breaking 2 and doping

i am sure most readers of this blog are familiar with the story by now. nike invested a large amount of money into a project called breaking2. the entire concept was to get a single human to break the 2 hour barrier for the mile. that means that the greatest athletes, sports scientists, engineers, coaches, and yes, marketing departments came together, pooled resources, and threw everything they possible could into breaking both a world record and barriers to human performance. and yet, with all of these resources, they failed. eliud kipchoge ran a blistering 2:00:25 (4:35 min/mi pace) and broke both his personal best and the world record, but fell short of the goal of sub-2 hour marathon. but what were the conditions of this run? and what role did performance enchaining drugs play in this attempt?

it is obvious that kipchoge is fast. undeniably one of the fastest humans to ever compete in the marathon. and this attempt will go down in history as one of the pinnacles of human performance. with that established, let’s now consider what it took to actually run this time.

firstly, and perhaps most importantly, kipchoge did not run this alone. he was accompanied by a host of the top marathon runners in the world who’s sole purpose was to keep kipchoge on pace to break this record. for those not familiar with endurance style events like running or cycling, having others accompany a run or ride carries a huge psychological and physiological advantage, even if those other athletes are competing against you. when they are working with you, this effect is potentially amplified. not only did these other runners help set the pace, they actually permitted kipchoge to draft off of them, and shield him from the air resistance that, especially at these speeds, is not insignificant. secondly, this attempt was made on a grand prix track, with very little undulation, located at only ~180m above sea level, and, since it was a looped track, no harsh corners or turns. essentially, the conditions selected were as optimal as possible.

it is clear then, that this attempt should not, and indeed can not, be compared with other marathon attempts. It would be equivalent to competing the paces during the 1-hour cycling record attempts with riders time-trialling in the tour de france. it is a different race and should be thought of as a different category - and yet no less impressive.

the component of this attempt that is not being discussed however, is the element of doping control. I have yet to see any article report on the number of doping control tests employed, how frequently these were administered, what was tested for, or what their protocol would be given a positive test. Since this occurred outside of an athletic governing body jurisdiction, how confident can we be that this attempt wasn’t also made with the assistance of pharmaceuticals?

although asking these questions should be considered no more than speculative at this time, there is an obvious history of doping scandals within marathon running, and specifically within kenyan runners. Only this week another runner tested positive, and the weeks prior resulted in olympic champion sumgong failed a doping control test. While it is not sufficient evidence to look purely at times, we have a situation that the fastest marathon times have consistently being associated with athletes implicated in doping controversy. and then kenyan olympic champion kipchoge bests his personal best by over 2:30 and the world record by over 2 minutes. this should raise suspicions, in the very least.

more than this, nike is far from clean when it comes to the drug use of nike endorsed athletes. the story of alberto salazar and the nike oregon project raises some concerns over the companys judgement of handling high performance and performance enhancement drugs. a recent report indicated that nike perhaps interfered with usada investigation into this matter - given the amount of money nike stood to gain from promotions, endorsements, selling shoes, and the rest of it, there is a clear motivation to at the very least turn a blind eye to any untoward doping behaviors.

to reiterate the earlier point - nothing should be taken away from this incredible feat of human performance. it was an exciting spectacle and something, as a scientist, i am glad to have witnessed. however, as always, we need to remain diligent in understanding context, and skeptical of these huge leaps forward in human performance.