New Doping News on Alberto Salazar in Sunday Times

rojo wrote:

In my book wrote:

Intent matters.

Bingo. Why in God's name would you be emailing Lance Armstrong talking about the performance enhancing benefits of the drug.

Whether it was a placebo or not, it's clear that Salazar believed you needed to do way more than just run to be the world's best.

What??? Are you serious? Lance wasn't guilty at the time. He was another athlete. Your main argument is Alberto is guilty because he sent Lance an email about a 100% LEGAL supplement?

WhatIsTheStory wrote:

rojo wrote:

Bingo. Why in God's name would you be emailing Lance Armstrong talking about the performance enhancing benefits of the drug.

Whether it was a placebo or not, it's clear that Salazar believed you needed to do way more than just run to be the world's best.

What??? Are you serious? Lance wasn't guilty at the time. He was another athlete. Your main argument is Alberto is guilty because he sent Lance an email about a 100% LEGAL supplement?

0/10

Keep trying clueless troll

sounds like they're trying to make fire out of smoke

So they infused more than 50ml which breaks the rules, what is the penalty? Seems to be the argument is over the phrase "almost certainly"

BBC coverage of the story

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/39093398

Everyone wondering why nothing has been done yet missed a key point of the article. The article states that several athletes in the OP are refusing to turn over their medical records to USADA. We already know USADA took Dr Brown to court to try to gain access to his records.

There is likely more to this story. Time will tell.

in the know7676 wrote:

if you have read the papers, you will realize the explicitly saying 50ml over 6rs is a moot point, as one needs to infuse much more than this.

Yes, it would be something like 8.33 ml/hr. Kind of like tko...barely dripping.

They're clean. They're all clean. Everybody at the NOP and everybody here in Ethiopia. We're all clean. I know this for a fact.

One thing missing is the context of the USADA document. USADA, in their statement, mentions that it was in conjunction with their attempt to force Dr. Brown to be deposed.

But exactly what was the document for? Was it part of what they submitted to the Harris County Court? Was it an internal memo/document, outlining their strategy against Dr. Brown (including bluffs or veiled threats) not to be released? Was it the final draft of something, or just an initial draft?

Keep in mind that Fancy Bears, like much of Russian propaganda and misinformation, is trying to play whataboutism. "Yeah, Russia is kinda dirty, but so is everybody else".

If that's their goal, they're going to leak whatever maximizes that end, regardless of the context of the leaked material.

I've been following some of the "likes" of pro-runners on twitter because no one has outright posted yet. Interesting what you can find there, and who has had suspicions about NOP all along.

Looks like the chickens are coming to roost on this one.

Why doesn't Fancy Bears make the USADA report public? We are just taking the Times word on what it contains. That isn't right or fair.

There was probably more in those injections besides l-carnitine.

but you are ok with russia and aden group

I see the professional commenters are out in force on this thread. How much does Nike pay you for this? And how do you sleep at night?

Never Closes wrote:

ryan foreman wrote:

Maybe it doesn't sound good.

But it also sounds a lot like what Salazar has openly and publicly said he has been doing for years. There is a notable lack of the terms illegal ped use or microdosing in that tweet.

In any case. It sounds like this investigation is finally coming to a conclusion. That in itself should be good news to everyone. Whatever they think of Salazar.

Investigations never close. The samples and data from prior testing are kept for years. Not until eight years after an athlete retires can they think they are clear. But if there was intentional cheating the investigation door never closes.

Salazar will have a cloud over his head his entire life.

Just like Paula. It is a shame it is so hard to have to find someone guilty, it is almost as if you have to catch them in the act. Heavy circumstantial evidence is not enough. Just ends up with a few in the know being sure of doping but the general population thinking they are innocent.

FAAAAAAAKE NEEEEWWWWWWWSSSSSSSSSS

To everyone saying "vitamin D is totally safe and legal": consider the dose.

The amount you get in a glass of milk is 400 iu.

The amount of a typical pill taken daily is 1000 iu.

You can also buy non-prescription pills of 5000 iu.

Much research suggests that 3000-5000 iu/day is needed to maintain healthy levels. This can be received through sun, supplements, or a combination of both. Note that in northern latitudes (most of the US and Europe) you generate none from the sun from November to March. But your body will store surplus (gained in the summer) and access it through the winter.

A day in the sun during the summer will generate a max of about 20,000 iu.

For someone extremely deficient in vitamin D, a prescription dose of 10,000-40,000 iu/day is given for a few weeks to restore healthy levels.

A daily dose of 40,000 for more than 1-2 months is toxic for most people.

If Mo was taking a dose thought to be harmful to his health, that means it was a daily dose of 40,000 for many months, or a higher daily dose for a shorter time.

In other words, a dosage 10x higher than any normal person would take for health reasons.

Yes, there are reasons to be highly suspicious of why he was taking this. Likely because some other drug was causing an extreme depletion of his natural stores.

I think you are wrong here. The needle has moved because this shows how far the project and Mo were willing to delve into a grey area. From here it is a short stride to illegal PEDs.

Is the Sunday Times on Donald Trumps list of FAKE NEWS provider? Just wondering