Another Kenyan busted!

You seemed to have overlooked the name of the organisation, which is the "World Antidoping Agency". You have no idea what doping is. It isn't medicine.

Surely WADA has some idea, and I provided you their answer to your question.

Yes, WADA does know, which is why in its title it says it is against doping - you know, the thing you never see.

Unlike USADA, the United States Americans Doping Agency thats only mission is too point at Russians while systematically empowering US athletes to dope to their hearts content and honor and reward the drug coaches like a certain Los Angeles guy with an inner city girl with an Irish last name.

But you were asking about "drugs that don't help". WADA explains why they can also ban drugs that don't help.

Regarding what I see, you tell me often that doping is clandestine. I don't see things that are hidden or that no one has shown.

WADA has also expanded their definition of doping beyond the popular meaning of simple presence and use of banned substances and methods.

If doping isn't clandestine then you (and we) would know everyone who is doping. I haven't seen you make a claim of that kind of omniscience yet. But it will no doubt come.

WADA doesn't only ban drugs that can enhance performance; it bans drugs like heroin, cocaine, marijuana etc but drugs that may only harm health are few since athletes don't take drugs unless they stand to make performance gains or at least get "high".

If you don't like WADA's answers, you are complaining to the wrong person.

Do you at least understand now why I cannot see what is hidden from me? Are you able to connect those dots in your brain?

The kinds of claims I do make are about performance, or lack of performance, or lack of performance data. For example, if all Russians ran slow, I can claim that both doped and clean Russians ran slow without knowing which is which, because doping isn't a factor.

I understand WADA is essentially an antidoping body, even if you don't.

What is "clandestine" means only we don't know who is doping but we know that many are. It is like a black market or white collar crime.

Russians are a bad example. They have all been banned because doping is right through their sport. A whistleblower said it is "99%" of their athletes.

You seem to have abandoned your point, again. How does "essentially an antidoping body" relate to your point about "drugs that don't help"?

How am I supposed to see doping if it is clandestine? Can you see ghosts? The emporer's clothes?

Maybe Russians look like a bad example for you. But surely a nation of 99% dopers would be a glowing example showcasing the success of doping. Yet, how many doped Russians have run sub-3:32 for the 1500m? Sub-13:10 for the 5000m? Sub-27:45 for the 10000m? Sub-2:09 for the marathon? These are slow times on the world stage, even as far back as the 1980s.

Athletes don't typically take drugs that don't help. They are looking for a performance advantage, not a handicap.

Doping that is clandestine is when you don't know who the individuals are that are doping because it is conducted in secret. But when it is recognized to be a billion dollar black market there is no doubt about the scale of doping. It is also known to be in all sports at the top level and in all countries.

Your arguments about the performance effects of doping fail on the basis that you don't know which athletes are doping and which aren't. What is credible is that most at the top of the sport will be doping. They couldn't win otherwise.

As for Russians, they haven't had the opportunity to compete for several years in global championships and nor do they focus now on distance running. Their women once did and were very successful. I recall a documentary about Russian doping where a female 800 runner who had run 1:56 doped couldn't run 2:00 clean. Doping works.

Disingenuous. It’s been obvious for many decades that “Russians” have an overall lack of depth when it comes to people with the right make-up to be runners. However, when it comes to strength events they excel, and yes have been caught doping as well. Your argument is as dishonest as pointing at Kenyans and asking why is their success at bodybuilding or the shot- put so poor while so many of them dope. It’s apparent your goal is simply to run cover for Africans.

Yeah,i read somewhere that not only elite athletes doped in russia,but many lower level provincial and grass roots athletes took drugs. It appears to be similar in india,which is also really sad,and perhaps even east african nations.

I'm not making any arguments about the performance effects of doping, so how can they fail? Unless you count the lack of performance data as my argument, then that is self-evident, unless you can provide the data.

But surely if 99% of Russians are doping, you can hardly make the argument that we don't know which ones are doping, especially if you say doping works.

Nothing in your gospels according to Armstronglivs provides any performance data, notwithstanding one anecdote of some unnamed woman in some unnamed documentary you recall seeing.

As for the Russians, the question applies not just for the last several years, but for all time. And I don't dispute any performance effect of steroids for women in events requiring power and muscular strength.

Why limit this "not the right make-up" argument to Russians? Why couldn't we make the similar argument for East Africans: "It's been obvious for many decades that "East Africans" have an overall depth when it comes to people with the right make-up to be runners"?

This only underscores the need for performance data, to support claims that doping is the significant factor and difference.

My repeated requests for doping related performance data have nothing to do with any alleged trying to "cover for Africans". I'm more interested in the question whether testosterone can help the 2:07 marathon runner, and how we know that, but by all means, those who take testosterone against the rules should be sanctioned within the same rules.

Nobody doubts that East Africans have talent and depth. It was the volume of depth and far beyond the curve marks that they began to post once Rosa and others began supplying them with EPO etc. It was almost comical the way some people believed or wanted to believe it was all real, eapecially the depth at the top that was indeed unreal to say the least. With advancements allowing modern runners to catch up it is interesting to see the panic in the Muh Africans set, and hard not to notice that under even normal scrutiny (that most athletes are under) the African men have somewhat stagnated on the track, as they did overall in Tokyo compared to what they’ve pulled since ‘87.

Acknowledging the depth of talent of East Africans and the lack of depth of "people with the right make-up" in Russia significantly undermines any argument that the difference in performances is from doping. Doping as an explanation becomes less significant, if not completely superfluous in light of accepting that different groups of people have different strengths naturally.

Without any robust performance data connected to doping, we can still say exactly the opposite -- that the depth at the top was real and that is almost comical the way some people believed or wanted to believe it was all doping. We need better data to determine which of these statements are more accurate. What we can say is that 100% of East Africans are altitude trained in the longest term.

It's popular to want to believe that "Rosa and others began supplying them with EPO etc.", but there is simply no evidence of any significant large scale doping in East Africa before 2010 timeframe. On the contrary, the Sunday Times reported that East African blood doping suspicion in the largest athlete blood database available, was below the worldwide average in the years 2001-2012. Many nations were blood doping far more frequently. Then one has to wonder at the lack of similar performances around the rest of the world in the 2000s from any of these other nations, but also in the 1990s from a supposedly powerful drug and method, alone or in combination with other drugs, that was completely undetectable, before the formation of WADA, before unannounced OOC EPO testing, especially in nations like Russia where doping was allegedly 99%, and anti-doping was actively thwarted by the government.

So you agree that there's no such thing as a superhuman metabolism?

Congratulations, now we're finally getting somewhere.

It appears you aren't. I never claimed whatever you mean by "superhuman metabolism" but that doping enhances what the body can do naturally. That may appear "superhuman" to some.

One thing is very clear throughout this thread:

Kenyans use drugs.