Brazilian 10k and 5k record holder tests positive for EPO at Pan Am Games

Two things-

1. The religious stuff is irrelevant. Assuming devout religious belief would keep someone from doping, there are lots of insincere people professing religious belief and an outsider has no idea if they are sincere. There have always been religious hypocrites. Jesus talked a lot about them.

2. Ghost is claiming inside knowledge about da Silva's positive results. If he has inside knowledge I'd be interested in knowing where it came from and what basis he has for what he's saying.

According to that press release from the Brazil anti-doping group da Silva has another week to file an appeal so maybe we'll see if she has an explanation.

World cross was held in Mombasa and not Nairobi. Marilson has always been unlucky in the big championships, up till now, but, hopefully, by the time London rolls around, he will be in top form.

Let's not jump the gun with the unfortunate Brazilian girl accused of doping. We will see, when she presents her defence.

I don't defend all dopers. Simply, with some people, there are extenuating circumstances. That is not to condone what they did, but you have to look at the problem from a global angle.

This is why there is a small body of doctors, coaches and athletes who support 'controlled' doping, under the guidance of doctors and medical personnel. Why not? Since, doping will always continue (just like other illicit activities like drug taking), better to have it accepted to a certain level and controlled. Then everyone would be on the same level.

If you accept that most elite cyclists are dopers, in an event like the 'Tour de France' - then it would be better to open it up and get on with it. This would also allow doctors, coaches and sport scientists to perform objective tests (openly) showing the effects of doping on the human body.

Ghost in Saudi,

www.kfupm.edu.sa

, apply today

Ghost-

I notice you didn't explain your basis for saying that da Silva took EPO by mistake.

Maybe or Maybe Not wrote:

There are some "too good to be true" WR's, like Flo-Jo's in the 100 and 200, that reasonably make people suspicious,

You make a fundamental mistake as regards to the 100m WR. The 10.49 is not a valid mark, despite being ratified. It is widely known that the wind was approximately 5mps for that heat, and all of the other times in the heat are also consistent with a 5mps time. In addition, the video of the race and of the interview afterwards shows her bib flying around etc, not indicative of the 0.0 'reading' on the wind gauge. The 'real' WR is FloJos 10.61 or 10.62, and Jeter's mark is not too far from that more realistic WR.

The 200 is from the OGs and has no wind-reading error, but the 10.49 is more out of line than her 21.3x WR. (2 x 10.49 = 20.98, much lower than the WR. (typical ratio is just over 2 so would correspond to 21-low, still way below her 200WR.

She has obviously been tested a lot and I'm not making any accusation, but Jeter is another sprinter whose PR is considered 'too good to be true' by some people. What constitutes a 'realistic' WR in the women's 100m is at least debatable regardless of wind. By 'realistic' I don't mean I'm making any assumption about doping, some times are so fast or extraordinary that someone who runs it should expect extra scrutiny.

'This is why there is a small body of doctors, coaches and athletes who support 'controlled' doping, under the guidance of doctors and medical personnel. Why not? Since, doping will always continue (just like other illicit activities like drug taking), better to have it accepted to a certain level and controlled. Then everyone would be on the same level.'

No some would use more than others. Why not let me just get on the start line in my car? Lets all do it in our cars! Cheating is cheating

You argument that people will still do it so it should be legal is ridiculous. Do I really have to name examples?

Pathetic how you claim this doper accidently may have took EPO then say its ok to take it anyway. Pathetic!

You need to stop coming out with this rubbish if you want more people to go to your stupid college

yothatswasssssup wrote:

WOW, you continue to amaze me ghost (from your insanity). So she was somehow accidently administered EPO along with all the other crap she was taking and improved ten fold??? WOW, truly pathetic answer from a CROOK defending drug cheats. But I bet you feel no shame through your continuous pathological lying as a typical CROOK would! get the fck outta here idiot! I suppose you want people to go to your crooked site to buy drugs seeing as you worship drug users so much!!!

I see no reason why drugs should be banned, for the following reasons:

1) drug news creates unfounded hysteria;

2) creates and heightens animosity between runners;

3) evidence that drugs help performance is based on marketing;

4) there is no reliable evidence that drugs help performance,

5) many people have run their best times without taking drugs.

All the drug marketing and hysteria does is to:

7) promote and increase the belief the drugs work;

8) and are required for top performance, which is false;

9) increases the use of drugs because people think they are good.

The bottom line reason the drug wars have been created and perpetuate is because:

10) all the promotion, marketing, hysteria, and resulting beliefs continue to increase the drug prices and the drug profits for the companies who manufacture and promote them.

Because of these reasons and much more, even though I don't like any drugs and don't take any drugs, I firmly believe the best course of action for athletes everywhere to take is to legalize all drug taking, to ban and do away with drug testing, and most importantly to minimize the emphasis on drug taking in athletics.

The sooner this is done, the better it will be for all runners, athletes and people everywhere.

Women? come on

I see your point, and yes, there should be limits. But when one recognizes that most or all of the top cyclists take drugs (not necessarily during the Tour to avoid detection) to attain the phenomenal speeds they do, then one has to think.

Ghost.

johnsonnosnhoj wrote:

Women? come on

Huh?

J.R. wrote:

I see no reason why drugs should be banned, for the following reasons:

3) evidence that drugs help performance is based on marketing;

4) there is no reliable evidence that drugs help performance,

All the drug marketing and hysteria does is to:

7) promote and increase the belief the drugs work;

8) and are required for top performance, which is false;

9) increases the use of drugs because people think they are good.

The bottom line reason the drug wars have been created and perpetuate is because:

10) all the promotion, marketing, hysteria, and resulting beliefs continue to increase the drug prices and the drug profits for the companies who manufacture and promote them.

Your drugs must be working.

Seriously, it's nuts to claim that EPO, steroids, HGH, etc. don't improve performance.

J.R. wrote:

I see no reason why drugs should be banned, for the following reasons:

3) evidence that drugs help performance is based on marketing;

4) there is no reliable evidence that drugs help performance,

All the drug marketing and hysteria does is to:

7) promote and increase the belief the drugs work;

8) and are required for top performance, which is false;

9) increases the use of drugs because people think they are good.

The bottom line reason the drug wars have been created and perpetuate is because:

10) all the promotion, marketing, hysteria, and resulting beliefs continue to increase the drug prices and the drug profits for the companies who manufacture and promote them.

Rodeo Clown wrote:

it's nuts to claim that EPO, steroids, HGH, etc. don't improve performance.

Please state your experience showing that all the drugs you've used actually worked, and how you tested to show you couldn't run faster without them.

6) drug use is ubiquitous in the United States, probably 90-99% + percent of the people in the U.S. use some kind of drugs, have drugs in their system, and think they need drugs to function in day to day life;

+1

I agree.

"Do you believe you could have won as many medals without the drugs?"

"Yes, yes, yes. No doubt. I don't have a doubt. And people who know the sport, who are sports people, they'll tell you the same thing. So that's why it's so unfortunate that I got caught, caught up. You just get caught up and I didn't take a break and it just cost me so much. I tell people the medals can be gone, the fortune can be gone but in my heart I know I would have won. I would have been Olympic champion."

http://www.postgazette.com/pg/11297/1184202-129.stm

No harm, no foul.

Not Cricket wrote:

What about the famous Sri Lankan cricketer PA de Silva?

Actually, the problem in cricket has been steroids like with Mohammad Asif.

Howls of derisive laughter, Bruce!

Are you a poofter?

J.R. wrote:

6) drug use is ubiquitous in the United States, probably 90-99% + percent of the people in the U.S. use some kind of drugs, have drugs in their system, and think they need drugs to function in day to day life;

So what? I think you are exaggerating the percentage, and even if not why does that make drug use acceptable for competitive athletes?

Is it just superstition that prohibits the doping of horses in horse racing.