El Guerrouj 2k WR - Incredible 3:49 Mile pace

rekrunner wrote:

I neither disputed, nor accepted, your words

There it is again. Mr. Unsure and Undecided.

Shopping hour wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

I neither disputed, nor accepted, your words

There it is again. Mr. Unsure and Undecided.

This a good demonstration of erecting the wrong goalposts.

There is a difference between determining if ideas are shared by experts (my goalpost), and agreeing or disagreeing with the ideas of a non-expert (a red herring).

rekrunner wrote:

Shopping hour wrote:

There it is again. Mr. Unsure and Undecided.

This a good demonstration of erecting the wrong goalposts.

There is a difference between determining if ideas are shared by experts (my goalpost), and agreeing or disagreeing with the ideas of a non-expert (a red herring).

Experts are not unanimous in their ideas and studies. Which is perfect for you.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Congratulations. You have found in one study an indication that EPO makes no apparent difference - to confirm your Pollyanna view that doping doesn't help top distance runners - even though it helps in every other possible sport you can think of. Other studies have shown that a few weeks of EPO use produced a 54% delay in in the onset of fatigue - effectively confirming why EPO has been the drug of choice in endurance sports for 35 years. But hold on to your religious beliefs, by all means - even if the sporting world utterly ignores your wilful naivety.

It's ironic, but predictable, that you asked me to read up on the subject, and now you don't like what I found. I gave you many opportunities to guide my search. I didn't really even go out of my way to look, but it was one of the studies provided to Jon in another thread.

This study supports your notion of EPO increasing RBCs and oxygen in the blood, increasing VO2 and VO2max, but cautions that that doesn't mean the oxygen gets inside the muscle. This is why your words alone have limited value.

A study that finds a 54% increase in time to exhaustion can be very persuasive to the non-critical and non-skeptical reader.

Shopping hour wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

This a good demonstration of erecting the wrong goalposts.

There is a difference between determining if ideas are shared by experts (my goalpost), and agreeing or disagreeing with the ideas of a non-expert (a red herring).

Experts are not unanimous in their ideas and studies. Which is perfect for you.

I didn't ask for unanimity, but just the existence of one expert. The current count is none. I would say that is pretty unanimous against the idea, but it is open to change.

You're unable to find any experts who say EPO works?

Shopping hour wrote:

But there is still alteration and the many other ways EPO helps beyond simply enhancing Oxygen transport have been mentioned. Many small gains equals big gains.

I don't doubt there can be other mechanisms. In fact, I think that was one of my questions to Jon in another thread from 8 years ago -- are there other mechanisms where EPO helps, such as protective mechanisms? It is not me that argues exclusively about oxygen.

It's possible that many small gains equals big gains, but again ... these are just your words.

Shopping hour wrote:

You're unable to find any experts who say EPO works?

The statement was not "EPO works", but about the significance of "scarcely breathing".

rekrunner wrote:

Shopping hour wrote:

You're unable to find any experts who say EPO works?

The statement was not "EPO works", but about the significance of "scarcely breathing".

It is significant because EPO works. Anything you can do to ease effort artificially does this.

Spring shoes, drafting, tailwinds, downhill and EPO. All make you suck less wind.

Shopping hour wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

The statement was not "EPO works", but about the significance of "scarcely breathing".

It is significant because EPO works. Anything you can do to ease effort artificially does this.

Spring shoes, drafting, tailwinds, downhill and EPO. All make you suck less wind.

Again these are just your words. Apparently you are also unable to find any expert.

But do you agree with the experts who say it works?

Shopping hour wrote:

But do you agree with the experts who say it works?

That's a very vague question.

Do "experts" even say "it works"? Those look like your words.

Which experts?

What did they say, exactly?

What led them to say that?

What does "works" mean?

Do they mean for everyone? Under all conditions?

rekrunner wrote:

Shopping hour wrote:

But do you agree with the experts who say it works?

That's a very vague question.

Do "experts" even say "it works"? Those look like your words.

Which experts?

What did they say, exactly?

What led them to say that?

What does "works" mean?

Do they mean for everyone? Under all conditions?

Physiologists etc.

That it works

Evidence and testing

Enhances performance

They did not test for everyone under all conditions.

Shopping hour wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

That's a very vague question.

Do "experts" even say "it works"? Those look like your words.

Which experts?

What did they say, exactly?

What led them to say that?

What does "works" mean?

Do they mean for everyone? Under all conditions?

Physiologists etc.

That it works

Evidence and testing

Enhances performance

They did not test for everyone under all conditions.

That is still quite vague.

What is "it"?

What is the area of expertise of these "experts"?

Do the "physiologists, etc." have any experience with "it"? What is their experience?

Do the "physiologists, etc." have experience with training, without "it"? What is their experience?

Do the "physiologists, etc." have experience with developing peak performance? What is their experience?

Performance in which events?

I can agree with many experts, and disagree with other experts, depending on what they said, exactly, and the basis for their statements, in the contexts where that basis applies.

I can agree that a number of studies achieved short term performance improvements with EPO.

I also agree when the experts' of better studies explain the limitations of these observations.

rekrunner wrote:

Shopping hour wrote:

Physiologists etc.

That it works

Evidence and testing

Enhances performance

They did not test for everyone under all conditions.

That is still quite vague.

What is "it"?

What is the area of expertise of these "experts"?

Do the "physiologists, etc." have any experience with "it"? What is their experience?

Do the "physiologists, etc." have experience with training, without "it"? What is their experience?

Do the "physiologists, etc." have experience with developing peak performance? What is their experience?

Performance in which events?

I can agree with many experts, and disagree with other experts, depending on what they said, exactly, and the basis for their statements, in the contexts where that basis applies.

I can agree that a number of studies achieved short term performance improvements with EPO.

I also agree when the experts' of better studies explain the limitations of these observations.

Yep. For every question that's answered, ten more pop up. Goalposts.

Who are the experts of better studies?

Did they meet all your question criteria?

Do you understand the EPO doping proposal that you represent?

How does that proposal fit into an understanding of Bioenergetics? Do you know anything about Bioenergetics? Even the basics? It seems not.

You claimed you know the volume of oxygen in one litre of air, but didn't verify it. So it seems you are playing the goalposts moving game.

How did that capillary thing work for you Jon?

Stay in your lane.

citric acid cyclist wrote:

Shopping hour wrote:

Yep. For every question that's answered, ten more pop up. Goalposts.

Who are the experts of better studies?

Did they meet all your question criteria?

Do you understand the EPO doping proposal that you represent?

How does that proposal fit into an understanding of Bioenergetics? Do you know anything about Bioenergetics? Even the basics? It seems not.

You claimed you know the volume of oxygen in one litre of air, but didn't verify it. So it seems you are playing the goalposts moving game.

EPO moves the goalposts of Bioenergetics, Homeostasis and Thermoregulation.

Fact.

Shopping hour wrote:

How did that capillary thing work for you Jon?

Stay in your lane.

What is that supposed to mean?