Meldonium

Eder always writes pretty darn well, this was no exception. turning into a bigger mess than they look capable of handling, no good, especially in an oly year. sheesh.

trutherer wrote:

Eder always writes pretty darn well, this was no exception. turning into a bigger mess than they look capable of handling, no good, especially in an oly year. sheesh.

Really? He took a whole lot of words to say very little: "arggh, athletes are doping!"

trutherer wrote:

Eder always writes pretty darn well, this was no exception. turning into a bigger mess than they look capable of handling, no good, especially in an oly year. sheesh.

The article was garbage. You have hundreds of athletes taking a drug they don't need for performance enhancing benefit. I don't care if we have studies showing it gives them an advantage it should be banned.

The cheaters already are a step ahead of thone trying to keep the sport clean. When a mass of athletes are taking a medication they don't need in a way not intended by the manufacturer we shouldn't waste years determining if they're getting an advantage, while in the meantime they steal from athletes doing it right.

This is only a controversy because the athletes were too stupid to look at what was going to be banned months in advance. They were all trying to gain an unfair advantage and they got busted. Just because a lot of athletes were morons doesn't mean we should let them off.

And this is like the DUI thing to me. When you get arrested for a DUI chances are that wasn't the first time you drove drunk. I would bet many of the athletes that got caught have doped before or were on other banned substances they didn't test positive for.

"This is only a controversy because the athletes were too stupid to look at what was going to be banned months in advance. They were all trying to gain an unfair advantage and they got busted. Just because a lot of athletes were morons doesn't mean we should let them off."

Are you willing to let off the "smart" athletes who stop taking the meldonium because they realized it would be banned?

Segundo Numero Dos wrote:

"This is only a controversy because the athletes were too stupid to look at what was going to be banned months in advance. They were all trying to gain an unfair advantage and they got busted. Just because a lot of athletes were morons doesn't mean we should let them off."

Are you willing to let off the "smart" athletes who stop taking the meldonium because they realized it would be banned?

You can't ban people for taking something that wasn't banned. That's a slippery slope. I consider them cheaters but unfortunately they get to walk in this case. Until athletes are required to disclose all medications and supplements they are taking to the anti doping agencies we're stuck with this situation.

I disagree with you. You position depends on whether someone read a memo, or someone else read a memo (coach, fellow athlete, friend, agent) and provided advance warning. The problem is the distribution method of the memo. Rather than assuming an athlete reads every single WADA email and understands them completely, WADA needs to require athletes to attend a meeting event where upcoming bans, etc, are discussed. Until an athlete attends a meeting event they cannot compete. The athletes that do attend--they may not pay attention, which is okay--would be required to sign off that the attended the event and understood what they were told. Now, the athlete that continues to use has absolutely no excuses--they signed that legal right away.

Primero, I understand the frustration (I think you're an athlete still competing, right?) but you have to look at this from a legal perspective. I totally agree that each and every athlete using meldonium *should* be banned on principle alone, but that's not how the system works.

the main gist i take from eder's article is that WADA should have done their damn homework before implementing the new restrictions. Since they didn't do that, a TON of cheaters are goign to get let off. it's bullcrap, and it's 100% the fault of wada for not having every single duck in a row before they implemented the restriction of meldonium. just not cool in any way shape or form. This is the kind of screw up that sets anti doping efforts back significantly, especially as now government grants can be withheld due to lawmakers seeing incompetence reigning at the administrative level.

Segundo Numero Dos wrote:

I disagree with you. You position depends on whether someone read a memo, or someone else read a memo (coach, fellow athlete, friend, agent) and provided advance warning. The problem is the distribution method of the memo. Rather than assuming an athlete reads every single WADA email and understands them completely, WADA needs to require athletes to attend a meeting event where upcoming bans, etc, are discussed. Until an athlete attends a meeting event they cannot compete. The athletes that do attend--they may not pay attention, which is okay--would be required to sign off that the attended the event and understood what they were told. Now, the athlete that continues to use has absolutely no excuses--they signed that legal right away.

Clearly people are still confused about how easy it is too know what will be banned so I will explain yet again. What will be banned for the next year is public info and posted on WADA's website. For those of you who haven't learned google yet here is a link to WADA's website where the list is easily viewable

This list is releases months before the year starts. It is not sprung on the athletes at the last minute so athletes have plenty of time to stop taking substance that will be banned or apply for a TUE if they have a legitimate claim. Every athlete is aware of this. Not knowing the drug was going to be banned is not a legitimate excuse. It is the athletes responsibility to not take the banned substance and ignorance is not an excuse.

Twinn wrote:

[quote]trutherer wrote:

Eder always writes pretty darn well, this was no exception. turning into a bigger mess than they look capable of handling, no good, especially in an oly year. sheesh.

Really? He took a whole lot of words to say very little: "arggh, athletes are doping!"[/quote

The critical element is that Don Caitlin stated that he finds no performance enhancing benefit to it which supports the contention I made several times on this board. The research is shoddy. So why ban something that doesn't work? Cause the athletes think it does? Athletes being stupid does not warrant a ban from the sport.

So are you suggesting we need definitive scientific proof to ban any drug? Do you know how impossible that will be. There are still people arguing epo gives you no benefit. Athletes are taking a drug they don't need for health requirements and not in the drugs medical intent for a performance enhancing effect. Whether it works or not is irrelevant. It definitely violates spirit of sport. Possibly negative health benefits to misuse a drug. And possibly performance enhancing effect. That is more than enough to ban it.

Stop giving the dopers benefit of the doubt. We don't have the time or resources to do medical studies on the performance enhancing effects of every drug in existence.

Why E Euros have been on Meldonium: Pick One

1) It doesn't aid performance but E Euro athletes have bad hearts.

2) It doesn't aid performance but E Euro athletes are stupid.

3) It aids performance but E Euros think that we are stupid.

Primo Numero Uno wrote:

So are you suggesting we need definitive scientific proof to ban any drug? Do you know how impossible that will be. There are still people arguing epo gives you no benefit. Athletes are taking a drug they don't need for health requirements and not in the drugs medical intent for a performance enhancing effect. Whether it works or not is irrelevant. It definitely violates spirit of sport. Possibly negative health benefits to misuse a drug. And possibly performance enhancing effect. That is more than enough to ban it.

Stop giving the dopers benefit of the doubt. We don't have the time or resources to do medical studies on the performance enhancing effects of every drug in existence.

Everyone deserves the benefit of the doubt particularly given the lack of science behind the supposed PED benefit, based on shoddy and dubious research. WADA banned it based on this shoddy research now are backtracking as well they should. If, all of a sudden a large number of athletes take bee pollen because they think it helps them perform should that/they be banned also? How about training at altitude if you were not born or actually live there? Everyone is looking for an edge but banning something that doesn't work anyway does no one any good.

Primo Numero Uno wrote:

So are you suggesting we need definitive scientific proof to ban any drug? Do you know how impossible that will be. There are still people arguing epo gives you no benefit. Athletes are taking a drug they don't need for health requirements and not in the drugs medical intent for a performance enhancing effect. Whether it works or not is irrelevant. It definitely violates spirit of sport. Possibly negative health benefits to misuse a drug. And possibly performance enhancing effect. That is more than enough to ban it.

Stop giving the dopers benefit of the doubt. We don't have the time or resources to do medical studies on the performance enhancing effects of every drug in existence.

Evidence beyond a reasonable doubt IE the preponderance of evidence, if performed using scientific rigor, indicates that the substance (drug) in question is performance enhancing.

Primo Numero Uno is absolutely correct.All these problems and rule changes could of all been avoided if the cheaters had simply stopped doping in time...but they were either too lazy, too stupid or more likely...both.

No argument that they screwed up as it was on WADA's website and they should have known about it. My beef is that it shouldn't have been banned at all given the lack of evidence it's actually a PED. More like an expensive (probably) placebo.

No, Primo is absolutely incorrect. How is anyone to know what will be banned in the future? How about banning energy gels, pain relievers, vaseline, and similar, because they allow to compete better than your normal abilities. If you are sick you compete sick, or stay home. If you are sore and stiff you run that way, or stay home. Special fluids bottles should be banned on long races; water only.

Agreed, slippery slope. perhaps performance enhancing shoes are next?

Has any person on letsrun ever read the banned list as set out in the WADA document . Please try and unless you have the help of several specialists then don't lie that you can understand it.

Birmingham wrote:

Has any person on letsrun ever read the banned list as set out in the WADA document . Please try and unless you have the help of several specialists then don't lie that you can understand it.

^THIS x 100

technobabble, gobbledygook, doublespeak, lawyerese, gibberish

It is amazing that well-paid "smart" people actually write the ban releases for WADA.