It's strange that no matter how bad my week went, how poorly I slept the few nights prior, and sometimes even how much beer I drank the night before, the pain of a cyclocross race brings a little smile to my face (I guess I talk to angels).
Yesterday was St Vincent, on the north side of St Louis. It's a park near Normandy high school, and as someone who grew up south, within the erected and metaphoric walls of Clayton, it's a really special place to race. The park is just this crazy anomaly of topographical terrain in the middle of an area of St Louis that will likely never be cool or gentrified. The nearby buildings have really cool old architecture and I swear the park has this grass more like some kind of emerald-irish-isle, then anywhere else in St Louis.
In terms of Bubba history, it's the infamous sight of my buddy Schottler's incredible solo effort off the front, only to be slowly reeled in by the ever methodical and well-paced Butthead. Last year, I won there...whilst sick as a dog. This year I don't think I'm quite so stupid or motivated to race sick (although my child is sick right now and with my luck, I'm virtually certain I'll catch it in time for the state cyclocross next weekend).
The real story yesterday, is one that's been interwoven into Missouri cyclocross for a long time, but highlighted yesterday because it's a trend likely to continue; we love cyclocross in BoCoMo. My teamate Jesse Maggard won the B race! Mike Morgan, who was riding a hunk of junk bike that if he doesn't like he should trade wit me, was top 5. And the A race saw PedNet director Lawrence Simonson, Butthead, and myself 5th, 2nd, and 1st respectively.
Two things I've learned in cyclocross this year:
1. Pacing on a qualitative scale: Basically there are 4 effort levels in a cross race, that over the course of racing this year, feel incredibly distinct and concrete.
-Warm-up spinning; this is easy, like Z1 or Z2 HR, 0-220watts
-Lung pace: this is typical 'tempo' riding of a cross race. You're pushing the pedals hard, but if you're driving your bike well and getting in a little recovery on the sections that allow for it, breathing is still out of the nose. It's probably like upper Z3 to Z4 HR, 240-300watts, RPE 5-7. The thing about lung pace is that it's sufficiently discombobulating that driving the bike becomes more difficult.
-Leg pace: These are the efforts that make cross a unique form of cycling...these are the repeated bursts of power the occur coming out of corners, on the climbs, over the bumps, and in a UCI race...they're basically the whole damn race. These are HR Z5, and are >320watts, with the shorter accelerations being 400-800w, RPE 8.
-Heart pace: this is when you put your chips in. Leg pace is part of the game and shouldn't hurt that bad. Heart pace is when you stretch out the leg pace into long efforts and you start to suck more at driving the bike. This is when you're gassed, seeing cross eyed. This is RPE 9 to 10.
2. Cross is just silly expensive. A broken fork and tubular this year isn't quite as bad as a couple of broken derailleurs and a broken frame last year, but it still sucks. I originally wanted to go to nationals again this year, but mostly due to funds, will be packing things up and selling a bunch of cross equipment after the state race next week. The reality of my wife still being on student loans and me with an incredibly meager scientist-level income (with 2 more years of student loans beginning next June when I finish up med school) has completely set-in. My choices need to be more sustainable and I'm not sure that cross, at least not in the way that I've approached it, will be in the cards for me next year.
Monday, December 3, 2012
Friday, November 30, 2012
Monday, November 26, 2012
Back at it
After a week in Florida, a couple weeks easy due to injury, and 4 weekends of not racing I wasn't quite sure what to expect in coming back to Bubba #9 at Spanish Lake this past Sunday. The night before consisted of solid family-man, local cat 2 race preparation; a bourbon tasting, a bunch of delicious holiday beers following a day of errands, way too much dessert, a little housework, and a hike with the family.
Alas, sometimes rest following a year of good preparation is a good thing. The calf seems to be fully healed, and I was probably the only one happy to see that yesterday's course had absolutely no dismounting at all. In fact, it was a gravel road race....like 17.5-18mph average fast cross race.
Within a couple of laps, it was myself, Butthead (I'm going to call him that until he carpools to a race with me), future-domestic pro Devin Clark, and Colorado native Taylor Carrington (number 1 ranked 30-39 year old cat 2 cyclocrosser in the country) dragging each other around. A washout would remove Devin from the mix and the last lap was pure planning and strategy. I was 3rd wheel on the 1.33 gravel road, which was a pretty good place to be. The last 1/4 lap had a grassy very steep kicker, then a couple turns followed by a big-ring grinder gravel climb, a couple of turns, then a pretty long pavement finish straight. I wanted to get around both of them on the first kicker and peg it up the longer gravel climb but couldn't manage to get around Josh, er Butthead until we got onto the gravel. At that point, it was wide enough for Taylor to come with me. He then followed my wheel for a sprint finish.
Above, I should have remembered that air drag increases with the square of speed. Oops.
Didn't quite make that one. Dang it was fun though.
Monday, November 5, 2012
Cross season
Over the last few years, I transitioned from a minimalist commuter on a surly showing up at my first cyclocross race in a Tshirt, to a dedicated competitor with multiple skinsuits, tires for every condition, and identical carbon race bikes. My wife has been more-or-less supportive of this change. I really do have fun racing my bike and try to keep it real and not make things to serious. The only problem with the cyclocross season (from both of our perspectives) is that it is a period of time of weekly racing (requiring 4+ hrs in the car every single weekend), during a time of the year when so many awesome things are going on. The training has always been the easy part for me. Riding 1 to 2 hrs Tue-Thurs isn't work and I really don't care what the weather is like; it keeps me sane and I do it regardless of whether or not I was racing. But seriously, do you know how many amazing beers come out in the fall? Yes, they can all wait til January, and I can practice moderation now, but I really don't want too.
All things in moderation, including moderation.
I really want to be a good dad. And husband. And also friend, son, brother, mountain bike racer, and cross racer. And on top of those things, I really, really care about being a good scientist. And doctor. And unfortunately, I kind of give a shit about this election tomorrow. And reading. Plus, there's a bunch of good food too cook, vegetables too grow, beer to drink, house projects too complete, and maybe there'll be some time to watch some sports on TV. Or maybe a movie.
So much for voluntary simplicity.
Two Sunday's ago, I raced in KC and ended up having some really nasty calf pain towards the end of the race. It seemed like a cramp and therefore ignorable, but it actually got worse once I stopped racing. And by the time I drove home, it was totally debilitating, leaving me hopping around and needing crutches at first. I saw a couple of sports docs on Monday, who both thought I tore a muscle in my calf and that it would take 6-8weeks too fully heal. Luckily I was scheduled to fly down to Florida on Wednesday morning for a few days on the beach at this medical conference my wife's family attends every year, so I had the opportunity to be away from bikes and to relax.
After talking things over with my wife, I decided that it'd be better to 'let-go' and re-focus for the remainder of the fall. Time to get into the gym, start riding my mountain bike more, and planning for next mountain bike season.
Florida was awesome.
All things in moderation, including moderation.
I really want to be a good dad. And husband. And also friend, son, brother, mountain bike racer, and cross racer. And on top of those things, I really, really care about being a good scientist. And doctor. And unfortunately, I kind of give a shit about this election tomorrow. And reading. Plus, there's a bunch of good food too cook, vegetables too grow, beer to drink, house projects too complete, and maybe there'll be some time to watch some sports on TV. Or maybe a movie.
So much for voluntary simplicity.
Two Sunday's ago, I raced in KC and ended up having some really nasty calf pain towards the end of the race. It seemed like a cramp and therefore ignorable, but it actually got worse once I stopped racing. And by the time I drove home, it was totally debilitating, leaving me hopping around and needing crutches at first. I saw a couple of sports docs on Monday, who both thought I tore a muscle in my calf and that it would take 6-8weeks too fully heal. Luckily I was scheduled to fly down to Florida on Wednesday morning for a few days on the beach at this medical conference my wife's family attends every year, so I had the opportunity to be away from bikes and to relax.
After talking things over with my wife, I decided that it'd be better to 'let-go' and re-focus for the remainder of the fall. Time to get into the gym, start riding my mountain bike more, and planning for next mountain bike season.
Thursday, November 1, 2012
Movember
Sometimes I catch myself being a crotchety-old-grouch when it comes to certain cancer related things. For example, when I read about 'X' cancer awareness campaign, I find myself thinking, 'what exactly are we supposed to be aware of'?
The statistics? Yes, the figures are staggering; just about everyone knows someone who's died from cancer. Residents of the US have about a 1 in 5 chance of dying of cancer. In 2008, ~5-600,000 people in the US died from cancer (23% of all mortality), which is a frequency surpassed only by heart/vascular disease.
That people do research and that private/donor money is important for research? Well, that's a huge area that does need more awareness.
Recently I was riding by some outdoor University tennis courts. There were a ton of construction workers putting some kind of pipes and electrical stuff under the courts. I don't know this for sure, but it seemed like they were installing equipment that will help keep the outdoor courts warm during the cold months of the year. I counted the construction workers; there were 46 of them. Oh yeah, and these courts are right next to an indoor tennis facility. But, I guess now that we're in the SEC, we need to keep up with Georgia, Florida, et al.
Meanwhile, researchers and students pinch pennies and pray for miracles.
Sometimes I think I'm crazy for taking the MD/PhD educational route at my particular University. But when I examine my value system and my motivation, deep down I believe that research is important for society and that my voice in research (as someone with cancer) is important. It's a little sad, but there was a facebook conversation/debate I recently witnessed where someone was basically saying that research is really only funded by the private sector and that basic science research does little for the economy. Unfortunately, after really thinking about the economics of things and reading this, I can't really disprove that point of view. But, I BELIEVE that it is wrong. And I choose to BELIEVE that discoveries made on the bench-top do lead to improvements in patient care and that these discoveries, no matter how obscure or strange sounding, often do spur economic growth (both because Universities create jobs and because discoveries are often open sourced and can be built upon by a poor grad student in Cambodia or Genentech).
Anyway, my point in all of this: we need to examine our beliefs, our priorities, and realize that gestures like growing a mustache or wearing pink also need to be backed up with tangible substance. It's not just the thought that counts. Wearing pink in October is fine and dandy, but it doesn't make anyone a better person for doing so, and ultimately it doesn't mean much unless it really inspires people to work for change...maybe it's figuring out WHY the breast cancer statistics are as they are or any number of other questions. Or maybe someone interested in doing something positive would donate to the University of Missouri MD/PhD program? Clearly our University is more interested in things in the same ballpark as the football coaches incredible salary.
The statistics? Yes, the figures are staggering; just about everyone knows someone who's died from cancer. Residents of the US have about a 1 in 5 chance of dying of cancer. In 2008, ~5-600,000 people in the US died from cancer (23% of all mortality), which is a frequency surpassed only by heart/vascular disease.
That people do research and that private/donor money is important for research? Well, that's a huge area that does need more awareness.
Recently I was riding by some outdoor University tennis courts. There were a ton of construction workers putting some kind of pipes and electrical stuff under the courts. I don't know this for sure, but it seemed like they were installing equipment that will help keep the outdoor courts warm during the cold months of the year. I counted the construction workers; there were 46 of them. Oh yeah, and these courts are right next to an indoor tennis facility. But, I guess now that we're in the SEC, we need to keep up with Georgia, Florida, et al.
Meanwhile, researchers and students pinch pennies and pray for miracles.
Sometimes I think I'm crazy for taking the MD/PhD educational route at my particular University. But when I examine my value system and my motivation, deep down I believe that research is important for society and that my voice in research (as someone with cancer) is important. It's a little sad, but there was a facebook conversation/debate I recently witnessed where someone was basically saying that research is really only funded by the private sector and that basic science research does little for the economy. Unfortunately, after really thinking about the economics of things and reading this, I can't really disprove that point of view. But, I BELIEVE that it is wrong. And I choose to BELIEVE that discoveries made on the bench-top do lead to improvements in patient care and that these discoveries, no matter how obscure or strange sounding, often do spur economic growth (both because Universities create jobs and because discoveries are often open sourced and can be built upon by a poor grad student in Cambodia or Genentech).
Anyway, my point in all of this: we need to examine our beliefs, our priorities, and realize that gestures like growing a mustache or wearing pink also need to be backed up with tangible substance. It's not just the thought that counts. Wearing pink in October is fine and dandy, but it doesn't make anyone a better person for doing so, and ultimately it doesn't mean much unless it really inspires people to work for change...maybe it's figuring out WHY the breast cancer statistics are as they are or any number of other questions. Or maybe someone interested in doing something positive would donate to the University of Missouri MD/PhD program? Clearly our University is more interested in things in the same ballpark as the football coaches incredible salary.
Monday, October 22, 2012
Mid-October Cyclocross
Official cyclocross racing season runs from September through December in this country. Although now it is a bit longer because beginning last year, the national championships was moved from mid-December too early January. Further, the Master's world championships is in the US for 2012 and 2013 and this year (well, actually early Feb 2013), the elite World Championships is going to be in the US. So now you can race in the US from September through early February. That get's to be a pretty long season, and similar to baseball, different riders (teams) ratchet things up at different times.
This past weekend was an exciting one for cyclocross fans because the American hero of our sport, Jeremy Powers, got his best ever finish in a world cup...which bodes extremely well for the rest of his season and the possibility to see him on the podium at the world championships.
Locally, there was a big race weekend down in Tulsa, OK, which originally looked extremely attractive. But seeing that the friday and saturday races started at 9:30pm, I decided that I'm too much of an old man, and that it'd be better too stay in Missouri.
This is a point in the season where you can still build some high-end fitness too last through the winter, so I've been hitting it pretty hard during the week and also on Saturday's. So, like all self-centered cyclists, I'm trying to rationalize why my legs didn't feel super hot on race day this past Sunday. One of my favorite racers in cyclocross wrote a great blog piece about those days/times when you're legs don't show up to a race:
"Dear legs,
I regret having to send this letter, but enough is enough. Maybe you never got the memo. Or maybe you just forgot because it doesn't feel like autumn yet and in your defense, it has been quite a while. So let me take this opportunity to remind you that we are supposed to be a bike racer now. Actually, it was supposed to be a week ago and due to your absense, beard and hands were hung out to dry. I have to wonder how you failed to notice how hands were out practicing for bike driving and beard was filling out in preparation for the coming season. What have you been doing? I have supplied you with all the tools you should need to succeed. Hard training, long rest, but you don't seem to take the hint. Well, moving forward, we have a long job ahead of us and it's going to be much longer if you continue to fail at your part of the bargain. Unfortunately I have to put you on the spot. If you don't get it together I am going to have to reconsider your involvement at this facility.
Sincerely your's
Bike Racer Dan"
This past weekend was an exciting one for cyclocross fans because the American hero of our sport, Jeremy Powers, got his best ever finish in a world cup...which bodes extremely well for the rest of his season and the possibility to see him on the podium at the world championships.
Locally, there was a big race weekend down in Tulsa, OK, which originally looked extremely attractive. But seeing that the friday and saturday races started at 9:30pm, I decided that I'm too much of an old man, and that it'd be better too stay in Missouri.
This is a point in the season where you can still build some high-end fitness too last through the winter, so I've been hitting it pretty hard during the week and also on Saturday's. So, like all self-centered cyclists, I'm trying to rationalize why my legs didn't feel super hot on race day this past Sunday. One of my favorite racers in cyclocross wrote a great blog piece about those days/times when you're legs don't show up to a race:
"Dear legs,
I regret having to send this letter, but enough is enough. Maybe you never got the memo. Or maybe you just forgot because it doesn't feel like autumn yet and in your defense, it has been quite a while. So let me take this opportunity to remind you that we are supposed to be a bike racer now. Actually, it was supposed to be a week ago and due to your absense, beard and hands were hung out to dry. I have to wonder how you failed to notice how hands were out practicing for bike driving and beard was filling out in preparation for the coming season. What have you been doing? I have supplied you with all the tools you should need to succeed. Hard training, long rest, but you don't seem to take the hint. Well, moving forward, we have a long job ahead of us and it's going to be much longer if you continue to fail at your part of the bargain. Unfortunately I have to put you on the spot. If you don't get it together I am going to have to reconsider your involvement at this facility.
Sincerely your's
Bike Racer Dan"
I think Josh must have sent a similar memo to his legs after last week, because he brought some heat and put me into a serious pain cave yesterday. It was like old times and honestly, really fun to suffer at the hands of the butthead. Well, let me re-phrase, it was really fun too race off the front with Josh from laps 4-10 yesterday. We traded leading and thus, attacking each other and had a solid dual. Which lasted until the finish line and concluded in pats-on-the-back and my comment to him, "thank you sir, may I have another".
As far as the race report, I've been pretty bad at writing these lately and need to get my day started...but, Kenda/Felt pro-mountain biker and super nice dude, Drew Edsall recently moved to St Louis. He was there and put in a blistering 2nd lap...which almost shattered all of us. Devin Clark was also riding really strong and at one point, it seemed like he and I were going to repeat the shenanigans of Hermann. However, an untimely miscalculated corner would prevent that from being the case.
Next up for me...well, it's Monday. Time to go cut some cancer cells with a laser (cancer research is awesome).
Bike-stuff-wise: I really want to go to a few bigger races this year. Originally the plan was Jingle cross and then try really hard to do well at the master's 30-34 race at nationals. Jingle is a logical choice because it's only 5ish hours from my house, the race supports a good cause (always important to justify our self-centered-ness with pseudo-concern for others), and it's a mid-west thing. But last week I got the urge to travel out to Boulder for the Boulder Cup and the Colorado Cross cup this coming weekend. The family situation will allow for that too happen, but right now an examination of our bank account may prevent that from happening. Which is a shame, because it looks like it is going to snow in Boulder on Friday! I guess it's always good to think about goals in these situations, the reality is that money is the biggest limiting factor in being able to travel for a bike race and the 1500mile round trip to Boulder probably isn't compatible with the cost-benefit equation.
post-script: I was talking to a friend about favorite CX racers and have established this list:
1. Adam Craig
2. Jeremy Powers
3. Tim Johnson
4. Dan Timmerman
5. Stybar
6. Tie between Tristan Schouten and Brian Matter
7. Zac McDonald
8. Barry Wicks
9. Sven Nys
10. Francis Mourey
1. Adam Craig
2. Jeremy Powers
3. Tim Johnson
4. Dan Timmerman
5. Stybar
6. Tie between Tristan Schouten and Brian Matter
7. Zac McDonald
8. Barry Wicks
9. Sven Nys
10. Francis Mourey
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Performance enhancing drugs
"So, I have a question for all my cycling coach, exercise physiologist, fitness expert friends out there. If one took performance-enhancing drugs and improved their VO2 Max and LT, but then stop taking drugs is it safe to say they may still reap some benefits of the enhanced physiological adaptation brought on by the drugs, even years later?"- Brandon Dwight, of Boulder Cycle Sport.
I've thought quite a bit about this question, and although I'm not credentialed in any of the ways he specifically addresses, I do understand medicine, physiology, pharmacology, and have a descent background in exercise phys. So this is all, from my humble opinion:
The bottom line is that performance enhancing drugs can't all be grouped into the same category. That is to say that Epo and blood transfusions are completely different than Clenbuterol, diuretics, anabolics, and things like growth hormone.
The physical demands of a baseball player are so incredibly different than those of a stage-racer cyclist, which in-turn are pretty different than even mountain biking and especially track cycling. In baseball, cheaters want to get bigger, stronger, and faster. So their enhancing pharmacology with things like growth hormone, estrogen antagonists, and testosterone enhancers all reflect that. And those particular drug regimens definitely alter gene expression in such a way as to produce long-term, performance enhancing benefits. I would imagine that track cyclists, if interested in the benefits of pharmacology, would utilize similar cocktails.
I'll never forget reading about some cat 2 cyclist from Houston who got busted taking a very advanced (medically speaking) estrogen antagonist and testosterone enhancing approach. He was on a bunch of breast cancer drugs (which as a cancer survivor, bike racer, and physician-scientist in training, really pissed me off). I'd predict that his ability to recover from training was enhanced and that he had a noticeable increase in short-duration power outputs on the bike. He probably won more sprints. But in terms of time trialing or a stage racing, there's a certain point where there would be diminishing returns and frankly null or even detrimental benefits with that particular pharmacologic approach. That's simply because the demands of endurance sports are so incredibly different than power sports. And size especially, but also to some extent the myofibril adaptations associated with high-power, is/are detrimental to type-I (endurance, skinniness) oxidative fibers. It's literally like comparing the white meat associated with a chicken with the red meat of a buffalo. They're metabolically incredibly different and everything from training to fuel-source are almost diametrically opposed. And this difference is mainly associated with the underlined, bolded term and has everything to do with oxidative phosphorylation, mitochondrial efficiency, and the physiology associated with getting hydrogen ions away from, and oxygen into working muscles.
Oxygen delivery. That's the name of the game in endurance sports. Anabolic's and cortisol synthetics don't really affect it. Genetics are huge, and effect pulmonary/chest anatomy and physiology in such a way that it's probably the biggest difference between a pro-tour rider and the rest of us. But the genetics of erythropoiesis probably don't factor in much...which is to say that most people's bone marrow is on pretty similar playing fields. Unless of course, you alter the kinetics of hematopoeisis. And like most things in physiology, you can increase hematopoesis or decrease it, and these events can occur naturally (you get a bacterial infection, your bone marrow makes more white blood cells) or pharmacologically/iatrogenically (cancer patient get's radiation treatment which damages bone marrow stem cells, so they become deficient in various blood cells). Just to tie the point back to performance, it is the red blood cells which serve to help buffer hydrogen ions (which isn't always talked about but is a HUGE factor) and deliver oxygen from the lungs (genetically determined) to the working tissues. Measurements of red blood cells often confuse medical students and physicians, so it isn't worth the effort to go through the meanings of Hct, Hgb, MCH, MCV, reticulocyte count, RPI, etc. But the key to discussing the answer to the question at the beginning of this post is that red blood cells hang out in the blood for around 4 months. So changing the kinetics of RBC production, like with EPO, or simple increasing circulating RBC mass, like with autotransfusions, have short-lived effects.
So in short, anabolics can have potentially long term performance enhancing effects. Drugs and transfusions to affect oxygen delivery almost certainly don't. But, since doping leads to enhanced performance, which can lead to winning races...then (to quote Adam Myerson) 'It can make the ability to return to that higher level easier than it would have if it was done cleanly, and incrementally. But more importantly, the access to better teams, better races, better support, and better money, all lead to an ability to do better preparation, and reach a higher level still. So, not exactly the question you asked, but an example of how it can indirectly continue to benefit the level of fitness reached after doping.'
To me, the use of EPO in endurance sports is a medical travesty and if you want too seriously talk about long term effects of EPO use, I think you're getting into the realm of oncology and cancer biology. Synthetic EPO saves lives; mostly for cancer patients and renal failure patients. And like any drug that is ingested or injected, there are effects beyond those associated with the therapeutic benefit. I was taught in medical school that there is no such thing as drug 'side-effects'. Biology doesn't work that way, there are only effects. For EPO, it's a mitogenic agent, or something that induces/promotes the cell cycle. Anything that does that, has the potential to facilitate conditions that lead to cancer. So in a sense, a cancer patient or former cancer patient that takes EPO is putting themselves at risk for more cancer. And in another, more abstract sense, spitting in the face of the patients for whom EPO was originally intended.
Personally, I've received enough radiation over the years that my bone marrow has taken a hit. When you measure my white blood cells and red blood cells, you can see that deficiency. Also, I ride and race bikes with active, living tumors in my vertebrae and in my lungs (although those in my lungs are only 5-10mm). I'm clearly not a world class athlete and could never be one, but my point in saying that is that these things effect oxygen delivery in my body, but I'm clearly still capable of having a descent power output at LT and VO2. My own conclusion based on understanding my own physiology, is that training can trump anatomy, but only to a certain point.
I've thought quite a bit about this question, and although I'm not credentialed in any of the ways he specifically addresses, I do understand medicine, physiology, pharmacology, and have a descent background in exercise phys. So this is all, from my humble opinion:
The bottom line is that performance enhancing drugs can't all be grouped into the same category. That is to say that Epo and blood transfusions are completely different than Clenbuterol, diuretics, anabolics, and things like growth hormone.
The physical demands of a baseball player are so incredibly different than those of a stage-racer cyclist, which in-turn are pretty different than even mountain biking and especially track cycling. In baseball, cheaters want to get bigger, stronger, and faster. So their enhancing pharmacology with things like growth hormone, estrogen antagonists, and testosterone enhancers all reflect that. And those particular drug regimens definitely alter gene expression in such a way as to produce long-term, performance enhancing benefits. I would imagine that track cyclists, if interested in the benefits of pharmacology, would utilize similar cocktails.
I'll never forget reading about some cat 2 cyclist from Houston who got busted taking a very advanced (medically speaking) estrogen antagonist and testosterone enhancing approach. He was on a bunch of breast cancer drugs (which as a cancer survivor, bike racer, and physician-scientist in training, really pissed me off). I'd predict that his ability to recover from training was enhanced and that he had a noticeable increase in short-duration power outputs on the bike. He probably won more sprints. But in terms of time trialing or a stage racing, there's a certain point where there would be diminishing returns and frankly null or even detrimental benefits with that particular pharmacologic approach. That's simply because the demands of endurance sports are so incredibly different than power sports. And size especially, but also to some extent the myofibril adaptations associated with high-power, is/are detrimental to type-I (endurance, skinniness) oxidative fibers. It's literally like comparing the white meat associated with a chicken with the red meat of a buffalo. They're metabolically incredibly different and everything from training to fuel-source are almost diametrically opposed. And this difference is mainly associated with the underlined, bolded term and has everything to do with oxidative phosphorylation, mitochondrial efficiency, and the physiology associated with getting hydrogen ions away from, and oxygen into working muscles.
Oxygen delivery. That's the name of the game in endurance sports. Anabolic's and cortisol synthetics don't really affect it. Genetics are huge, and effect pulmonary/chest anatomy and physiology in such a way that it's probably the biggest difference between a pro-tour rider and the rest of us. But the genetics of erythropoiesis probably don't factor in much...which is to say that most people's bone marrow is on pretty similar playing fields. Unless of course, you alter the kinetics of hematopoeisis. And like most things in physiology, you can increase hematopoesis or decrease it, and these events can occur naturally (you get a bacterial infection, your bone marrow makes more white blood cells) or pharmacologically/iatrogenically (cancer patient get's radiation treatment which damages bone marrow stem cells, so they become deficient in various blood cells). Just to tie the point back to performance, it is the red blood cells which serve to help buffer hydrogen ions (which isn't always talked about but is a HUGE factor) and deliver oxygen from the lungs (genetically determined) to the working tissues. Measurements of red blood cells often confuse medical students and physicians, so it isn't worth the effort to go through the meanings of Hct, Hgb, MCH, MCV, reticulocyte count, RPI, etc. But the key to discussing the answer to the question at the beginning of this post is that red blood cells hang out in the blood for around 4 months. So changing the kinetics of RBC production, like with EPO, or simple increasing circulating RBC mass, like with autotransfusions, have short-lived effects.
So in short, anabolics can have potentially long term performance enhancing effects. Drugs and transfusions to affect oxygen delivery almost certainly don't. But, since doping leads to enhanced performance, which can lead to winning races...then (to quote Adam Myerson) 'It can make the ability to return to that higher level easier than it would have if it was done cleanly, and incrementally. But more importantly, the access to better teams, better races, better support, and better money, all lead to an ability to do better preparation, and reach a higher level still. So, not exactly the question you asked, but an example of how it can indirectly continue to benefit the level of fitness reached after doping.'
To me, the use of EPO in endurance sports is a medical travesty and if you want too seriously talk about long term effects of EPO use, I think you're getting into the realm of oncology and cancer biology. Synthetic EPO saves lives; mostly for cancer patients and renal failure patients. And like any drug that is ingested or injected, there are effects beyond those associated with the therapeutic benefit. I was taught in medical school that there is no such thing as drug 'side-effects'. Biology doesn't work that way, there are only effects. For EPO, it's a mitogenic agent, or something that induces/promotes the cell cycle. Anything that does that, has the potential to facilitate conditions that lead to cancer. So in a sense, a cancer patient or former cancer patient that takes EPO is putting themselves at risk for more cancer. And in another, more abstract sense, spitting in the face of the patients for whom EPO was originally intended.
Personally, I've received enough radiation over the years that my bone marrow has taken a hit. When you measure my white blood cells and red blood cells, you can see that deficiency. Also, I ride and race bikes with active, living tumors in my vertebrae and in my lungs (although those in my lungs are only 5-10mm). I'm clearly not a world class athlete and could never be one, but my point in saying that is that these things effect oxygen delivery in my body, but I'm clearly still capable of having a descent power output at LT and VO2. My own conclusion based on understanding my own physiology, is that training can trump anatomy, but only to a certain point.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)