There is no “genetic superiority” when it comes to distance running. Literally everyone sub 2:09 is just doping.

Imagine if US runners could go to any Walgreen and get EPO. Imagine how much better our distance runners would be.

From the guardian article linked above:

This Übermensch image a lot of you have created of the east Africans is built on a house of cards.

Blood Doping Finns wrote:

Then why were your fellow countrymen using blood transfusions for sea level races? (e.g. , Maaninka, Vainio and more than likely Viren)...

Even taking as given that the Finns were primaly elevating Hct's above normal levels, Maaninka case was not from the 1960s, Vainio's presumed case not from the 1960s, Viren's presumed case not from the 1960s.

The fact that practically all the gossip is about events after the Ekblom-Åstrand research proves that something significant took place around the late 1960s/early 1970s.

Here We Go Again wrote:

Aragon wrote:

Except that there are zero known "real" blood doping cases from the 1960s nor any evidence that it was known that transfusion-induced supranormal hemoglobin was beneficial at sea level.

How do you know that? Links please.

Nobody can exactly "know" what people knew and when, but I do know for sure that in the 1960s at the Mexico olympics conferences and elsewhere it was an unsettled question whether even naturally altitude-boosted Hct's were beneficial at sea level. The first (known) attempt to research specifically how increasing Hct via transfusion affected Vo2Max is from 1966 (a failed attempt by the Åstrand-Ekblom-Kirschner-Rapport-Gullbring team).

When you add to this the timeline that it took until only after the 1972 Ekblom-Goldbarg breakthrough paper that all known blood doping programs started (with apparently GDR never starting theirs) an the negative and dismissive initial reception to the paper (very easy to find articles where the paper is "debunked" from the 1970s and 1980s), it looks that the blood doping thesis was very revolutionary for its time.

If the default position was very dismissive after the breakthrough paper by the Swedes whom everybody respected (Åstrand's first textbook on work physiology), it can not've been more transfusion-friendly before it even when some transfusions very might've taken place in the sports world for other reasons (e. g. to circumvent the acclimatization process for Mexico, treatment for anemia [Jouko Kuha], accidents etc).

So who pioneered the method then? Perhaps Kiprop was also the first person to take epo as well.

Subway Surfers wrote:

Finnish training methods wrote:

Viren was offered like a million dollars by a German newspaper for a tell all interview. He declined it. One of the Brits who came behind Viren at the Olympics become close friends and said he thought he was clean. If I had to bet on it, I would bet on Viren being clean. Just because some of the top Kenyans are doping, I don't think all top Kenyans are doping. I have always got the vibe that people who accuse Viren and Waldemar Cierpinski are just jealous. Listen and read what Frank Shorter has said about Waldemar Cierpinski. I just get a emotional feeling from Frank, not one based on objective facts.

So who pioneered the method then? Perhaps Kiprop was also the first person to take epo as well.

Italians are the main pioneers.

Big Red wrote:

I don't know about genetic superiority, maybe it is not a thing, maybe it is, but being born at altitude is a thing, and it helps East African runners.

PEDs are not easier to get in East Africa,

This is simply not true. In some countries with government controlled health systems and natural borders it is very difficult to obtain high profile drugs.

Italian coaching wrote:

Subway Surfers wrote:

So who pioneered the method then? Perhaps Kiprop was also the first person to take epo as well.

Italians are the main pioneers.

(39:28) Shorter, "Well that worked so well, I don't think that I will ever do that again." Shorter dates it at 1970, but it was most likely Kuha in 1968.

Big Red wrote:

I don't know about genetic superiority, maybe it is not a thing, maybe it is.

PEDs are not easier to get in East Africa, but I can accept that testing is not as rigorous, so there is some validity to the premise of this post, but not much.

What is at work here? Plain and simple, this is a racist post. .

This is one of the most stupid posts ever posted on LetsRun, and that's quite an achievement. Having said that, it manages to sum up the typical stupidity of the doping apologists and SJWs that infest this place - in just 3 sentences!! Well done!

You think East Africans may or may not be genetically superior, but you're certain that it's racist to discuss the possibility that they might not be. And then you claim that PEDs aren't easier to come by in East Africa when it's been well documented and widely publicized that until recently EPO was available in high street pharmacies over the counter, and still is in Ethiopia and no doubt other places that apparently still aren't on the radar of the IAAF such as Uganda and Botswana.

mooonshot wrote:

If doping works without a genetic superiority, where are all the white 2:02-2:03 Marathoners or all the sub-59:00 Half Marathoners or all the sub-26:40 10,000m runners or all the sub-12:50 5000m runners?

Oh, right, doping only works on Africans because they are genetically superior.

Logic, people, and reality of data.

Already mentioned that altitude and number of full time athletes also contribute to their success.

Genetics has little to do with it all the EA record holders and even just elites are born in Rift valley at altitude. Millions with same genetics in low altitude areas have little success.

Kiprop was seen as the perfect example of genetic superiority bone length slim calves etc we know know the real reason.

A lot of Kenyans build is due to diet.

Back to doping it's down to testing. How many Kenyans were being busted even 5 years ago. Hardly any. Even now their is advance notice of tests and bribes. Ethiopia is behind Kenya in terms of out of competition testing. Also has corruption problems.

Blood Doping Finns wrote:

Aragon wrote:

Except that there are zero known "real" blood doping cases from the 1960s nor any evidence that it was known that transfusion-induced supranormal hemoglobin was beneficial at sea level.

The reception of the Ekblom-Åstrand research was very negative and dismissive from scientifiic viewpoint in 1970s and the East Germans never adopted the method (used hypoxic training) and even the Russians and Italians conducted their own time trials before they adopted the method in the mid-1970s and late 1970s.

Then why were your fellow countrymen using blood transfusions for sea level races? (e.g. , Maaninka, Vainio and more than likely Viren). I think the way these guys dominated major events and the multiple Olympic gold medals by Viren is sufficient evidence for me.

If they were blood doping it just shows its not as effective as EPO as Viron was not consistent outside of the Olympics. Brendan foster regularly best him outside the Olympics. I think it's because you can too up with a pint but difficult to maintain a continuous advantage all year round.

Will the line be drawn? wrote:

Is anyone else sick of hearing how these East Africans are just genetically superior? They are in area where getting drugs is way easier than other parts of the world and in areas where drug testing isn’t even a thing. It’s awfully funny people think these guys are just better athletes. The only thing they are doing that Americans aren’t is getting away with doping. These guys debuting at times faster than the world record times ten years ago makes zero sense, humans didn’t all of a sudden evolve to be faster in the last 10-20 years. The entire area needs banned from participating in the Olympics until they get good testing.

With your logic anyone who is sub 9.9 in the 100 dash is doped.

Borderline wrote:

Just pointing this out. EPO hit the scene and the world record went from 2:09 to 2:01 in a matter of 20 years. Yet we are supposed to think these athletes are just getting better by magic.

The world record in 1998 was 2:06.

I agree that East African's domination is not due to any genetic superiority. They just work harder and are more committed. Certainly more focused than almost all U.S. elite marathoners. Plus the East African domination started in the early 1990's. That is almost 30 years. Hardly overnight sensations.

While we are at it, let's not forget, about 100 years ago, French scientists discovered that injecting the plasma of anemic rabbits starts raising RBC within a matter of hours.

casual obsever wrote:

And let's not forget that the scientific reports started in the 40s. Who knows who read that and tried it out...

Jack Foster is the best example of the genetic component. I used to support Arthur Lydiard in his US tour before his death and Foster commentary was always, "I took so easy to running.. I found I could do the same work as the other fellows and would improve at a greater rate... I just feel I am a natural."

If that's not describing a genetic predisposition to running, then you are lost. And then you have someone like Lagat, who has an extra component within something like a muscle biopsy where he has more fast twitch than Foster, and you have a much more genetically advantaged athlete. You guys don't understand the importance of body morphology with running endurance. If you want an example, watch the Tour de France this morning and watch the morphology of the skinny guys destroy the other riders up Tourmalet.

Kiprop was the perfect example of genetic superiority and that's why Coe and the IAAF had it in for him. I'll buy his EPO positive when Paula comes clean and admits that Coe had more pricks on his arm than a heroin junkie.

It's 100% genetic and a thread like this that questions it should be deleted for racism. Go put on your white hoods and march with your crosses alongside Coevett!

And three Norwegian brothers with a father who didn't run are three of the best in the world now because of their genetic superiority, not their training approach? Those in the family who didn't advance in athletics didn't do the work.

You see the one saying people from different countries have a genetic superiority. My posts say that is not the case it's down to altitude. Altitude has nothing to do with race. You need to educate yourself on the definition of that which you are accusing others of.

Genetics does have an influence but every country has people with the right genetics to succeed at long distance running.