Another mythical story brought to us from La-La land.
In my world, we started this particular exploration of your faith with me saying "Understandable among competitive older men ..."
You've fabricated both sides of this imaginary dispute and are arguing with yourself.
So you have no idea why testosterone is a banned drug and you have no idea that aging athletes who are losing testosterone would benefit from it and you have no idea that in the ballooning prescriptions for testosterone among the older age groups that this will include recreational athletes. You simply have no idea. About anything.
Says the man who think the bladder is part of the digestive system.
Regardless… the long term benefits of being on the sauce is not ideal. What y’all think??
. We know doing bodybuilder levels of doping is bad. But down at the anti-aging levels of hormone replacement I am unaware of any long term studies suggesting harmful effects. But it is also very early
On the contrary, you said "Prescriptions for testosterone have gone through the roof in recent years (source: ABC)" which would include "the use of drugs for approved medicinal purposes but by sub-elite and recreational athletes".
I said there is nothing wrong with that, if you have a prescription, and are not subject to rules.
So we were discussing that, whether you realize it or not.
Why would the ordinary late middle-aged male take testosterone replacement therapy - as the sudden boost in prescriptions shows - and yet sportsmen in that age group, who would clearly stand to benefit even more, not take it?
The sportsmen in that age group not taking testosterone are following the rules they are subject to.
I wouldn't be too hard on the athletes -- after all, they are not scientists, and they are easily swayed by non-scientific rumors, as are fans.
I'm not so sure WADA experts would know which drugs actually enhance performance for elite athletes. They are more scientists and lawyers rather than successful coaches of elite athletes. Most WADA funded doping studies aren't blinded, so placebo is a real confounder. In any case, WADA's target is the much lower standard of subjectively deciding "potential to enhance performance".
How do "successful coaches of elite athletes" know doping doesn't work unless they have used it on their athletes?
Perhaps you presume too much. Maybe successful coaches of elite athletes don't know doping doesn't work because they have never used it on their athletes.
To the OP. Doping is present in masters road racing and USADA and USATF do not care.
USATF makes a good chunk of change from organizations who host "Masters championship" races. Then they announce that there will be drug testing at the race and tell the runners if they will be tested so the runners can clean themselves up before race day.
Now USATF can claim that they tested and everyone was clean. The truth is that UASTF does not want to open this can of worms.
So you have no idea why testosterone is a banned drug and you have no idea that aging athletes who are losing testosterone would benefit from it and you have no idea that in the ballooning prescriptions for testosterone among the older age groups that this will include recreational athletes. You simply have no idea. About anything.
Says the man who think the bladder is part of the digestive system.
So liar soorer shows he knows nothing about testosterone and its use by older athletes. Still wading through an old threat about Shelby's urine.
How do "successful coaches of elite athletes" know doping doesn't work unless they have used it on their athletes?
Perhaps you presume too much. Maybe successful coaches of elite athletes don't know doping doesn't work because they have never used it on their athletes.
That isn't what you are saying, as per below.
- "I'm not so sure WADA experts would know which drugs actually enhance performance for elite athletes. They are more scientists and lawyers rather than successful coaches of elite athletes."
If WADA experts don't know which drugs enhance performance because they are "more scientists and lawyers rather than successful coaches of elite athletes" then it appears you are saying coaches know better about drugs than the WADA experts do. You may be right - but not for the reasons you suggest.
Why would the ordinary late middle-aged male take testosterone replacement therapy - as the sudden boost in prescriptions shows - and yet sportsmen in that age group, who would clearly stand to benefit even more, not take it?
The sportsmen in that age group not taking testosterone are following the rules they are subject to.
Which means the increasing numbers who do take it are not following the rules. Thank you for making that clear.
To the OP. Doping is present in masters road racing and USADA and USATF do not care.
USATF makes a good chunk of change from organizations who host "Masters championship" races. Then they announce that there will be drug testing at the race and tell the runners if they will be tested so the runners can clean themselves up before race day.
Now USATF can claim that they tested and everyone was clean. The truth is that UASTF does not want to open this can of worms.
This is simply not true. I have been running 3-4 USATF masters XC or road national championships races each year for the last 5 years and USATF has drug tested a couple of masters athletes at most of them. E.g. ask Dan King if he got drug tested after winning the 60+ 8k race at Club XC in Tallahassee last Dec.
Perhaps you presume too much. Maybe successful coaches of elite athletes don't know doping doesn't work because they have never used it on their athletes.
That isn't what you are saying, as per below.
- "I'm not so sure WADA experts would know which drugs actually enhance performance for elite athletes. They are more scientists and lawyers rather than successful coaches of elite athletes."
If WADA experts don't know which drugs enhance performance because they are "more scientists and lawyers rather than successful coaches of elite athletes" then it appears you are saying coaches know better about drugs than the WADA experts do. You may be right - but not for the reasons you suggest.
Contrary to your suggestion, WADA experts aren't particularly qualified to know what enhances performance for elite athletes because they have never enhanced the performance of elite athletes (not withstanding near-elite athletes running 1970's high-school girl's times).
Successful coaches would know far better than WADA experts what enhances elite performance. This may or may not include drugs that some coaches may or may not have tried, but I don't presume to know, and you certainly don't know, and WADA experts likely don't know either, because they are generally not experts in elite performance.
Which means the increasing numbers who do take it are not following the rules. Thank you for making that clear.
Who said the increasing prescriptions for testosterone were from "sportsmen in that age group" subject to these rules?
I didn't. ABC didn't.
Once again, you presume far too much.
If there hasn't been any increase in older athletes taking testosterone then you must believe that those who would benefit the most from its use would not be part of the huge increase in prescriptions. Yes - you would believe that, in your fantasy land.
- "I'm not so sure WADA experts would know which drugs actually enhance performance for elite athletes. They are more scientists and lawyers rather than successful coaches of elite athletes."
If WADA experts don't know which drugs enhance performance because they are "more scientists and lawyers rather than successful coaches of elite athletes" then it appears you are saying coaches know better about drugs than the WADA experts do. You may be right - but not for the reasons you suggest.
Contrary to your suggestion, WADA experts aren't particularly qualified to know what enhances performance for elite athletes because they have never enhanced the performance of elite athletes (not withstanding near-elite athletes running 1970's high-school girl's times).
Successful coaches would know far better than WADA experts what enhances elite performance. This may or may not include drugs that some coaches may or may not have tried, but I don't presume to know, and you certainly don't know, and WADA experts likely don't know either, because they are generally not experts in elite performance.
The experts WADA use know of the likely or potential effect of the use of the drugs they ban in sport. The coaches won't unless they have used the drugs on their athletes. Some undoubtedly will know.
Who said the increasing prescriptions for testosterone were from "sportsmen in that age group" subject to these rules?
I didn't. ABC didn't.
Once again, you presume far too much.
If there hasn't been any increase in older athletes taking testosterone then you must believe that those who would benefit the most from its use would not be part of the huge increase in prescriptions. Yes - you would believe that, in your fantasy land.
Yet another hypothetical.
Once again, I didn't say that. ABC didn't say that.
Contrary to your suggestion, WADA experts aren't particularly qualified to know what enhances performance for elite athletes because they have never enhanced the performance of elite athletes (not withstanding near-elite athletes running 1970's high-school girl's times).
Successful coaches would know far better than WADA experts what enhances elite performance. This may or may not include drugs that some coaches may or may not have tried, but I don't presume to know, and you certainly don't know, and WADA experts likely don't know either, because they are generally not experts in elite performance.
The experts WADA use know of the likely or potential effect of the use of the drugs they ban in sport. The coaches won't unless they have used the drugs on their athletes. Some undoubtedly will know.
After decades of anti-doping research on amateurs, I am not convinced the WADA experts really know what is likely to improve performance at the elite level. Even for the amateurs, can we say they PB'd in any doping experiment? You can see it in the anti-doping research when the more honest researchers advise against projecting that research onto elite performance. WADA experts don't even have to prove "potential", but simply argue it, and vote on it by committee.
I am convinced, despite your ignorance is bliss self-confidence and arrogance, you lack the knowledge, and that you don't really know what WADA experts know and you don't know what successful coaches know.
I know people not doping who placed very high in those events with full time jobs, so I wouldn't understand why people would. But then again when you've been around somewhat competitive running your whole life, someone doping to run sub 3 or sub 2:30 seems silly you've been around plenty of people who could do that if they just run consistently.
Whereas I guess some people with no running background might think they have to dope to run that time.
To the OP. Doping is present in masters road racing and USADA and USATF do not care.
USATF makes a good chunk of change from organizations who host "Masters championship" races. Then they announce that there will be drug testing at the race and tell the runners if they will be tested so the runners can clean themselves up before race day.
Now USATF can claim that they tested and everyone was clean. The truth is that UASTF does not want to open this can of worms.
This sounds about right.The standard protocol is to stop oil based testosterone esters 6 weeks out .They then change to water based Test Propionate up until 2 weeks out and there you go the athlete passes the test on race day.Even high school kids know how to do this.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.