Some good news is on the horizon in the oft-so-depressing world of doping in sports. After millions of dollars and countless man-hours of scientific research, a technique to unmask cheats by peering into their blood appears to be on the verge of producing its first doping cases. This milestone for the so-called ‘biological passport' could be reached in the coming weeks or months, most likely in cycling. Successful first use of this technique to sanction cheating riders could help change public perceptions of Lance Armstrong's drug-tainted sport, allowing it to stake a claim as an anti-doping pioneer. If, as expected, cyclists are banned and, crucially, if these first cases hold up against any legal challenges, then pressure also will mount on other sports to either adopt this new weapon or explain why they aren't doing everything possible to clean up, too. Make no mistake, the passport is no panacea. Sports won't be rid of cheats overnight. There are indications that some dopers are already learning to navigate the traps laid by testers screening blood, by more carefully managing their drug use and other forms of cheating to hover just below the radar screen. But, combined with regular drug tests and more effective policing, the program is giving the cats another claw with which to catch the mice. Already, the system appears to be acting as a deterrent, even before the first cheat caught with it is hauled before a disciplinary panel. And for those who don't cheat, being in the program makes their exploits more credible. Unlike with regular testing, the blood screeners aren't looking for the specific drugs or doping methods that cheats have used. Instead, they search for telltale traces that doping leaves on the body, in athletes' blood. Illegally enhancing athletic performance with blood transfusions or hormones like EPO, a drug of choice for crooked endurance athletes, throws the body out of whack, skewing blood values. By spotting those abnormalities, scientists believe they can now prove that the athlete must have doped – even if they don't specifically identify the illegal drug or method that the cheat used. In layman's terms, it is roughly the difference between police catching criminals red-handed and forensic scientists proving crimes by piecing together evidence left at the scene. If the samples are collected often enough and at the right times, this long-term hematological monitoring of athletes offers the best current hope of catching those who transfuse their own blood, a doping method that is otherwise undetectable using conventional tests and which gives cheats a big boost by increasing the supply of oxygen to their muscles. The program could also expose those who use types of EPO that aren't caught using standard testing. Because its blood-screening program is farthest along, cycling is likely to reap the reward of claiming the first scalp and shoulder the burden of having to run the first case or cases past a gauntlet of defense lawyers, who will probably try to pick apart the new method and its indirect proof of athletes' guilt. The head of cycling's governing body, Pat McQuaid, told The Associated Press he is confident that his organization, the UCI, will press its first disciplinary proceedings in “days or weeks” – hopefully before the Tour de France in July. The expected sanction for a first offense is a 2-year ban from competition, although McQuaid says anti-doping rules also allow for fines. Cycling's program currently looks for abnormal readings of hemoglobin, a protein in red blood cells that transports oxygen from the lungs to rest of the body, and of immature red blood cells called reticulocytes. Some of the UCI's experts are perplexed why the cycling body hasn't yet acted on the suspicious cases they have identified. But the caution reflects the high stakes involved. Professional cycling teams, riders and race organizers have had to foot some of the $6.7 million cost of creating the blood passport program and will be none too happy if the first cases prove a dud. If they fail, the whole blood-screening concept would be hurt, although probably not fatally. That would be bad for sports such as athletics, which this year is starting its own passport program. It would also be more sorry PR for cycling. For years, it has been in the news as much for doping as for sporting exploits. Now it is reveling in the worldwide and largely rosy surge of attention generated by Armstrong's decision to come back to the sport and shoot for an 8th Tour de France crown after 3 years in retirement. But ultimately, the blood passport could do more than Armstrong to turn cycling's image around.
