Sunday, February 12, 2012
Widespread Plasticizer Clouds Doping Tests of Cyclists
This article details the issues with recent attempts to catch professional cyclists for drug use. Just last week Alberto Contador, a three-time Tour de France champion from Spain, was found guilty of using performance enhancers. But the interesting part was that they also found a plasticizer in his system, which is commonly used to soften plastic bags or tubes, prompting allegations that Contador might have had illegal blood transfusions. The problem is that drug testing is getting so high tech that athletes are not only being tested for illegal substances or procedures, but also for evidence in things like the residue from IV bags. Many argue that since these plasticizers are so widespread in food and common household items already, there’s no telling how they would have gotten into an athlete’s system. On the other hand, some say that sharp spikes in the quantities of these chemicals in a cyclist’s body are an indicator that he was using IV bags for blood doping, or illegally boosting one's red blood cell count to carry more oxygen to the lungs and muscles. The World Anti-Doping Agency funded research to look into controversial cases like Contador’s, but have thus far yielded underwhelming results. The plasticizer, or phthalate, in question is called bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, or DEHP. Shanna Swan, a reproductive epidemiologist at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York who has studied the effects of phthalates on infant boys, says that 98% of Americans have measurable levels of DEHP, as is can come from food and is found in many medical supplies. Also, a national survey by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from 2001 to 2001 found that DEHP's first metabolite is present at 37.9 micrograms per liter in the 95th percentile of men, which means that just "5 percent of U.S. men had a value higher than this," Swan said. Not to mention it is possible that a rare acute exposure from occupational or diet sources can significantly elevate levels. And in cyclists, this gets even more complicated because many things might cause their levels to spike, like hydration status and time since last meal. Because of the varying explanations and complication surrounding DEHP exposure, the WADA discontinued funding for the plasticizer test in November, a year after Contador was implicated in blood doping.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I was extremely impressed by the way my classmate, Elizabeth Cory, presented her review on the article, “Widespread Plasticizer Clouds Doping Tests of Cyclists.” First off, she clearly explains the fact that drug testing is getting so high tech that they not only test for drugs, but also for evidence from IV bags. However, these plasticizers are so widespread in food and common household items that the sharp spikes in the quantities of these chemicals can be explained by many things other than blood doping. I was also impressed by Elizabeth’s thorough description and explanation of the article, and some of the tests applied to try and catch athletes who are using drugs to increase their ability. She didn’t assume that the reader was well informed on the information in the article so explained it very clearly which was helpful in my reading of her review. For example, instead of assuming the reader knew what blood doping was, she explained that it was, “illegally boosting one's red blood cell count to carry more oxygen to the lungs and muscles.” I also liked the way she connected this article to our society, because I too am an athlete and am concerned with the growing usage of drugs to increase performance.
ReplyDeleteAlthough this article was very well presented, there are a few things that could be changed to overall help the reader’s experience. One thing I noticed was that mid-way through the first paragraph, I began getting slightly confused, as I didn’t understand all of the information being presented. Therefore, I suggest that Elizabeth slightly dumbs down parts of the article so it would be easier to understand. My second suggestion is just that Elizabeth explains what a plasticizer is a little bit more because even after reading the article I was slightly confused.
From this article, I learned that drug testing has become so advanced that not only can they test for the drug itself, they can also test for traces of evidence from IV bags. However, these tests have found to be ineffective because they can be alternately explained by many household items or food.
Elizabeth Cory did an excellent job summarizing this article. Elizabeth did a great job stating the purpose of the article, which was to expose the illegal use of drugs in order to enhance one’s performance in professional cycling and in other sports. She explains how drugs are becoming so advanced that professional athletes are being fully tested for illegal drugs as well as in other residues, such as residues in IV bags. However, she also explains that plasticizers are so prevalent in food and in ordinary household items already, that there is no way of telling how they have gotten into an athlete’s system. Elizabeth also explains the plasticizer, DEHP, in a way that people who have never researched about it would be able to understand. In addition, I also like how Elizabeth wrote about how DEHP connects to her life, as well as to the lives of other athletes. DEHP is so widespread that many people are researching about it and testing athletes for it. It is quite upsetting to learn that many professional athletes do use performance enhancers.
ReplyDeleteEven though Elizabeth did a great job summarizing this article, she should have quoted and cited more details from the article. Elizabeth could have also clarified the years in which the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that DEHP's first metabolite is present at 37.9 micrograms per liter in the 95th percentile of men. She stated the year 2001 to 2001, which was quite confusing when I read the review.
This article was very interesting and informative. Prior to reading this article and Elizabeth’s review, I did not know about the widespread use of performance enhancers. I learned that performance enhancers are so common throughout the world of athletes. Athletes are being tested for illegal drugs in their bodies as well as in residues of IV bags. However, it is extremely difficult for one to know how it got into their system because plasticizers are so ubiquitous in food and common household objects already.
I think that Liz did an excellent job reviewing the article, “Widespread Plasticizer Clouds Doping Tests of Cyclists.” In the beginning of her review she had a very clear summary and explanation of the topics in the article. She explained some of the more obscure scientific terms that I didn’t know. Her explanations helped me to understand what she was talking about and the overall point that she was trying to make. Furthermore, her use of facts and quotes from the article helped to back up what she was saying. These direct quotes and statistics really enhanced her summary and helped me understand the topic on a higher level. Lastly, I really liked how she related the article back to everyday life. For example, she stated that, “Many researchers note that there is a growing body of data to support the theory that the absence of chemicals like this in our environment would also have positive health consequences.” She gives an interesting fact that grabs the attention of the reader. If chemicals like those discussed in this article are affecting our health negatively then this is a huge issue. This link between the topic of this article and everyday life that she provides is essential and helps highlight the importance of this article.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Liz did an excellent job of summarizing this article I did have to read her review twice to fully understand and follow it. About half way through the first paragraph I started to become confused and it become harder to follow her explanations. Furthermore, although the statistics and quotes did enhance the overall review I did think that there were too many of them. These statistics could have been split up by sentences that didn’t contain a fact or quote to make it easier to read.
I was not aware that DEHP could come from medical supplies and even food. I was also not aware that cyclists were getting tested for this drug, which can come from something as innocent as food or from using IV bags for doping, which is illegal. This article talked about many topics that I wasn’t familiar with and as a result I learned a lot.
I was very impressed with how my classmate, Elizabeth Cory, reviewed her article, “Widespread Plasticizer Clouds Doping Tests of Cyclists.” She had a very thorough explanation of exactly what tests were being done on the professional cyclers. This was very good because it would have been very hard to understand without her explaining it, because many of the terms and ideas being presented are very complex. Her review was also very well done because she explains the new technology being used in these drug tests. I would not have known about this if I had not read this article and review.
ReplyDeleteI would suggest the Elizabeth should explain some of the terms in the article a little bit better because I still don’t really have a very good idea about what plasticizers are. Also, she could have explained how the athletes use these performance-enhancing methods and what the methods are because I do not know what they are. At one point in the middle of the review Elizabeth uses a few very complicated terms without really explaining them so if those were explained it would make the review better.
Before I read this article and review I was definitely not aware of all of these new methods for testing athletes. I had no idea that they were being tested for objects that would be in the IV that is used for these surgeries and it is very interesting because this new technology is amazing.