Shameful: Drug cheat Liza Hunter-Galvan wins $10,000 at 2015 Boston Marathon

rojo wrote:

So go [be] a teacher, hell pharmacist, anything but a runner.

She may actually be working on the teacher part. She's been working as a sub, according to the local rag.

trent wrote:

Do the effects of EPO truly wear off?

Does the drug cheater retain any beneficial effects following the PEDs?

If the cheater continues to use PEDs during suspension then that means they are training at a higher level than clean athletes. Does anyone know if known cheaters are tested more often than non-cheaters and are cheaters tested throughout their suspension?

She continued to deny it until evidence was conclusive and then she had the audacity to assert that she only did it once. She still thinks the rest of the world is stupid enough to believe her lies.

Take a look Lagat for your answer to that. That dirty old man is still benefitting from his doped-up glory days.

This is extremely embarrassing for Boston. And if I'm a Master's runner, I'd be pissed as hell. I have no dog in the fight, but I think someone should make sure TCM, site of the US Master's Championships, knows of her and makes sure she's not allowed in.

Moderating is very different than racing.

Malmo voluntarily admitted to taking banned substances. Very different than Hunter-Galvan claiming she thought EPO was an amino acid if I'm reading the comments correctly.

rojo wrote:

. Studies have come out that doping can help you years after you dope.

.

There are no studies that have shown that is true. Citation?

pubmed wrote:

rojo wrote:

. Studies have come out that doping can help you years after you dope.

.

Citation?

"rojo, LetsRun.com, World Famous Message Board, 4/21/2015 8:19PM"

There's your citation, rojo said it, that's all you need.

citation

noun

1. a quotation from an author, especially in a scholarly work.

That's really dumb. Where is the scientific citation?

runnerwhoprofesses wrote:

Perhaps races could eliminate cash prizes. Pro runners could still get sponsored.

This would be a very good solution and would probably help curb a lot of the doping problem in E. Africa (it is after all completely ridiculous that someone is awarded $10000 for running a 2h 45 min marathon major). However, athletes could still be motivated to dope to perform with the goal of attracting sponsorship. So you could go another step further and make track and field completely amateur again which would make the sport much more exciting to many. Think of more Kawauchi-type distance runners.

Although LHG is a convicted doper, focusing on her is probably short sighted. Given all the recent news, one cannot help but suspect that overall winners of the men's and women's races at Boston are drug cheats, and they are stealing much more money from the clean athletes.

Penal system wrote:

So you folks don't believe in giving someone a second chance?

Sure, but convicted child molesters shouldn't be allowed to work in elementary schools, or convicted thiefs work the cash register.

I'm fine with return to competition after a ban, but anyone who knowingly takes peds (especially epo) should be ineligible for prize money for life.

pubmed wrote:

rojo wrote:

Studies have come out that doping can help you years after you dope.

There are no studies that have shown that is true. Citation?

I knew you were going to bring up that study. Read closer.

The 2013 study by Kristian Gundersen of the University of Oslo did not show that anabolic steroids had a decades long benefit. You are reciting a speculative conjecture by Gundersen, who said, "If it is sufficient to build muscle mass, I think it would be sufficient to give you this long term effect. I think it could last 10 years but I don't have the data to back that up. It would be my speculation yes," he said.

Speculation is not synonymous with scientific study. Got it?

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/athletics/29510575

pubmed wrote:

I knew you were going to bring up that study. Read closer.

The 2013 study by Kristian Gundersen of the University of Oslo did not show that anabolic steroids had a decades long benefit. You are reciting a speculative conjecture by Gundersen, who said, "If it is sufficient to build muscle mass, I think it would be sufficient to give you this long term effect. I think it could last 10 years but I don't have the data to back that up. It would be my speculation yes," he said.

Speculation is not synonymous with scientific study. Got it?

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/athletics/29510575

It's perfectly acceptable for animal study data to be extrapolated to humans.

just to be clear here, we're talking strictly about athletic doping, right? So, the hard street drug dudes - users and sellers - get second chances? I mean, they sell for profit and to succeed, to make more money, often leaving victims in their wake. What's the difference? For all the letsrun rec drug users, what's the difference? You're not making a profit, but your seller is.

science 101 wrote:

pubmed wrote:

I knew you were going to bring up that study. Read closer.

The 2013 study by Kristian Gundersen of the University of Oslo did not show that anabolic steroids had a decades long benefit. You are reciting a speculative conjecture by Gundersen, who said, "If it is sufficient to build muscle mass, I think it would be sufficient to give you this long term effect. I think it could last 10 years but I don't have the data to back that up. It would be my speculation yes," he said.

Speculation is not synonymous with scientific study. Got it?

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/athletics/29510575

It's perfectly acceptable for animal study data to be extrapolated to humans.

Not really. Gundersen made it clear that he is speculating and he didn't have the data to back it up.

pubmed wrote:

science 101 wrote:

It's perfectly acceptable for animal study data to be extrapolated to humans.

Not really. Gundersen made it clear that he is speculating and he didn't have the data to back it up.

Such a study in humans would likely never be approved by an irb so it had to be done in an animal analog. Mice don't live for 10 years so of course he dosn't have 10 year data to back it up. Almost all of science is speculative. You don't prove anything, you support it by failing to disprove it. In this case he could not disprove the lasting effects of peds.

There has not been any studies on humans that "doping can help you years after you dope." There has been a study that showed this might be true in mice. So if "you" are a mouse and you've doped a few years ago, you may be in luck. You are also a very lucky creature. Scientists have cured almost all of your cancers, diseases, obesity problems and have even extended your lifespan significantly. I wish I was a mouse.

Looking at the video of the start of the women's race, it looks like Hunter-Galvan started with the elites. I think she is just left of the middle of the pack, wearing a pink singlet with black arm warmers and shorts. I do not know what happened this year, but in the past, Boston has had very generous support for elite masters runners. They have offered plane tickets, hotels and food plus the same amenities as the international elites at the start/finish. The prize money is the biggest masters purse in the US for the marathon. Boston does try to attract top masters talent. Boston is definitely looking at who is invited if they are still offering the same kind of benefits. Hunter-Galvan at the very least got elite access for the start of the race and did not have to sit around with a few thousand other runners on a damp field outside an elementary school.

Dingler wrote:

Such a study in humans would likely never be approved by an irb so it had to be done in an animal analog. Mice don't live for 10 years so of course he dosn't have 10 year data to back it up. Almost all of science is speculative. You don't prove anything, you support it by failing to disprove it. In this case he could not disprove the lasting effects of peds.

All of science is speculative? What the hell are you talking about? it's speculation that starts the process. But science isn't science without replicable studies and/or experiments that lead to rational conclusions.

She did pocket some money from the Dallas Marathon as well. However, Dallas Marathon no longer allows any athlete who has served a doping suspension to even participate in the event...in large part due to the backlash the Dallas Marathon board received from allowing her elite entry in 2014. You would think the WMM would adopt a similar policy.

http://www.runnersworld.com/elite-runners/should-runners-who-have-served-drug-bans-be-welcomed-at-races