This is the greatest day since the lAnce Armstrong 60 Minutes special!
This is the greatest day since the lAnce Armstrong 60 Minutes special!
TrackCoach wrote:
I do have one question, why no evidence of blood doping?
The oxygen tents? Microdosing with EPO? ???
Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if there are studies of how well the tents work? Or of any of the other tricks we've heard about, such as the cryo-saunas?
MikeM wrote:
Me.
https://www.facebook.com/michael.machiorlattiIf by fishy you mean don't take things at their face value and inquire. Sure.
Who are you?
MikeM, appreciate your thoughtful take on this post, but don't expect anything approaching reasonableness or engaged critical thought on LRC.
Not taking at face value everything said in an article that claims Kara Goucher is the most prominent (note, they didn't say master self-promoter or most marketed) distance runner in America does not make one an employee of Nike, but just a thinking person.
One question I think anyone reading the Propublica article would have:
Magness has access to all NOP records but can only produce a picture "purportedly" showing a line entry from 2002 that lists prednisone and testosterone medication. Why only this? If NOP kept such meticulous records and had them accessible at least 8 years after the entry why could Magness not have more evidence?
Posters shouldn't get defensive about such a logical question, but boy have they. Question the Gouchers' motivations, note that they didn't seem to have any challenges taking millions in Nike money for a prolonged period of time (during which supposedly many NOP athletes but not the Gouchers were cheating - and the Gouchers said nothing) or point out that there is really nothing much new in this story and watch how quickly you are attacked.
It's as if by asking such questions you are attacking the integrity of LRC posters and readers of the article in question and potentially smearing their reputation and ability to make a living, instead of just wanting rational, evidence-based responses.
How do you know all of this...this scandal shit?! Prove it. Prove it in a court of law. Bottom line is that the BBC in UK is no different that MSNBC in this country. I hope NOP sues the livin' shit out of 'em. Talk about mountains out of friggin' mole friggin hills! Bangers for breakfast? GMAB!!!
Mr. Magoo wrote:
Renato Canova wrote:I never said EPO has no effect on Kenyan Marathon runners, I said has no effect on the top African Marathon runners (both Kenyan and Ethiopian), which is a very different thing.
So you really believe that EPO is merely an equalizer and that the most talented runners out there gain no benefit from increasing their O2-carrying capacity?
Do you actually hold a medical or other advanced science degree? Because the shit you spout sounds suspiciously like blatant psuedoscience, if it even rises to that level.
I won't use the same level of vitriol, but I have the same question. What is the basis for saying that EPO helps everyone but the best? Is there any science behind that? If you're wiling to admit that EPO helps those below the "top", then I'm not sure the basis for saying that it doesn't help the "top".
And as much as I respect you as a coach, I'm not sure the whole "trust me, I'm experienced" really means much. If EPO helped Lance, who was clearly one of the top cyclists prior to using, I don't understand why it wouldn't help the top East Africans.
Some of the article contains quasi-damning evidence, while other parts of the article are not evidence for anything. Two comments that Kara makes are evidence of nothing: 1) that Salazar was anti-Tyler (while also asserting that Lance doped--he's free to have his opinion and many of us who have nothing to do with doping also were anti-Tyler), 2) that Rupp was exhausted but then set the American record three weeks later (exhaustion does not take three weeks to clear--I've gone sometimes from totally exhausted in, say, week three of hundred mile weeks, to absolutely fresh and pr'ing in a week or two).
The prednisone is covered by the TUE. Prednisone, a corticosteroid, is nasty stuff (horrible and very many side effects supposedly primarily for long-term use--I hated allowing her to take this and never let her do the full prescribed courses) that my daughter had to take for her asthma when she was having a lot of trouble breathing and had to go to the urgent care clinics at night a few times. Now, if he had asthma, there is nothing sketchy. What Alberto does is to go to the gray line--Rupp has asthma and so can get this. The testosterone to make up for the prednisone?? I don't know if that is legal. Rupp wasn't being tested in hs. Now in the rest of his career, he is apparently getting low doses and being checked by Nike's own internal lab to prevent positive tests. That is pretty damning and from multiple sources.
Best though is that now we have a very unlikely new nickname for Rupp:
Alpha Male.
As a guy nearly done earning his MD degree, I would honestly like to know the rationale behind the claim that EPO does not benefit top level African marathoners. Please, indulge me. Explain the physiology behind that claim.
TAA wrote:
I'll give my thoughts on the documentary.
1. No evidence that any of Stuart Eagon's story happened. Daly asks Eagon "Did he appear to have any medical condition which might warrant using prednisone?" to which Eagon says "No, not that I observed." Bullshit. How could he not known about Rupp's asthma or allergies?
2. The massage therapist's story doesn't make any sense. Why would Salazar tell him "don't get the wrong idea" and tell an obvious lie about his use of the drug for his heart that could be fact checked in 2 seconds. Why would Salazar just leave androgel at the training camp if he was really trying to hide cheating? Too many silly mistakes to sound real. I doubt Salazar is that dumb. Also no evidence that any of this happened.
3. The "Mike" interview is a joke. If you're 100% anonymous you can make up anything you want because there's no accountablity or reputation on the line. An anonymous interview about an event that can't be traced is not evidence of anything. There's no proof that anything "Mike" said happened or even if the person was actually a former NOP athlete.
4. The blood chart showing Galen on testosterone is interesting.
5. Daly: "Could this (the testosterone) have been an isolated incident?" Magness: "There were multiple little things that kept adding up." Of course he didn't give any examples of these other things.
6. Magness's story about Salazar's son is, once again, another untraceable story with no evidence.
7. Then Magness's interview ends with him playing the victim card. Sigh...
8. Kara's bottle with Salazar's writing on it is interesting. Are there other examples of Salazar's writing to compare it to? Why didn't the video compare the writing on the bottle to other examples of Salazar's writing to prove it? I guess we're just supposed to take her word for it.
9. Then Kara tells a couple stories with no evidence. Notice a theme?
10. Of course got to end Kara's interview with her crying. Need to make Salazar look as evil as possible. Another use of the victim card.
I'm not convinced.
Just Do It™
blentos! (?) wrote:
How do you know all of this...this scandal shit?! Prove it. Prove it in a court of law....
LOL, a court of law? You have no clue how WADA and the USADA operate when they hand out bans.
MN88 wrote:
As a guy nearly done earning his MD degree, I would honestly like to know the rationale behind the claim that EPO does not benefit top level African marathoners. Please, indulge me. Explain the physiology behind that claim.
That you will be an MD has no bearing on your qualifications of being knowledgeable about anything to do with EPO. MD degrees do not work that way.
Renato Canova wrote:
I never said EPO has no effect on Kenyan Marathon runners, I said has no effect on the top African Marathon runners (both Kenyan and Ethiopian), which is a very different thing.
And, in spite of some case from stupid runners (like Rita Jeptoo, who was able running at the same speed without EPO, too), I don't change my mind, because of the specific knowledge I have about the most part of Kenyan and Ethiopian runners, knowledge that all the posters in Letsun (and practically all the scientists of antidoping) don't have.
Renato, surely you're aware that Rita never ran under 2:23 prior to 2012. Then she's able to run under 2:20 on two occasions, including setting the Boston course record? To me, that pretty clearly indicates that she was significantly faster while using EPO.
You claim to want a scientific discussion on this topic, so please begin by presenting some evidence that Rita could indeed run equally fast without EPO. All the evidence I've seen indicates exactly the opposite.
TAA wrote:
I'll give my thoughts on the documentary.
1. No evidence that any of Stuart Eagon's story happened. Daly asks Eagon "Did he appear to have any medical condition which might warrant using prednisone?" to which Eagon says "No, not that I observed." Bullshit. How could he not known about Rupp's asthma or allergies?
2. The massage therapist's story doesn't make any sense. Why would Salazar tell him "don't get the wrong idea" and tell an obvious lie about his use of the drug for his heart that could be fact checked in 2 seconds. Why would Salazar just leave androgel at the training camp if he was really trying to hide cheating? Too many silly mistakes to sound real. I doubt Salazar is that dumb. Also no evidence that any of this happened.
3. The "Mike" interview is a joke. If you're 100% anonymous you can make up anything you want because there's no accountablity or reputation on the line. An anonymous interview about an event that can't be traced is not evidence of anything. There's no proof that anything "Mike" said happened or even if the person was actually a former NOP athlete.
4. The blood chart showing Galen on testosterone is interesting.
5. Daly: "Could this (the testosterone) have been an isolated incident?" Magness: "There were multiple little things that kept adding up." Of course he didn't give any examples of these other things.
6. Magness's story about Salazar's son is, once again, another untraceable story with no evidence.
7. Then Magness's interview ends with him playing the victim card. Sigh...
8. Kara's bottle with Salazar's writing on it is interesting. Are there other examples of Salazar's writing to compare it to? Why didn't the video compare the writing on the bottle to other examples of Salazar's writing to prove it? I guess we're just supposed to take her word for it.
9. Then Kara tells a couple stories with no evidence. Notice a theme?
10. Of course got to end Kara's interview with her crying. Need to make Salazar look as evil as possible. Another use of the victim card.
I'm not convinced.
"Victim Card"?!? You know, absent any other explanation, Occam says that if someone is acting like a victim, then they most likely are. What's your explanation? In particular, why are they all going after NOP now? If they're just butt hurt why didn't they do it closer to the time they left, or, when it would do more damage than now?
Personally, I think Hasay leaving NOP is the key to all of this.
Link wrote:
Personally, I think Hasay leaving NOP is the key to all of this.
Where was it announces she left NOP? I thought she was just injured.
i don't think he/she was touting that he almost has an MD. He was saying that as someone who has been learning about physiology and the body for years and years, how does this concept work.perhaps it is not in line with anything he/she has learned and just extremely curious or baffled.relax. take a breath.
MDs are not all the same wrote:
MN88 wrote:As a guy nearly done earning his MD degree, I would honestly like to know the rationale behind the claim that EPO does not benefit top level African marathoners. Please, indulge me. Explain the physiology behind that claim.
That you will be an MD has no bearing on your qualifications of being knowledgeable about anything to do with EPO. MD degrees do not work that way.
MikeM wrote:
So this seems like more of smear campaign as it isn't coming from an anti-doping agency but the BBC.
Umm, I think you have the BBC confused with the World News or whatever that rag with the redhead editor was. Why in the hell would ProPublica and the BBC randomly start a smear campaign against a US running coach?
TAA wrote:
I'll give my thoughts on the documentary.
1. No evidence that any of Stuart Eagon's story happened. Daly asks Eagon "Did he appear to have any medical condition which might warrant using prednisone?" to which Eagon says "No, not that I observed." Bullshit. How could he not known about Rupp's asthma or allergies?
2. The massage therapist's story doesn't make any sense. Why would Salazar tell him "don't get the wrong idea" and tell an obvious lie about his use of the drug for his heart that could be fact checked in 2 seconds. Why would Salazar just leave androgel at the training camp if he was really trying to hide cheating? Too many silly mistakes to sound real. I doubt Salazar is that dumb. Also no evidence that any of this happened.
3. The "Mike" interview is a joke. If you're 100% anonymous you can make up anything you want because there's no accountablity or reputation on the line. An anonymous interview about an event that can't be traced is not evidence of anything. There's no proof that anything "Mike" said happened or even if the person was actually a former NOP athlete.
4. The blood chart showing Galen on testosterone is interesting.
5. Daly: "Could this (the testosterone) have been an isolated incident?" Magness: "There were multiple little things that kept adding up." Of course he didn't give any examples of these other things.
6. Magness's story about Salazar's son is, once again, another untraceable story with no evidence.
7. Then Magness's interview ends with him playing the victim card. Sigh...
8. Kara's bottle with Salazar's writing on it is interesting. Are there other examples of Salazar's writing to compare it to? Why didn't the video compare the writing on the bottle to other examples of Salazar's writing to prove it? I guess we're just supposed to take her word for it.
9. Then Kara tells a couple stories with no evidence. Notice a theme?
10. Of course got to end Kara's interview with her crying. Need to make Salazar look as evil as possible. Another use of the victim card.
I'm not convinced.
Me neither based on the BBC/Propublica "new" story that really didn't add much new. And as you suggest, the "new" stuff added are stories people tell without facts/evidence/corroboration or much scrutiny (e.g, why couldn't Magness produce more evidence than one picture "purportedly" of Rupp's records with a line entry from 2002?). But this "news story" without much hard evidence gave the anti-NOP/AlSal club "proof" for what they've known all along.
So a few important points to make.
1. Intentional or unintentional use of legitimately prescribed medication in an unprescribed manner is illegal.
2. The non-medical use of prescription medications implies that the person is using the drug for reasons other than those indicated in the prescribing literature or other off-label uses prescribed by a clinician. This is illegal.
3. Regarding Rupp's possible use of testosterone to "offset" the effects of his prednisone. Physiologically speaking, the use of exogenous corticosteroids would suppress adrenal hormone production, which includes testosterone. Supplementing with exogenous testosterone to mitigate that undesirable side effect of prednisone would probably work. But is doesn't change the fact that testosterone is a banned substance.
4. Suggesting Goucher should take Cytomel, which is a thyroid hormone (T3), is both stupid and illegal. She was already taking thyroid hormone replacement for Hashimoto's disease: which unlike Rupp's "hypothyroidism," Hashimotos is an autoimmune condition that can be definitively diagnosed by specific serum antibodies that are specific to that disease. It's hard to bullshit that diagnosis.
Regardless of whether Salazar was violating WADA rules or not, if the stories are true, he was distributing prescription medication for non-medical use. Which is illegal. He should be in serious legal trouble. The physicians are that are working with NOP to supply them with this stuff should lose their damn licenses.
It's also coming from David Epstein...his investigation eventually lead to Armstrong's demise. This isn't some small, inconsequential news organization or rookie journalist.
smear this wrote:
MikeM wrote:So this seems like more of smear campaign as it isn't coming from an anti-doping agency but the BBC.
Umm, I think you have the BBC confused with the World News or whatever that rag with the redhead editor was. Why in the hell would ProPublica and the BBC randomly start a smear campaign against a US running coach?
the entire group was in question from the start, but the moment Mo ran 3:28 for the 1500... this is just the tip of the iceberg.
micro-doping is alive and well!