Carbon monoxide has taken centre stage in cycling following recent warnings from the International Cycling Union (UCI). During a congress in Switzerland, the body urged teams and cyclists to avoid using inhalers of the gas, the application of which is causing controversy among the sport’s elite. Although it is not considered doping, its performance-enhancing potential and associated risks have placed it at the centre of an intense ethical and health debate.
The controversy arose during the last Tour de France, when reports indicated that teams such as Visma-Lease a Bike and UAE Team Emirates were using the technique. Those involved, including cyclists such as Tadej Pogacar and Jonas Vingegaard, have defended its use solely as a medical test in altitude training. However, concern is growing among specialists and competitors.
THE RESPONSE FROM THE PROTAGONISTS
DSM rider Romain Bardet expressed his concerns about the issue in a recent interview, calling the practice part of an ‘arms race’ in modern cycling. His statements highlight the inequalities between teams with greater resources to access advanced techniques and those with financial constraints. For his part, Vingegaard said he would follow UCI guidelines if the technique is banned, while downplaying its impact by comparing it to smoking a cigarette.
The Movement for Credible Cycling (MPCC) has backed the UCI’s measures, criticising the World Anti-Doping Agency’s (WADA) slowness in addressing potentially dangerous practices. “Carbon monoxide is a toxic gas, and its use must be strictly regulated to avoid health risks to cyclists,” the body said in a statement.
RISKS AND BENEFITS: A FINE LINE
Experts such as Iker García Alday explain in the Spanish newspaper ‘Marca’ that, in low doses, carbon monoxide can be used to measure haemoglobin values and simulate high-altitude training. This technique, similar to intermittent hypoxia, can improve red blood cells, but its misuse could be lethal. “The UCI is seeking to avoid a dangerous trend that could spiral out of control,” a member of the regulatory body told the Spanish-language sports daily.
The use of advanced techniques such as carbon monoxide or intermittent hypoxia raises questions not only about health, but also about fairness in sport. Teams with greater resources have access to technologies that widen the gap with the more modest teams, perpetuating inequalities within the peloton.
A CONSERVATIVE AND NECESSARY DECISION
The UCI, in collaboration with WADA, seeks to preserve the integrity of cycling by regulating these practices. While some studies support the benefits of carbon monoxide, the associated risks justify the body’s conservative stance. “It is a move to ensure the health of cyclists and keep competition within ethical boundaries,” conclude experts in sport physiology.
As cycling evolves, new technologies and practices emerge that challenge the limits of what is permitted. The UCI faces the challenge of finding a balance between innovation and fair play, ensuring that the sport remains a fair and safe competition for all its players, which is the most important thing.
