Houlihan, 28, competed at the 2016 Olympics in Rio de Janeiro and would have been set to compete this week at the U.S. Track and Field Olympic Trials, which begin on Friday in Eugene, Ore.
This is why I think the ~2008 to ~2015 period looks like the cleanest period in a long while for the sport. Things are muddy now with the influence of shoes. It's funny how during that period there was lots of complaining about nobody trying to run fast or chase records. Lots of sit and kick races. Maybe, just maybe, it was never realistic for runners to go out and chase records every week on the DL circuit and especially not in WC/OLY races with everything on the line without having some chemical assistance. From memory, almost all of the "dominant" runners in that period are known/highly likely dopers. Remember the mysterious Kenyan 1500 collapse at every championship? We all wondered why the Ethiopian 10k teams didn't just run away from Mo Farah (not saying he was clean either). If I had to guess, the testing was ahead of doping in that period. I will never forget watching Genzebe Dibaba run a 3:50 1500 in Monaco (in old spikes) and knowing doping was back. I'm probably off but, in my memory, that was right around when doping won and then the Rio Olympics made a mockery of the sport. I still believe NOP and Rupp (NOT Farah with his special trips to Spain/Morocco) were absolutely pushing the limits of what was allowable without crossing the line and barely reaching the top level of the sport until that stopped being enough and the squeaky clean Bowerman Babes started collecting records and medals. Before widespread EPO usage and ~2008 to ~2015 look strangely similar compared to the times between and since...
I agree with much of this, but don’t dismiss the strong circumstantial evidence that suggests that AlSal may have been giving Rupp androgel massages during that period. As a reminder:
-AlSal had a prescription for androgel
-AlSal had his androgel on him frequently, including at training camps
-AlSal conducted an experiment in the Nike lab to determine exactly how much of his androgel could be applied to someone before triggering a positive test
-AlSal regularly gave massages to Rupp despite having access to licensed massage therapists
-A Nike doctor reported that Rupp was on “testosterone medication” at the age of 16
Am I missing anything?
Oh yeah, Androgel, the drug that’s more effective than EPO
this board condemned Rupp for alleged androgel use but gives so many more suspicious runners likely using actual peds free passes. kipchoge’s untouchable marathon span. Yeah right.
It was claimed to be Testoboost- basically some cheesy concoction from GNC- but point well taken. I had forgotten about the prednisone.
Yes, "Testoboost" is what was claimed. Others claimed that they ate uncircumcised pigs, had sex four times, or carried the blood of their unborn twin. But I believe my eyes over the word of the accused in this case. Taking Testoboost" won't result in hemoglobin rising from 760 to 900, but taking testosterone will.
Several very prominent athletes identified in the leak -- Rita Jeptoo, Jemima Sumgong, and Wilson Kipsang -- have been banned for violating anti-doping rules.
Paula Radcliffe, whose marathon world records during the height of EPO use in the early 2000s are regarded by many as highly suspicious, was also mentioned.
Are you saying these athletes were part of the Fancy Bears leak? I don't see any of these names in the saved documents at "letsrun".
Winter/spring 2020 the bowerman babes seemed to have something dosed just right when they had Karissa run 14:26, Shelby 14:23, Vanessa Fraser 14:48 and Colleen 8:28 within months all not to be replicated again
“Paula Radcliffe, whose marathon world records during the height of EPO use in the early 2000s are regarded by many as highly suspicious, was also mentioned.”
At the time, I somehow believed her performances. I am not so sure now. Her explanations for her off score values never made sense. And how could she be, at a certain point, some four minutes faster than anyone else?
Did she get some advantage from treatment for exercise-induced asthma? Was she blood doping? Or was there something else?
It is sad but true that it is difficult to believe her performances were clean. And it is sad but true that we shall likely never know how she did it.
“Paula Radcliffe, whose marathon world records during the height of EPO use in the early 2000s are regarded by many as highly suspicious, was also mentioned.”
At the time, I somehow believed her performances. I am not so sure now. Her explanations for her off score values never made sense. And how could she be, at a certain point, some four minutes faster than anyone else?
Did she get some advantage from treatment for exercise-induced asthma? Was she blood doping? Or was there something else?
It is sad but true that it is difficult to believe her performances were clean. And it is sad but true that we shall likely never know how she did it.
Can you explain what is it that doesn't make sense about her values being impacted for 2 hours after an intense effort and training at altitude at 2400m? Decades of science and experience with blood testing are pretty clear that it makes a lot of sense.
What doesn't make much sense is all this talk about "height of EPO use in the early 2000s" in the same light as the realization that no one else could come within three minutes of her time, until after the late 2000's, with Shobukhova in 2011, and Keitany and Dibaba in London 2017. Was there no depth or breadth of EPO use in the height of EPO usage in the early 2000s? Did no one else know about or use EPO? By Jan 2018, only 22 other women broke 2:20 (including 1 Russian, 2 Chinese and 3 Japanese, and only 41 other women ran faster than Ingrid Kristiansen's 1985 London performance of 2:21:06 (including 2 Russians, 3 Chinese and 3 Japanese).
What also makes sense is Paula's fast times starting with aggressive honest pacing from the gun. Paula's London 2003 performance started out strong from the gun. She had two pacemakers until 30K, and one until the finish. Compare this to most women's races before the supershoe era, where the start was usually pedestrian.
I agree with much of this, but don’t dismiss the strong circumstantial evidence that suggests that AlSal may have been giving Rupp androgel massages during that period. As a reminder:
-AlSal had a prescription for androgel
-AlSal had his androgel on him frequently, including at training camps
-AlSal conducted an experiment in the Nike lab to determine exactly how much of his androgel could be applied to someone before triggering a positive test
-AlSal regularly gave massages to Rupp despite having access to licensed massage therapists
-A Nike doctor reported that Rupp was on “testosterone medication” at the age of 16
Am I missing anything?
Oh yeah, Androgel, the drug that’s more effective than EPO
this board condemned Rupp for alleged androgel use but gives so many more suspicious runners likely using actual peds free passes. kipchoge’s untouchable marathon span. Yeah right.
This guy doesn't think that literally taking testosterone is performance enhancing.
Radcliffe on EPO? where does anyone get that association?
Radcliffe blood doping as part of a medical treatment to return blood values to "normal" is what I assumed was done.
And that became a therapy on the edge with actual blood doping.
This would be the grey zone, and a bit over, I'd venture to say.
^^This. I really doubt Radcliffe was using EPO. She certainly wasn't haven't transfusions either, which were also banned from '86.
You have to try and understand her psychology. She is that person that takes the moral high ground, the one that held the 'EPO Cheat Out"' sign during the 2001 Worlds; the one that is vitriolic when other runners get banned. Very black and white. She is the type of person that would have a 'medical treatment' - which could be a number of procedures - and in her mind that is justification because a 'medical professional' prescribed it and it is not illegal. It's the equivalent to all those Norwegian Skiers taking asthma inhalers: 'legitimate' therapeutic medication, doing everything they can to stretch the rules.
I'd also agree with the poster above about Radcliffe having the guts to go out relatively hard from the gun. There's definitely been a mental shift since, with more women prepared to take it out at a really strong (not crazy) pace.
Oh yeah, Androgel, the drug that’s more effective than EPO
this board condemned Rupp for alleged androgel use but gives so many more suspicious runners likely using actual peds free passes. kipchoge’s untouchable marathon span. Yeah right.
This guy doesn't think that literally taking testosterone is performance enhancing.
“Paula Radcliffe, whose marathon world records during the height of EPO use in the early 2000s are regarded by many as highly suspicious, was also mentioned.”
At the time, I somehow believed her performances. I am not so sure now. Her explanations for her off score values never made sense. And how could she be, at a certain point, some four minutes faster than anyone else?
Did she get some advantage from treatment for exercise-induced asthma? Was she blood doping? Or was there something else?
It is sad but true that it is difficult to believe her performances were clean. And it is sad but true that we shall likely never know how she did it.
Can you explain what is it that doesn't make sense about her values being impacted for 2 hours after an intense effort and training at altitude at 2400m? Decades of science and experience with blood testing are pretty clear that it makes a lot of sense.
What doesn't make much sense is all this talk about "height of EPO use in the early 2000s" in the same light as the realization that no one else could come within three minutes of her time, until after the late 2000's, with Shobukhova in 2011, and Keitany and Dibaba in London 2017. Was there no depth or breadth of EPO use in the height of EPO usage in the early 2000s? Did no one else know about or use EPO? By Jan 2018, only 22 other women broke 2:20 (including 1 Russian, 2 Chinese and 3 Japanese, and only 41 other women ran faster than Ingrid Kristiansen's 1985 London performance of 2:21:06 (including 2 Russians, 3 Chinese and 3 Japanese).
What also makes sense is Paula's fast times starting with aggressive honest pacing from the gun. Paula's London 2003 performance started out strong from the gun. She had two pacemakers until 30K, and one until the finish. Compare this to most women's races before the supershoe era, where the start was usually pedestrian.
If you haven’t read it already, have a look at Ross Tucker’s article in The Science of Sport (September 2015). He makes clear that her explanations are, at best, not conclusive.
It was also not helpful that (1) she refused to release details of her blood scores and (2) she changed her story along the way.
Yes, "Testoboost" is what was claimed. Others claimed that they ate uncircumcised pigs, had sex four times, or carried the blood of their unborn twin. But I believe my eyes over the word of the accused in this case. Taking Testoboost" won't result in hemoglobin rising from 760 to 900, but taking testosterone will.
“Paula Radcliffe, whose marathon world records during the height of EPO use in the early 2000s are regarded by many as highly suspicious, was also mentioned.”
At the time, I somehow believed her performances. I am not so sure now. Her explanations for her off score values never made sense. And how could she be, at a certain point, some four minutes faster than anyone else?
Did she get some advantage from treatment for exercise-induced asthma? Was she blood doping? Or was there something else?
It is sad but true that it is difficult to believe her performances were clean. And it is sad but true that we shall likely never know how she did it.
Can you explain what is it that doesn't make sense about her values being impacted for 2 hours after an intense effort and training at altitude at 2400m? Decades of science and experience with blood testing are pretty clear that it makes a lot of sense.
What doesn't make much sense is all this talk about "height of EPO use in the early 2000s" in the same light as the realization that no one else could come within three minutes of her time, until after the late 2000's, with Shobukhova in 2011, and Keitany and Dibaba in London 2017. Was there no depth or breadth of EPO use in the height of EPO usage in the early 2000s? Did no one else know about or use EPO? By Jan 2018, only 22 other women broke 2:20 (including 1 Russian, 2 Chinese and 3 Japanese, and only 41 other women ran faster than Ingrid Kristiansen's 1985 London performance of 2:21:06 (including 2 Russians, 3 Chinese and 3 Japanese).
What also makes sense is Paula's fast times starting with aggressive honest pacing from the gun. Paula's London 2003 performance started out strong from the gun. She had two pacemakers until 30K, and one until the finish. Compare this to most women's races before the supershoe era, where the start was usually pedestrian.
"Can you explain what is it that doesn't make sense about her values being impacted for 2 hours after an intense effort and training at altitude at 2400m?"
Being impacted, fine, but what doesn't make sense is a 20% decrease in ret-% within days (while not being at altitude), and a 20% increase in hct 1 hour after a 10,000 m race.
"Can you explain what is it that doesn't make sense about her values being impacted for 2 hours after an intense effort and training at altitude at 2400m?"
Being impacted, fine, but what doesn't make sense is a 20% decrease in ret-% within days (while not being at altitude), and a 20% increase in hct 1 hour after a 10,000 m race.
These large jumps between two independent measurements, before standard protocols were established still make sense.
These 20% differences falsely presume that the measurements were collected, stored, and analyzed under the same standards. To arrive at 20% changes with negligible uncertainty, you have to collect and analyze two samples under strict standards and protocols, which were not developed in 2003. It took several years to refine the protocols, before the ABP was approved for use in 2009.
If you haven’t read it already, have a look at Ross Tucker’s article in The Science of Sport (September 2015). He makes clear that her explanations are, at best, not conclusive.
It was also not helpful that (1) she refused to release details of her blood scores and (2) she changed her story along the way.
I read what Ross wrote at the time. There is much about this story that is inconclusive, and Paula cannot change that. Ross wrote what he usually writes: it could be, or might not be, but my opinion, with caveats, is that ....
1) I assume the rest of her blood scores were normal, as the "abnormal" ones were published (with no context). She objected to the forced circumstances surrounding the release, and the precedent it would set for others to release their data under pressure, to a public with only a partial understanding of what is rightly suspicious and what is not.
2) Did she change her story? I'm not so sure she changed, it, and I don't think her "story" is relevant anyway. There is simply too much uncertainty around data that was collected and analyzed under unknown circumstances, and natural and non-doping factors can explain what data we have seen based on the existing ABP research. I think there are always multiple factors at play, and at times she said listed some factors, then at other times she listed other factors, but multiple factors are still valid. Altitude, non-standard measures, and intense effort are not exclusive factors.
Take a closer look at the photo. The graph of hemoglobin rise spans 4 years, and the written log of altitude tent exposures are over 7 months.
You don't think it was the altitude tent resulting in the hemoglobin rising?
4 years *total*, yes, but there is a steady rise from 760 to 880 within the first four datapoints already, a whopping 16% increase.
"altitude tent exposures are over 7 months"? The last I see there is "9 Jul - 4 Dec", which is just under 5 months, not over 7 months.
Sure, if you look at the last entry rather than the whole "written log", which spans from May 13 to Dec. 4, or just about 1 week under 7 months (sorry my bad -- not over 7 months).
The dates are fuzzy, but the first four data points still span 5 months -- plenty of time for hemoglobin to rise in a tent set at 9K-12K.
The question was to the one who said that tesosterone raises hemoglobin. Shouldn't we expect a large increase from the high altitude exposure? Note that the only entry indicating "currently on prednisone and testosterone medication" is dated 4-December, long after that "whopping 16%" rise, while notably absent from all of the other entries in the log.
