Especially since the essential difference is only that PED's are generally considered to be those compounds on the banned substance list, while "vitamins and supplements" are compounds not on the list, or not in the quantities specified on the list, or not taken at a time prohibited by the list.
Oh, because if we add enough examples, "proof by example" gradually becomes a logically valid argument? I wonder, are there any confounders in these examples that might cast doubt on the exact contribution of EPO? Any "EPO works" discussion must eliminate these confounders, and come up with an accurate estimate of clean performances -- both of which are lacking here. And you think I'm the one who looks foolish.
High-Octane Dopers wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
If she tests positive, and loses her case, she should be sanctioned to the full extent of WADA regulations.
Both Jebet & Jepchumba already tested positive. According to the AIU, Jepchumba tested positive on 071018 & Jebet back on 020418.
So, rekrunner you can knock off your nonsense about EPO not working with the top performers of the sport. Your constant montra of EPO not a causative factor with very fast times involving top elites is falling on deaf ears now. The more these big names keep falling to EPO doping positives the more foolish you look trying to undermine the effects of EPO with elites.
Jepchumba:
3rd fastest ever HM.
Jebet:
Olympic Gold medalist.
Former WR holder.
Currently 2nd fastest SC all-time.
1) Unless you have a great many more reasons, I have to disagree with the use of the word "reasonably". 2) For men's events like 5000m, 10000m and the marathon, we can talk about 2 or 3 confirmed dopers in the top 100. For events like the men's 1500m, now that we have added Kiprop to Ramzi, we have only two in the top-16 or so. While some call this "egregrious", and "overwhelming", I remain sceptical.
Sprintgeezer wrote:
1) There are a great many reasons permitting one to reasonably decide against Bolt.
2) I wouldn't know, I don't follow or know distance as intensely--but maybe a large and sufficiently coherent population is now in the process of being assembled. I doubt it will ever reach the level of clarity that exists in the 100m, but it may form decently over the next few years.
Subway Surfers wrote:
m!ndweak wrote:
just like these lies?
-kenyans would never dope cause they are so nice, simple, high morals and good christians....or something really f*cking lame like that
-kenyans dont take EPO, but if they did it wouldnt work on them
-EPO doesnt work on my kenyans cause they are TOP TIER runners, only sub elite scrub runners take EPO, and then its doesnt work it actually makes them slower
-Taking EPO isnt necessary cheating, as all it does is allows the injured or sick runner to get back to 90% top aerobic fitness without putting in the months of work
-non of my kenyans even take asprin, vits or suppliments
ok man, ok
The best one is epo doesn't help for the marathon, though the evidence is overwhelming, the marathon has improved the most since epo became available. In fact the longer the event the greater the gain.
+1
Bingo...sub-maximal performance benefits are significant.
It's not a question of "close". They don't seem analogous at all. To me, "WADA banned" is an essential difference. Some PED's are legal, so if you want to continue down this line, please be less ambiguous.
Sprintgeezer wrote:
Especially since the essential difference is only that PED's are generally considered to be those compounds on the banned substance list, while "vitamins and supplements" are compounds not on the list, or not in the quantities specified on the list, or not taken at a time prohibited by the list.
rekrunner wrote:
1) Unless you have a great many more reasons, I have to disagree with the use of the word "reasonably".
2) For men's events like 5000m, 10000m and the marathon, we can talk about 2 or 3 confirmed dopers in the top 100. For events like the men's 1500m, now that we have added Kiprop to Ramzi, we have only two in the top-16 or so. While some call this "egregrious", and "overwhelming", I remain sceptical.
Do you believe in a 100% detection rate for anti-doping? If you do, then those are the only two (2) dopers in the "top-16 or so." If you don't believe in a 100% detection rate then the Kiprops & Ramzis may be just the tip of the iceberg. ?
"Improving the most" is not overwhelming evidence that EPO was a significant factor in this improvement. We don't even have scientific studies for the marathon.
Subway Surfers wrote:
The best one is epo doesn't help for the marathon, though the evidence is overwhelming, the marathon has improved the most since epo became available. In fact the longer the event the greater the gain.
I believe it is not necessary to have a 100% detection rate. I believe you need to use words like "believe" and "may be" and "tip of the iceberg". These look like strong declarations of faith, rather than the kind of intellectual debate I would prefer to have. "Sprintgeezer" is guessing "maybe a large and sufficiently coherent population is now in the process of being assembled", and comparing the case of distance runners to the case of sprinters. Contrast that with a faith based projection that 2 out of 16 is significant on the basis that there is much we do not know about the other 14. The foundation of your "maybe" is that we lack knowledge. BTW, we do not have 100% detection rate for sprinters, yet "Sprintgeezer" is in a much stronger position to talk about the correlation between fast sprinters and doping, despite my expressed reservations that such talk can be considered reasonable. We don't have anything close to comparable for the men's distance events.
Apply some commen sense wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
1) Unless you have a great many more reasons, I have to disagree with the use of the word "reasonably".
2) For men's events like 5000m, 10000m and the marathon, we can talk about 2 or 3 confirmed dopers in the top 100. For events like the men's 1500m, now that we have added Kiprop to Ramzi, we have only two in the top-16 or so. While some call this "egregrious", and "overwhelming", I remain sceptical.
Do you believe in a 100% detection rate for anti-doping? If you do, then those are the only two (2) dopers in the "top-16 or so." If you don't believe in a 100% detection rate then the Kiprops & Ramzis may be just the tip of the iceberg. ?
rekrunner wrote:
"Improving the most" is not overwhelming evidence that EPO was a significant factor in this improvement. We don't even have scientific studies for the marathon.
There are studies that measured time to exhaustion which is a key element in marathon running.
rekrunner wrote:
My main concern would be with any potential performance benefit.
Since we are talking about legal supplements and vitamins, I'm not sure what the point is supposed to be.
liar wrote:
Don't worry, rekrunner will always believe in them.
supplements and vitamins don't make you faster, but help to not to run slower (in case of some little or big deficiency)
rekrunner wrote:
It's not a question of "close". They don't seem analogous at all. To me, "WADA banned" is an essential difference. Some PED's are legal, so if you want to continue down this line, please be less ambiguous.
Sprintgeezer wrote:
Especially since the essential difference is only that PED's are generally considered to be those compounds on the banned substance list, while "vitamins and supplements" are compounds not on the list, or not in the quantities specified on the list, or not taken at a time prohibited by the list.
The problem with this line of argument is that it lacks any kind of moral grounding into why athletes should or shouldn't take substances. Here's mine: if you take a substance which is meant for a medical condition you do not have, then you have a crossed an ethical line.
This is best illustrated when the authorities change their mind about a substance, so if you are just blindly following the 'if WADA has banned it, it must be bad; if they haven't, it must be OK' line, then you essentially have no ethical position on doping.
Let's take an example. Here's the IOC medical commission commenting on a drug: "I think we need to be very precise that the position of the medical commission is that this is a banned substance". So according to you rekrunner, taking this drug would be doping, right? Well, it was.......but this was a quote from 2000 about our old friend Actovegin, drug of choice of Lance & the Postal Boys, Paula Radcliffe, Usain Bolt, Jama Aden and many, many more. Some people (Gabriella Szabo for example) got the book thrown at them for taking this drug (which is still banned in sport in the US and Canada and many other places by the way). But within a year the IOC (it was pre-WADA) had changed their mind on Actovegin and un-banned it.
So now it's OK, right? Well, I would say ethically no - and I would actually say no from a doping perspective as well. Ethically - because people are taking it for conditions they don't have, and from a doping perspective, because far too many people are taking it for it not to be big suspicions that it gives a performance benefit, despite (apparently) no testing proving this conclusively (there are plenty of suggestions that it helps with the effectiveness oxygen supply in conjunction with blood doping).
And then we have Meldonium. That was fine, right, because it wasn't on the doping list? Except then it was, and then it wasn't fine any more? No - the answer is that it was never fine. Athletes shouldn't be taking drugs to treat heart conditions in elderly people. And the % of people taking Meldonium was massive.
The sport is still screwed because of a total lack of transparency around doping, testing, supplements, TUEs etc. I applaud what the Integrity Unit is doing, but you still need i) a truth and reconciliation process ii) way more transparency around everything before things are going to really improve.
DHT123 wrote:
Renato Canova wrote:
And, Subway, another thing : you say that all the Kenyans are the same for you : Manangoi (world champion) the same as Kwemoi (WR holder in altitude).
This is one of the reasons because many of you think doping is widely diffused among the top runners, transferring the situation of one in the situation of other 30.
I think you need to start to think of INDIVIDUALS, who in every part of the world are different one from another, physically, mentally, for education, ambience, behavior.
This happens with Kenyans and with Americans, with Europeans and with Asian people.
I'm, and I always will be in the future, against every kind of generalization, exactly the opposite of LR posters demonstrate to do when put everybody (ALL KENYANS, ALL TOP RUNNERS, ALL SPORTSMEN) in the same pot. And the pot is the one of doped, something NOT ACCECTABLE without knowing the single cases.
Hi Renato,
On another thread a while back, you said that you'd be publishing details of Sondre Moen's drug testing in the year up until his breakthrough time at Fukuoka (you posted some informative details here on the LR forum about the tests that he'd had during this period), to promote full transparency about this. Do you still have plans to do this, as I haven't seen anything in the public sphere about this?
On another point, could any of the other posters on here enlighten me about the current status for blood testing in Kenya/Ethiopia right now? I was under the impression that there was still no blood testing taking place in these countries as there were no suitable testing facilities in Africa that they could get the samples to in the required timescale/condition for them to be used. This seemed to fit with the fact that Sondre Moen was urine tested several times during the time he spent in Kenya, but not blood tested.
But on the recent video put out by Mo Farah from Ethiopia, he's blood and urine tested by the official who is testing him. Is this correct? And which authority would be doing that testing? UKAD? Abbott Marathon Majors? IAAF? The guy who did the testing looked/sounded like he was more Kenyan than Ethiopian. And are the other Kenyan athletes that have been popped for EPO (which I guess would be from a urine test) being blood tested back home, as opposed to when they compete in Europe?
Finally, no-one seems to be mentioning Violah Jepchumba here, who's recently tested positive as well. Bahrain in theory, but basically Kenyan. 3rd fastest half marathoner in history (at the time).
Hi Renato,
You've replied to other people on this thread who have been far less polite than I - would be great if you could answer the question about publishing Sondre Moen's testing history?
No-one more knowledgeable than me want to comment on the blood testing in Kenya/Ethiopia? Rekrunner, El Keniano, Renato, Cleans, A.N.Other?
rekrunner wrote:
"Improving the most" is not overwhelming evidence that EPO was a significant factor in this improvement. We don't even have scientific studies for the marathon.
Subway Surfers wrote:
The best one is epo doesn't help for the marathon, though the evidence is overwhelming, the marathon has improved the most since epo became available. In fact the longer the event the greater the gain.
"Improving," who said anything about improving? I use absolutes, the data that actually exists.
Mo was urine and blood tested by WADA at the same time, which is extremely idiotic unless it was 'staged.' Pretty sure AK currently can only test urine samples, but yes Renato needs to clarify that one.
Subway Surfers wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
"Improving the most" is not overwhelming evidence that EPO was a significant factor in this improvement. We don't even have scientific studies for the marathon.
"Improving," who said anything about improving? I use absolutes, the data that actually exists.
In reviewing rekrunner's EPO-footprint analysis data, he's shows out of the 6 disciplines analyzed the marathon demonstrating the largest performance gain of 3.2% for the E. Africans during the rEPO use timeframe vs the pre-90s top 5 average of 2:07. "3.2%" is very significant and, IMO, the single most greatest game changer occuring with rEPO. Incidentally, he also shows an identical "3.2%" improvement for the E. African women - definitely consistency shown there.
Ironically, this isn't too far off of m!ndweak's estimated ~4% improvement with rEPO (and yet he undermines & dismisses m!ndweak's estimation...go figure). So, in essence, rekrunner has done a fine job of showing that the marathon benefits the most from rEPO use. ?
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=8635957Marathoners On The Rocket Fuel wrote:
Subway Surfers wrote:
"Improving," who said anything about improving? I use absolutes, the data that actually exists.
In reviewing rekrunner's EPO-footprint analysis data, he's shows out of the 6 disciplines analyzed the marathon demonstrating the largest performance gain of 3.2% for the E. Africans during the rEPO use timeframe vs the pre-90s top 5 average of 2:07. "3.2%" is very significant and, IMO, the single most greatest game changer occuring with rEPO. Incidentally, he also shows an identical "3.2%" improvement for the E. African women - definitely consistency shown there.
Ironically, this isn't too far off of m!ndweak's estimated ~4% improvement with rEPO (and yet he undermines & dismisses m!ndweak's estimation...go figure). So, in essence, rekrunner has done a fine job of showing that the marathon benefits the most from rEPO use. ?
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=8635957
Good spotting ?(thee old thread got notoriously closed), in a gorilla war use your enemies weapons against them ? notice the longer the distance the bigger the gain? Also, see mindweak's post, just priceless.
Subway Surfers wrote:
Mo was urine and blood tested by WADA at the same time, which is extremely idiotic unless it was 'staged.' Pretty sure AK currently can only test urine samples, but yes Renato needs to clarify that one.
This is where you are wrong. And in so many other aspects...
Renato doesn't need to do anything for you. I don't know why he still provides data and wastes time replying to the likes of you.
He should ignore people like you.
Oh and...
Subway Surfers wrote:
Good spotting ?(thee old thread got notoriously closed), in a gorilla war use your enemies weapons against them ? notice the longer the distance the bigger the gain? Also, see mindweak's post, just priceless.
LOL gorilla war????? LOL
The point is that you will continue to defend Renato, even though he is blatantly lying.
rekrunner wrote:
My main concern would be with any potential performance benefit.
Since we are talking about legal supplements and vitamins, I'm not sure what the point is supposed to be.
liar wrote:
Don't worry, rekrunner will always believe in them.
You said "improved the most". I stand corrected.
Subway Surfers wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
"Improving the most" is not overwhelming evidence that EPO was a significant factor in this improvement. We don't even have scientific studies for the marathon.
"Improving," who said anything about improving? I use absolutes, the data that actually exists.
Subway Surfers wrote:
Marathoners On The Rocket Fuel wrote:
In reviewing rekrunner's EPO-footprint analysis data, he's shows out of the 6 disciplines analyzed the marathon demonstrating the largest performance gain of 3.2% for the E. Africans during the rEPO use timeframe vs the pre-90s top 5 average of 2:07. "3.2%" is very significant and, IMO, the single most greatest game changer occuring with rEPO. Incidentally, he also shows an identical "3.2%" improvement for the E. African women - definitely consistency shown there.
Ironically, this isn't too far off of m!ndweak's estimated ~4% improvement with rEPO (and yet he undermines & dismisses m!ndweak's estimation...go figure). So, in essence, rekrunner has done a fine job of showing that the marathon benefits the most from rEPO use. ?
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=8635957Good spotting ?(thee old thread got notoriously closed), in a gorilla war use your enemies weapons against them ? notice the longer the distance the bigger the gain? Also, see mindweak's post, just priceless.
dont forget guys rek and others constantly attacked me over and over and over about how i just randomly pulled 4% out of my a$$....then i would explain it and explain it, then get deleted then banned lol....but the EPO busts from kenya keep coming dont they?
but but but it doesnt work, tea is $32, my kenyans dont even take asprin....what? wtf are they christian science? lolz