testosterone doping

[xcrunner]

Well we all know that Floyd Landis, after winning his first Tour de France tested positive for a drug test after stage 17. While he still remains innocent (the second test has confirmed the results of Test A), his reputation is probably forever tarnished.

Justin Gatlin (USA) is now facing a similar fate as Landis. Gatlin, who shares the 100m world record of 9.77 seconds with Asafa Powell (JAM), tested positive for "'testosterone or its precursors.'" Gatlin tested positive for a doping charge in 2001 at the US Junior Championships. A later charge was dropped because Gatlin's ADD medicine made a test come back positive. If convicted for this latest case of doping, Gatlin could face a life ban from IAAF events.

So we have Landis and Gatlin who both have tested positive for excess testosterone levels. The current level set by WADA is a 4:1 testeosterone to epitestosterone ratio. Over the years WADA has lowered the limit; it was 6:1 and even as high as 8:1 at some points. In most cases, testosterone levels are influenced by genetics.

I don't know much about biology, but it seems if so many athletes are testing positive now, maybe the ratio of testosterone has been set too high. If these athletes are doping though, I do believe that they should be punished.

So, do you think that testosterone doping standards are too low?

[dramamine]

From what I have read the levels are very reasonable. Even athletes who are genetically gifted (which most high level athletes are) should be O.K. under the current rules. Of course there might be a genetic freak here and there (I don't know enough about it to be sure that there isn't an athlete who has been screwed by the new standards) it's kind of a catch 22: if we let the freaks set the standard, then what's to stop someone from low dose testosterone to achieve "freak" status? I'm not sure what the answer is.

In terms of prolific drug use in high level sports I think the problem has come up because of slack standards in the past and many doctors being on the side of the athletes. I often wonder if there is a solution to this problem at all. I have spoken with Division 1 track and field athletes as well as football players and by the sounds of it the rate of drug use at this level is extremely high (greater than 50%). In professional sports the athletes make more than enough money to beat the tests.

Random thoughts, no conclusion. It's all pretty depressing.

[banane16]

actually, i have read that with "normal" pepeole, the testosterone ratio ist 1:1, very rarely 1:2. so i do not think that those high levels occur only by "genetic predisposition".

after all, as not everyone with a genetic predisposition becomes a high level athlete, there should be some cases in medical studies where "normal" people have a simular high testosterone level. but it seems are not.

so, only conclusion: doping is very common in some particular fields in sport (if not at allmost all pro/high level sports).

i do believe there are genetic diffences amongst people, but i am pretty sure, that the are ususally not this wide. after all, if a person has such a high level of a hormon "naturally" for some time, it must cause some effects that require medical attention.

but you never hear about this, the abnormality is only discovered, when an unexpected doping screening is done. how naiive would i have to be, to believe that no manipulation of any kind has happened?

there still is one thing i doe not understand: pro athletes rely on their body to make a living, but still they seem to regulariely torture it which substances not properly tested, which cause very early death with some of their collegues. are they to stupid to be horrified of death or serius damage?

[xcrunner]

Originally Posted by banane16

but you never hear about this, the abnormality is only discovered, when an unexpected doping screening is done. how naiive would i have to be, to believe that no manipulation of any kind has happened?

Ah, but athletes know when they will be tested. In some sports, fencing, distance running, sprints, cycling all athletes know what places (at the finish) will be tested. and then you have random testing if the USADA or WADA thinks they need to do it. This is just a comment, but in Lance Armstrong's case, didn't it seem that he was strangely chosen in every random drug test?...

[brutus]

Landis hasn't tested 'Positive' for anything yet!!! It really annoys me when I hear/read in the news about how Landis has failed a doping test and has 'tested positive for Testosterone'!!

All the test showed was an elavated Testosterone/Epitestosterone ratio. Until they can prove that he has been using DHEA or similar gear wich would account for the increased Testosterone level along with the low level of Epitestosterone, I dont see how they can punish him. There are natural Test boosters that one can take such as Bulgarian Trib that raise Test levels but I am unsure of Their affect on Epitestosterone levels.

Note: The threshold is currently 4:1 Testosterone/Epitestosterone. It used to be 6:1 not sure why they changed it.

[banane16]

i am not sure how easy it is to tamper with doping tests, or to place some substance in an athletes food/water, if he is due to a screening. i am pretty sure, that there has been tries to do so.

however, if it comes to armstrong (or landis): i do not think that they have been treated unfair, though they might have been tested more often than others. they are high profile athletes, after all!

and if the were not using any illegal substance at any time, which they claim, it should be no problem to be tested as often as WADA likes it - the have nothing to hide, have they?

i still think that those tests must be pretty unnerving at a contest situation. however, i am pretty sure that no high profile athlete in the cycling circuit is innocent - what they do is so very very far beyond everything a "normal", well trained person is able to, there must be some "help".

[brutus]

Originally Posted by banane16

however, i am pretty sure that no high profile athlete in the cycling circuit is innocent - what they do is so very very far beyond everything a "normal", well trained person is able to, there must be some "help".

Thats a bit of an ingnorant stance dont you think. To say that all elite level cyclists are amazing athletes so they must be on the juice?!
These people are mutants in their own right, If you research Lance Armstrong you'll find out about his crazy VO2 max, his big old heart and his previous results in triathelon (I think). (Armstrong has never been tested positive!!!!)

[banane16]

Originally Posted by brutus

Landis hasn't tested 'Positive' for anything yet!!! It really annoys me when I hear/read in the news about how Landis has failed a doping test and has 'tested positive for Testosterone'!!

from what i read, he HAS been tested positive with the "A probe", and in 99.9 % of all cases, an athletes B probe has shown the same result. so i think it is highly unlikely that he is innocent, though the second result is not known yet.

if there are "natural" substance that raise levels of homons tested, i am pretty sure the equipes medical teams knows about this "freak food" and tells the athletes about it. come one, landis had to expect to be tested winning the tour de france, if he is stupid enough to tamper with anything, he just deserves to be punished. sometimes it takes not only legs, but brains, too.

i think, those recurring scandals about doping set up a very bad example for young athletes and any growing up person. i mean, why should they stay away from illegal substances of any kind, if sportsmen/women use them to get rich and famous?

[banane16]

Originally Posted by brutus

(Armstrong has never been tested positive!!!!)

i have read that there is a strong indication that armstrong HAS used EPO at a time where there were no good tests available. when an old probe was tested by accident, it turned out that it was positive. there is no other "natural" reason why this should occur.

he was never officially convicted though.

that elite cyclists can only do what they do with doping i read in an international newspaper lately, in an article by an high profile sports medicine expert.

however, i am no expert in this field, but for various reasons i do believe this expert more than eg. landis, who was convicted for doping before, as far as i know.

[brutus]

Originally Posted by banane16

from what i read, he HAS been tested positive with the "A probe", and in 99.9 % of all cases, an athletes B probe has shown the same result. so i think it is highly unlikely that he is innocent, though the second result is not known yet.

if there are "natural" substance that raise levels of homons tested, i am pretty sure the equipes medical teams knows about this "freak food" and tells the athletes about it. come one, landis had to expect to be tested winning the tour de france, if he is stupid enough to tamper with anything, he just deserves to be punished. sometimes it takes not only legs, but brains, too.

i think, those recurring scandals about doping set up a very bad example for young athletes and any growing up person. i mean, why should they stay away from illegal substances of any kind, if sportsmen/women use them to get rich and famous?

As I said earlier he has tested 'positive' for a higher than normal ratio of tes/epitest not for an actual substance!! plus I think they said that his actual test level was quite low.

Checked on wada I dont think natural test boosters are banned.

Originally Posted by banane16

i have read that there is a strong indication that armstrong HAS used EPO at a time where there were no good tests available. when an old probe was tested by accident, it turned out that it was positive. there is no other "natural" reason why this should occur.

Yeah sorry about that he has but wasn't 'convicted' the test prob showed higher than normal levels of red blood cells as thats what epo is used for.

[banane16]

Originally Posted by brutus

As I said earlier he has tested 'positive' for a higher than normal ratio of tes/epitest not for an actual substance!! plus I think they said that his actual test level was quite low.

Checked on wada I dont think natural test boosters are banned.



Yeah sorry about that he has but wasn't 'convicted' the test prob showed higher than normal levels of red blood cells as thats what epo is used for.

as far as i understand, landis A test has been declared "positive" by WADA, which makes him a suspect by the law of this organisation, which he has agreed to follow by being a pro. how this result happened, in the end makes not much of a difference. if the B probe is positive, too, he is "technically" guilty. full stop. if the tested condition was "natural" with him, do you really think with all the medical attention a bike pro gets, this sondition was not discovered earlier? sorry, i do not believe this.

by the time armstrongs test was done, by the WADA law he did nothing wrong, so "technically" he remains not guilty. in my eyes, the result makes him morally questionable, too. but this is a matter of taste, in the end.

in my opinion, there are only two ways to get of the doping dilemma: either you make sure that pros are clean ALL THE TIME, by daily testing. or you drop all doping rules and give in to the fact that you can not win against criminals. then, every pro may do as he likes, and face likely early death.

[chefencer]

Slate: Tour de Farce
Floyd Landis' positive test shows why drug testing will never work.

[Feltan]

Given our national character, I think it both reasonable and normal that Americans be allowed a higher testosterone level -- they should be allowed to carry guns too.

Regards,
Feltan

[KD5MDK]

Originally Posted by banane16

i have read that there is a strong indication that armstrong HAS used EPO at a time where there were no good tests available. when an old probe was tested by accident, it turned out that it was positive. there is no other "natural" reason why this should occur.

he was never officially convicted though.

that elite cyclists can only do what they do with doping i read in an international newspaper lately, in an article by an high profile sports medicine expert.

however, i am no expert in this field, but for various reasons i do believe this expert more than eg. landis, who was convicted for doping before, as far as i know.

Armstrong's retained samples were not tested "by accident". When you sign the waiver form, you acknowledge that your unused samples may be used in research after the required retaining period is expired, as long as all identifying information is not released. So, chain of events, from the report of the independent auditor:
1) Lance competes in TdF, signs waiver, gives sample.
2) Sample split into A and B portions. A portion tested. (There is no test for EPO at this time.)
3) Years pass, with the B sample frozen in a labratory. Lab decides to do research on detecting EPO. Decides to use leftover B samples in storage that are no longer supposed to be used for testing.
4) Results of tests on tubes are published, with results being sent to French Ministry of Sport and WADA. The labratory for no explicable reason (the attribute it to WADA pressure) includes the test tube serial numbers on the report, despite the pledge of confidentiality for research work on the waiver, etc.
5) French newspaper publishes the research report the very day after the report was sent to the Ministry and WADA. Accuses Armstrong of using EPO in the 1998 and 1999 Tours.
6) WADA sends a letter to the international cycling federation, stating that evidence indicates LA used EPO in past Tours and requests sanctions be applied to him.
7) UCI (cycling federation) points out to WADA that the samples tested were years old, and well past their certified date for use in doping control, that the lab was testing a detection method, not using an approved one, that there was no B sample to prove that an error was not made, the athlete was never informed that research that could personally identify them was going on or would be released, and that there was no chain of custody for the sample between when the retention period ended and when the results were released.

All this is from the report of the independent investigator hired by the UCI, who is the head of the Netherlands ADA and I would say pretty knowledgeable about this field. Is it possible that LA used EPO in the 98 and 99 Tours? Yes it is. However, the evidence that indicates that is dwarfed by the mishandled procedures, breaches of privacy, absence of doping control standards being followed, and reasonable evidence that the WADA was willing to ignore its own ethics policy in an attempt to get Lance Armstrong.