El Guerrouj 2k WR - Incredible 3:49 Mile pace

You would be wrong. And that's why you'll never understand how EPO works.

A schoolboy can get this level of biology.

Shopping hour wrote:

You would be wrong. And that's why you'll never understand how EPO works.

A schoolboy can get this level of biology.

Go on then, answer the question.

What is the volume of oxygen in one litre of air?

Give the answer in millilitres.

It's very easy math Jon, you can do it!

Shopping hour wrote:

It's very easy math Jon, you can do it!

But can you?

Of course.

Shopping hour wrote:

Of course.

Go on then.

I'm really hoping JK can tell us how EPO circumvents thermoregulation.

Because JK is a genius isn't he?

Still going on about that?

You've never explained why using more oxygen defies physics. Many mammals use twice the oxygen humans do. Are they defying physics and thermoregulation?

Isn't physics a more universal thing?

Are you religious by any chance?

So you can't present a counter argument, despite 15 pages of opportunity to do so. What - not even a single citation supporting your view?

citric acid cyclist wrote:

Shopping hour wrote:

What's with you and Gary wanting everyone to do your work for you? Go back to school if you don't know the answer to this.

Besides people have told you this answer already and you were able to do nothing with it.

Enough with the Red Herring s.

I know the answer. I'm just pointing out that none of you have a clue about oxygen delivery.

Jon, you have been spouting your theories here for 20 years but no one buys them. It must be lonely being the only one in the world who is right. Or maybe you are just a little bit mad.

Armstronglivs wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

You still think we are disputing *your* point about ...? It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

I told you from the beginning:

"These are all your words" and "I don't want to debate with you about your words -- that would be pointless."

I asked you to find words coming from an expert in the field, and that is when the intelligent discourse ended.

So you can't present a counter argument, despite 15 pages of opportunity to do so. What - not even a single citation supporting your view?

A counter-argument would first require an argument.

My view? Which view is mine? Have I expressed a view? Can you be more specific?

Which "argument" do you think I am supposed to counter?

Which view have I expressed that you would like me to support with a citation?

Shopping hour wrote:

Still going on about that?

You've never explained why using more oxygen defies physics. Many mammals use twice the oxygen humans do. Are they defying physics and thermoregulation?

Isn't physics a more universal thing?

Are you religious by any chance?

Religion eh? Well what do you actually believe?

Do you believe that EPO can deliver more oxygen than

humanly possible?

Do you even know what thermoregulation is?

Why not? It's really basic physiology. About as basic as you can get. But you aren't alone. There are lots of people who call themselves exercise physiologists who don't know what it is either. That's kinda scary.

Armstronglivs wrote:

citric acid cyclist wrote:

I know the answer. I'm just pointing out that none of you have a clue about oxygen delivery.

Jon, you have been spouting your theories here for 20 years but no one buys them. It must be lonely being the only one in the world who is right. Or maybe you are just a little bit mad.

Go on, tell everyone how EPO delivers more oxygen while breathing the same amount of oxygen?

It's really quite entertaining reading your posts. Do tell us more.

Full circle back to the plaintive questioning?

Answer my difficult questions Do dogs and horses defy physics and thermoregulation in Oxygen kinetics?

Does Andrew Jones deny that EPO works and tell you what limits it's impossible to go beyond? What are human limits?

Go on.

citric acid cyclist wrote:

Go on, tell everyone how EPO delivers more oxygen while breathing the same amount of oxygen?

It's really quite entertaining reading your posts. Do tell us more.

Are you really unable to grasp how extra blood cells will pick up more oxygen out of each breath?

This is kind of scary how you can't figure this one out.

Here's a gem for you.

Because the maximal flow of O2 through the lungs was 300 ml/min higher after Epo treatment and because SaO2 and alveolar-arterial oxygen tension difference (AaDO2) were not affected by rHuEpo treatment, it can be concluded that lung O2 diffusing capacity was if anything increased by Epo. Epo treatment increased [Hb]; hence, the carrying capacity for O2 was increased, which could maintain the Po2 gradient and facilitate Ḋo2, while maintaining maximal cardiac output and likely pulmonary transit time unaltered. An elevation of the O2 solubility in blood should facilitate Ḋo2 in the lungs. The latter could explain a greater flow of O2 despite similar AaDO2.

In summary, rHuEpo administration increases red blood cell mass and O2 transport capacity, and this is the main reason for V̇o2 max to increase. The healthy heart can tolerate higher RPP than observed at peak exercise in normoxia, suggesting the main mechanism causing exhaustion during an incremental exercise test to exhaustion is not a failure or attainment of the maximal working capacity of the heart. V̇o2 max is not limited by muscle diffusion capacity in healthy humans.

citric acid cyclist wrote:

Shopping hour wrote:

Still going on about that?

You've never explained why using more oxygen defies physics. Many mammals use twice the oxygen humans do. Are they defying physics and thermoregulation?

Isn't physics a more universal thing?

Are you religious by any chance?

Religion eh? Well what do you actually believe?

Do you believe that EPO can deliver more oxygen than

humanly possible?

Do you even know what thermoregulation is?

Why not? It's really basic physiology. About as basic as you can get. But you aren't alone. There are lots of people who call themselves exercise physiologists who don't know what it is either. That's kinda scary.

rekrunner wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

So you can't present a counter argument, despite 15 pages of opportunity to do so. What - not even a single citation supporting your view?

A counter-argument would first require an argument.

My view? Which view is mine? Have I expressed a view? Can you be more specific?

Which "argument" do you think I am supposed to counter?

Which view have I expressed that you would like me to support with a citation?

A wind-up doll whose head has come off would be more coherent. Your evasiveness has acquired comic proportions. You've lost your wits along with the argument. I don't expect you to know what the "argument" is - your head would need screwing back on.

Shopping hour wrote:

citric acid cyclist wrote:

Religion eh? Well what do you actually believe?

Do you believe that EPO can deliver more oxygen than

humanly possible?

Do you even know what thermoregulation is?

Why not? It's really basic physiology. About as basic as you can get. But you aren't alone. There are lots of people who call themselves exercise physiologists who don't know what it is either. That's kinda scary.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/cgi-bin/uy/webpages.cgi?/logicalfallacies/Argument-by-Repetition

He doesn't have an argument. He only has a question - the same dumb question endlessly repeated.