# An analysis of the long-term effects of performance-enhancing drugs



## love4himies (Jun 12, 2012)

An analysis of the long-term effects of performance-enhancing drugs - VeloNews.com

Something I didn't know was that EPO may have negative long term affects on athletes once they stop:



> The drug of choice for cyclists over the past decade has been EPO, and it paints a grimmer long-term picture. EPO appears to produce no structural improvements even in the short run. It does not affect capillary density, muscle size, or muscle fiber type. It does not produce the sort of benefits that last.
> 
> “What I have anecdotally noticed is that while people are taking erythropoietin — while I was taking erythropoietin — there is certainly an increased training load possibility,” Vaughters said. “But I have also noticed that when you cease taking the drug, there is a sort of backlash — since your bone marrow receptors have been over-occupied with erythropoietin, your body basically shuts down red blood cell production for a while and the bone marrow isn’t as receptive to natural erythropoietin.”





> Of course, as Vaughters pointed out, the EPO he took over his entire career amounted to about the quantity a cancer patient would receive in one month. He saw these consequences far more in cyclists who rode in the mid-90s, before there was a 50-hematocrit limit and biological passports. These riders couldn’t compete after they stopped taking EPO. For later generations who micro-dosed, he admitted that these long-term consequences were less likely.


And the point that we seem to forgive athletes/stars for cheating in their personal as well as their professional lifes, but we are hard on pro cyclists:



> Our celebrities have meltdowns, chop off their hair, interrupt awards shows, and get pulled over driving drunk. And, for punishment, they get to tour the talk-show circuit, sign new contracts, and revitalize their careers. Politicians sleep with interns, misappropriate funds, email pictures of their less-public sides, and, sometimes, still win elections. Even when our athletes cheat on their wives repeatedly, their “brands” are often salvaged by means of a simple “image readjustment.”
> 
> In cycling, however, forgiveness is a foreign concept.
> 
> ...


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

I may need to reread that but I missed it, what are the long term effects?


----------



## love4himies (Jun 12, 2012)

Local Hero said:


> I may need to reread that but I missed it, what are the long term effects?


They were comparing testosterone to EPO and there is evidence of Testosterone having positive long term effects once a person stops taking it as it seems to increase the nuclei (aids in muscle recovery) in muscle cells permanently, where as EPO actually can have an adverse affect on the bone marrow producing red blood cells after the athlete has stopped taking it.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

love4himies said:


> They were comparing testosterone to EPO and there is evidence of Testosterone having positive long term effects once a person stops taking it as it seems to increase the nuclei (aids in muscle recovery) in muscle cells permanently, where as EPO actually can have an adverse affect on the bone marrow producing red blood cells after the athlete has stopped taking it.


He thinks there is anecdotal evidence that the receptors are "over occupied" temporarily and the body is less receptive to natural EPO. *If* this is true, it is short term. 

What are the long term effects?


(Is there any medical or scientific evidence that the body builds up a tolerance to EPO? and if so, it is long term or short term?)


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

from my skim of the VN article I didn't come away with much real information beyond speculation by riders who have a reason to downplay any long-term results... would've been nice to see any kind of reference to a real study.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Creakyknees said:


> from my skim of the VN article I didn't come away with much real information beyond speculation by riders who have a reason to downplay any long-term results... would've been nice to see any kind of reference to a real study.


I agree that the discussion of EPO is a thinly-veiled argument to forgive dopers (after a short term ban) rather than level a lifetime ban against them.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Local Hero said:


> He thinks there is anecdotal evidence that the receptors are "over occupied" temporarily and the body is less receptive to natural EPO. *If* this is true, it is short term.
> 
> What are the long term effects?
> 
> ...


OK, it's on page 3 of the article: _The effect is called erythropoietin hyporesponsiveness. It’s well documented in cancer patients who take large quantities of EPO to stay alive. EPO receptors become desensitized and there can even be damage to bone marrow where red blood cells are produced._

But the studies of EPO hyporesponsiveness deal with hyporesponsiveness to exogenous EPO during treatment for anemia: Hyporesponsiveness to erythropoietin:... [Adv Chronic Kidney Dis. 2009] - PubMed - NCBI

(Perhaps the anemia that was being treated was not caused by a lack of EPO in the first place; the EPO was just a band-aide treatment.)


----------



## jlandry (Jan 12, 2007)

Concentration/memory loss? 



Local Hero said:


> I may need to reread that but I missed it, what are the long term effects?


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

jlandry said:


> Concentration/memory loss?


Bloodletting (and subsequent boost in EPO) has shown to improve those things.


----------



## jlandry (Jan 12, 2007)

I wasn't serious, hence the smiley. I was joking about your comment. 
"I may need to* reread* that but I *missed it,* what are the long term effects?"




Local Hero said:


> Bloodletting (and subsequent boost in EPO) has shown to improve those things.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Yes, I knew you were being funny. I was trying to convince myself to donate blood.


----------



## Alaska Mike (Sep 28, 2008)

Local Hero said:


> I agree that the discussion of EPO is a thinly-veiled argument to forgive dopers (after a short term ban) rather than level a lifetime ban against them.


Pretty much how I see it. It's an extremely rare case where someone "only" used EPO. More often it's a cocktail of testosterone, HGH, and/or a variety of other drugs that allow them to build lean muscle, endure more, and recover faster. The adaptations there don't fade quite so fast.


----------



## love4himies (Jun 12, 2012)

I think the point of this article is that we seem to be harder on cyclists that dope and are not so honorable in their personal lives, than other sports (Vick, Woods). Why are cyclists given 2 year bans when in other sports athletes caught doping are told they have to sit out a couple of games? 

And why a lifetime ban if the drugs they used don't give a lifetime advantage (EPO)?


----------



## Alaska Mike (Sep 28, 2008)

love4himies said:


> I think the point of this article is that we seem to be harder on cyclists that dope and are not so honorable in their personal lives, than other sports (Vick, Woods). Why are cyclists given 2 year bans when in other sports athletes caught doping are told they have to sit out a couple of games?
> 
> And why a lifetime ban if the drugs they used don't give a lifetime advantage (EPO)?


Vick competes in a sport that has a serious drug problem, but does not fall under WADA. The governing body, owners, fans, and advertisers have decided to look the other way about doping. If you can play ball, they'll forgive just about anything, as Vick's case demonstrates.

Woods competes in a sport that has a very small drug problem, and falls under WADA. I'm not sure how much testing they actually do, but my rough guess is that's it's on par with a Southern California Masters cycling race except for the Olympics or a major event. Just not on the radar. Tiger got raked over the coals in the press during his divorce (and rightly so), but that's not a offense that will get you banned.

You do realize people died during the early years of EPO use in the peloton? You do realize that EPO so fundamentally changed the sport at the professional level that clean cyclists could no longer compete at the level they once did and either left the sport voluntarily, were marginalized, or no longer had a team to ride for? Cycling lost a great many current and potential sponsors who were afraid of being associated with a sport that everyone considered "dirty". Under the structure of the UCI, that meant teams folded and people lost their jobs. EPO is far cheaper and easier to acquire than blood transfusions, so more of the peloton could pack their blood, resulting in higher speeds. EPO created an environment that fed on itself, and cycling lost.

At this point? Yeah, I'm all for lifetime bans for anyone who is busted for EPO. Do I think past offenders should get a lifetime ban? No. At one point many saw it as part of being a professional. If I put myself in their shoes, I probably would have done the same. However, cycling should draw a line in the sand and be very clear that this is the consequence of a positive finding. Will people still try to get around it by micro-dosing and watching their glow times? Sure, but at least the idiots will get caught and eliminated.

As for the other drugs like testosterone or HGH, I'd like to see the bans extended to 4 years. Drugs like Clembuterol prove more problematic, with food-borne contamination a real possibility in places like China. I'll let the guys with the 50lb brains figure that one out.

I don't race under WADA/USADA authority, but I mostly follow the guidelines, because I consider it the right thing to do. True, I'll take a banned cold medicine occasionally, but that's to keep my wife and 4 kids from getting sick, not for any performance-enhancing properties. If I'm taking those drugs, chances are performance is nothing I could be accused of having.

What is or is not prohibited isn't up to me, nor are the sanctions for offenses. I'm perfectly fine with that. However, if professional cycling is to survive, they need to ensure the culture between 1990(ish) and 2010(ish) never repeats itself. For the first time in a long time, I think they're actually trying. It may be far from perfect, but at least the UCI is slowly changing course.


----------

