Then he shifts the debate onto data and scientific studies which we know don't exist for peds
All cleverly enough done
Yeah. In most sports drug choice is from anecdotal evidence many would say. An athlete tries something, it works. Word gets out, or if it’s their coach/doctor then the stablemates get the same ‘therapy’. Rek knows this, so he takes the ‘show us the peer reviewed papers’ route. Maybe he’s a supplier to some, if you get my drift.
See how disingenuous this troll is? The steroids are easier to detect (for a host of reasons), he knows this. He also understands what masking agents do, why they are used, but he feigns ignorance and deflects. Cowardly pilpul, but always to be expected. Yes, like the guy said, rek is worked up over Ruth. Notice that poster never specifically said Ruth was on EPO - although we all know she was - and who knows yet how many drugs she was actually on, since more and more evidence is showing Kenyans will take anything and everything. The poster did note EPO is of course the drug of choice. And rek tries to twist it to deflect.
The “agents” have a lot of fun in EA mixing and matching drugs, peptides, etc, testing them on very willing guinea-pigs. Guys like Berardelli are busy indeed.
Why are posters suddenly talking about Ruth? This thread is about Cornelius Kabet Kiplagat, and how he got a bus driver to buy him EPO hoping to run the marathon faster. Ruth admitted taking a diuretic -- nothing to do with anything in this thread.
If EPO is so hard to detect, we are once again simply lacking facts and evidence. This is a common theme throughout the mythology -- inventing new baseless claims to support the previous baseless claims.
Then he shifts the debate onto data and scientific studies which we know don't exist for peds
All cleverly enough done
Yeah. In most sports drug choice is from anecdotal evidence many would say. An athlete tries something, it works. Word gets out, or if it’s their coach/doctor then the stablemates get the same ‘therapy’. Rek knows this, so he takes the ‘show us the peer reviewed papers’ route. Maybe he’s a supplier to some, if you get my drift.
If you make a claim about a performance benefit, and want to convince me it is not baseless, then there must be a basis that includes performance data. I don't require it to come from the decades of research, but simply note that four plus decades of research does not give us the necessary performance data to support these claims for the marathon. Therefore I ask, where can I find the data that allegedly supports these otherwise baseless claims?
You say "anecdotal" evidence, but where is this anecdotal evidence then that EPO is the distance running drug of choice? I saw a lot of testimonies in cycling, but virtually none in running, at least among the athletes and their coaches.