WeldonJ, WeldonJ, WeldonJ??. YOU(or was it your brother? You guys are the same person to me, I am sorry) insist that Regina Jacobs is on drugs, even though there is no proof or, as far as I am concerned, even no particularly strong arguments to say so (except that she skipped some meets), but then you JUMP to defend the new princess of running, Paula Radcliffe, as being beyond doubt. Just because Paul Radcliffe calls everyone else a cheater, does not mean she is clean (oh, and by the way, she is now recanting her statements that the Chinese 10k record holder was dirty. Why back down now?? ). What about Paula?s sudden insanely good times, huh? Where is the proof that she stopped using her tent (whether it is wrong or not is another question?.we will get to that)? Nowhere, but you seem awfully sure. There is no reason to give Paula Radcliffe a free pass on the drug issue and accuse all others. Her improvements are startling.
So, the tent thing?..is THAT the reason for her remarkable recent times?? Could be. And Waz?s point was right on: there are many gray areas in what should be considered legal, and what should not. This is one more, and rightfully so. It is very similar to the classic Blood doping and enhancing you own testosterone, believe me. EPO is a natural substance, so is testosterone, so is your own blood you took out of your own body, so is Ma Huang (ephedra), so is HGH, and so are LOTS of things that are ?banned substances.? But, as others pointed out, many other ?natural? supplements such as protein powders, creatine, etc., are not banned. People who brought up such ?artificial? things as sneakers, tracks, weight machines are out to lunch, because that is different. There is no equipment or clothes that is banned. But is an altitude tent a piece of equipment?? You are breathing in an artificial versions of natural substances found in the air? Isn?t this closer to using synthetic EPO than a using a weight machine? As far as substances taken into your body, where is the line drawn on what is legal & what is not? Is it about artificiality? In my mind, these seemingly arbitrary rules concerning legality appear to be based on 3 things:
Can the product GREATLY enhance one?s performance? Steroids & EPO (among many) fall under this category.
Are they considered very risky/dangerous to your health? Again, Steroids & EPO meet this standard, as does high amounts of such products of Ma Huang (ephedra) and other stimulants.
Is the product/tool unnaturally administered and/or can it be found in food? Things like EPO & Steroids are injected, which seems ?not natural,? and can not be found in food. Things like protein or creatine are found in food and are eaten/swallowed, a seemingly more natural process. Caffeine can be administered as a pill but is found in food/drink. It is banned above certain levels. I know there are exceptions to this rule, but this is a consideration I believe.
And I know what some are ready to say, but trust me, carbo or protein-loading above what the average person eats will not make the difference that high Steriod & EPO use will. And they do not pose the same health risks (of course there are risks of too much protein, as there is to too much anything practically) as using the banned substances. So if the above 3 points are the considerations, how does the altitude tent stack up?
It appears to greatly help performance
It COULD be dangerous for sure. Altitude sickness anyone?? If it is increasing your red-blood cells, and your blood thickness, aren?t these the same dangers as EPO overuse??
Is breathing in artificially changed, synthetically created ?air? unnatural? Sounds like it to me.
The IOC, and the world in general, accept environments that ?naturally? exist such at the air around mountains. But artificially ?recreating these environments to breathe in ?man-made air???? Isn?t that closer to using synthetic EPO (for the last time, a ?natural? substance) than just buying nice sneakers or eating lots of protein? It is DEFINITELY a gray area. And, yes, I believe this despite molfin?s well-meaning attempts at English and at contradicting Waz?s point. Lastly,
IF THE TENT RAISES YOUR RED-BLOOD CELL LEVELS TOO HIGH, IT IS A BANNED TOOL!! Since testing for EPO and its sister substances(especially) is nearly impossible, testers rely on a red-blood cell % of total blood volume as a test (at least in cycling). If you are above 50%, than you are targeted/considered to be doping (similar to the testosterone/epitestosterone ratio done in testing for ?Roids).
So??Paula better be careful, and I think these tents are at LEAST a gray area, if not flat out illegal. Maybe Paula is no more ?clean? than Regina or any others she has accused.