"People have been threatened at this meet" - Kara Goucher

Thank you Freud drone for a textbook example of my point!! As I said, one telltale sign you're dealing with a drone is a repeat of another quote with no new words.

Right on the mark wrote:

Who woke up the PR drones? wrote:

Kara is a wannabe hobby jogger, Kara is a psychopath, Kara is a crack whore, ... no hard evidence blah blah blah.

This will soon be Salazar and his crew, or those who decide to turn their heads and lie, against Kara Goucher and the track world. You can bet that Kara will get many many more to come out and confess what they know. She's the poster girl for US female distance running and soon she will have 50,000 other women behind her. Can you win a fight with your gf or wife? Don't think so! Salazar will go down and the gorgeous Kara Goucher will spearhead this. There's no way that her sponsors will not back her and in fact she will become more marketable because of this. Nike will soon force Salazar out as soon as these allegations are proven to be the truth. This might be different if it was a male runner like Nick Symmonds starting e whistle blowing! Salazar vs The Gouchers! This one won't be close!

Who woke up the PR drones wrote:

Thank you Freud drone for a textbook example of my point!! As I said, one telltale sign you're dealing with a drone is a repeat of another quote with no new words.

Right on the mark wrote:

If someone posts to say that they don't believe the doping allegations, what could they say that would convince you they are not a "PR drone"? I'm sure you will probably respond by calling me a PR drone who is trying to get free advice on how not to look like a PR drone. But seriously, it sounds like you are just applying that label to anyone who disagrees with you.

Karma Police wrote:

She said, firstly, a corticosteroid such as Prednisone in smallish doses like those we're discussing doses wouldn't make a difference to performance...Her opinion (and she is a scientist not a rule-maker) is that it is not improving performance beyond what you are personally capable of - but bringing you back to where you would be without the allergy - it is perfectly OK.

When your wife earned her degree, did she study the specific effects of corticocosteroids on athletes? I know that they don't teach this to medical students in their pharmacology courses. It doesn't make a lot of sense to discount what runners here who have actually been prescribed prednisone in typical doses are saying -- that they unquestionably felt an energy surge during exercise. And based on the mechanism of action of prednisone, this makes perfect sense.

There have also been studies on this.

From 2009:

"These data indicate that short-term glucocorticoid intake improved endurance performance in women, but further investigation is needed to determine whether these results are applicable to elite female athletes and, if so, current WADA legislation needs to be changed."

From 2007:

"From these data, short-term prednisolone intake did appear to significantly improve performance during submaximal exercise with concomitant alteration in hormonal and metabolic responses."

(Prednisolone is the biologically active product of prednisone metabolism by the liver.)

From 1996:

"We conclude that prednisone, given in an appropriate dose, protects muscle fibres against the development of mechanically induced damage, possibly by stabilizing the muscle fibre membranes."

There's probably a reason WADA has prednisone on its in-competition banned substances list.

bkrunner wrote:

Who woke up the PR drones wrote:

Thank you Freud drone for a textbook example of my point!! As I said, one telltale sign you're dealing with a drone is a repeat of another quote with no new words.

If someone posts to say that they don't believe the doping allegations, what could they say that would convince you they are not a "PR drone"? I'm sure you will probably respond by calling me a PR drone who is trying to get free advice on how not to look like a PR drone. But seriously, it sounds like you are just applying that label to anyone who disagrees with you.

+1

Maybe she will surprise me and cone out with a decent response. But so far it has been proven that regardless of whether she's telling the truth about some things, she's intentionally left out important facts to make her case seem legit. Perhaps Salazar has done the same. But she's been caught and he hasn't until we see what she's referring to.

What we need is to get them both in the same room. They can have access to whatever emails they want, and have a legit moderator, no munipulating their "truths".

interesting indeed... wrote:Haven't read through the thread, but have to say after watching that I definitely believe that SHE at least believes she's telling the truth and isn't afraid to tell the truth to the proper authorities.

She did go to the "proper authorities" in February 2013.

Their lack of any sort of sanction or reprimand of NOP based on what she told them is pretty telling.

Now...if Kara wants to change her story and say that she was doping herself or something like that, THEN we have something substantial to talk about.

I eagerly await her statement, but something tells me it's going to be the same old same old from her.

Mrr82 wrote:

But so far it has been proven that she's intentionally left out important facts to make her case seem legit.

Which important facts? Please be specific.

Mrr82 wrote:

Perhaps Salazar has done the same. But she's been caught and he hasn't until we see what she's referring to.

Salazar has in fact been caught lying. He lied in his letter. This is in spite of what was obviously his best effort to release only certain e-mails in a conversation (it was obvious that he had done so well before Kara and Magness said that he had).

From the most recent ProPublica article:

Salazar said that he never criticized Goucher’s weight and that Brown, Goucher’s endocrinologist, is the one who directed him to give Cytomel to Goucher at the world championships in Daegu, South Korea, in August 2011. The ProPublica and BBC accounts referred to an instance earlier in 2011, in March, prior to the Boston Marathon. “His story is a different timeline,” Goucher told ProPublica. “He’s trying to use Daegu to cover up Boston.”

It's plain even from the one e-mail Salazar released from the spring of that year, dated March 11...

)

...that Salazar was still concerned that Kara was too heavy, even if he was softening the blow in his conversations with her nutritionist by attributing what he saw as excess to muscle development in her upper body, calves and thighs. There's no telling what he may have said to her in person.

Salazar then refers to e-mails on March 25, April 4 and April 11 in which he claims to have been positively ecstatic over whatever weight Kara had by then reached. Strangely, however, he chose not to make these e-mails public.

Does that strike you as suspicious at all?

He concludes this section with, "These documents make clear that I was thrilled with Kara’s weight after she had Colt and I told her so repeatedly." Here, by "these documents," he means a single document -- the March 11 e-mail exchange.

It's a classic bait-and-switch: Salazar provides one e-mail that doesn't even establish what he hopes to establish, then refers to -- but does not disclose -- e-mails in which he really approves of her weight, and ends with "Look at all of these documents!"

I really don't know why more people can't see through such an obvious, even clumsy attempt at a smokescreen. I think the FDA should advise putting Ritalin in every municipal water supply in America.

Man Overboard wrote:

I eagerly await her statement, but something tells me it's going to be the same old same old from her.

Your story has not changed since you started posting on this site, interestingly enough immediately as Salazar's manifesto was posted. The money will run out soon. No one is buying your cr*p.

That is what I say. Good point. I think it would be hard to get all parties to do so, but that is what needs to be done if an investigation ensues. However, it might not even get that far. This just seems like a terrible s**t storm to have to work through. At this point, with Kara Goucher declaring 'she has evidence' to back things up, then she better produce it. Certainly give her time, but at this point the only person who seems to have a coherent fact based argument is Alberto. He also has documentation and emails about him consulting USADA/WADA. So as noted before, it seems like people are unhappy that their perception that he has cheated was not something that USADA/WADA thought was cheating. It now seems like they are pleading their case to the media. You don't get your way so you throw a fit. From the sounds of it USADA/WADA are continuing to talk to other people, so if once again this leads to nothing, then let it be.

I think the track world is ok with people asking questions, making things known, and trying to make sure things are clean. But if that process is undertaken and the results show nothing illegal was taking place, then I am sorry if I don't give a rats a** about what you 'think' is going on. You have to prove things. You can't just feel like Galen must be up to no good, it must be proven.

First off, I've only read the first page and will read the rest later but from looking @ the video, I will say Kari seemed very nervous and wanted to come forward in telling the truth and yet have been guilty of some sort of situation in the past and wants to redeem herself by coming forward. Nothing wrong w/it and in fact, I have more respect for her in doing so, however I truly hope she is doing it for the right reasons.

Until all evidence is out there, back and forth is good. I wanted to wait for Salazar's response before convicting him, and I thought he came out on top. I still thought he was on top after Magness and Epstein issued their responses. I'm not going to take Goucher on her word that she has anything consequential, but if she has something new it deserves to be considered. My gut is that on the major issues it will be more of the same suspicions without convincing evidence, but my gut has been wrong many times before. It will be interesting to see her response. For everyone it seems the best course of action is to get the information out there and let USADA and other appropriate agencies review the information and reach a decision.

Yes, you are correct. The exercise challenge test (exactly like the ones the OP do) are STANDARD protocol to evaluate exercise-induced asthma. That item, you're right, needs to be deleted from the list. It's crazy that no one realizes this (including Epstein!!!).

Youheardithere wrote:

This will soon be Salazar and his crew, or those who decide to turn their heads and lie, against Kara Goucher and the track world. You can bet that Kara will get many many more to come out and confess what they know. She's the poster girl for US female distance running and soon she will have 50,000 other women behind her.

Goucher has nothing on Hasay or May Cain both of whom were more probably more popular in highschool than she was at the height of her career.

And what's with the whole "our truth" and "his truth" stuff. Why not just give us *the* truth?

"When BB and ProPublica approached us with the story, we felt that it was time to tell our truth."

Kara replying after being discredited by the Alberto rebuttal, "...it just was unfortunate that instead of stating his truth (Salazar) had to involve personality and personal things into it."

our, his, the truth wrote:

Goucher has nothing on Hasay or May Cain both of whom were more probably more popular in highschool than she was at the height of her career.

Why should what Kara says about other runners scale with your assessment of their popularity? In fact, she hasn't accused any of her fellow runners of anything.

our, his, the truth wrote:

And what's with the whole "our truth" and "his truth" stuff. Why not just give us *the* truth?

\

Focusing on this is a desperation ploy. It was obviously just a slip, one she wouldn't have made in writing, and is semantically of no importance. That her demented adversaries would focus on this is predictable.

Thank you for being the only one with common sense. Unless there are studies to back up what this pharmacist is saying, it is pointless to say it. You have provided research to the contrary. I know it took time to gather this, so thank you for doing it.

our, his, the truth wrote:

"When BB and ProPublica approached us with the story, we felt that it was time to tell our truth."

Kara replying after being discredited by the Alberto rebuttal, "...it just was unfortunate that instead of stating his truth (Salazar) had to involve personality and personal things into it."

I don't think that word means what she thinks it means. The word she's looking for is testimony.

Lorenzo the Magnificent wrote:

I'm always a little uneasy when people put a pronoun in front of the word "truth." His truth, my truth, their truth means no truth.

Ding ding ding...

KMB wrote:

our, his, the truth wrote:

Goucher has nothing on Hasay or May Cain both of whom were more probably more popular in highschool than she was at the height of her career.

Why should what Kara says about other runners scale with your assessment of their popularity? In fact, she hasn't accused any of her fellow runners of anything.

our, his, the truth wrote:

And what's with the whole "our truth" and "his truth" stuff. Why not just give us *the* truth?

Focusing on this is a desperation ploy. It was obviously just a slip, one she wouldn't have made in writing, and is semantically of no importance. That her demented adversaries would focus on this is predictable.

"It was obviously just a slip, one she wouldn't have made in writing..."

The "our truth" was from a twitter post - written.

That relativistic thinking is seen again when she complains about wishing Salazar would have just said "his truth" without the personal stuff (like all her emails going on about how much she loves him and will love him forever).