Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Keino Accuses Gammoudi

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • rhymans
    replied
    As Kuha mentioned Gammoudi was very well prepared - he was a lowlander who realised he had to be in good condition at altitude to stand any chance of winning in '68 - he trained a lot at the French altitude venue (Font Romeu) and competed in the 1966 (14:20.0 - just beaten by Colombia's altitude based Alvaro Mejia - also 14:20.0) and 1967 (where he won in a tactical 14:41.0 race), and (also as mentioned earlier) he was an Olympic silver medal from 1964 - either Keino was misquoted (has a journalist ever done such a thing!), or else the lack of oxygen at altitude has gone to his brain.

    Leave a comment:


  • imaginative
    replied
    Originally posted by gh
    Here's the article (run through a scanner without any spellcheck or any other vetting by me, so probably some gobbledygook in here):
    ******

    "The news has been followed by a hot discussion in the Swedish press. One of the athletes asked is Anders Garderud, 8:28. 4 steeplechaser. 'I would like to see if I could lower my record under Kerry O'Brien's world record of 8:22. 0, as the test results suggest I could. We are fast heading towards more intense cooperation between doctors and athletes. We had better take the opportunity while we can, because we may not be able later.

    "There we are. Will Garderud be the first in the trial flight?"
    Does anyone now more about Gärderud's use or non-use? Notably, he improved by
    about twenty seconds compared to the article, for a time that remained absolute
    world class until at least the early nineties.

    Leave a comment:


  • paulthefan
    replied
    Originally posted by gh
    Originally posted by eldrick
    well, seeing as he's just about the only world class athlete tunisia has ever produced, it does make you wonder...
    quite to the contrary, I wonder far more about small nations that produce multiple world-class athletes; one is an outlier, multiples are a hint of.....
    watch it big fella!

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Here's the article (run through a scanner without any spellcheck or any other vetting by me, so probably some gobbledygook in here):
    ******
    ‘Blood Doping’” ‘Miracle’ Results Through Undetectable Method?

    A Swedish physiologist has apparently made a "remarkable discovery" which could have enormous impact on the future of athletic performance, not the least of which would be track and field. According to information brought to the attention of Track & Field News, the withdrawl and reinjection of an athlete's blood under controlled circumstances can considerably improve one's work capacity.

    It should be stressed early that the exact details of the research have not been released to anyone, but inquiries by T&FN to Swedish correspondents and US medical /physiological athletic experts indicate that tests have been conducted and that the reported results are quite conceivable.

    The report came to us unsolicited on Mon., Oct. 4 from a Swedish sportswriter unknown to us except as a reader of this publication. As we had not learned this information from our regular Swedish correspondents previously nor seen any mention in major non US publications, we feel it is important to chronicle the data received. .

    • Anders Janson submitted the initiai report on letterhead from Dagens Nyheter, which claims to be Sweden's largest morning paper, along with a business card indicating his association with the publication. Most of his article appears here, beginning with quotes from Bjorn Ekblom, chief physiologist at Gymnastik and Idrottshogskolan (school for certification of gymnastics teachers) of Stockholm.

    "Our experiment came about like this. We took seven pupils from our school and let them run on our treadmill to get an indication of their capacity. Then we drew 27 ozs. of blood. (That's equal to nearly one quart, or approximately one fifth of an average human's total quantity of blood.) On the test the following day, we saw a clear decrease in capacity. Then, day by day, as new blood was produced in their bodies, the values went up. After 14 days, all were at their maximum again. Then, one month after the experiment began, we gave them back their own blood. The effect was stunning. Our test persons increased their capacity by 20%. The best was 23%.'

    "It was a fantastic feeling,' declares one of the test people, 27 yearold Lars Ove Gradin. 'I was able to run at top speed on the treadmill two minutes longer than before. You had a stronger feeling, almost as though you were boiling over with energy.'

    "Although this is a totally new discovery in the literature, of physiology, we can't be sure that someone, sometime has not invented the same thing,' observes Ekblom. 'It is even possible that someone may be using this blood doping on their athletes. It's easy to see the significance this could have on long distance runners and cyclists. Now, when I reflect on my laboratory tests, I feel scared. This is a method which is not against any rules and probably never could be. Even if I appeal to the sense of jus¬

    tice of all leaders and doctors in the world, I'm not sure someone will not make use of the results, say in the Olympics. And what will become of sport then? I have even been offered considerably more than 100, 000 Swedish crowns ($20, 000 plus) for my exact method.'

    "The news has been followed by a hot discussion in the Swedish press. One of the athletes asked is Anders Garderud, 8:28. 4 steeplechaser. 'I would like to see if I could lower my record under Kerry O'Brien's world record of 8:22. 0, as the test results suggest I could. We are fast heading towards more intense cooperation between doctors and athletes. We had better take the opportunity while we can, because we may not be able later.

    "There we are. Will Garderud be the first in the trial flight?"

    • Jack Daniels, a noted US athletics physiologist who was a key figure in research on the effects of altitude for US athletes who competed in the Mexico City Olympics and who has worked closely with Jim Ryun among others, was the first to respond of five persons sent requests by T&FN. He assured us that Bjorn Ekblom was highly reputable, that he had been widely published in technical journals and that he had indeed worked with athletes. Further, both he and Ekblom had studied under P. 0. Astrand, one of the world's most respected athletics physiologists, at the institution where Ekblom now teaches. "The Swedes are perhaps the most advanced nation in the study of exercise physiology. If Ekbom actually did the work, I have no reason to doubt the results if reported correctly." He promised to contact Ekblom directly.

    • George Sheehan, M.D., who admits to being "only" an internist who runs marathons but also writes a medical advice column for Runners World, wrote, "I have reviewed the report of Ekblom's work, and it seems like the sea level answer to high altitude acclimatization. What he 'is doing is raising the oxygen carrying capacity something in the order of 10 to 12 percent. This is in the range of that attained by the high altitude training done for a long period. (However, in the US, 21 days is the legal limit for the use of whole blood because reactions occur to results of decomposition. However, storage of red cells can be accomplished by special new methods.) The normal red cell life span is 120 days, so obviously the effect is shortlived and in 120 days the runner would be back on his own. What Ekblom might be doing is to pack the red cells while outside the body and just put back red cell mass making the runner's blood thicker and comparatively quicker to take up oxygen. Taking and giving the runner's own blood makes it a safe procedure and eliminates all reactions to incompatibility.

    • Ernst Joki, M. D., and director of the Exercise Research Laboratories at the University 01 Kentucky, meanwhile, took a dimmer view of the report. "I would disregard the statement by Mr. 'Swedish journalist'. It is probably worthless but it may be appropriate to inquire from Prof. P.O. Astrand what all the noise is about."

    • Jan Agertz, Swedish correspondent to T&FN, reported, "The information on the study was widely published in Sweden. I have discussed the matter with a medical student who was familiar with the study report. He said the process was completely harmless. As far as he understood, it just implied that the number of red blood corpuscles increases, and by that also the amount of oxygen you can utilize in your body."

    • Sven Ivar Johansson, yet another Swedish T&FN correspondent, provided still further confirmation of the study. "Bjorn Ekblom, 33, is assistant professor at the Institute of Sports in Stockholm where physiological research is a main occupation." As for the results, Johansson adds, "The 'super effect' of the seven tested lasted for about two days." He seems to affirm, in his comments, that the method involves the packing of red cells. "The blood transfusions provide the test persons with a surplus of red blood corpuscles, which transport oxygen to the muscles for increased energy."

    • Bjorn Eckblom, the physiologist involved, directly responded to Jack Daniels' inquiry. "The aim of this study was not to find a perfect way of doping athletes but to study the different parameters thatwill influence the oxygen transport system chain and general physical performance. As you can understand, the study has become of greatest interest to coaches and trainers all over the world, but I have refused to travel to different countries and refused TV interviews. While I do not think I can stop this type of preparation of an athlete from becoming routine before big events, I do not want to contribute to such kinds of preparation by explaining all the details. Further, I have not finished the whole study as we still need some data on different kinds of side effects. Even so, I have submitted an article to an American physiological journal. I do not feel it is fair to divulge details before I have at least received an answer."

    • Daniels, again: "Ekblom brings up a good point. I don't know of any way, with respect to athletics, that you could check whether a guy had a blood volume induced into him unless it produced an increase in blood pressure. But there's such a range of blood pressures anyway. What about the guy who normally has low blood pressure, who receives an injection of blood, and whose blood pressure then is normal?"

    The potential impact on athletics of this study if the method is comparatively simple to effect is indeed incredible. In an age when altered states of psyche and physique are increasing in society at large, it is only natural that new discoveries with reference to athletic performance improvement should be made. If the 'blood doping' is actually adaptable to athletes, then it becomes an issue which athletic administrators should consider quickly as a question of morality and health and as a field in which enforceable rules may or may not be required.

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    They were def. going the autologous route.

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    Originally posted by gh
    Originally posted by eldrick
    blood doping is just a blood transfusion, which has been around successfully since '30s :

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_transfusion

    it wasn't exactly rocket-science by the time of the '60s, so i have no idea why this swedish researcher thought it may have not been tried before '71, just because it wasn't in the literature

    any doc with 1/2 a brain ( even a med student with 3/4 of a brain ) & a willing athlete couda done it anytime after the '30s
    I'll try to get the whole article scanned: it seems that one of the keys to the whole thing was developing methodologies for preserving the blood for a longer period of time than what was considered acceptable at the time. We are talkign almost 40-year-old technology at this point.
    i'd think that may be correct if you were doing autologous transfusions ( taling off 1 pint of blood from yourself, storing it in a fridge & re-transfusing it a few weeks later ), but no one was checking blood-doping then - you simply coud get your crooked doc to pick up a pint of blood from the local blood bank ( compatible blood of course ) & just transfuse that

    i never saw the point of autologous transfusions back then apart from obvious risk of blood-bank transfusions ( hepatitis or bad luck for the sample to contain prohibited substances - but chances of both are pretty low ( blood was screened pretty well back then for transmissible diseases & you'd be damn unlucky to get transfusion from a donor on steroids ! )

    the only other advantage of an autologous transfusion i can see is that it is a perfect match ( even someone else's "compatible" blood is going to have some minor blood group mismatches despite main ones of ABO & Rhesus being the same - there are a dozen other minor classes ) - homologous blood will last longer in the circulation than the external one, which will undergo a degree of minor haemolysis because of smaller group mismatches - for argument's sake it may last 1 or 2 weeks longer in circulation

    Leave a comment:


  • Bruce Kritzler
    replied
    Remember that Keino had to drop out of the 10k due to (gall bladder ?) pain. So, he may not have felt too good for the 5k.

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Originally posted by eldrick
    blood doping is just a blood transfusion, which has been around successfully since '30s :

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_transfusion

    it wasn't exactly rocket-science by the time of the '60s, so i have no idea why this swedish researcher thought it may have not been tried before '71, just because it wasn't in the literature

    any doc with 1/2 a brain ( even a med student with 3/4 of a brain ) & a willing athlete couda done it anytime after the '30s
    I'll try to get the whole article scanned: it seems that one of the keys to the whole thing was developing methodologies for preserving the blood for a longer period of time than what was considered acceptable at the time. We are talkign almost 40-year-old technology at this point.

    Leave a comment:


  • kuha
    replied
    Re: Keino accuses Gammoudi

    Originally posted by Master Po
    Originally posted by Bauchwalzer
    I have immense respect for Keino but, perhaps, he has a grudge with Gammoudi, a great runner as well. Maybe I'd put more credence to it had Gammoudi been a "one hit wonder". The truth on this will never be known, odds are.
    Agree w Bauchwalder re Keino, and I would put more credence in K's assertion had he actually offered a reason, or even suggested what some of his evidence for this assertion is. In the absence of any persuasive supporting evidence for this claim, it sounds like the reason is, "anyone who beat me had to be doping." In the absence of evidence, I'll go with this possibility: maybe, just maybe -- not utterly unlike Keino himself -- Gammoudi was really talented, and really well-prepared. It's possible.
    The really hilarious irony is that Keino's own 3:34.9 was a far more off-the-chart performance than Gammoudi's 14:05! If Keino had been anywhere near his 1500 form for the 5000 final, he would have won easily.

    Leave a comment:


  • catson52
    replied
    Originally posted by tandfman
    Originally posted by catson52
    When did Jouko Kuha (not related to our erstwhile poster!) set his steeplechase WR?
    Erstwhile? I believe he's still very much around. (Which is a good thinig.)

    The answer to your question is July, 1968, a few months before the Mexico City Olympics.
    Kuha, my apologies for totally inciorrect usage of the English language. Tandfman, thanks. I have umpteen track magazines and books literally within five feet of this computer. I was just too lazy to look it up, whilst taking a break from trying to prepare an article for submission to a scientific journal.

    Leave a comment:


  • Master Po
    replied
    Re: Keino accuses Gammoudi

    Originally posted by Bauchwalzer
    I have immense respect for Keino but, perhaps, he has a grudge with Gammoudi, a great runner as well. Maybe I'd put more credence to it had Gammoudi been a "one hit wonder". The truth on this will never be known, odds are.
    Agree w Bauchwalder re Keino, and I would put more credence in K's assertion had he actually offered a reason, or even suggested what some of his evidence for this assertion is. In the absence of any persuasive supporting evidence for this claim, it sounds like the reason is, "anyone who beat me had to be doping." In the absence of evidence, I'll go with this possibility: maybe, just maybe -- not utterly unlike Keino himself -- Gammoudi was really talented, and really well-prepared. It's possible.

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    nowdays, we only get that sort of "small country-excellent crop" in technical events like belaruskies in hammer ( also hungarians in same ? )

    viable explaination is because of difficulty of event & supposed lack of depth compared to running events - small country can hire the best coaches & make concerted effort to find big, motivated guys for an event - you can "buy" success in it

    however, running events have too much depth & there is no huge technical wizadry involved in running for a small country to dominate ( in the past small countries like finland dominated in '20s in middle/long distances but i'd put that down simply to lack of competition/depth ( no africans ) )

    modern days, jama is an exception, but they have had good sprinters for a few years now & in the past - if a small country dominates some running events, it's likely because they are "special" in some way - probably genetically ( but also thru naughty ways )

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Originally posted by eldrick
    well, seeing as he's just about the only world class athlete tunisia has ever produced, it does make you wonder...
    quite to the contrary, I wonder far more about small nations that produce multiple world-class athletes; one is an outlier, multiples are a hint of.....

    Leave a comment:


  • LopenUupunut
    replied
    Originally posted by catson52
    Originally posted by gh
    Steroids were legal in '68 and blood doping, I'm pretty sure, hadn't yet been invented.

    Suspect Keino conflating Gammoudi with other dodgy North African nations to come.

    When did Jouko Kuha (not related to our erstwhile poster!) set his steeplechase WR? I seem to recall that there was a clear impression he was doing something unusual - blood doping?
    He did a WR. That's pretty unusual :wink:

    I've never before heard Kuha's specific name being attached to blood doping but can't disprove it (though it's worth mentioning that he wasn't part of any major distance running team). Besides Maaninka, Mikko Ala-Leppilampi also admitted blood doping - I'm not sure if he ever gave a time frame but he didn't improve noticeably after 1970, which as we can all see happens to be the year before '71. Finnish distance running came back to the very top between '68 and '72 - admittedly, that also coincides with new training regimes being introduced here by Arthur Lydiard and his pupils, and with an increase in the number of Finnish running enthusiasts, so it can't be automatically assumed to be all due to blood doping. But we certainly were pioneers in blood doping (and, regrettably, are still pretty good at it).

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    Originally posted by Brian
    Originally posted by eldrick
    blood doping is just a blood transfusion, which has been around successfully since '30s :

    any doc with 1/2 a brain ( even a med student with 3/4 of a brain ) & a willing athlete couda done it anytime after the '30s

    Good point. Maybe too scared of the viscosity causing death factor? Didn't think about Heparin, et al?
    i checked some conditions &- polycythaemia rubra vera ( disease producing too many red cells ) can push haematocrit into the 80s !!!

    that must be like 4 or 5 extra pints of blood in the system & they can survive ( not for long without blood-letting )

    it's safe to say an extra 1 or 2 pints with adequate hydration ( & maybe some diuretic cover ) is not much of a risk

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X