New doping test???

mike6

" (Quote) US researchers have developed a new way to detect performance-enhancing drugs that they say is 1,000 times more sensitive than current tests.

In the laboratory, the new screen detected stimulants and steroids in minute concentrations.

The method is inexpensive and works with existing equipment, the scientists claim.

If validated, the test would significantly extend the time in which cheating athletes could be caught." (Quote)



This from the BBC Sport site. Dated 19th March so If it has already been posted, apologies.

A genuine claim or a threat to scare any current dopers and those even thinking of going down that route?

If the "Glow time" of any banned substance is prolonged by more sensitive tests that would suggest that with some products there effectiveness could have worn off by the time they are un detectable. :shock:

ddraver

Can only be a good thing...

hommelbier

Link to BBC article

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-26636371

Will testing now be easy piesi? (sorry)

No_Ta_Doctor

Good to see Armstrong doing something good for sport... ;-)

Mad_Malx

But most of the (cycling) action is for EPO and related - not going to pick these up.

(Edit - well spotted NtD)

Mad_Malx

mike6 wrote:

If the "Glow time" of any banned substance is prolonged by more sensitive tests that would suggest that with some products there effectiveness could have worn off by the time they are un detectable. :shock:

Yes - pretty pointless detecting non-stimulant amounts of stimulants (which even at stimulant amounts don't really make that much difference to absolute athletic performance anyway - allowable caffeine is probably about as good. Both will help concentration when fatigued).

More useful for out of competition anabobolic steroids though.

Crampeur

More false positives?

mike6

Crampeur wrote:

More false positives?

Difficult to tell. If the procedure is more sensitive one would hope its also more accurate. Depends what you mean by false positive. If its sensitive enough to pick up very small amounts of banned substances you would imagine it would also be able to detect synthetic or none natural stuff.

As for EPO perhaps it will be able to detect markers that flag up even micro dosing.

Crampeur

mike6 wrote:

Crampeur wrote:

More false positives?

Difficult to tell. If the procedure is more sensitive one would hope its also more accurate. Depends what you mean by false positive. If its sensitive enough to pick up very small amounts of banned substances you would imagine it would also be able to detect synthetic or none natural stuff.

As for EPO perhaps it will be able to detect markers that flag up even micro dosing.

Cheers, that makes sense.
I meant such as the Rodger's and Breyne's Clenbuterol positives recently. But there's a lower limit anyway, so I suppose a more sensitive test wouldn't actually lead to more false positives, just more positives closer to that limit?

Mad_Malx

Haven't look closely, but as I read it, it's mass spectrometry (MS). This isn't very useful for EPO, because quantitative protein MS (eg for recombinant EPO) is very difficult and expensive. The markers are also proteins and cells (red blood cells etc), so I don't think MS is going to tell you anything beyond the passport. (I'm happy to be put right)

Clenbuterol sensitivity is already far below the biologically active concentration and MS isn't needed to achieve this. In-competition clenbuterol positives are most likely from blood doping using OOC blood that still contained low clen, or food chain contamination, which is well established in in Mexico and China.

kleinstroker

Utterly pointless! Without knowing the pathways and metabolites of every single chemical a sportsperson could ingest, and metabolise, detecting anything at these levels is worthless. It may or may not prove something, but without categoric proof there are no contra-indicated metabolites also present, it seems like a waste of time.