Alex Hutchinson calls out CANOVA over study confirming EPO works on Kenyan runners

Interesting theory. You've stated previously you do not have any physiology training. Do you have any data to back up these ideas?

Rekrunner is a liar wrote:

Interesting theory. You've stated previously you do not have any physiology training.

Do you have any data to back up these ideas?

Are you sure this wasn't for Jon Orange?

Back to the lab, jo wrote:

Rekrunner is a liar wrote:

Interesting theory. You've stated previously you do not have any physiology training.

Do you have any data to back up these ideas?

Are you sure this wasn't for Jon Orange?

Jon Orange is not to be taken seriously. He has as much support for his ideas as Rekrunner.

I haven't seen Renato produce any data to back up any of his physiological theories. It all sounds plausible and in some ways intuitively logical. However many ideas sound intuitively correct but turn out to be total nonsense when actually studied.

I always find it interesting that Renato says he has no experience with EPO, no interest in EPO, and no training as a physiologist, but seems so certain that his ideas in this realm are correct. I don't know what to make of it.

Lol, as if you're not a doping apologist troll too. So which regular anti-doping poster are you? Subway? Casual Observer? Hmm, I don't think so. I can't remember the handle 'I once reported a doper..' here before.

Kiprop and Bett are the two biggest men's Kenyan doping busts this year, and it happens that both infamously cheated white athletes from medals (Willis the Gold (after Ramzi's bust), and Langford the bronze last year). Maybe you're just obsessed with reading race into everything?

Lol, I'm not lying about what RekRunner said, I'm just using logic to follow through the conclusions of his own premises. As a master Wiki Logician himself, he should appreciate that. If he thinks that EPO doesn't aid performance then there is no reason it should be illegal. I did not state that he thinks EPO should be legal, I stated that 'if he thinks EPO doesn't work, he presumably thinks it ought to be legal, unless he thinks substances that aren't performance enhancers should be illegal'. It is Rekrunner that is lying about what I said.

You must think you are the only one who changes handles as they please.

Do you think I want to bring my regular handle into these filthy topics?

I've been on here for almost 15 years and I am almost 15 years older than you. I don't need to prove anything to you.

And you brought race into it again, and you did lie about rekrunner.

No point trying to reason with you.

Peace.

Oh and yes, I once reported a doper to my "local" anti-doping department. And I got in trouble for it.

What have you done in real life to report dopers?

Thought so.

So yeah, peace.

Well you did say "You clearly think EPO should be legal", something that is never in my thoughts. Much of what you think I think is based on false premises. I don't "think that EPO doesn't aid performance". When it comes to EPO working, I often say things like "diminishing returns for elites". It should remain illegal because of it's potential to "work" for partly trained runners, for walkers, for cyclists, for skiers, and many other Olympic sports covered by WADA.

Apparently a lot of people care when I say "not more than 1%". But this is not the only point I spend my spare time debating.

physics defiant wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

and because legal methods can achieve much of the same effect.

Arguing about exaggerations of magnitude of effect is not apologizing for breaking the rules.

I can be completely against doping, and still say 5% for fully trained elites is nonsense.

I don't say genetic superiority, because there are many factors in combination besides genetics.

I don't argue that "EPO doesn't work" -- other people start these arguments.

"much of the same effect..." But not all.

Who cares if it's .1 % or 5%?

Are you seriously spending a large part of your spare time merely debating the % that it works.

JHF

So you "know" it's not more than 1%.

You are as funny as JO with your greater understanding than real scientists.

rekrunner wrote:

Please stop making up lies about what I think. I do not think EPO should be legal.

I think athletes should not take EPO, both because it is not legal, and because legal methods can achieve much of the same effect.

Arguing about exaggerations of magnitude of effect is not apologizing for breaking the rules.

I can be completely against doping, and still say 5% for fully trained elites is nonsense.

I don't say genetic superiority, because there are many factors in combination besides genetics.

I don't argue that "EPO doesn't work" -- other people start these arguments.

Training at altitude works.

No one is denying that altitude doesn't work, but apparently it doesn't work enough for the Kenyans as they're testing positive left & right! ?

rekrunner wrote:

I did not advise you not to judge -- I just pointed out that the basis for your judgement was not something you could find in the article you linked.

Wrong. The basis was Pound's evidently false claim that Ben was innocent, despite his positive test and obvious steriod abuse since years. History, including that link, provided plenty of evidence for that.

rekrunner wrote:

In the case of these studies, it's not a question if I liked or didn't like -- the reasons for my judgement are the long list of disclaimers by the study authors themselves.

Long list? 2-4 items? And adding "disclaimers" isn't exactly proof of "irresponsibility".

Coevett wrote:

Lol, as if you're not a doping apologist troll too. So which regular anti-doping poster are you? Subway? Casual Observer? Hmm, I don't think so. I can't remember the handle 'I once reported a doper..' here before.

Kiprop and Bett are the two biggest men's Kenyan doping busts this year, and it happens that both infamously cheated white athletes from medals (Willis the Gold (after Ramzi's bust), and Langford the bronze last year).

Firstly, it wasn't me as I was fast asleep or working and I accidentally bumped the "save password to this device" button, so it now a nuisance to post anonymously (something Rojo will be delighted about).

-Firstly all the real world accounts of those that have taken epo: Armstrong, Hamilton and the Panorama journalist all claim that you do the scheduled session say an 1 hour ride (or a 12k run) and at the end you feel so fresh you just keep going at it. However, just like the film "Limitless" after you are finished, you probably have some sort of hangover, hence need for the cocktail, androgens for muscles and something like cocaine/speed as a pick me up.

-As for Lance, all the cyclists via wattage seemed slower in 2009 than 2001 most likely due to the ABP monitoring of parameters. I take it that you two are discussing the allegation that LA was doping up his Hct as a means to recover in 2009. The pattern does look rather suspicious.

""When Prof Gore compared the suppressed reticulocyte percentage in Armstrong's 2009 and 2010 Tour de France samples to the reticulocyte percentage in his other samples, Prof Gore concluded that the approximate likelihood of Armstrong's seven suppressed reticulocyte values during the 2009 and 2010 Tours de France occurring naturally was less than one in a million," the report said."

Interestingly, Andy Schleck "I believe in his comeback that he was clean."

Coevett wrote:

Kiprop and Bett are the two biggest men's Kenyan doping busts this year, and it happens that both infamously cheated white athletes from medals (Willis the Gold (after Ramzi's bust), and Langford the bronze last year). Maybe you're just obsessed with reading race into everything?

I agree with this but there are way, way more examples. How many medals have the dirty Dibaba sisters won? What about Maurice "epo+hgh" Greene? The 1988 Olympic 100m, the silver should go to someone from the Semis. The 2012 w1500m, what a disgrace that was.

Subway Surfers wrote:

-Firstly all the real world accounts of those that have taken epo: Armstrong, Hamilton and the Panorama journalist all claim that you do the scheduled session say an 1 hour ride (or a 12k run) and at the end you feel so fresh you just keep going at it. However, just like the film "Limitless" after you are finished, you probably have some sort of hangover, hence need for the cocktail, androgens for muscles and something like cocaine/speed as a pick me up.

If blood doping makes it easier to compete, it might make it also easier to exercise, whether there is better training effect is another matter and which part rHuEPO played is difficult to conclude because people usually take multiple PEDs. It is still weird that of all the real world accounts, JV is the only one who even speculates that it might be some extra advantage from the RBC hormone. There might be others, but not that many, I'll challenge you to provide these accounts because I've almost never seen an endurance athlete making the claim.

You said "pretend". 2-4 is more than 0. I didn't say "proof" but "basis".

casual obsever wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

I did not advise you not to judge -- I just pointed out that the basis for your judgement was not something you could find in the article you linked.

Wrong. The basis was Pound's evidently false claim that Ben was innocent, despite his positive test and obvious steriod abuse since years. History, including that link, provided plenty of evidence for that.

rekrunner wrote:

In the case of these studies, it's not a question if I liked or didn't like -- the reasons for my judgement are the long list of disclaimers by the study authors themselves.

Long list? 2-4 items? And adding "disclaimers" isn't exactly proof of "irresponsibility".

So they believe.

Wake up and smell the coffee wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

Please stop making up lies about what I think. I do not think EPO should be legal.

I think athletes should not take EPO, both because it is not legal, and because legal methods can achieve much of the same effect.

Arguing about exaggerations of magnitude of effect is not apologizing for breaking the rules.

I can be completely against doping, and still say 5% for fully trained elites is nonsense.

I don't say genetic superiority, because there are many factors in combination besides genetics.

I don't argue that "EPO doesn't work" -- other people start these arguments.

Training at altitude works.

No one is denying that altitude doesn't work, but apparently it doesn't work enough for the Kenyans as they're testing positive left & right! ?

I did not say "know".

physics defiant wrote:

So you "know" it's not more than 1%.

You are as funny as JO with your greater understanding than real scientists.

Subway Surfers wrote:

Coevett wrote:

Kiprop and Bett are the two biggest men's Kenyan doping busts this year, and it happens that both infamously cheated white athletes from medals (Willis the Gold (after Ramzi's bust), and Langford the bronze last year). Maybe you're just obsessed with reading race into everything?

I agree with this but there are way, way more examples. How many medals have the dirty Dibaba sisters won? What about Maurice "epo+hgh" Greene? The 1988 Olympic 100m, the silver should go to someone from the Semis. The 2012 w1500m, what a disgrace that was.

Mardi Lestari!

I don't doubt that all the top sprinters back then (and likely now) were doping. Which means maybe Ben Johnson should be given more credit given that he was running 9.79 (when celebrating early Bolt style) in a period when running faster than 10.31 was good enough to get you into world finals.

You are almost correct in your assumption that I believe the people who misled them should be punished. But then you are one of those people. You see my view as weird or radical, when I'm just pointing out the construct of the so called PED consistenly ignores basic physiological principles; homeostasis and biomechnical efficiency, neither of which you understand or even want to understand. How can you deny that the the laws of physics pertain to these issues?

Your belief is like a religious dogma which can't be questioned.