Salazar, Farah, talk about use of L-carnitine, a legal supplement with 11% performance gains

I am not the "caffeine" guy. Please go back and ask that poster to substantiate their claim. Thanks.

I brought the issue of gray zone. What are you so afraid of? Are you pro-performance enhancement use, prior to the something being legally banned?

That Salazar was noted in some of the links is not as important as using something based on performance enhancement claims made by recent research. Salazar is not the only coach look for things that have documented results that WADA hasn't addressed yet. Because WADA takes so long to get things done (banned) their is a window of opportunity to use something and not violate any rules. This is a problem--loophole--in my opinion that WADA should address.

jjjjjj wrote:

11% would have been an improvement by Farah of over a minute in a 5000m. He improved in 2011 by maybe ten to twelve seconds. But it doesn't surprise me that Salazar's looking for every legal means of improvement for his runners. He has always said this. But if it does result in an improvement of 2% even, it should probably be banned.

There's a quote back in the 2011 time frame about the post race drinks that Salazar's athletes were drinking - and that every supplement was provided to USADA or WADA for approval or testing.

This may be what Dr. Brown meant by "permission." "If it's not on the list, you can use it." And the operation was professional enough to test in independent or Nike's labs to see that the supplement was clean.

This is the reality of L-Carnatine:

Just another crap supplement that's been pushed for years to fool people. The objective studies says it does nothing for running performance. Either Salazar and his crew are fitness fanatics or he's consciously putting out misinformation to throw people off the drug track.

It looks like I'm not alone in my assessment this is a non-story. Here are all 23 registered (name) comments for the Times article. Come back to me, Times, when you've got something. I can't stand crappy journalism. Crappy journalism = create news, don't report news. And to the poster that says beet root juice doesn't have adverse side effects, I beg to differ. I didn't poop straight for a week after I tried that one time, not to mention the immediate nausea.

MadDog 44 minutes ago

Oh dear, trying to create a story where there is none.You should be ashamed of yourself, but then you seem to have lost that ability completely. Gutter press.

FlagRecommendReply

Guy de Vere 1 hour ago

If a world-leading coach didn't use all the legal supplements available, now that actually would be a story. "The revelations will spark concerns about use of legal supplements" Really??

Haven't been reading The Times/ST much recently, looks like I haven't missed anything important.

FlagRecommendReply

Neil Robertson 1 hour ago

thanks guys but I was joking. I think I can hang to my Sunday clubrun with just bread and water!

FlagRecommendReply

Paul Collins 2 hours ago

If it is legal then what is the story ? Even a pint of beetroot juice will boost performance trouble is not many athletes want to drink it.

Flag2RecommendReply

John Cleave 8 hours ago

When all athletes use it, then theres no gain, Perfect

FlagRecommendReply

Stephen Annett 8 hours ago

I cannot see the benefit of this substance. Lactate acid builds up for preciseliy the reason stated in the article, to stop over exertion. Take this signal away and over training will occur, resulting in muscle depletion, muscle injuries and exhaustion. The product in question is a substance to be avoided in my opinion.

FlagRecommendReply

Malcolm Clark 8 hours ago

Whoooo...a supplement that contains L-carnitine...AND...carbohydrate. Shocking. In more news: sugar is a bit sweet. And fruit comes from trees.

Flag1RecommendReply

Steppenwolf 8 hours ago

L-Carnitine is also used a supplement to mitigate the effects of M.E. It is available at virtually every high street chemist. If it can be bought openly then it is street legal until it is declared otherwise.

FlagRecommendReply

Chris 1966 9 hours ago

A story about taking a supplement which breaks no rules Is a non story

Flag6RecommendReply

Duncan Bell 9 hours ago

This almost reads like one of those clickbait adverts you get online - "sports administrators hate this one weird trick to get 11% better performance - and it's legal!!!"

Flag2RecommendReply

martin ampomah 10 hours ago

This story is pretty bad, I am genuinely shocked that any Editor would let this slip into the paper. Its hard enough for clean athletes without the press writing rubbish to try and create some sort of controversy.

Flag10RecommendReply

Pra Caralho 10 hours ago

So, exactly, WHAT?

Flag4RecommendReply

Ian Young 10 hours ago

This is a totally pointless article - I cannot figure out what message it is trying to deliver.

I am guessing it is a "sell newspapers" mini-headline.

Flag7RecommendReply

graham simpson 10 hours ago

Wow what a non story. I take a L-Carnitine supplement daily. It has weight loss properties. But the real benefit is that it transports fatty acids to the mitochrodria (the energy burning furnace cells). So, it's very efficient as the body would prefer to burn muscle as it's easier. Carnitine 'taxis' the fatty acids instead. There's also an appetite suppressant effect. I buy mine from myprotein.com. Just drop 500ml into a milk shake / cup of coffee / corn flakes whatever. If you want a pre trainer try James Haskell's excellent Hades pre trainer (that's stuffed with L-Carnitine)

http://www.jhbodyfire.com

FlagRecommendReply

Mr John Bridger 10 hours ago

Yes, reckless and ridiculous as is the claim that Nutramet 'developed' it. A total non-story and it seems the ToL has sunk to new depths and lows in reporting facts of which this article totally lacks. Does no-one check this stuff?

The Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition as many studies one of which concludes - GPLC appears to be a useful dietary supplement to enhance anaerobic work capacity and potentially sport performance, but apparently the dosage must be determined specific to the intensity and duration of exercise.

Not only available in Holland and Barrett and everywhere online, but us oldies can buy Cardioace in Boots that contains l-carnitine as the prime ingredient.

Flag2RecommendReply

Monica Prelle 11 hours ago

The reporting in this story is reckless at best.

Flag4RecommendReply

Stephen Edge 11 hours ago

You can buy this stuff as a sports supplement from Holland and Barrettt. Im not really sure what this article is getting at.

Flag6RecommendReply

Neil Robertson 11 hours ago

where can I get some?

Flag1RecommendReply

Ken Broadbent 10 hours ago

@Neil Robertson

Tesco.

Flag1RecommendReply

RACHELLE SMITH 8 hours ago

@Neil Robertson

The company, Nutramet Limited was dissolved in February of this year. All supplements are not equal and the effectiveness would depend on the purity of the product, the concentration of L-carnitine and the ratio between L-carnitine and carbohydrates, among many other things.

FlagRecommendReply

david hurst 12 hours ago

The so-called controversy here - which four (!) writers are doing their combined best to stretch into the thinnest story of the week - is about L-carnitine, widely available in health food shops all over the country. There is nothing new about it or any of the other amino acids marketed as health/vitamin supplements. This is a non-story in every respect - though no doubt a welcome plug for the named manufacturer.

Flag3RecommendReply

David Harris 12 hours ago

What a pointless article, are you accusing Mo of using this supplement or not? if not, why publish his name.

Flag10RecommendReply

Daniel James 18 hours ago

"Athletes no longer use legal supplement" doesn't have quite the same ring to the headline...

I see in the comments the company was dissolved that made this supplement, so you can't even buy the supplement anymore.

That to me shows it didn't improve performance 11%. It means it didn't work.

Injecting the stuff and the injection angle of the article is of more interest to me.

"It looks like I'm not alone in my assessment this is a non-story."

Of course you're not alone. What you fail to accept is that there are people who are not alone in their assessment there is a story.

...Areson broke up with Magness?!?

Sht, condolence card in order here.

It shouldn't surprise anyone that sleazy will cut every corner. Salazar was a doper. That is a fact. Every NOPer is a doper. That is a fact. sleazy has stated that his athletes don't use ANY supplements except for Vitamin D. That is a lie, but he is a sociopathic liar. sleazy has also stated that it is impossible to be a world class runner or win an Olympic medal without doping. He firmly believes that and puts it into action every single day. All of NOPe and nike need to be banned for life. sleazy, rupp, mo, centro and radcliffe need to be in prison.

I am assuming there was a reason Salazar bought 2,500 packets (180 cartons with 14 packet each) of the of the supplement 3,600 pounds ($5,400 at today's exchange rate). His purchased wasn't a trial sample.

More info on how Magness was a "lousy" coach, he seems to be doing really well with his athletes these days, getting the best out of them.

What I heard at the time was Magness hated, hated, hated the weather in Portland and wanted out.

Note also, that Magness Does Not have any "NDA," or "Non-Disparage" clause in his former Nike contract, so he can say anything he wants openly and does and has.

There is no might... wrote:

"Same thing applies to potassium so should we ban that as well?"

Please provide the name of a peer-reviewed research paper that shows potassium has a impact on actual performance. If it does, then yes, it should be banned.

Cute way of claiming, we can use it because WADA hasn't figured this out yet. And, there is no "might be", unless you chose to believe the statement attributed to Salazar are false. The paper reporting the statement has likely vetted them to avoid liability issues. So, the ball is in your court, to prove the statements are actually false.

One can not be taking serious when they say ban anything that provides a performance advantage. I will not be providing any such research after that sentence.

Maybe its a cute way of saying its not fair just to ban something without enough research and data. The side effects are not always correct, often times doctors filter what they hear a patient saying. They choose to write certain side effects down and ignore others. I would be willing to bet the control group reported side effects. My point here is that all this makes the decision on if it should be legal very complicated with the lack of research.

I don't want to go into a long discussion about the grey area. You clearly are the type of person to ban anything you think is dangerous or an unfair advantage. One major study exist on this supplement so lets ban it, great logic. I don't have to prove any statement false b/c I am okay with it being legal.

Even if they find later down the road it needs to be banned I stand by my statements. I would say good for them for taking the time to gather data and research and make a logical decision. (even though I think this is not always the case)

Researched wrote:

I am not the "caffeine" guy. Please go back and ask that poster to substantiate their claim. Thanks.

I brought the issue of gray zone. What are you so afraid of? Are you pro-performance enhancement use, prior to the something being legally banned?

This is no more in the "gray zone" than caffeine or Vitamin D or iron. It's an amino acid, for Christ's sake. Spoiler alert: it will not be banned, as WADA has no interest in wading into the murky world of untestable nutrition supplements with little to no actual benefit.

This is old stuff. Many studies and review articles have been published about L-carnitine and exercise performance:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10919968

"Available experimental clinical studies designed to assess the effect of carnitine on exercise metabolism or performance in healthy humans do not permit definitive conclusions to be drawn. In the aggregate, however, these studies suggest that carnitine supplementation does not improve maximal oxygen uptake or metabolic status during exercise in healthy humans."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15591004

"Despite this strong foundation and 20 years of research, no compelling evidence exists that carnitine supplementation can improve physical performance in healthy subjects."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9627906

"Despite the theoretical basis for carnitine supplementation in otherwise healthy persons to improve exercise performance, clinical data have not demonstrated consistent benefits of carnitine administration."

Your reports are dated from 1998-2004. The first peer-reviewed research is from 2011, and significantly more current.

Yes, it's no more gray zone than Vitamin D, and it will improve you're running performance just as much. Total misinformation.

Caffeine, though, will get you 0.5-2% in a 1500, and some people will call that gray zone: If you're racing middle distance, since caffeine is legal in concentrations that work, you have to assume that everyone out there is using it--they would be stupid not to. Doesn't work in practical use for events over 3000.

WADA would not be able to ban this supplament. The closest they could come would be to ban certain methods, like injections.

(The injections are what led to Magness's 9% performance gains, btw.)

The supplement and its effects are moot. The question to ask is what else did NOP try? What have they maintained, and what have they abandoned? Are they still using staff to Guinea Pig other products?

WADA can ban any product they think has potential health risks.

Sounds like snake oil to me.