Lights

Comments

The UCI ‘clearly asks teams and riders not to use repeated CO inhalation’

The governing body takes a small step towards addressing carbon monoxide use in the pro peloton.

Dane Cash
by Dane Cash 26.11.2024 Photography by
courtesy UCI
More from Dane +

Cycling’s governing body has taken a small step towards addressing the controversial subject of carbon monoxide in sport by requesting that teams avoid using the substance as a performance enhancer. The UCI touched on the subject at its annual UCI Women’s WorldTour and UCI WorldTour Seminar, which took place on Monday and Tuesday in Nice, France.

“The UCI clearly asks teams and riders not to use repeated CO inhalation,” the UCI said in a statement. “Only the medical use of a single inhalation of CO in a controlled medical environment could be acceptable. The UCI is also officially requesting the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) to take a position on the use of this method by athletes. The medical session concluded with a roundtable discussion about the wellbeing and mental health of riders.”

The news comes four months after Escape Collective broke the news of carbon monoxide use in the pro peloton. Several teams are already utilizing a tool that relies on the inhalation of carbon monoxide to track changes in hemoglobin mass (Hbmass) in response to training interventions (the diagnostic use that the UCI refers to above as “single inhalation”), and there is growing concern around the potential use of carbon monoxide as a performance enhancer as well; inhaling the substance frequently can simulate the effects of altitude training on blood chemistry, in particular an increase in Hbmass.

At present, WADA code does not specifically ban the use of carbon monoxide, although rules do prohibit “artificially enhancing the uptake, transport, or delivery of oxygen.”

The Movement for Credible Cycling (MPCC), a coalition of teams committed to combatting doping in cycling, recently called on the UCI and WADA to weigh in on the as-of-yet unaddressed subject. Tuesday’s statement from the UCI represents a preliminary step in that direction, although “asking” for and “requesting” action are not definitive solutions.

Did we do a good job with this story?