OT - floyd tests positive for testosterone

Anders wrote:
Peter H. kirjoitti:


If you were real tired at 6 PM from a long endurance effort,
and either orally or by muscular injection took some testosterone
then, would it be of any advantage in an endurance effort that started
at noon the next day? If so, what would the advantage be?

FWIW a Finnish anti-doping doc made the general suggestion that this
kind of positive test result could have come as a huge surprise to the
athlete and his team if and when he was given a blood transfusion for
recovery and performance gain and, as I understood it, when he/ had
been given a testosterone boost before collecting the blood used for
that transfusion.

That's an interesting idea, if I understand it.
But with out-of-competition, unannounced testing,
wouldn't it be pretty risky anytime to be taking
a "boost" of testosterone?
Especially if a blood transfusion of, say, 1/5
of your blood volume supposedly put the tested ratio up to 5:1
(all we know is it tested over 4:1),
I would assume that the "boost" would have to have
raised it at that time to something like 25:1.
Maybe I'm doing the arithmetic
wrong (notice that I didn't say "math"!),
but I don't know the chemical details,
so might get it wrong anyway.

In any case, do they take a blood (as well as urine) sample
after winning a stage?
If so, presumbly they could detect any recent blood transfusion;
there is a test for that now.

Today's NYTimes has a article which indicates that testosterone
seems to give some kind of psychological boost
to quick recovery, so maybe that
answers my earlier question.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/31/sp...html?th&emc=th

Best, Peter

Ethanol consumption is said to be very effective to raise this ratio. So,
alcohol.

Floyd was having beers and Jack Daniels on the night after his bonking. His
body must have been craving anything fat, sugury, alcoholic.

However, while ethanol effects epitest/testosteros levels, alcohol
consumption is allowed, as it does not improve performance.

"Matt" schreef in bericht
...
A thought...............

Floyd's failed test was a ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone, where
4:1 equals failure. There are two ways to raise this ratio. Increase
testosterone levels OR decrease epitestosterone levels.

Does anyone here know what could cause the levels of epitestosterone to
drop, as compared to the testosterone levels being increased?

Thanks,
Matt


"32 degrees" wrote in message
...
complete and pretty good summary on www.velonews.com

still have to test B sample and do endocrinological history to see if
its
natural but doesnt sound good

JK

"Jan Gerrit Klok" wrote in message
.. .
Ethanol consumption is said to be very effective to raise this ratio. So,
alcohol.

Floyd was having beers and Jack Daniels on the night after his bonking.
His
body must have been craving anything fat, sugury, alcoholic.

However, while ethanol effects epitest/testosteros levels, alcohol
consumption is allowed, as it does not improve performance.

At some ski WC event there were offered beer amongst other drinks for the
competitors to speed up the sample giving process, but there weren't a
massive amount of positive testosterone cases. Unless this was already in
the 70's when they were looking rather the stimulants than hormones. Anyway,
the amounts of alcohol required for raising testo levels are far more than
couple of beers and whiskeys, and the time frame should be hour or two, not
like twenty hours.

"Matt" schreef in bericht
...
A thought...............

Floyd's failed test was a ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone, where
4:1 equals failure. There are two ways to raise this ratio. Increase
testosterone levels OR decrease epitestosterone levels.

Does anyone here know what could cause the levels of epitestosterone to
drop, as compared to the testosterone levels being increased?

Thanks,
Matt

The import of testosterone would close the body's own testosterone and
epitestosterone production. I suppose, when the B sample is analysed, they
go with more detailed tests, as now they already know what they are
searching.

Antti

Peter H. wrote:

That's an interesting idea, if I understand it.

You probably understand it, but the question is did *I* get it right in
the first place: the nincompoop of a TV sports journalist who
"interviewed" the doc failed to answer the obvious followup questions
(or maybe she did ask them but the editor preferred footage of her
looking suitably sexy but sporty behind a microphone and repeating the
things everyone already knew about the case).


But with out-of-competition, unannounced testing,
wouldn't it be pretty risky anytime to be taking
a "boost" of testosteron

Apparently if you use testosterone in oral form, the time margin you
need to beat the test is always less and usually much less than 48
hours. If you believe your early warning system is good enough or your
ability to predict when the testers will or will not arrive, you may
think that the risk is manageable. And there's always a certain period
of time during which you can try to make yourself scarce and let time
or party tricks work for you, if the risk materializes.


Especially if a blood transfusion of, say, 1/5
of your blood volume supposedly put the tested ratio up to 5:1
(all we know is it tested over 4:1),
I would assume that the "boost" would have to have
raised it at that time to something like 25:1.
Maybe I'm doing the arithmetic
wrong (notice that I didn't say "math"!),
but I don't know the chemical details,
so might get it wrong anyway.

The blood used in the transfusions is sort of condensed stuff, which
could - but only could as in maybe or maybe not - mean that you could
get a greater concentration than in whole blood. I don't really have
any idea about the volumes involved, either.

Your arithmetic strikes me as right, assuming you are transfusing one
1/5 on top of the 5/5 with a ratio of 1:1 but, using the same
arithmetic, with a pre-transfusion ratio of 3:1, you'd need "only" a
15:1 in the transfused blood to get a 5:1 in the test.


If my understanding of the doc's theory - which he offered as a general
explanation only because he didn't know the details about the Landis
case - is right, there would still remain the obvious question: why
would you be so stupid as to collect the blood for the transfusion just
when the testosterone ratio is high?

Maybe that is exactly the time when you must do it, but you would
normally expect to finetune it right and to remain just inside the
allowed limits - and believing that you are clever and that something
is foolproof for a clever guy is one sure way to end up looking foolish
or worse one day. (Just ask certain Finnish skiers and coaches...)


In any case, do they take a blood (as well as urine) sample
after winning a stage?

No idea. Don't they take pre-race hemocrit tests just like they do
hemoglobin tests in XC races - but that's about it for normal
procedure, unless WADA testers steps in.


If so, presumbly they could detect any recent blood transfusion;
there is a test for that now.

I gather that the existing test only detects blood from outside donors
and that there is no longer a valid, approved test for homologous
transfusions yet.


Today's NYTimes has a article which indicates that testosterone
seems to give some kind of psychological boost
to quick recovery, so maybe that
answers my earlier question.

This would indeed be an explanation. BTW what normally happens to
testosterone levels or ratios during a long endurance event such as a
Tour de France mountain stage?


Anders