EPO doesn't work scientists claims

[Stretch]

Cohen is quite a reputed Harvard scientist..so I am sure he would have all his statistical ducks in a row...but 48 tests is hardly an adequate sample..and as mentioned  - there was no test against a baseline of any of those test cases

[Fat Boab]

Possibly from the same team? A literature study giving some context.......

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bcp.12034/full

[Patchelicious]

no that is just science, any hypothesis is regarded as viable until proven wrong. Then you have to restate and retest the new hypothesis.

Oh FFS, I know how it works ????

 

My point was about how the Hub loves using the exception as the rule.

 

And in any case, I took homeopathic calming pills this morning so I'm not geared to debate today. And before you tell me they don't work, I once read a study that said they do, so they do, it's science.

[Jakkals.]

I don't want to hear hub opionions, the only opinion i want to hear is Betsy's

I cannot handle that womans nagging FFS. If you were married to her, you would wish your death would come sooner.

[Fat Boab]

I don't want to hear hub opionions, the only opinion i want to hear is Betsy's

 

 

.....and Dr Ferrari's?

[Patchelicious]

I cannot handle that womans nagging FFS. If you were married to her, you would wish your death would come sooner.

 

https://youtu.be/G3A2M2drZ-M

[Fat Boab]

Oh FFS, I know how it works

 

My point was about how the Hub loves using the exception as the rule.

 

.....marginal games?

[Fat Boab]

The Lancet article is free to read.....a homework opportunity?http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS2352-3026(17)30105-9/fulltext

 

 

Summary follows:

 

Summary

Background

Substances that potentially enhance performance (eg, recombinant human erythropoietin [rHuEPO]) are considered doping and are therefore forbidden in sports; however, the scientific evidence behind doping is frequently weak. We aimed to determine the effects of rHuEPO treatment in well trained cyclists on maximal, submaximal, and race performance and on safety, and to present a model clinical study for doping research on other substances.

Methods

We did this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial at the Centre for Human Drug Research in Leiden (Netherlands). We enrolled healthy, well trained but non-professional male cyclists aged 18–50 years and randomly allocated (1:1) them to receive abdominal subcutaneous injections of rHuEPO (epoetin β; mean dose 6000 IU per week) or placebo (0·9% NaCl) for 8 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by age groups (18–34 years and 35–50 years), with a code generated by a statistician who was not masked to the study. The primary outcome was exercise performance, measured as maximal power output (Pmax), maximal oxygen consumption VO₂ max, and gross efficiency in maximal exercise tests with 25 W increments per 5 min, as lactate threshold and ventilatory threshold 1 (VT1) and 2 (VT2) at submaximal levels during the maximal exercise test, and as mean power, VO₂, and heart rate in the submaximal exercise tests at the highest mean power output for 45 min in a laboratory setting and in a race to the Mont Ventoux (France) summit, using intention-to-treat analyses. The trial is registered with the Dutch Trial Registry (Nederlands Trial Register), number NTR5643.

Findings

Between March 7, 2016, and April 13, 2016, we randomly assigned 48 participants to the rHuEPO group (n=24) or the placebo group (n=24). Mean haemoglobin concentration (9·6 mmol/L vs 9·0 mmol/L [estimated difference 0·6, 95% CI 0·4 to 0·8]) and maximal power output (351·55 W vs 341·23 W [10·32, 3·47 to 17·17]), and VO₂ max (60·121 mL/min per kg vs 57·415 mL/min per kg [2·707, 0·911 to 4·503]) in a maximal exercise test were higher in the rHuEPO group compared with the placebo group. Submaximal exercise test parameters mean power output (283·18 W vs 277·28 W [5·90, −0·87 to 12·67]) and VO₂ (50·288 mL/min per kg vs 49·642 mL/min per kg [0·646, −1·307 to 2·600]) at day 46, and Mont Ventoux race times (1 h 40 min 32 s vs 1 h 40 min 15 s [0·3%, −8·3 to 9·6]) did not differ between groups. All adverse events were grade 1–2 and were similar between both groups. No events of grade 3 or worse were observed.

Interpretation

Although rHuEPO treatment improved a laboratory test of maximal exercise, the more clinically relevant submaximal exercise test performance and road race performance were not affected. This study shows that clinical studies with doping substances can be done adequately and safely and are relevant in determining effects of alleged performance-enhancing drugs.

[Jakkals.]

https://youtu.be/G3A2M2drZ-M

hahaha exactly!!!

[scotty]

So #givehimthe7winsback

If indeed it is found to have no proven benefit, taking into account the amount of money LA spent on doping and been as litigious as he is perhaps he can also sue for a refund from his suppliers. 

[Thor Buttox]

The Lancet article is free to read.....a homework opportunity?http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS2352-3026(17)30105-9/fulltext

 

 

Summary follows:

 

 

Summary

 

 

Background

 

Substances that potentially enhance performance (eg, recombinant human erythropoietin [rHuEPO]) are considered doping and are therefore forbidden in sports; however, the scientific evidence behind doping is frequently weak. We aimed to determine the effects of rHuEPO treatment in well trained cyclists on maximal, submaximal, and race performance and on safety, and to present a model clinical study for doping research on other substances.

 

 

 

 

Methods

 

We did this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial at the Centre for Human Drug Research in Leiden (Netherlands). We enrolled healthy, well trained but non-professional male cyclists aged 18–50 years and randomly allocated (1:1) them to receive abdominal subcutaneous injections of rHuEPO (epoetin β; mean dose 6000 IU per week) or placebo (0·9% NaCl) for 8 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by age groups (18–34 years and 35–50 years), with a code generated by a statistician who was not masked to the study. The primary outcome was exercise performance, measured as maximal power output (Pmax), maximal oxygen consumption VO₂ max, and gross efficiency in maximal exercise tests with 25 W increments per 5 min, as lactate threshold and ventilatory threshold 1 (VT1) and 2 (VT2) at submaximal levels during the maximal exercise test, and as mean power, VO₂, and heart rate in the submaximal exercise tests at the highest mean power output for 45 min in a laboratory setting and in a race to the Mont Ventoux (France) summit, using intention-to-treat analyses. The trial is registered with the Dutch Trial Registry (Nederlands Trial Register), number NTR5643.

 

 

 

 

Findings

 

Between March 7, 2016, and April 13, 2016, we randomly assigned 48 participants to the rHuEPO group (n=24) or the placebo group (n=24). Mean haemoglobin concentration (9·6 mmol/L vs 9·0 mmol/L [estimated difference 0·6, 95% CI 0·4 to 0·8]) and maximal power output (351·55 W vs 341·23 W [10·32, 3·47 to 17·17]), and VO₂ max (60·121 mL/min per kg vs 57·415 mL/min per kg [2·707, 0·911 to 4·503]) in a maximal exercise test were higher in the rHuEPO group compared with the placebo group. Submaximal exercise test parameters mean power output (283·18 W vs 277·28 W [5·90, −0·87 to 12·67]) and VO₂ (50·288 mL/min per kg vs 49·642 mL/min per kg [0·646, −1·307 to 2·600]) at day 46, and Mont Ventoux race times (1 h 40 min 32 s vs 1 h 40 min 15 s [0·3%, −8·3 to 9·6]) did not differ between groups. All adverse events were grade 1–2 and were similar between both groups. No events of grade 3 or worse were observed.

 

 

 

 

Interpretation

 

Although rHuEPO treatment improved a laboratory test of maximal exercise, the more clinically relevant submaximal exercise test performance and road race performance were not affected. This study shows that clinical studies with doping substances can be done adequately and safely and are relevant in determining effects of alleged performance-enhancing drugs.

 

 

That last paragraph sums it up, no? They tested submax at 280W which is what, 4W/kg? Nowhere near where the top guys are operating. And the comment about long-durarion hematocrit dropping versus the effects of boosting short term are very relevant.

[jcza]

There has been previous studies that found there is very little scientific evidence that EPO works, however what we have seen seems to prove otherwise. I'll try find the paper published around 2012/3. 

[Escapee..]

Oh FFS, I know how it works

 

My point was about how the Hub loves using the exception as the rule.

 

And in any case, I took homeopathic calming pills this morning so I'm not geared to debate today. And before you tell me they don't work, I once read a study that said they do, so they do, it's science.

 

Patch you have been pretty aggro (what I have seen in my limited hub time lately)

 

Think its time to get some new muti

[jcza]

For the anoraks - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3690100/

[LOOK695]

Patch you have been pretty aggro (what I have seen in my limited hub time lately)

 

Think its time to get some new muti

Maybe because his Epo is not working as promised????????????????

[FCH]

good too know, chill your jets big boy

Oh FFS, I know how it works

My point was about how the Hub loves using the exception as the rule.

And in any case, I took homeopathic calming pills this morning so I'm not geared to debate today. And before you tell me they don't work, I once read a study that said they do, so they do, it's science.

 

Patch you have been pretty aggro (what I have seen in my limited hub time lately)

 

Think its time to get some new muti