RE: t-and-f: EPO Question/steroids
On the question of steroids, Brian Mcewen wrote: > Only difference would > be that a typical NCAA-elite runner would face > testing at NCAA's only ... Not true. Division I NCAA track and field athletes are subject to year-round random testing for anabolic agents, diuretics, peptide hormones and analogues, and urine manipulators. 4.1.1. Student-athletes competing in Divisions I-A, I-AA or II football or Division I indoor or outdoor track and field are subject to year-round testing according to the provisions of Section No. 1.3.1.1. --- "Mcewen, Brian T" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > << How about steriods in college? >> > > Yes ... how about steroids ... they would be as > easily detected as they are > on the world-elite scene (i.e. lots of get with it). > Only difference would > be that a typical NCAA-elite runner would face > testing at NCAA's only ... at > least until they ran US Nationals or something else > post-season. You could > take them all year long. > > Ever hear of a guy named Stijn Jaspers? > > You would have been about 8 years old at the time, > but he ran 13:24 and died > (of heart failure I think). It was proven that he > was taking clenbuterol, > and I remember more than one DIV I coach was fired > over this. > > /Brian McEwen > > > -Original Message- > From: alan tobin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 2:35 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: t-and-f: EPO Question > > > How about steriods in college? I think it would be > extremely easy to get > ahold of steriods, but would also be very easily > detectable. > > Alan > > http://www.geocities.com/runningart2004 > > > >From: "Turner, Andrew" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: 'alan tobin' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: RE: t-and-f: EPO Question > >Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 13:22:32 -0500 > >MIME-Version: 1.0 > >Received: from [129.59.1.103] by hotmail.com (3.2) > with ESMTP id > >MHotMailBD3193E100A140042A22813B01670B730; Wed, 01 > Aug 2001 11:22:26 -0700 > >Received: by exchange1.mail.Vanderbilt.Edu with > Internet Mail Service > >(5.5.2650.21)id <35D083SK>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 > 13:22:39 -0500 > >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed, 01 Aug 2001 > 11:23:28 -0700 > >Message-ID: > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) > > > >Blood doping is less expensive if you have a > reliable person to handle the > >blood and somewhere to store it. Have there been > cases where collegiate > >athletes have been caught blood doping? How, if, is > it similar to EPO? > > > >-Drew > > > > > >-Original Message- > >From: alan tobin > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > >Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 12:50 PM > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: Re: t-and-f: EPO Question > > > > > >Costs way too much. One vial I believe is $1000? > Not sure on that though. > >Plus, if college athletes were using we'd see a lot > faster times, world > >elite type times. > > > >Alan > >http://www.geocities.com/runningart2004 > > > > > > >From: Jason Wiens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Reply-To: Jason Wiens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >To: Track and Field List > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Subject: t-and-f: EPO Question > > >Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 09:02:08 -0700 (PDT) > > >MIME-Version: 1.0 > > >Received: from [128.223.142.13] by hotmail.com > (3.2) with ESMTP id > > >MHotMailBD3173610046400431A380DF8E0DFCE20; Wed, > 01 Aug 2001 09:03:59 > >-0700 > > >Received: (from majordom@localhost)by > darkwing.uoregon.edu > >(8.10.1/8.10.1) > > >id f71G2BC21859for t-and-f-outgoing; Wed, 1 Aug > 2001 09:02:11 -0700 (PDT) > > >Received: from unicorn.it.wsu.edu > ([EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >[134.121.1.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu > (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id > > >f71G29A21833for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, > 1 Aug 2001 09:02:09 > >-0700 > > > > >(PDT) > > >Received: from localhost (jwiens@localhost)by > unicorn.it.wsu.edu > > >(8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA07504for > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, > > >1 > > > > >Aug 2001 09:02:08 -0700 (PDT) > > >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed, 01 Aug > 2001 09:05:47 -0700 > > >X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >Message-ID: > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >Precedence: bulk > > > > > > > > >I'm wondering what people think the prevalence of > EPO use is among > >College > > >athletes? How would factors like cost, > availability, access to a medical > > >doctor affect the use and possibly make its use > prohibitive? > > > > > >Thank you for your help, > > > > > >Jason > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Anything that enters your HEART > changes YOU! > > > > _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ > > > _/Research Associate >_/ > > > _/Department of VCAPP >_/ > > > _/Washington State > University
RE: t-and-f: EPO Question/steroids
A few notes to add to this debate. I took a pharmacology class this spring and wrote a review type paper on the present state of what is known of EPO and some of its uses and misuses. If anyone wants to look at it or see some of the sources I found email me privately. Secondly I agree with Buck completely. EPO is dangerous. Carefully monitored it can be helpful. I believe the doses used in some of the elite athlete trials that have been done were 50 unit injections received daily. The enhancement on a cardiovascular test after 3 weeks of receiving injections was something on the order of 15% increase in cardiovascular run time on a treadmill (with the discontinuation of treatment if the Hematocrit level got above a certain %). If someone does the math on that its a pretty good sized improvement. BUT BUT BUT BUT, there are some very serious risks that one is taking by using EPO. First is that using it will actually CAUSE anemia if you don't take supplements (As Buck mentioned), and the viscosity of your blood can get so high with increase in RBC levels that you have a great strain on your heart. Is it something college athletes use? Probably not, is it available to one of these athletes? Maybe but that is unclear. If the athlete did obtain it there would be so many factors that must be monitored for it to be effective that it would take a few very well trained doctors to do it. Why do you think Lance Armstrong has an entourage? (Not saying he is doped, but heck he has a guy that his sole job is to set up Lances altitude tent!!!). Lastly but definitely not least, the kids that Brian said stopped smoking pot 10 days before a drug test either 1) All failed that drug test because it takes at LEAST 30 days for THC to go down to a low level to not be detected (by most standard tests)or 2) They wanted to sound cool and anti-authority about the test and actually were not dope smokers. Oh, and one final thing. A professor here at Duke (the one who taught this pharmacology class I took) has written a new and really good book about a variety of different drugs used in sports. It is called 'Pumped' and is by Cindy Kuhn. Jeremy Block Duke University PS -- Because of the way recombinant EPO (rhEPO) was made you can now test for it using markers I believe.
Re: t-and-f: EPO Question/steroids
In a message dated 8/2/01 5:11:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Lastly but definitely not least, the kids that Brian said stopped smoking pot > 10 days before a drug test either 1) All failed that drug test because it > takes at LEAST 30 days for THC to go down to a low level to not be detected ( > by most standard tests)or 2) They wanted to sound cool and anti-authority > about the test and actually were not dope smokers. You can clear in a week. Particularly if you have low body fat, don't smoke chronically and you drink a ton of water. 30 days is the standard for daily users. Mike
RE: t-and-f: EPO Question/steroids
I was tested. Notified the day before the test and then had to go in and give a sample. This was winter of 2000. I also know someone who was "busted" for steroid use by the NCAA... so they do test with little notice AND find positive cases. Often an athletics dept tries to cover up the charge, however, so as to pretect their name. That is why you don't hear about it that often. In the NCAA you get a one year ban, so I imagine a lot of athletes use that as their redshirt year. M >From: "Mcewen, Brian T" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: "Mcewen, Brian T" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: t-and-f: EPO Question/steroids >Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 10:11:38 -0400 > ><<< Division I NCAA track and field athletes are >subject to year-round random testing for anabolic >agents, diuretics, peptide hormones and analogues, and >urine manipulators. >>> > >This is true ... they are SUBJECT to it ... but ask them how many times >they >actually GET TESTED. > > >The athletes that lived near me used to tell me they were going through >withdrawal ... because they were due for drug testing in 10 days. They had >to quit smoking pot during that time. > >The frequency of testing and advance notice may vary from region to region >and may have changed in the last ten years but you can certainly get >away with steroid use in NCAA athletics. > _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
RE: t-and-f: EPO Question/steroids
<<< Division I NCAA track and field athletes are subject to year-round random testing for anabolic agents, diuretics, peptide hormones and analogues, and urine manipulators. >>> This is true ... they are SUBJECT to it ... but ask them how many times they actually GET TESTED. The athletes that lived near me used to tell me they were going through withdrawal ... because they were due for drug testing in 10 days. They had to quit smoking pot during that time. The frequency of testing and advance notice may vary from region to region and may have changed in the last ten years but you can certainly get away with steroid use in NCAA athletics.
