ALBERTO RELEASES STATEMENT

ella guru wrote:

New from The Telegraph: Alberto Salazar open letter - seven things we learned

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/mo-farah/11698216/Alberto-Salazar-open-letter-seven-things-we-learned.html

Bloody tabloids, gutter press... Oh, hang on a sec...

If this is a rebuttal by the media, for "unanswered questions" this is as lame as it comes. Are we reading the National Enquirer? Maybe I shouldn't demean their name by equating it with this tabloid fodder.

It is amazing how these sites will sit there and complain about Salazar's treatment of poor Magness and poor Goucher when they went to task to try and ruin his career. All is fair only for the accuser and not the accused defending himself.

You're showing your bias Troy, not good.

odelltrclan wrote:

I find it ironic that on this site and these message boards that the term "TUE" has been made commonplace. The site's administrators have made sure that everyone knew about them. Because of this, people act as though Galen Rupp has been running with a TUE for virtually every race of his pro career. Now we find out there has only been 2 of them in the last 4 years. If I was Salazar I would pay someone to go through every one of the posts on this site and think about lining up the attorneys.

I wonder if you realize that every post that says anything about "lining up the attorneys" or "lawyering up" is instantly recognizable as a joke.

odelltrclan wrote:

Are we reading the National Enquirer? Maybe I shouldn't demean their name by equating it with this tabloid fodder.

Well boohoo for you cos here's another: Questions still to be answered -

By the way, The Telegraph is considered to be a quality broadsheet, they did the expose on UK MP's claims rorting, just thought you'd like to know, you know, facts and gray areas and all that stuff.

The Telegraph is a joke if you have ever lived in London.

Bramaterra wrote:

The Telegraph is a joke if you have ever lived in London.

I have, but don't quite see what relevance that has to a digital paper, i.e. available worldwide, but whatever. When I lived there I heard the lefty Guardian was a joke, the Tory Telegraph and Times were a joke, the tabloid tits out Sun was a joke, etc..., depends who you talk to.

No, we're reading The Tele wrote:

odelltrclan wrote:

Are we reading the National Enquirer? Maybe I shouldn't demean their name by equating it with this tabloid fodder.

Well boohoo for you cos here's another: Questions still to be answered -

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/mo-farah/11699534/Alberto-Salazar-denial-Questions-still-to-be-answered.html

By the way, The Telegraph is considered to be a quality broadsheet, they did the expose on UK MP's claims rorting, just thought you'd like to know, you know, facts and gray areas and all that stuff.

http://parliament.telegraph.co.uk/mpsexpenses/home

seem like reasonable questions to me

reasonable questions wrote:

No, we're reading The Tele wrote:

Well boohoo for you cos here's another: Questions still to be answered -

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/mo-farah/11699534/Alberto-Salazar-denial-Questions-still-to-be-answered.html

By the way, The Telegraph is considered to be a quality broadsheet, they did the expose on UK MP's claims rorting, just thought you'd like to know, you know, facts and gray areas and all that stuff.

http://parliament.telegraph.co.uk/mpsexpenses/home

seem like reasonable questions to me

ComeOnRojo wrote:

haha good one

Posted from my phone and guess my response ended up buried in the quoted text part.

For the most part I agree, reasonable questions with the exception of why doesn't Salazar's use an alternative medicationsince people with heart issues should steer clear of testosterone. People need to give this angle up. Yes there is a small risk but he feels the benefits he gets outweigh that risk. What medication did their "medical experts" propose he use instead?

odelltrclan wrote:

If this is a rebuttal by the media, for "unanswered questions" this is as lame as it comes. Are we reading the National Enquirer? Maybe I shouldn't demean their name by equating it with this tabloid fodder.

It is amazing how these sites will sit there and complain about Salazar's treatment of poor Magness and poor Goucher when they went to task to try and ruin his career. All is fair only for the accuser and not the accused defending himself.

Quoter Of Excellent Posts wrote:

odelltrclan wrote:

If this is a rebuttal by the media, for "unanswered questions" this is as lame as it comes. Are we reading the National Enquirer? Maybe I shouldn't demean their name by equating it with this tabloid fodder.

It is amazing how these sites will sit there and complain about Salazar's treatment of poor Magness and poor Goucher when they went to task to try and ruin his career. All is fair only for the accuser and not the accused defending himself.

Thanks for reposting Troy.

Dear Ben Bloom:

Almost every single one of your "unanswered questions" have, in fact, been answered directly by Salazar in his response. I know 11,750 words is a lot to handle...but give it a shot.

0/10

Your ignorance has melted you wee-little brain.

What Would Epstein do? wrote:

Epstein isn't Jesus, doesn't walk on water, and is not beyond a rush to judgement, while trying to pile on something the BBC had conned him into thinking had real evidence.

Epstein effed up.

Wait for it, Radar O'Reilly.

As I said, I'm deeply divided about Salazar. Anyone old enough to throw around M*A*S*H references is old enough remember Salazar from the Duel in the Sun days, and of course part of me can't help but love someone who would run himself so hard that he was once administered last rites after crossing the finish line. (C'mon, he was muy guapo back in the day, to boot.)

But we're talking about Salazar as coach here, and I have a much harder time with that. Do I think that same indomitable will that drove him to running greatness as a young man might be a bit of a double-edged sword in the context of him being a coach? Quite possibly.

I'm not interested in what I personally believe is pretty hare-brained speculation about things like EPO micro-dosing. Look, this isn't cycling, where several members of the peloton dropped dead from turning their blood to heart-stopping treacle on EPO. However, I do think it's eminently possible that Salazar walked right up to the line of what is explicitly banned without ever technically crossing it, because he's like that: competitive, detail-oriented, go-big-or-go-home.

And that's where I think Epstein has done some really good work. If you actually listen, start to finish, to his interview with Lauren Fleshman, it's not a sensationalistic witch-hunt. Fleshman credits Salazar with reaching out to her after she left Nike and introducing her to the sports psychologist who she says saved her career, and says "He just wanted me to succeed... Alberto cares... I really believe he wants to do things the right way... I believe that he justifies, at least to himself, that he's doing things legally and in the interest of his athletes. And I believe that if it was decided that it was no longer okay to use medical exemptions in this way, that he would stop doing it."

Prior to that, Epstein says: "...I've reported unorthodox medicine and doping stories in a lot of sports, and never have I kind of experienced what I did with this story, in terms of the athletes almost rising up and wanting public discussion of things that AREN'T banned... Having a discussion of how they want their sport to be, basically. And in every other sport it was usually -- well, first of all, there was a lot of... omerta, not even talking about it. But then it was more like, 'Well, that's not strictly illegal, so it's fine.' And it seems like we're at this different point that I don't ever remember in any sport, in track and field where people are discussing what they want the sport to be, regardless of what the current rules are, necessarily -- if someone's just on the right side of it, or just on the wrong side of it."

Just as cycling has begun ushering in a new generation of young athletes who are not confronted with the same terrible, limited choices as those riding 15-20 years ago, the same can happen for track and field. What's important is not a referendum on Salazar, but about continuing to move the sport forward and freeing the stars of tomorrow from shouldering a difficult and dubious legacy.

Enter the young -- I would say "Wait for it," but hell, they're already here.

sorry to dredge this thread up and apologies if i missed it, but did anyone note that in the exhibit items in salazar's statement there are a number of things redacted? even when they are not, however, note the interesting admission below, which suggests that the cytomel kara took was prescribed for galen...regardless of whose prescription is legal, wouldn't it be illegal simply to use medication not prescribed for you?

[She got them on Wednesday and Thursday. I'll have her start on cytomel npw thanks! -Alberto

Sent from my iPad

On Aug 20, 2011, at 7:50 PM, wrote:

Alberto,

When did she get those injection? She should immediately start on the cytomel 5 micrograms twice a

day. the 1st dose she should take with her levoxyl and the next 12 hours later and so on.

Jeff

In a message dated 8/20/2011 8:59:33 A.M. Central Daylight Time, writes:

Hi Dr.Brown, below are the Cortisone shots that Kara got recently.do you want her to change

anything? I've got the cytomel you prescribed for Galen.we're going to be traveling for the next

18 hours to Seoul.thanks ! Alberto

Sent from my iPad

source:

Most interesting about this exchange is the SALAZAR asked his Dr Brown if Kara should change anything. Salazar is acting as a pseudo-doctor in this case. Kara was not involved in the decision making re: cytomel. In fact, her name DOES NOT appear at all Salazar's Exhibit 21. The name used to defend the use of Cytomel is a generic, this athlete. Not naming a patient for a prescription is a medical no-no. A real doctor should be seeing a patient, and not decide what to do through emails. This is shady beyond compare. There are likely an entire group of emails missing from what Salazar, and his Freud PR team, decided needed to be redacted. In Exhibit 21, Dr Brown mentions to Salazar: "As I recall ... I emailed you ... that this athlete immediately start on Cytomel ... You may still have this email."

So does that mean Alberto deleted information from the emails? He blatantly left blanks in the nutritionist emails about Kara as well. I wondered if that was to better serve his narrative.