# Hampsten on doping environment



## 97 Teran (Feb 17, 2004)

From the Daily Peloton... perhaps from another source prior (Eurosport? I think Hampsten was a guest columnist for them...)

http://www.dailypeloton.com/displayarticle.asp?pk=6730

Intelligent, reasonable comments welcome. Don't abuse this thread by being puerile and flaming either Lemond or Armstrong. The kiddy cycling pages are for that garbage, go there to hang out with others at a similar 'maturity' level.


EDIT- Ok, this is in another thread in the TdF forum for some reason... sorry to have replicated it...


----------



## shokhead1 (Jan 21, 2003)

Whats to say. They are concered about doping in cycling. I'm concered about doping anywhere. All that can be done is to test and make getting caught not worth it to anyone that had anything to do with it.


----------



## Tig (Feb 9, 2004)

*Doping "what if's"*

I’ve always respected Andy Hampsten. He is kind and soft spoken, with a natural talent many current pro’s would kill for. His article wisely doesn’t point fingers at Armstrong since Andy, like the rest of us, doesn’t have any solid proof against him. He mainly voices his concerns about the continuing problem of performance enhancing drugs in the pro peloton. However, by not questioning Lemond’s direct attack against Armstrong without evidence, he indirectly states that he believes Lemond’s accusations.

In the back of my mind, I worry that doping is far greater than we know of. I wonder about the “what if” scenarios. Remember, what I’m talking about is _“what if”, _ and not accusations. _*What if…*_ doping is so well managed that even the newest blood tests won’t reveal it most of the time. …that the recipe for doping without detection is as carefully adhered to as the top rider’s training regimes. …that some doped riders have been beating other equally or more talented riders that are clean. …that those clean riders will live without knowing that a top placing was robbed from them by a dishonest competitor. …or worse, almost every rider is secretly doping, so the playing field ends up staying level _(if so, the best are still beating the others through better training, stronger teams, stronger talent, and determination). _ …that the riders and teams are projecting a clean image that we innocently believe while they continue to dope in secret. …that the only clean riders _(after being caught)_ left are coming forth and spilling the beans and bearing the wrath of the dirty majority. What if… Armstrong has been doping for 6 TdF wins? If the world found out, the impact would be devastating to: the Tour, the teams, the sponsors, the whole sport of competitive cycling, cancer victims and survivors, and perhaps sports in general, not to mention all but erasing his accomplishments in cycling. 

Yes, all just a bunch of _hypothetical noise_, but I still can’t help wondering and doubting sometimes. I have also considered that disgruntled ex-teammates and workers could be playing the doping card to get back at someone, since they don’t have to offer any real proof to be heard by the eager press.

Personally, I doubt anyone could get away with doping consistently for 6 years in a row. I doubt Armstrong is doping. I doubt most pro's are doping. I hope my beliefs are real.

Remember how limited Pantani’s successes were after he raced clean? Some of his problems were psychological, but without the juice, he was no longer dominant. 

When I read articles like the CyclingNews.com one below, my worry becomes fear. I don’t want the riders I admire to turn out to be cheaters. None of us do!

*Former US Postal doctor speaks out * 
Prentice Steffen, a team doctor with the US Postal team in 1997, has alleged that he was sacked by the team that year for refusing to supply drugs to some of the riders. In comments made to AFP, Steffen said, "It was out of the question to carry out practices of this kind. But, after of my adamant refusal, I was simply thanked a few months later." 
According to Cyclingnews sources, the US Postal team felt that Steffen, emergency room physician by training did not have the expertise to be a cycling team doctor. 
Dr. Steffen left the team before Lance Armstrong arrived in 1998. He explained that "at that time, we were a small team with average ambitions. Everyone was clean. But one day, Marty Jemison and *Tyler Hamilton * came to ask me whether I could supply them with illegal products. I got the impression that they were speaking for everyone and that they had come to test the waters...To get to the top level, the team leaders were convinced that only doping would allow the team to obtain good results. From there, I understood that the whole mentality was changing."


----------



## azmadoc (Mar 23, 2004)

When most people speak of "doping" in cycling, they're referring to EPO, a synthetic hormone that stimulates red blood cell production. As I understand it, the test for this is a simple blood count or "hematocrit". If your hematocrit is too high, you're judged to have been abusing EPO. So, whether or not you use EPO, if you can't use it to raise your hematocrit higher than the next person, then you have no advantage. Besides this, the question remains whether EPO offers advantages to competitive athletes, since raising the hematocrit above a certain level increases blood viscosity, thus hindering oxygen delivery.


----------



## Sub (Feb 13, 2004)

innocent until proven guilty. I have no doubts Lance is not a doper. If realizes what cycling and life is about it's Lance after being on his death bed.


----------



## FunkySoul (Jun 8, 2004)

*Drugs*

From the atricles I've read on drugs in cycling, it appears that drugs are in fact a large part of pro cycling. The really issue is are they getting out of control.

Negative drug tests mean absolutely nothing. The drug companies are motivated to keep one step ahead of the testing and they have the resources to do so. Millar and several track athletes have never tested positive, yet they've admitted using drugs for months and years. 

Regarding the red blood cell levels in cyclists blood, I've heard from medical people that any kind of elevated level is proof of drug use. After exercise red blood cell levels should be decreased. Miraculously when pro riders finish a gruely stage the levels are increased. What does this mean? It means the cycling authorities know drugs are used and that they are just trying to keep it within limits. 

The goal of the cycling authorities is not to get rid the peleton of drugs but to manage it. 

That's my opinion and I'm sticking with it.


----------



## al0 (Jan 24, 2003)

FunkySoul said:


> Miraculously when pro riders finish a gruely stage the levels are increased. What does this mean? It means the cycling authorities know drugs are used and that they are just trying to keep it within limits.
> 
> .


No miracles - it just means some level of degidratation, i.e. loss of water is much higher then loss of blood cells. So *absolute *amount of blood cells is decreased but r*elative *(per cubic cm of blood) *increased*. And just later are measured in blood tests.


----------

