You Can Run But You Can't Hide Malmo - More And More People Know The Truth About You

Depending how old they are, they may be in a warehouse a long ways away from where the clinic was. Assuming they survived the move, never got damaged, and got filed correctly, you should be able to get them with a 1-2 page release of information form. May take weeks.

Interesting, dd, but like all medical studies there are usually those found with the opposite conclusions, aren't there? especially in the case of a drug that was developed for anemia. Can you find any of those studies (in the early 80s)

Malmo: "I didn't cheat. I had a perfectly legal prescription for a valid reason that allowed my blood count to return to normal. I went from a 23:30 8k all the way down to 23:28 during this period, 30s slower than my PR. If that's cheating then I'm pretty damn bad at it aren't I?"

This is less-than-weak reasoning, and needs more information before it can be taken seriously as a proposition.

Nothing in what you wrote suggests that at the time you ran 23:28, you wouldn't have run 24:00 without the winstrol.

If I were genuinely interested in this, I would point out that there could be every reason to believe that your 30-second faster PR was drug-assisted as well.

I only mention these things in passing, however, for your benefit, to hopefully make you more aware of how you might be perceived.

When I said be careful, I meant it. Seek the advice of somebody who tears people to shreds for a living, because from where I sit, you seem to present many opportunities.

malmo wrote:

dd, assuming you are actually a physician, Is there a way to get my medical records from a doctor who has retired? Do they have to hold them somewhere fort some period? I'm curious.

You do know that Smulovitz died earlier this year?

There is relevancy in setting the record straight over what went on 30 years ago. The were many, many athletes seriously hurt by the exploits of the dopers. What a shame.

If the truth ever comes out on who the dopers were, the shame will shift to them and their enablers, where it belongs.

And those who are doping today may realize that the shame may well find them ten, twenty, or thirty years after they retire.

You know who wrote:

If I were genuinely interested in this, I would point out that there could be every reason to believe that your 30-second faster PR was drug-assisted as well.

But there isn't any reason to believe that except that you want to believe it.

malmo wrote:

You will read whatever you want into it. It was a legit medical prescription for an FDA approved drug. Doctors don't prescribe iron supplements. You can get them at the grocery store without prescription. At the time I was taking daily multivitamins.

The point how I got to Smulovitz office has been explained. Quit trying to play "gotcha".

Not trying to play gotcha. You are brave for bringing this out (years ago and today) and answering a lot of questions.

I didn't realize that Winstrol is the trade name for stanozolol, which I'd heard of as a performance enhancer. And a good one at that.

*%&%%% wrote:

I didn't realize that Winstrol is the trade name for stanozolol, which I'd heard of as a performance enhancer. And a good one at that.

Or in my case a PDD (performance dehancing drug)

Well, you are the guy that told me research was easy, so I find it ironic that you want me to find the article for you. I guess it isn't that easy...

Searching for stanozolol AND anemia yields 40 articles (a pretty tiny number, meaning there's frankly not much there). At leas half are from the pre-2000 time, so many are hard to access-- only bigger journals have digitized all old issues. this reference might what Tabener was citing, but it's an obscure jounral that I don't have the time to try find paper access to:

Panminerva Med. 1981 Oct-Dec;23(4):243-8.

Treatment of aplastic anaemia with methenolone, stanozolol and nandrolone. A report of 130 cases.

Resegotti L, Dolci C, Bertero L, Genovese A, Podestà F, Testa D.

This is my last post on this thread.

Malmo, you need to THINK better, because your statement can easily be shown to be false. You must understand your assumptions and biases, and the support they either have, or don't have.

My advice to you is the same. I have no idea how risk-averse you are, but if you neglect to seek good advice, you do so at your peril.

In all seriousness, I hope that your venture will be worthwhile.

You know who wrote:

Nothing in what you wrote suggests that at the time you ran 23:28, you wouldn't have run 24:00 without the winstrol..

Except that I ran 23:30 8 weeks before that 23:28, before connecting with Smulovitz.

I think that you really need to look in the mirror. You are not interested in the facts, you are desperately trying to create a diversion from the facts.

malmo wrote:

*%&%%% wrote:

I didn't realize that Winstrol is the trade name for stanozolol, which I'd heard of as a performance enhancer. And a good one at that.

Or in my case a PDD (performance dehancing drug)

Perhaps, but correlation is not causation, and as I've pointed out to you, one may say your athletic achievements are not tainted by PEDs, but one may also say that intent is "part of the crime," as by a somewhat flawed analogy, if I attempt to kill somebody, but fail, I may be convicted of "attempted murder," and if I assert failure as a defense, I may be laughed at by a jury.

You know who wrote:

In all seriousness, I hope that your venture will be worthwhile.

I'm not sure what you mean by "venture"? I am only going to TRY to sort out the facts and timelines. Just have I alway had approached it in the past. How that turns out is unknown.

Malmo,

Smulovitz is deceased, you will have some difficulty getting records from him. Which brings up a point: Smulovitz is deceased, Geoff Hollister is deceased, Dick Brown is very ill, whatever happened or didn't happen was over 30 years ago, yet you have tried to cast a pall over the careers of some amazing people like Dick Brown, Mary Slaney, Stu Togher, etc. Most people in today's running community don't even know who is George Malley (other than some guy who admitted using a banned substance). I've read what you say you want to accomplish, but it makes little sense, and results only in damaging our sport.

I think the reason malmo needs to keep pursuing is it for the sports sake.

Systematic doping supported by a sponsor, agent, coach, or group is the reason why we still have a problem today.

No offense but many of the same players who were around during the AW days are still heavily involved in the sport.

The environment has to change.

Blow it all up Malmo. It's for the good of the sport that people finally know.

Connect the dots.

Think about it, there's a reason Dick Brown was given his little side project in Eugene. There's a reason why most of the big players haven't talked.

The same thing will happen in this current generation. No one will stand up. The cycle just repeats itself. Someone from the 80's generation needs to stand up and show the current generation that it doesn't have to just be accepted.

Doeswn't make sense. I am not trying to "cast a pall" over anyone. Sorry to hear about Dick Brown. He's a good guy, the one most likely to tell the whole story, he's just serving the wrong master. View the Ben Johnson documentary and compare Browns interview with Sev's.

Stewart Togher was more than knee deep in doping.

Believe that.

Doesn't Make Sense wrote:

Malmo,

Smulovitz is deceased, you will have some difficulty getting records from him. Which brings up a point: Smulovitz is deceased, Geoff Hollister is deceased, Dick Brown is very ill, whatever happened or didn't happen was over 30 years ago, yet you have tried to cast a pall over the careers of some amazing people like Dick Brown, Mary Slaney, Stu Togher, etc. Most people in today's running community don't even know who is George Malley (other than some guy who admitted using a banned substance). I've read what you say you want to accomplish, but it makes little sense, and results only in damaging our sport.

I thought I'd chime in here, since, in between everything else in my too-busy life, I've been thinking hard about what good can be served by dredging all of this up again.

I said above - as did Malmo - that Dick Brown was a really good guy. And it's hard to drag somebody like that into this, publicly, especially, when his days left are probably short. But, here's the thing. Though he was a good guy, he could have been a much better guy. You know how? By resisting the urge to participate in a win at all costs culture. Resisting the intrinsic temptation that that presents to all highly competitive people. By resisting the money and fame that doing so brought him (yes, I suppose it was modest but it was relatively great money and fame for doing what he most wanted to do.) By resisting the temptation to minimize what, as you, or someone, pointed out above were possibly large, but certainly unknown risks to the athletes who followed his advice.

I only knew Slaney and Togher a little. Other than their athletic accomplishments, I wouldn't necessarily call them great human beings. That might be because I didn't really know them, but, their principal professional contributions were in the world of Athletics. Those contributions were (most likely) celebrated not because they were great human beings, but because they were willing to bend - if not break - the rules that people who valued sport, really valued it, held most dear.

Sport is funny. I don't know how to say this without sounding like a poster in a dentist's office, but here goes: In order to achieve the benefits of sport, for it to be realize all of its potential virtues, athletes must strive, with all their might, to win. Ironically, though, we must all remember this: victory is not to be found anywhere on the list of those virtues.

I think these are the relevant parts of that documentary: