<< the usage of EPO (and I assume other drugs similar to it) are NOT simple to use effectively (without dying) by any means. >>
Actually not. In pro cycling, the riders bring mobile blood testing equipment with them when they travel, and not unlike a diabetic monitors their blood sugar, the riders can monitor their hematocrit THEMSELVES on a daily or even hourly basis. There are not "numerous life threatening side effects" to the use of EPO, as any dialysis or chemotherapy patient will tell you. The only immediate "side effect" is not a side effect, but the primary effect, that is increasing the RBC count. It's simple: 45% hematocrit - good for riding, 50% crit - even better for riding, 60% - BEST - as long as you don't get caught. There are several documented cases of riders with hematocrits OVER 55% during stage races, so 60% will not kill you. Making sure that you don't "spike" your hematocrit through too much/too frequent dosing is not tricky, and making sure your hydration stays at a level high enough to prevent what you describe isn't hard either. Athletes can accomplish this without seeing the doctor every week. How long has it been since an elite athlete died? Last Fall, (I believe it was) a Spanish marathoner who was older than 35, and was formerly close to World Class, died from heart problems that smelled like blood doping complications. But it has been a long time since their were enough deaths to say that this is difficult to accomplish. I have read about long-term problems with EPO creating too much spent-RBC's that deposit huge amounts of iron into the blood, but I don't know exactly how it harms you. The article said that it would cause and promote pancreatic cancer and one other kind of cancer (I don't remember). The article tested French pro-cyclists blood for iron that wasn't attached to hemoglobin, and found levels that were 5-20 X the expected amount. They concluded that we probably would not know the effects of long-term use of EPO (at the dosage that athletes use it) for another 10 years. That is when they expected cancers to show up. /Brian McEwen P.S. I wish it was much harder for athletes to self-administer drugs, but it isn't hard. Think of how much recreational drug abuse occurs with much more deadly (and volatile) drugs, and how long the drug use occurs (10-20-30 years). Some of those people die, but not many, and they don't have any kind of doctor looking after them to make sure they live. -----Original Message----- From: Michael Contopoulos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 2:15 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pharmaco-economics was: t-and-f: Olympic DQ's Dan, the usage of EPO (and I assume other drugs similar to it) are NOT simple to use effectivley (without dying) by any means. You DO NOT just shoot yourself up and go to bed a happy fast little camper. In fact, EPO users recquire very close monitorization by a doctor or doctors as it has numerous life threatening side effects. The largest and most dangerous implication of EPO or other such drugs is that when you increase your blood to the point where 60% or more of it is made up of red blood cells, the blood becomes very thick. This thickening of the blood makes it hard for the heart to pump it, consequently resulting in cardiovascular problems that can be fatal. It is necessary to constantly monitor the athlete to test his RBC (Red Blood Cell) count, make sure his heart beat does not get below or above a certain point (often athletes are hooked up to machines at night while they sleep that beep loudly if their heartrate goes below a certain level), etc. Its not a simple procedure, but rather one that takes quite a bit of science, knowledge and intelligence. Mike >From: Dan Kaplan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Dan Kaplan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: T&F <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Pharmaco-economics was: t-and-f: Olympic DQ's >Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 10:01:12 -0800 (PST) > >--- Buck Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I always chuckle to myself when I read the oft-repeated idea that > > the athletes are ahead of the testers when it comes to science. > >What's so hard to believe about that? If someone can get their hands on >the stuff (hypothetically speaking, of course), I assume it takes most >semi-intelligent people very little science to inject or swallow it. On >the other hand, testing for it would take a whole lot more science beyond >just creating the drug, assuming the R&D leading to the patent did not >also include ways of testing for the drug's presence. > >Dan > >===== >http://AccountBiller.com - MyCalendar, D-Man, ReSearch, etc. >http://Run-Down.com - 10,000 Running Links, Fantasy T&F >------------------------------------------------------------ > @ o Dan Kaplan - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <|\/ <^- ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) >_/ \ \/\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] (lifetime forwarding address) > / / (503)370-9969 phone/fax > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email! >http://mail.yahoo.com/ _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
