercially available to athletes.

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.

Widespread doping continues in cycling despite recent proclamations by Olivier Rabin, the science director for World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), and Pierre Bordry, the head of the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD), that they are practically on the verge of eliminating doping from cycling.

The testosterone doping test is flawed. The EPO test is flawed in more ways than one. Peptide hormones such as human growth hormone (HGH) and insulin-like growth factor (IGF-1) are currently undetectable. And this does not begin to address other current and emerging synthetic blood boosting techniques being used by cyclists.

It seems that anti-doping agencies are happy to assert that they are winning the war on doping while neglecting issues such as biogeneric/biosimilar erythropoietin (EPO) stimulating proteins (ESPs); blood oxygen carriers: perfluorocarbon emulsions (PFCEs) and hemoglobin based oxygen carriers (HBOCs); hydroxyethylstarch (HES/HAES); and before long, if not already, EPO-mimetic peptide (EMPs).

The newer blood boosting techniques like PFCEs and HBOCs do not increase hematocrit levels; so these drugs have performance enhancing effects without risk of exceeding the 50% hematocrit cutoff. Furthermore, the performance enhancing effects of PFCEs and HBOCs are instantaneous. The HES/HAES are actually plasma expanders and would dilute the hematocrit concentration.

Occasionally, the press reports on these substances e.g. when the U.S. Postal Team was caught with Activegin and subsequently admitted taking Activegin to the 1999 Tour de France prior to its ban and when Mauro Gianetti almost killed himself using PFCEs during the 1998 Tour of Romandy. (Ironically, Mauro Gianetti is the team manager who was “duped” by riders on the scandal-plagued Saunier Duval-Scott cycling team).

And while most of us just learned about a third generation version of EPO called Mircera, a “fourth-generation” version of EPO belonging to the class of drugs known as EMPs may receive FDA approval within the next 2-3 years; it is unknown whether athletes are currently experimenting with Hematide or Hemomer.

Blood oxygen carriers: perfluorocarbon emulsions (PFCEs) and hemoglobin based oxygen carriers (HBOCs)

Actovegin (Nycomed)
HemAssist (Baxter Healthcare)
Hemolink (Hemosol)
Hemopure (Biopure)
Oxyglobin (Biopure)
Oxycyte (Synthetic Blood International)
Oxygent (Alliance Pharmaceutical Corp)
Oxyglobin (Biopure)
PHER O2 (Sanguine Corp)
PHP (Curacyte)

Plasma expanders: hydroxyethylstarch (HES/HAES)

Dextran (B. Braun Medical)
Gentran (Baxter Healthcare)
Hespan (B. Braun Medical)
Voluven (Fresenius Kabi)

EPO-mimetic peptide (EMPs)

Hemomer (AplaGen Biopharmaceuticals)
Hematide (Affymax/Takeda Pharmaceutical)

***

Cyclists will continue to use performance enhancing drugs. They will continue to remain ahead of the anti-doping agencies. By only giving credence to official statements from WADA, AFLD, etc., one would believe this was all but impossible. But the evidence that doping continues is everywhere.

For example, here is an experpt from a post at RoadBikeReview.com regarding how doping is still possible given all the doping controls:

HGH, IGF-1 and Actovegin are pretty much the minimum that riders take. Ok…a few might just be on HGH because after all HGH converts in the liver to IGF-1. NONE of these drugs can be dectected…

[...]

Now for a one day classic they just come to controls with a 49% hematocrit. They can get there with blood doping or Dynepo use (human identical epo) After morning controls they have about an hour, and sometimes a little more, to blood dope. Units of their own blood are slammed into them with blood pumps. You can infuse a litre of packed cells in about an hour with no issue. This is at least 3 units of pure red cells. This will boost your hematocrit by at least 5% and sometimes 8-9%! The top riders then line up at the starting line with a 55-59% hematocrit!!!

After the race the extra blood is taken out, the plasma is spun off and the red cells are frozen as above. They end up with a 50% hematocrit. Alternatively they can just bleed the extra blood out of you until you are at 50%.

[...]

In grand tours you have to pass morning controls with no more than a 50% hematocrit, just like for any race, so they either take the extra blood out of you after the stage and save for re-infusion after morning controls, or they simply jack you with IV saline and volume expanders like Hespan right before morning controls so your hematocrit is diluted to 49-50%. You still have the same O2 carrying capacity that you had at say 56% …the blood is just diluted down. This extra fluid also comes in handy in the stage.

If you blood dope for any length of time you must supplement with very tiny doses of epo and only via the IV route. Blood doping shuts down your own red cell production so you will have next to zero retics (immature red cells) in you …and if control sees this they will know you are blood doping.

Is WADA really winning the war against doping in sports?

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.

A BBC investigation suggests that most athletes who use recombinant human erythropoietin (EPO) continue to get away with it. The investigative article reveals several reasons why the EPO test is failing. But the BBC revealed that the biggest problem is not the ineffectiveness of the existing EPO tests used by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). It is a lack of testing for variants of EPO.

Athletes are using various “biosimilar” EPO agents for which WADA has not yet developed a detection method. WADA’s ballyhooed test for the previously undetectable Mircera (pegylated EPO) was an admission that the already flawed existing EPO test was unable to detect variants of EPO; the announcement of the new CERA (Mircera) test at the 2008 Tour de France was considered a major victory.

There are also dozens of “copycat” or “biosimilar” versions of EPO. These are variants of EPO that are produced by different methods or exist as slightly different biological forms of EPO e.g. darbepoetin alfa, epoetin alfa, epoetin beta, epoetin gamma, epoetin delta, epoetin epsilon, epoetin zeta, epoetin theta, epoetin kappa, epoetin omega. The existence of biosimilar versions of EPO is a major problem for drug testers (“Concerns over Olympic drug test,” July 21).

Because the medicine has been so successful financially, companies in India, China and Cuba have developed drugs that do a similar job in the body, but have a slightly different molecular fingerprint. These cheap versions of EPO, often called biosimilars, can be easily bought over the internet.

[...]

“There are now a number of compounds that bind to the EPO receptor, and there is no single test for them, you can order it here over the internet and it will be delivered to you here in the UK or in Germany; Chinese-made doping substances” [according to Professor Werner Franke].

Some scientists who track and monitor the development of copycat EPO drugs say there could be up to 80 different versions now being manufactured in different parts of the world.

A few biosimilar versions are available in the EU and Eastern Europe; however, a plethora of doping options are commercially available with biosimilar EPO pharmaceuticals produced around the world, particularly in Southeast Asia, several of which could be purchased inexpensively over the internet.

Abseamed (Medice Arzneimittel Pütter)
Aranesp (Amgen)
Binocrit (Sandoz)
Bioetin (Nanogenpharma) [Vietnam]
Ceriton (Rambaxy) [India]
Dynepo (Shire)
Epocim (CIMEQ) [Cuba]
Epoetin Alfa Hexal (Hexal Biotech Forschungs)
Epofer (Emcure) [India]
Epofit (INTAS Pharmaceuticals) [India]
Epogin (Chugai Pharmaceutical Company) [Japan]
Epokine (Macropharma Corporation) [Philippines] 
Eporon (Century Pharmaceuticals) [India]
Eporon (Dong-A Pharmaceutical Company) [Korea]
Eposino (Shandong Kexing) [China]
Eposino (Hindustan Bio Sciences) [India]
Epotin (Claris Lifesciences) [India]
Epotrex-NP (Novell Pharmaceutical) [Indonesia],
Epoyet (Bio Sudis) [Argentina],
Eritina (Chalver Laboratories) [Columbia]
Eritrogen (Bioprofarma) [Argentina]
Eritromax (Blausiegel ) [Brazil],
Erykine (INTAS Pharmaceuticals) [India]
Erypo (Janssen-Cilag)
Espo (Kirin Brewery Company, Pharmaceutical Division) [Japan]
Espogen (Hoffman Health) [Pakistan]
Gerepo (North China Pharmaceutical Group Corporation) [Malaysia]
Hemapo (Innogene Kalbiotech) [Singapore]
Hemax (Seignior Pharma) [Pakistan]
Hypercrit (Biogalenic) [Venezuela]
Mircera (Roche)
NeoRecormon (Roche)
PDpoetin (Pooyesh Darou Pharmaceuticals) [Iran]
Renoge (Biomedis) [Philippines]
Retacrit (Hospira/STADA) [Germany]
Shanpoietin (Shanta Biotechnics) [India]
Silapo (Bioceuticals Arzneimittel AG)
Vintor (Emcure) [India]
Wepox (Wockhardt) [India]
Zyrop (Zydus Biogenyc) [India]

I think the science director of WADA could be considered delusional in his claim that WADA is catching all users of recombinant EPO.

Dr Olivier Rabin is WADA’s science director. Is he happy that the test is catching all the drug cheats?

“I am reasonably confident, yes,” he told the BBC. “Now, it would be very presumptuous on my part to say that we are absolutely 100% sure we are going to get everyone. But I can assure you that if you were to take recombinant EPO and that would be in your urine – then, yes, we would detect it.“

Maybe the public will buy it, but the athletes already know better.

Hat tip to Trust But Verify.

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.

Spanish doctor Marcos Maynar Mariño sent an email offering comprehensive urinalysis and steroid profiling at 50 euros per athlete to as many as ten professional cycling teams including Gerolsteiner, Milram, CSC and Columbia . Maynar offered to provide a complete analysis consistent with the same control methods used by the International Cycling Union (UCI). The services would be conducted by the Laboratory of Analytical Chemistry at the Faculty of Sciences at the Universidad de Extremadura in Cáceres, Spain (“Dos médicos españoles, acusados de dopar,” July 20).

According to the German television station ARD, Spanish doctor Marcos Maynar offered these services as for internal testing allowing athletes to monitor their doping to ensure that their use of performance enhancing drugs would not be detected by doping controls at the 2008 Tour de France and other pro cycling events. Maynar responded to the allegations that he aided and abetted doping by suggesting that ARD had ulterior motives stemming from bitterness over disgraced cyclist Jan Ullrich (“Marcos Maynar niega que quiera favorecer el dopaje,” July 21).

“Since Jan Ullrich’s tested positive, the Germans have wanted to shit on the Spaniards.”

Maynar admits to sending out the email but only to help pro tour teams with their own internal controls; he denies that his services would allow athletes to escape the detection of performance enhancing drugs. Marcos Maynar and his brother Juan Ignacio Maynar are both experts in anabolic steroids and work at the university laboratory. They claim their blood and urine testing services and legally recognized analysis for biological passports were developed to generate a badly need source of revenue for the University. He strongly denies that he supports doping in cycling (“Spanish lab allegations and confessions in Tour doping,” July 20).

But Marcos Maynar Marino from the university, who sent the email, insisted in a statement that the offer was made to assist the teams to find dopers, not to support substance abuse.

‘We are not supporting doping but try to prevent team-members from doing something which could destroy the team,’ Maynar said.

Maynar’s credibility with regard to doping has been hurt by his alleged involvement in other doping scandals.

In June 2004, Maynar was implicated in a nationwide steroid bust called Operación Gamma II that shutdown a network of steroid distributors providing anabolic steroids to bodybuilders and athletes at gyms in various cities in Spain.

In May 2006, Maynar was found to share clients with Eufemiano Fuentes, the mastermind behind the Operación Puerto doping scandal.

In May 2008, Maynar was the team doctor for the Portueguese LA MSS team who authorities found guilty of systematic doping.

Maynar said he was surprised by the raid, insisting that the team always “presented normal levels.”

“My relationship with the team is merely as a collaborator. I only go to races to control the hematocrit levels of the cyclists and look after the nutritional part of the athletes,” Maynar was quoted as saying.

Hat tip to Cycling Fans Anonymous.

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.

The French National Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) has been utlizing a secret new anti-doping test for a previously undetectable performance-enhancing drug during the 2008 Tour de France. Rumors about a test for Mircera started circulating when cyclist Riccardo Ricco failed his doping protocol. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) quickly confirmed the rumors.

WADA gave notice to cyclists competing at the 2008 Tour de France that they were now able to detect the performance enhancing drug Mircera (methoxy polyethylene glycol-epoetin beta), a third generation version of erythropoietin (EPO) belonging to the category of drugs known as Continuous Erythropoeitin Receptor Activators (CERA).

Doping experts concerned with the fairness of the doping protocols administered by WADA-accredited labs were quick to raise questions about the new CERA doping detection methods (“Larry: New CERA test, looking at Hamilton’s HBT,” July 20).

The TdF news concerning the detection of CERA has raised a lot of questions, including legal questions. How is it that AFLD can use a “secret” test, one that is not referenced in any of the WADA rules? How can we know that the lab’s test is valid? If there are no WADA rules for the test, how can the lab determine that the results of the test are sufficient to prove an AAF?

The folks at Trust But Verify (TBV) offer an excellent primer on unaccredited WADA anti-doping methods used to detect adverse analytical findings (AAFs). TBV, citing precedent from the Tyler Hamilton case, explains why it is legal for WADA-accredited labs to use “secret” and “unaccredited” testing methods in some cases.

[I]t is not necessary for WADA to approve a lab method before the method can be used to prove an AAF.

The panel also ruled that a WADA lab CAN use an unaccredited test method to prove an AAF, so long as the lab can prove two things. First, the lab must prove that the unaccredited test method was conducted “in accordance with the scientific community’s practices and procedures.” Second, the lab must prove that it “satisfied itself as to the validity of the [unaccredited] method before using it.” If the lab can satisfy this two-pronged burden of proof, then (according to the Hamilton decision) the lab gets the benefit of the presumption under WADA Code 3.2.1. If the lab cannot satisfy this burden, then the lab method in question cannot be used, and the AAF against the athlete must be dismissed.

The reasoning in the Hamilton case was based on the panel’s assumption that sometimes WADA labs must use unaccredited test methods. New forms of doping arise all the time, but the formal lab accreditation process is relatively slow (the method at issue in the Hamilton case was not formally validated until more than a year after the lab’s finding of the Hamilton AAF). If labs are going to detect new performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs), they may have to do so with new (and thus unaccredited) test methods. But since accreditation is an important step in making sure that test methods are “fit for purpose”, the panel reasoned that the validity of unaccredited test methods must be defended by the lab and ultimately ruled upon by the arbitration panel.

This means that AFLD may still be required to scientifically validate the new CERA test in the cases of Miguel Beltran, Moises Duenas Nevado, Riccardo Ricco and any other cyclists who accused of allegedly using Mirecera during the 2008 Tour de France.

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.

Rant’s Daniel Rosen asked the question “Will it ever be possible to have a Tour de France… that is completely free of doping?” I would answer that with a definitive no – not now, not ever. Professional cycling is an extreme sport that is practically synonymous with doping.

Steroid and doping expert Dr. John Hoberman of the University of Texas wrote an article about the Festina scandal at the 1998 Tour de France for me almost ten years ago. Hoberman thought that the public had finally accepted that the Tour de France during a “definitive outing of the Tour as a virtual pharmacy on wheels.”

The Tour debacle has finally made it acceptable to say in public and without provocation what many have known for a long time, namely, that long-distance cycling has been the most consistently drug-soaked sport of the twentieth century. 

Unfortunately, we still have not come to terms with an acknowledgement of the scope of doping in cycling. We continue to entertain incredulous stories that doping in the sport is limited to certain generations of riders or specific geographical areas. We still believe in fairy tales that tell us a dope-free Tour de France is possible. It is not. So what should be done about doping in cycling?

We could continue to put our faith in anti-doping efforts. But the history of drug testing in competitive sports over the past 30 years or so has taught us that doping technology is always far ahead of doping detection. We can ignore history and pretend that things will be different this year or next year – or the year after that.

Hoberman puts forward an argument articulated by Hans Halter in the German newspaper Der Spiegel. The admittedly unpopular argument is to accept doping in such extreme sports such as cycling or, more accurately, to “quitely ignore” the pervasive and universal doping in the Tour de France (“A Pharmacy on Wheels – The Tour De France Doping Scandal,” November 15, 1998).

As one unblinkered observer put it at the height of the furor: “For as long as the Tour has existed, since 1903, its participants have been doping themselves. No dope, no hope. The Tour, in fact, is only possible because — not despite the fact — there is doping. For 60 years this was allowed. For the past 30 years it has been officially prohibited. Yet the fact remains: great cyclists have been doping themselves, then as now.”

[...]

There is, in fact, a case to be made for quietly ignoring the virtually universal doping that goes on in this “extreme sport,” an argument that accepts and even embraces the medically extreme and potentially fatal character of the ordeal itself. It is an argument that is (from its own perspective) properly contemptuous of medical humanitarianism and fastidious concerns about sportsmanship in the traditional (and here outmoded) sense of the term. This argument was boldly launched into the midst of the Tour madness by the German journalist, physician, and cycling fan Hans Halter, who presented it with the precisely correct doses of principled defiance and ironic pathos that this philosophy of “sport” requires. “No one can seriously expect,” Halter wrote, “that these extreme athletes, tortured by tropical heat and freezing cold, by rain and storm, should renounce all of the palliatives that are available to them.” Indeed, no one can, for those who accept the ordeal must concede to the martyrs at least a measure of relief. What the Tour scandal tells us is that modern society does not even know how to begin to draw the line.

Hoberman’s essay is still one of the most insightful articles into the doping culture in professional cycling that I have read. It hits uncomfortably close to the truth about the nature of “extreme sports.”

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.

The desperation in professional cycling is increasing as commentators try to explain away the pervasive doping problems in the sport. At the onset of the 2008 Tour de France, the doping problem was characterized as a generational issue. The “old cycling” versus “new cycling” story was bolstered when 37-year old Miguel Beltran tested positive for erythropoietin (EPO). Beltran represented the old school generation that was to blame for systematic doping in the sport. The story offered hope for a clean drug-free sport with the emergence of several young, talented riders that represented “new cycling.” (“Riccò case a setback for ‘new cycling’,” July 17)

Faith in the new generation of cycling was shattered when Riccardo Ricco tested positive for EPO and the new CERA drug Mircera.  How could the story of “new cycling” explain why the 24-year old leader of the best young rider competition was doping just the same as the old generation of cycling? The old generation could no longer be blamed for the scourge of doping in cycling. Cycling needed a new story!

The Scotsman was happy to provide a new story to preserve the integrity of the Tour: Blame the country of Spain for doping problems in cycling! If Spain were eliminated from world maps, the Tour de France would apparently be a very clean sport. How did the Scotsman arrive at this conclusion? (“Tour’s three doping cases to date are all linked to a country where old cultures endure,” July 18)

• Two of the four riders failing drug test and/or implicated in doping scandal during the 2008 Tour de France are, in fact, Spaniards (Miguel Beltran and Moises Duenas).
• The other two riders, while NOT from Spain, rode for a Spanish team! (Leonardo Piepoli and Riccardo Ricco ride the Spanish road racing team Saunier Duval-Scott.)
• Spain has evil dope doctors that work with professional cyclists. (Dr. Eufemiano Fuentes was the Spanish mastermind behind Operation Puerto in 2006. Plus, Dr. Jesus Losa of Spain appears to have helped Moises Duenas dope.)
• Cyclist David Millar asserts that performance enhancing drugs and doping thrive in the “wild west” of Spain. Millar makes an incendiary attack on the Spanish culture as unworthy of competing in the Tour de France (no voluntary Millar-torium here). 

“They have this culture embedded in them and they honestly believe it is not possible to do these things without (doping]. It’s sad. You see that Christian (Vande Velde, Millar’s Garmin team-mate] is third overall, and he is doing it without any injections, without anything. If you can’t do it like that then you are not good enough – it’s as simple as that.”

• International Cycling Union (UCI) president Pat McQuaid has identified clandestine “cocoons” in Spain where doping is easily rationalized; professional cyclists “live in their own little world, surrounded by a small number of people belonging to the old guard; and they can be very influenced by those within that cocoon.” Notice how McQuaid masterfully interjects the “generational” story as a subplot in the “blame Spain” story.

Of course, a person would have to be incredibly naive to believe that doping in cycling is restricted to the geographical boundaries of a single country or to particular a generation.

Cycling is synonymous with doping. No fanciful stories or fairy tales will explain away doping in the Tour de France.

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.

Cyclist Riccardo Ricco of the Saunier Duval-Scott team tested positive for the new performance enhancing drug Mircera (methoxy polyethylene glycol-epoetin beta) at the 2008 Tour de France. Ricco is a top cyclist on the Tour and the King of the Mountains and White Jersey leader.

Mircera is a third generation version of erythropoietin manufactured by pharmaceutical giant Hoffman-LaRoche that has been called “Super EPO.” The big news at the Tour is not that another cyclist was caught doping, it is that a cyclist was caught using a performance enhancing drug that was widely considered “undetectable.” The quick withdrawal of the entire Saunier Duval team from the Tour supports speculation that Mircera was the team’s secret weapon (“Riccardo Riccò tests positive; Saunier Duval team withdraws from Tour de France,” July 17).

Recent rumors in the sport had suggested that some riders were using an undetectable new oxygen-enhancing drug widely thought to be Roche’s Micera. The existence of a test for CERA was not announced, but Riccò’s positive for the substance suggests that it has not escaped the attention of anti-doping officials.

WADA spokesperson Frédéric Donzé took used the opportunity to congratulate WADA on a job well-done.

“WADA is very much aware of the development of new EPOs and biosimilar EPOs in an expanding market.”

“In the case of Mircera (CERA ) thanks to the cooperation of the manufacturer of this substance (Roche) and of WADA-accredited laboratories, WADA received the molecule well in advance and was able to develop ways to detect it,” he said. “This case shows the significant work that WADA conducts in anticipating doping trends, including by closely cooperating with pharmaceutical companies at very early stages of the development of molecules or substances for therapeutic purposes to develop detection methods for anti-doping purposes.”

Mircera is an artificial form of erythropoietin (EPO) stimulators similar to Amgen’s Epogen and Aranesp. But Mircera is thought to be superior to Epogen and Aranesp due to the use of pegylation technology that provides a sustained release of erythropoiesis stimulating proteins (ESPs). PEGylated erythropoietin (PEG-EPO) results when a molecule of polyethylene glycol is attached. 

Mircera (PEG-EPO) belongs to a category of drugs called Continuous Erythropoeitin Receptor Activators or CERA because it continuously interacts with the EPO receptor producing longer lasting effects. Only 1-2 monthly injections of Mircera have similar results to three times weekly injections of Epogen. Detailed instructions on using Mircera can be found on the Internet.

Trust But Verify wonders if Ricco actually tested positive for Mircera or was simply caught with the product in his possession (during a police search of his room). TBV points to comments made by blood doping expert Professor Michael Audren to CyclingNews.com.

It’s a delayed-action EPO, which has a different molecular mass from EPO. It’s only been commercially available since the start of the year. We can tell when someone’s used it but we can’t declare them positive. In that respect it’s like Dynepo, another EPO-like product. We know that Micera was being used on the Giro, so I’m not surprised that it’s also turned up at the Tour. But I would be very surprised if they AFLD had declared Riccò positive for Micera, for the reasons I’ve just mentioned. Maybe they searched Riccò’s room and found the product itself… (emphasis added by TBV)

It would not surprise us if TBV and Professor Audren are correct; WADA is well-known for overstating their ability to effectively and reliably detect various performance enhancing drugs.

Post from: Steroid Report

Written by: Millard Baker | Twitter | FriendFeed | Facebook | E-mail

©2010 Steroid Report. All Rights Reserved.