Anne Gripper has declared that the war on doping is being won,according to Cycling news. While the declaration may be a bit optimistic the article includes some interesting insights into the thinking of the BioPass Panel.

The first is that the “experts” basically aknowledge that hemoglobin and hematocrit values are relatively easy to manipulate and explain away. So while an abnormally high level is evidence of doping normal levels aren’t great evidence of clean competition (something to keep in mind when data is used as marketing.) Instead, it looks like the Reticulocyte count is their current go to value. This is a same impression that I came away with after looking at the Armstrong data from all sides.

Point number two is that they really aren’t using the passport yet to actually sanction athletes. Yes, a couple of cases have been brought forward as sort of a pilot study of the legal system. But at the moment it appears that suspicious trends are being used as a guide for traditional doping. The likely reason is that the 3 standard deviation cutoff effectively castrates the BioPassport. Such wide cutoffs are likely to pick up only reckless or unsophisticated doping practices. An unrealistic number of data points may be necessary for the current Bayesian network to narrow the predicted range sufficiently for a 3 standard deviation cutoff to be of much legal use. Suspicious trends however, say values around 2 standard deviations or improbable trends, are much more likely to be seen and can be used to more effectively target riders for traditional testing.

The final notable item is the statement that the war on doping is being won and that (normal) Retic values are the proof.

While I agree that it is likely harder to manipulate the Retic, you need a bit of a qualifier.

An abnormaly low retic can be bumped up with small doses of EPO, and possibly propped up a bit with altitude exposure as well. Masking a high Retic on the other hand would require large RBC transfusion.  So a lack of unusually high Retic counts makes high doses of EPO unlikely. But the absence of low Retics does not necessarily rule out blood transfusions or withdrawal of large dose EPO supplementation.  

With the the above in mind, it is encouraging that the BioPass data, according to Gripper’s statements, may show an end of the era of high dose EPO use.

An alternate cynical conclusion may be that Retic is already being manipulated by means that have not been reported yet.

Either way, the likely future of anti-doping will be to develop tactics and tests to pick up EPO micro-dosing, blood transfusions, and blood volume expansion.