"We have tapentadol, which is 10 times stronger than tramadol": New MPCC president urges to fight dangerous "grey areas"

The Movement for Credible Cycling (MPCC) was born during the darkest days of cycling history, yet its principles stand to this day. Back in 2007, the doping scandals were at their heights with entire teams pulling out of the Tour de France amidst doping revelations. In shadow of these events, an organization whose purpose is to stand for the right values emerged under the guidance of Roger Leagay who passed down the baton this year to new MPCC president Emily Brammeier.

Anti-doping battles are now fully in the jurisdiction of International Testing Agency (ITA), but MPCC still finds its place as a more strict version of official anti-doping bodies which battles also against the so-called "grey zone".

"There are two key pillars that run through the organisation – there’s obviously the fight against doping. And then there’s also the focus, more so these days, on the reduction of the grey zone. The underlying principles are actually just to protect riders’ health, the fairness of the sport, and its credibility," Brammeier said on the road.cc podcast.

"Obviously a lot has changed," she says. "We’re talking about it a lot more, which I think is actually the most important thing. Doping used to be the norm and now it’s totally different. We have much stricter rules. And the mentality for the most part is also quite different. But we’ve still got a way to go there."

A remnant of its tainted past, cycling takes "pride" in one of the most elaborate anti-doping structures across the sports world, making cheating a rather futile attempt. Yet many still try to bend the rules.

"We are one of the most tested sports in the world, which is obviously a good step and I think a really important one. But I do believe that we can still take some steps forward with that. We need a more robust anti-doping system. The grey area is a big challenge these days."

"We are in a different place, but there’s still work to be done. And I think that’s what’s important with the MPCC, we really need to keep shining that light on the areas of weakness, areas of opportunity, and pushing forward change – because it’s human nature to cheat. There will always be cheaters, that’s normal and we’ll never be able to avoid that. But what matters is how as a sport do you deal with it? What measures do you take to step forward? And who do we want to be?"

While the old-school doping has been made virtually impossible through excessive testing, MPCC's work is far from finished. Rather than using banned methods and substances, MPCC suspects that many riders and teams resort to the use of "technically legal" but "morally dubious" methods in the pursuit of at times marginal gains.

"The grey area and the excessive medicalisation of the sport is one of our biggest modern challenges," Brammeier says. "The MPCC said that tramadol was a concern years ago. And it was 10 years before something happened. Unfortunately, we’re governed by process, and we really need to change the way we approach the sport."

"Now we have tapentadol, which is 10 times stronger than tramadol. And it’s been placed on a monitoring list and the likelihood is we’ll have to wait, whether it’s 10 years or whatever, to have a conclusion on whether it’s safe to take. The MPCC standpoint is: Why wait? This could be a problem, let’s ban it. And if it’s found to be safe to use, then use it. This feels like a healthier approach to medicine in the sport."

"In the real world you’re not taking tapentadol and driving a car. So why do we allow that in a bike race where we’re so focused on safety, on crashes in the finals? These key moments when riders are taking the maximum risk, they’re the periods they want these medicines for – so why are we putting them in danger? It protects riders to have a preventative approach."

"These are medicines to treat sick people. If you’re really sick, of course, you need it. But then the question is, should you be going and racing your bike if you’re really that sick?" Brammeier concludes by raising the question.