mileage_man wrote:
.
what's with all these handles that I don't recognize? if you make up a handle for this you aren't very credible. esp since rojo already pointed out salazar's fudging the dates on the Kgoucher cytomel issue - salazar didn't address the accusation.
For the ten millionth time wrote:
For the ten millionth time, thyroid medication does not require a TUE. It is not a banned substance.
Here, let me try:
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
I didn't read through this whole thread, but I did read every single word of Salazar's statement, including each accompanying "exhibit."
Without giving my stance on the issue itself (not sure if I have an opinion yet), I must just point out one thing:
Salazar's emails include some cringe-worthy spelling and grammar. He had a very, very meticulous lawyer and/or editor write his statement.
That is all.
TJR25 wrote:
The fact that they were asthma only statistics doesn't matter.
I see. So if a doc tells you that if you smoke Viagra, there's a 40% chance you'll develop lupus, and then you point out, "No, actually there's a 40% chance of developing priapism, not lupus," and the doc retorts, "The statistics don't really matter because lupus and priapism are both fatal disases," you'll consider that person a competent physician?
Sadly, there are a good many posters running amok in this thread who are even more clueless than you, intentionally or otherwise.
anacondarunner wrote:
I must say, Alberto's statement is a tour de force and has made me do a complete 180 on this topic. I wasn't expecting to change my mind, but after reading all of it, I believe he complied with WADA and IAAF regulations and it is clear that some of his accusers have made knowingly false statements. Wow.
Hey look, someone who works for Freuds.
KMB wrote:
TJR25 wrote:The fact that they were asthma only statistics doesn't matter.
I see. So if a doc tells you that if you smoke Viagra, there's a 40% chance you'll develop lupus, and then you point out, "No, actually there's a 40% chance of developing priapism, not lupus," and the doc retorts, "The statistics don't really matter because lupus and priapism are both fatal disases," you'll consider that person a competent physician?
Sadly, there are a good many posters running amok in this thread who are even more clueless than you, intentionally or otherwise.
1/10 only because the word lupus made me chuckle.
rojo wrote:
There is a lot of selective denials and some of the evidence is totally irrelevant.
Let's take the Cytomel for example.
Alberto provides a letter from Dr. Brown saying he told Kara Goucher to take Cytomel in August of 2011.
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0248/8471/files/Exhibit_21.pdf?10179272499514451932The problem for Alberto is that has nothing to do with the accusation made by the Gouchers in ProPublica was that Salazzar told her to get on Cytomel without a prescription early 2011 in March or April - before she ran 2:24 in the Boston marathon - just 5+ months after giving birth.
Epstein wrote:Five months after she gave birth to Colt in 2010 (September 25), Salazar was unhappy about Goucher's weight, she says. Salazar had previously recommended that several female runners he deemed overweight take over-the-counter supplements marketed as fat-burners. But for Goucher, he had something different in mind. "You need to just take some Cytomel," she says he told her. Cytomel is the brand name for a form of synthetic thyroid hormone, prescribed when the thyroid is naturally underactive, which can lead to weight gain and fatigue. When Goucher asked how she would get it, she says Salazar told her, "Just ask Galen for some of his, he has a prescription for it.".
So the Goucher allegation hasn't been proven to be a lie as people are claiming. Salazar is providing a letter from Dr. Brown for a totally different time frame.
Oh my goodness, talk about grasping at straws!! At least Salazar has some emails to back up his claims that he was NOT worried about her weight headed into Boston and in fact he COMPLIMENTED her on being in superb condition in the days before the marathon. Kara....has shown us NOTHING to back up her claim.
Does Kara even claim that Salazar gave her the bottle in March or April? Nope.
Salazar has answered all the troubling questions you raised about the Cytomel bottle - when (August 2011), where (South Korea), how (because Rupp had the same scrip) & why (her OWN endocrinologist told him to because they were halfway around the world) he gave it to her.
Salazar's explanation passes the smell test and he's got the evidence to back it up. Kara......nada.
KMB wrote:
According to the Cleveland Clinic, the prevalence of true hypothyroidism (Alberto incorrectly uses the term "incidence" -- actually he writes this as "incident") in the general U.S. population is less than 1 in 300.
Going only by the results of blood testing in the absence of symptoms ("biochemical hypothyroidism"), this rises to about 1 in 22.
http://www.clevelandclinicmeded.com/medicalpubs/diseasemanagement/endocrinology/hypothyroidism-and-hyperthyroidism/So when Alberto notes that "only" 5 out of 55 (or 1 in every 11) NOP athletes have been diagnosed with the condition since joining the program -- seeming to imply strongly that others brought a diagnosis into the game with them -- I'm not sure what the "only" is supposed to mean.
0.3% of the population is clinically hypothyroid.
4.6% of the population is hypothyroid by serum analysis.
At least 9.1% of NOP runners carry the diagnosis of hypothyroidism.
This should come as no surprise given how the NOP's own endocrinologist, the aforementioned Dr. Jeffrey Brown, deviates from his peers when it comes to establishing a diagnosis of hypthyroidism.
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/is-thyroid-replacement-a-performance-enhancing-drug/
^
This
(I'm reposting this from a few minutes ago as I had problems with the formatting of the other post).
rojo wrote:
Cavman wrote:I agree with the other criticisms of Rojo. Salazar's statement provides much more evidence and detail than the accusations, and to state that this doesn't change much is perplexing. He doesn't just state his side of the story in a he-said/he-said type of way without providing any evidence, but with the sabotage test, for example, he provides contemporaneous emails and details that do not appear to match up with a micro-doping effort.
Is there still room for him to by lying? Sure. But not much. To say the microdoping theory is still an open question, you have to come up with some plausible explanation for those emails from 2009, and you need some kind of explanation that the testing protocol used (and supported by evidence) is better explained by a micro-doping theory than a sabotage test.
Rojo, I know you aren't a lawyer, but contemporaneous documents like these provide much stronger evidence than what has been provided by the accusers so far.
Let me briefly explain why I said I need to re-read it and analyze it, but before I do let me state, I've been on the phone with sources all afternoon and haven't read most of this thread.
There is a lot of selective denials and some of the evidence is totally irrelevant.
Let's take the Cytomel for example.
Alberto provides a letter from Dr. Brown saying he told Kara Goucher to take Cytomel in August of 2011.
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0248/8471/files/Exhibit_21.pdf?10179272499514451932The problem for Alberto is that has nothing to do with the accusation made by the Gouchers in ProPublica was that Salazzar told her to get on Cytomel without a prescription early 2011 in March or April - before she ran 2:24 in the Boston marathon - just 5+ months after giving birth.
Epstein wrote:
Five months after she gave birth to Colt in 2010 (September 25), Salazar was unhappy about Goucher's weight, she says. Salazar had previously recommended that several female runners he deemed overweight take over-the-counter supplements marketed as fat-burners. But for Goucher, he had something different in mind. "You need to just take some Cytomel," she says he told her. Cytomel is the brand name for a form of synthetic thyroid hormone, prescribed when the thyroid is naturally underactive, which can lead to weight gain and fatigue. When Goucher asked how she would get it, she says Salazar told her, "Just ask Galen for some of his, he has a prescription for it.".
So the Goucher allegation hasn't been proven to be a lie as people are claiming. Salazar is providing a letter from Dr. Brown for a totally different time frame..
Very clever.
Kara Goucher never said she wasn't ever on Cytomel or a patient of Dr. Brown. She simply said that Alberto told her to take Cytomel early in 2011 when didn't have a prescription for it and that allegation stands.
As for the androgel, i'm not sure what has changed. The allegatiosn by ProPublica and the BBC were that a) Salazar had androgel in the camp b) he tested it on his son (and they even said Salazar said this was for sabotage reasons). Those allegations werent' refuted. They were simply confirmed by Salazar.
Here is another example of why it needs to be-read.Salazar doesn't really explain away the hollowed out book allegation either. People just think he did.
As was the case with the Goucher allegation on Cytomel, Salazar is explaning away the wrong thing. Salazar is explanied away the 'hollowed out book allegation' by saying he sent nasal spray in a book (and provided some emails showing he was asking some docs about nasal spray at the time) when in fact that's not what was alleged.
Here is allegation by Magness made in ProPublica.
ProPublica wrote:
Magness then flew to Dusseldorf to meet Rupp prior to the race. Soon after he arrived, Rupp told him he wasn't feeling well. Magness called Salazar, who he says told him to expect a package. Two days later, a box arrived at his hotel room. Inside it he found a paperback thriller. Confused, he flipped it open. A section of the pages had been hollowed out to form a compartment into which two pills were taped. "At that point," Magness says, "my mind was like, this is stuff you see in movies, this is extremely strange." He handed the pills to Rupp, who he says promptly swallowed them and laughed off the clandestine packaging as typical Salazar antics. Magness, who had been on the job less than two months, says he never asked what the pills were. At the end of the week, Rupp placed fourth in the 5K in Germany. Neither Salazar nor Rupp responded to questions about the hollowed-out book containing pills.
Salazar explains the hollowed out book by saying the following:
Salazar wrote:I sent Galen his Nasonex prescription. I put it inside a paperback book.
Well there is one huge difference here. Nasonex is a nasal spray. Magness specifically says that Salazar sent him pills in a hollowed out book. Salazar says it was a nasal spray which would be a lot harder to fit into a book.
This thus has turned into a he said - she said type argument. Magness says Salazar did one thing, Salazar says it never happened - the only difference is Salazar has cleverly provided documentation that makes it look like his side is totally validated.
Abuse Lab wrote:
TJR25 wrote:Regardless of the interpretation of which problem(s) the stats were referring to, isn't Salazar's group the only one to be accused of abusing TUE's? So it would not be widespread in athletics. Correct me if I am wrong.
Salazar is the only coach who has his own lab that can run USADA style tests.
I would not call it his own personal lab, it is owned by Nike and can be used by any Nike sponsored athlete in any sport. All of the elite training groups do blood tests on their athletes and use some type of lab. When there is systematic doping among a large group, you will see a mobile lab and doctors traveling with the team/group.
i just wish he would finally release a statement regarding why he carries a bag everywhere.
"Kara Goucher never said she wasn't ever on Cytomel or a patient of Dr. Brown. She simply said that Alberto told her to take Cytomel early in 2011 when didn't have a prescription for it and that allegation stands."
Then at best Kara was trying to mislead everyone.
To say "well, I was on Cytomel and my Dr prescribed it, but on one particular day my prescription hadn't been renewed and AS told me to borrow Galen's". Is a much different story than "AS asked me to take some of Galen's prescription meds."
You see? At best she is totaly misleading everyone if she actually had a prescription for the meds and took them regularly and just didn't have a current prescription that day. If she hid the fact that she indeed did take Cytomel (perhaps even before she was with NOP???!!) she's screwed.
She's no longer credible until she produces documentation that she did not take Cytomel except when pushed to do so by AS, and has A LOT of explaining to do.
Read Part 1.
I can be wrong, I can be naive.
It convinced me. Most points sounded convincing, taking into account that Salazar seems a bit over-caring, so to say. But that's not forbidden.
Numeracy wrote:
For the ten millionth time wrote:For the ten millionth time, thyroid medication does not require a TUE. It is not a banned substance.
Here, let me try:
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Thyroid meds are not on the WADA list. They do not require a TUE.
Ok so then what proof does anyone have that the NOP took thyroid meds other than the statements made, by the BBC/propublica and crew?
GRASPING AT STRAWS
rojo wrote:
(I'm reposting this from a few minutes ago as I had problems with the formatting of the other post).
rojo wrote:Let me briefly explain why I said I need to re-read it and analyze it, but before I do let me state, I've been on the phone with sources all afternoon and haven't read most of this thread.
There is a lot of selective denials and some of the evidence is totally irrelevant.
Let's take the Cytomel for example.
Alberto provides a letter from Dr. Brown saying he told Kara Goucher to take Cytomel in August of 2011.
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0248/8471/files/Exhibit_21.pdf?10179272499514451932The problem for Alberto is that has nothing to do with the accusation made by the Gouchers in ProPublica was that Salazzar told her to get on Cytomel without a prescription early 2011 in March or April - before she ran 2:24 in the Boston marathon - just 5+ months after giving birth.
So the Goucher allegation hasn't been proven to be a lie as people are claiming. Salazar is providing a letter from Dr. Brown for a totally different time frame..
Very clever.
Kara Goucher never said she wasn't ever on Cytomel or a patient of Dr. Brown. She simply said that Alberto told her to take Cytomel early in 2011 when didn't have a prescription for it and that allegation stands.
As for the androgel, i'm not sure what has changed. The allegatiosn by ProPublica and the BBC were that a) Salazar had androgel in the camp b) he tested it on his son (and they even said Salazar said this was for sabotage reasons). Those allegations werent' refuted. They were simply confirmed by Salazar.
Here is another example of why it needs to be-read.Salazar doesn't really explain away the hollowed out book allegation either. People just think he did.
As was the case with the Goucher allegation on Cytomel, Salazar is explaning away the wrong thing. Salazar is explanied away the 'hollowed out book allegation' by saying he sent nasal spray in a book (and provided some emails showing he was asking some docs about nasal spray at the time) when in fact that's not what was alleged.
Here is allegation by Magness made in ProPublica.
ProPublica wrote:
Magness then flew to Dusseldorf to meet Rupp prior to the race. Soon after he arrived, Rupp told him he wasn't feeling well. Magness called Salazar, who he says told him to expect a package. Two days later, a box arrived at his hotel room. Inside it he found a paperback thriller. Confused, he flipped it open. A section of the pages had been hollowed out to form a compartment into which two pills were taped. "At that point," Magness says, "my mind was like, this is stuff you see in movies, this is extremely strange." He handed the pills to Rupp, who he says promptly swallowed them and laughed off the clandestine packaging as typical Salazar antics. Magness, who had been on the job less than two months, says he never asked what the pills were. At the end of the week, Rupp placed fourth in the 5K in Germany. Neither Salazar nor Rupp responded to questions about the hollowed-out book containing pills.
Salazar explains the hollowed out book by saying the following:
Salazar wrote:I sent Galen his Nasonex prescription. I put it inside a paperback book.
Well there is one huge difference here. Nasonex is a nasal spray. Magness specifically says that Salazar sent him pills in a hollowed out book. Salazar says it was a nasal spray which would be a lot harder to fit into a book.
This thus has turned into a he said - she said type argument. Magness says Salazar did one thing, Salazar says it never happened - the only difference is Salazar has cleverly provided documentation that makes it look like his side is totally validated.
This!
This is a very solid rebuttal. The dynamic of this story is changed. Magness seems like he has some answering to do of his own now.
Kant Reed wrote:
I really can't read wrote:Same question I had but regarding the prednisone. So it's okay for them to take "out of competition" but not okay for them to test positive for on race day? Fleshman and them are right, these rules are just dumb
The Oregon Project pulls out of a lot of meets. Salazar knows if the are testing positive BEFORE race day.
In 10 years, I can only think of one meet where the whole NOP team pulled out.
The statement explicitly talks about sending Z-pak (pills).
rojo wrote:
(I'm reposting this from a few minutes ago as I had problems with the formatting of the other post).
rojo wrote:Let me briefly explain why I said I need to re-read it and analyze it, but before I do let me state, I've been on the phone with sources all afternoon and haven't read most of this thread.
There is a lot of selective denials and some of the evidence is totally irrelevant.
Let's take the Cytomel for example.
Alberto provides a letter from Dr. Brown saying he told Kara Goucher to take Cytomel in August of 2011.
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0248/8471/files/Exhibit_21.pdf?10179272499514451932The problem for Alberto is that has nothing to do with the accusation made by the Gouchers in ProPublica was that Salazzar told her to get on Cytomel without a prescription early 2011 in March or April - before she ran 2:24 in the Boston marathon - just 5+ months after giving birth.
So the Goucher allegation hasn't been proven to be a lie as people are claiming. Salazar is providing a letter from Dr. Brown for a totally different time frame..
Very clever.
Kara Goucher never said she wasn't ever on Cytomel or a patient of Dr. Brown. She simply said that Alberto told her to take Cytomel early in 2011 when didn't have a prescription for it and that allegation stands.
As for the androgel, i'm not sure what has changed. The allegatiosn by ProPublica and the BBC were that a) Salazar had androgel in the camp b) he tested it on his son (and they even said Salazar said this was for sabotage reasons). Those allegations werent' refuted. They were simply confirmed by Salazar.
Here is another example of why it needs to be-read.Salazar doesn't really explain away the hollowed out book allegation either. People just think he did.
As was the case with the Goucher allegation on Cytomel, Salazar is explaning away the wrong thing. Salazar is explanied away the 'hollowed out book allegation' by saying he sent nasal spray in a book (and provided some emails showing he was asking some docs about nasal spray at the time) when in fact that's not what was alleged.
Here is allegation by Magness made in ProPublica.
ProPublica wrote:
Magness then flew to Dusseldorf to meet Rupp prior to the race. Soon after he arrived, Rupp told him he wasn't feeling well. Magness called Salazar, who he says told him to expect a package. Two days later, a box arrived at his hotel room. Inside it he found a paperback thriller. Confused, he flipped it open. A section of the pages had been hollowed out to form a compartment into which two pills were taped. "At that point," Magness says, "my mind was like, this is stuff you see in movies, this is extremely strange." He handed the pills to Rupp, who he says promptly swallowed them and laughed off the clandestine packaging as typical Salazar antics. Magness, who had been on the job less than two months, says he never asked what the pills were. At the end of the week, Rupp placed fourth in the 5K in Germany. Neither Salazar nor Rupp responded to questions about the hollowed-out book containing pills.
Salazar explains the hollowed out book by saying the following:
Salazar wrote:I sent Galen his Nasonex prescription. I put it inside a paperback book.
Well there is one huge difference here. Nasonex is a nasal spray. Magness specifically says that Salazar sent him pills in a hollowed out book. Salazar says it was a nasal spray which would be a lot harder to fit into a book.
This thus has turned into a he said - she said type argument. Magness says Salazar did one thing, Salazar says it never happened - the only difference is Salazar has cleverly provided documentation that makes it look like his side is totally validated.
Read it and actually noted in addition to Rojo, that Salazar clearly falsified details.
The time line with Kara is indeed inaccurate with the Cytomel.
And big LOLZ at the people that assumed the nasel spray was evidence to disprove Magness's statement on it being PILLS.