Vor uns war der CSC-Tisch mit dem Sieger der Deutschlandtour, Jens Voigt. Damals ging das Gerücht um, es gäbe ein neues Wundermittel namens PFC. In meiner Berauschung rief ich dem Deutschen hinüber: 'Gell Jens, das sollte nicht CSC, sondern PFC heißen.'" Das Gelächter am CSC-Tisch hielt sich in Grenzen.
Kohl is a drunk. Seriously.
what's the traduction, please ?
I understand there's a word game, but ...
At the Tour of Germany, the CSC-table was celebrating Jens Voigt's overall win. Back then, there was a rumour going round that a 'miracle' product called PFC had hit the market. Kohl had had too much alcohol and said things he nornally wouldn't. That day, he said: "Hey Jens, shouldn't it be called PFC instead of CSC?".
The CSC team became quiet.
(It's not a direct translation, it's how I remember the story)
Edited by CrueTrue on 06-10-2009 18:36
I have asthma so I read one the asthma medicine box how much one dose was. And if I remember right, to have the same value as Petacchi I need to take the medicine 150times and every does take at least 5-6seconds, so that is 12 and ha half minute of inhaling asthma medicine. Sounds like fun.
CrueTrue wrote:
At the Tour of Germany, the CSC-table was celebrating Jens Voigt's overall win. Back then, there was a rumour going round that a 'miracle' product called PFC had hit the market. Kohl had had too much alcohol and said things he nornally wouldn't. That day, he said: "Hey Jens, shouldn't it be called PFC instead of CSC?".
The CSC team became quiet.
(It's not a direct translation, it's how I remember the story)
That's almost a direct translation, yes
I remember Willy Voet mentioning PFC as by far the most dangerous doping product in use
Kohl's reaction is quite understandable, as he'd just seen a flat-rider drop Cunego, Gesink, Leipheimer and everyone else on a 2700m climb that's one of the steepest mountains in cycling. Perfectly normal, no doubt Edited by issoisso on 24-07-2013 22:27
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
López was down on GC and had a TT coming where he'd lose gobs of time. He attacked at the start of the climb and everyone ignored him.
He just happened to not get caught. Either way, that's nitpicking.
Edited by issoisso on 06-10-2009 19:29
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
Sherpa wrote:
I think you should read Mark Cavendish biography "Boy Racer". It has some interesting thoughts by Cav about the doping thing
Man looks like that's only on shelves in Britain / Europe maybe but I'm dying to get it now that you mentioned it, Maybe I can find a torrent of it online or I'll have to buy it and wait 2 weeks for Amazon to get it to me.
But I agree that doping could help sprinters ((being one myself (which is why I always sign off with my name in green )) for the last few km to make sure you hold a wheel, but realistically I've never experienced what seems like a decreased kick even if I ride 85mi+ through some mountainous terrain then sprint at the end. That's just my experience anyway. (Granted there is some drop in my my peak wattage but it'd be like 1425 instead of 1500 and that big of a variation can just happen in short races too)
It seems to go along with sprinters never really "peaking" because fitness isn't that important to win, hence guys like Cav winning from Jan - Sept when most other kinds of riders could never do that. So long as you don't take a lot of time off and your muscles start to atrophy your kick is usually still with you.
That's just my two cents though, what'd you guys think?
Shifty
P.S. What exactly is PFC and how does it work and is it still used widely?
Sherpa wrote:
I think you should read Mark Cavendish biography "Boy Racer". It has some interesting thoughts by Cav about the doping thing
Man looks like that's only on shelves in Britain / Europe maybe but I'm dying to get it now that you mentioned it, Maybe I can find a torrent of it online or I'll have to buy it and wait 2 weeks for Amazon to get it to me.
But I agree that doping could help sprinters ((being one myself (which is why I always sign off with my name in green )) for the last few km to make sure you hold a wheel, but realistically I've never experienced what seems like a decreased kick even if I ride 85mi+ through some mountainous terrain then sprint at the end. That's just my experience anyway. (Granted there is some drop in my my peak wattage but it'd be like 1425 instead of 1500 and that big of a variation can just happen in short races too)
It seems to go along with sprinters never really "peaking" because fitness isn't that important to win, hence guys like Cav winning from Jan - Sept when most other kinds of riders could never do that. So long as you don't take a lot of time off and your muscles start to atrophy your kick is usually still with you.
That's just my two cents though, what'd you guys think?
Shifty
P.S. What exactly is PFC and how does it work and is it still used widely?
It's EXTREMELY dangerous so its use is limited to very special occasions (Voigt in Germany, anyone?). But the performance enhancing is insane. The molecules have 50 times the oxygen carrying capacity of normal haemoglobin.
EDIT:
Willy Voet said it was the entire reason why the Festina "programme" was first put into place: the team initially didn't care how the riders doped or what they doped with as long as they got results.
But when they started using things as insanely dangerous as PFC the team started monitoring everything.
Edited by issoisso on 06-10-2009 20:08
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
It's EXTREMELY dangerous so its use is limited to very special occasions (Voigt in Germany, anyone?). But the performance enhancing is insane. The molecules have 50 times the oxygen carrying capacity of normal haemoglobin.
''If the product is oxygenated with 100 percent oxygen, then you will have the effect of carrying oxygen to the muscle tissues at five times the rate of hemoglobin,'' said Bob Nicora, president of Synthetic Blood Institute based in Kettering, Ohio.
Maybe a bit exaggerated?
That seems pretty intense though. Provided they can get side effects and possible "sludgening" of blood under control that could be huge for certain patients though (and potentially change cycling forever if it's not easy to detect).
It's EXTREMELY dangerous so its use is limited to very special occasions (Voigt in Germany, anyone?). But the performance enhancing is insane. The molecules have 50 times the oxygen carrying capacity of normal haemoglobin.
''If the product is oxygenated with 100 percent oxygen, then you will have the effect of carrying oxygen to the muscle tissues at five times the rate of hemoglobin,'' said Bob Nicora, president of Synthetic Blood Institute based in Kettering, Ohio.
Shifty wrote:
That seems pretty intense though. Provided they can get side effects and possible "sludgening" of blood under control that could be huge for certain patients though (and potentially change cycling forever if it's not easy to detect).
No, the blood's viscosity is unaltered.
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
First link didn't work. and the second did say 50x in a few places but the first article you referred me to said 5x. Obviously there's some discrepancies in the two articles, possibly because of the self-admitted lack of research on them due to their known danger, regardless it seems it would be hard to give credit to one over the other.
No, the blood's viscosity is unaltered.
''His symptoms were difficulty breathing, muscle pain, gastroenteritis and what we call intravascular coagulation,'' the doctor said.
"Although there is no reliable research on PFC abuse in humans, possible symptoms involve a perilous thickening of the blood."
She is certainly worried, though, about the potential for abuse offered by the modified haemoglobin drugs: "I may be getting cynical but this seems to be the way sport is going." Her fear is of a possible series of deaths from blood clots in otherwise healthy athletes.
I know it's not the same thing as being thicker but blood coagulating is what I was referring to when I say "sludgening" (mostly because I wanted to use the word ) And the second quote directly says thickening.
Not trying to get into a mean spirited argument or anything, just pointing out that there seems to be differing information out there, which, like I said, I think is due to the lack of trials on them so far.
Shifty wrote:
First link didn't work. and the second did say 50x in a few places but the first article you referred me to said 5x. Obviously there's some discrepancies in the two articles, possibly because of the self-admitted lack of research on them due to their known danger, regardless it seems it would be hard to give credit to one over the other.
Strange. Works quite well for me, the first link. Are you sure you're using a proper browser?
Anyway, just noticed that the perflourocarbon article on wikipedia also mentions 50 times.
Shifty wrote:
''His symptoms were difficulty breathing, muscle pain, gastroenteritis and what we call intravascular coagulation,'' the doctor said.
"Although there is no reliable research on PFC abuse in humans, possible symptoms involve a perilous thickening of the blood."
She is certainly worried, though, about the potential for abuse offered by the modified haemoglobin drugs: "I may be getting cynical but this seems to be the way sport is going." Her fear is of a possible series of deaths from blood clots in otherwise healthy athletes.
I know it's not the same thing as being thicker but blood coagulating is what I was referring to when I say "sludgening" (mostly because I wanted to use the word ) And the second quote directly says thickening.
Oh ok then. I took it you mean blood viscosity increasing (such as with EPO), not blood clots
Shifty wrote:
Not trying to get into a mean spirited argument or anything, just pointing out that there seems to be differing information out there, which, like I said, I think is due to the lack of trials on them so far.
No worries
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
Proper browser? Do you consider Firefox "Proper"? (man I wish I had a British accent )
50x seems almost unreal though. I know there are other factors (Lactic Acid production and disposal and such) at play and I don't know the difference in performance that might show but isn't a lot of your ability limited by Oxygen uptake and Delivery and how efficiently you can do it? That's why guys like Bradley Wiggins who don't have much muscle on their legs can TT so well, because they can still get out 400+W or whatever is necessary but their Cardiovascular systems can keep their legs fresh at that power.
Realistically it seems like it's all about your cardiovascular system from my understanding, I can hit 1500W or more and I'm only 69kg +/- 1kg I just can't MAINTAIN that for more than a few seconds, in other words, even a 17 year old kid can hit anywhere on the wattage scale that Lance can it's just a matter of how long you can maintain it, which falls a lot onto your cardio.
So how much would that increase your performance then (I know it's most likely to be speculation by most on these forums unless someone is in this field that I'm unaware of) ? Could I hold 800W for 15min instead of 45 sec?
Hate that I ramble on this forum, I'm much more coherent to talk to in person believe me, come to Columbus, OH and we'll have coffee sometime if you don't believe me
Shifty wrote:
Proper browser? Do you consider Firefox "Proper"? (man I wish I had a British accent )
Quite proper. I'm using the same, so it's weird that it doesn't open. I don't wish I had a british accent, though
Shifty wrote:
50x seems almost unreal though. I know there are other factors (Lactic Acid production and disposal and such) at play and I don't know the difference in performance that might show but isn't a lot of your ability limited by Oxygen uptake and Delivery and how efficiently you can do it? That's why guys like Bradley Wiggins who don't have much muscle on their legs can TT so well, because they can still get out 400+W or whatever is necessary but their Cardiovascular systems can keep their legs fresh at that power.
It's more important for climbers. It's why weight is so important for climbing: VO2max depends on weight. It's also why since the early 90s large men can suddenly miraculously climb......most doping enhances oxygen carrying. As Lucho Herrera put it: "I retired when I saw riders with fat asses climbing with me"
Shifty wrote:
Realistically it seems like it's all about your cardiovascular system from my understanding, I can hit 1500W or more and I'm only 69kg +/- 1kg I just can't MAINTAIN that for more than a few seconds, in other words, even a 17 year old kid can hit anywhere on the wattage scale that Lance can it's just a matter of how long you can maintain it, which falls a lot onto your cardio.
Oxygen carrying is the most important, yes. Unless you're a sprinter. Which, again, is why sprinters are far more likely to be clean.
Shifty wrote:
So how much would that increase your performance then (I know it's most likely to be speculation by most on these forums unless someone is in this field that I'm unaware of) ? Could I hold 800W for 15min instead of 45 sec?
No idea.
Shifty wrote:
Hate that I ramble on this forum, I'm much more coherent to talk to in person believe me, come to Columbus, OH and we'll have coffee sometime if you don't believe me
Sorry, I'm a few thousand kms too far away to have coffee right now
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
Alright I got it working, turns out it was a "security failure" I had to go through a bit to confirm it was okay. Page looked very similar to the "Page Load Error" so I figured it was and ignored it, I'll have to have a look at it, looks interesting.
issoisso Wrote:
It's why weight is so important for climbing: VO2max depends on weight.
I'm all too aware, being 6'1" with broad shoulders isn't ideal for cycling because it's very hard if not impossible to get my weight down to 135-145 that climbers can. At 69kg (I'm 70 now but I've been lazy since nationals) I'd be running low on essential body fat % so I can maintain that for a few weeks at best. I also just naturally have a pretty muscular upper body and I wish I could get rid of some of that muscle as it isn't essential to cycling (I know some is good like Forearms and Triceps and Core but Pecks and things of that sort don't do much).
I feel like I'm complaining about the things that most athletes in other sports would love. lol.
issoisso wrote:
Oxygen carrying is the most important, yes. Unless you're a sprinter. Which, again, is why sprinters are far more likely to be clean.
Aware of that as well (It is important for, as we've discussed, getting to 200m in good shape but not for the fireworks). If I'm not mistaken ATP stores and Leg Strength / Speed and Fast Twitch Muscle Fibers are most important for a sprint itself. (Just the physical sprint, obv. ignoring things like positioning and timing etc.)
Seeing multiple people in this thread yet only issoisso and I seem to be talking
(I'm using averages for this working out, and it's based on my values, which are far below a pro cyclist (about half of what I'd expect an average pro to manage))
An average male body contains 5 litres of blood.
My haematocrit is about 44.5.
Therefore haemoglobin is 1/3 of that, so roughly 150 g/litre.
My haemoglobin is roughly 7.5 KG of my blood weight...
Now that haemoglobin carries for me 69ml.kg.min-1 of O2. That lets me maintain a wattage of around 260 watts.
So. If we were to inject myself with this PFC (I don't know the amounts, but I can only guess it'd be a continual use over say a week? But we'll go on just one injection of 100g's for 5 days.)
260 watts / 7,500 g's haemoglobin = 0.0346
Now PFC is described as 5 times more "potent" than normal haemoglobin.
500g's X 5 = 2500g haemoglobin value.
So now my body is considered at 10,000 g's of haemoglobin.
10,000 g X 0.0346 = 346 watts.
So I'd have gained a rather astonishing value of wattage at my maximum.
Obviously, the amount of haemoglobin I was working myself out at is a rough calculation, the amount of PFC injected in myself is a complete random amount (it could be 1/10th, it could be more, but even so, an improvement of 9 watts, is still an improvement). The potentancy of the actual molecule is not known either, as actual tests are no longer ethically morale, so I doubt we'll ever find out.
To sum up the use of EPO or any drug to improve VO2. The use of those drugs are to "shift" the turn over from aerobic energy production to anaerobic further along. Ie, instead of producing lactic at 300 watts, you produce it at 340, meaning you can go for longer harder. This is what drugs are used for, basically.
Interesting stuff, I think your numbers are very similar to mine (Not sure what your sprint or V02 are or if you're a sprinter or not or your weight) But my Hematocrit is ~48 I believe and my Threshold wattage is somewhere about 285 on a good day and 69.5kg in season.
I also feel a bit of a "duh" moment because I knew all those things I just didn't connect them to figure it out lol. That is also all assuming that Hematocrit is directly proportional to Wattage and there aren't other factors at work. So this could still be inaccurate.
We should have a Hematologist peruse these forums and answer questions imo.
Shifty
P.S. @ rjc, where do you get most of your information on these things because I figured you wanted to be a coach or a lab tech or something involved in cycling because you know about this kinda stuff.
I'm looking to get a degree in "Applied Physiology" at UCLA starting next year which would basically set me up to do a lot of things in the cycling field that I'd like to. However, being that I'm not in college now and High School classes don't even go near this stuff I usually educate myself by reading articles in "The Journal of Applied Physiology" and all other technical articles that appear in cycling literature, which is why I have an interest in doping because it's definitely a part of all that but a part that isn't often talked about so I want to understand it better.
For those interested in the Journal of Applied Physiology they offer a lot of free articles online, admittedly some of them are in "science-speak" and difficult to read if you aren't used to it or aren't fully focused, but they have some articles that don't require and prior knowledge to read and understand and a lot that I think help as a cyclist (ie one about caffeine increasing performance and what was the best way to administer it, before, during or before and during etc.)
Here's a link for anyone interested, Let me know what you think if you check it out.
Obviously Haematocrit is not directly linked to wattages, but apparantly is linked to how much haemoglobin you have in your body (roughly 1/3rd. 44.5 / 3 = 15ish) I was just using that as an example to describe how it would improve Oxygen supply. I could have used it to show what it would do to my VO2 max, but at the end of the day wattages show more for most people.
I expect your numbers are probably higher than mine based on your results.
I get my information from being on a Sports and Exercise Science degree in the UK. I've done a lot of VO2 max tests for peoples dissertations, and have done a fair bit of work in coaching myself and working out what doing X and Y does to my values. I do want to become a coach, and personal trainer, and physiology is very much my area of interest. I am currently in my 3rd, and final, year of my degree and all my work this year is going to be on physiology.
The journal of applied physiology is more than adequate to give you a great knowledge base. In fact, if you read them in your spare time, you're doing more than most uni students here in the UK.
My dissertation is going to be on cycling, and differences between pros and amateurs... I just need to find some pros to do some tests for me
rjc_43 wrote:
Obviously Haematocrit is not directly linked to wattages, but apparantly is linked to how much haemoglobin you have in your body (roughly 1/3rd. 44.5 / 3 = 15ish) I was just using that as an example to describe how it would improve Oxygen supply. I could have used it to show what it would do to my VO2 max, but at the end of the day wattages show more for most people.
Yeah I knew that because I get routine blood work done for cycling to monitor some things and Hematocrit isn't on there but Hemoglobin is so you just have to multiply it by 3 to figure it out
And I meant relating wattage to Hematocrit (and Hemoglobin because they're directly proportional) wouldn't work although it seems good in theory.
rjc_43 wrote:I expect your numbers are probably higher than mine based on your results.
My results are sub par actually. My numbers, so I've been told for a few years, are outstanding for a 17 year old so far as peak wattage (was actually higher when I was younger, at 15 I could do 1550 or so and I'm 17 now and just worked it back up to 1500 on a good day, so I lost some of my kick from running and distance cycling I suspect.). The numbers have just yet to yield results for me since this is my first serious year of racing and I went from a 5 to a 3 this year because I just upgraded as soon as I could win a race so never had a slew of wins or great results, but I see potential for them next year.
rjc_43 wrote:I get my information from being on a Sports and Exercise Science degree in the UK. I've done a lot of VO2 max tests for peoples dissertations, and have done a fair bit of work in coaching myself and working out what doing X and Y does to my values. I do want to become a coach, and personal trainer, and physiology is very much my area of interest. I am currently in my 3rd, and final, year of my degree and all my work this year is going to be on physiology.
Yeah that's pretty cool, I'd looking to do that and then go to graduate school (total of 8 years) at University of California (Hopefully L.A. or Berkley) not sure how much money I could ever make with it but I find the human body fascinating at how well it adapts and what it can do on it's own and just everything about it, hard to explain how much I enjoy it I guess you know what I'm talkin' about or you don't.
rjc_43 wrote:The journal of applied physiology is more than adequate to give you a great knowledge base. In fact, if you read them in your spare time, you're doing more than most uni students here in the UK.
Yeah it's good stuff, I already understand a lot of it if I take my time but I have a feeling a lot more will click once I get into classes and learn about the terminology and variables and equations and such.
rjc_43 wrote:My dissertation is going to be on cycling, and differences between pros and amateurs... I just need to find some pros to do some tests for me
What level pro are you talkin'? Because local teams or even country wide teams would probably be thrilled to have pre-season testing or otherwise done for free if they aren't big time pros. (I'm assuming the university allows you to use the lab for work at no expense?).
You could always do that and then also use previously experimented and published results for Pro Tour riders.
) 
