Major USADA screw up over L-Carnetine/NOP issue

Of course Rupp and Farah were injecting. They won medals. That's the reason for the investigation. The truth will come out. Mo will lie to the end.

Link?

So NOP doped, and gets to keep their friggin medals. What a fine day it is...cheaters win.

Too lazy to find it yourself?

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/Health/article1537354.ece

Did you read the story? It says Alvina Begay (Who is that?) took the Carnetine by injection in December, Not Mo or Galen who won friggin medals.

Alvina Begay was obviously a NOP Guinea Pig.

So a legal supplement that a member(s) of the NOP allegedly took in an illegal way - two weeks before the whole thing would have been entirely legal? Cut the crap about doping. It's an amino acid. The USADA scientist that misinformed the NOP should be fired on the spot and USADA should immediately issue an apology. Who are American athletes supposed to go to if they can't count on USADA to give them the right information? Disturbing.

So NOP... wrote:

So NOP doped, and gets to keep their friggin medals. What a fine day it is...cheaters win.

If it improves performance by 11% we should see a sub 24 10K soon.

Goodness, oh my wrote:

So a legal supplement that a member(s) of the NOP allegedly took in an illegal way - two weeks before the whole thing would have been entirely legal?

Cut the crap about doping. It's an amino acid. The USADA scientist that misinformed the NOP should be fired on the spot and USADA should immediately issue an apology. Who are American athletes supposed to go to if they can't count on USADA to give them the right information? Disturbing.

You do not seem to be aware the L-Carnetine is NOT listed as "legal" by WADA. It is not listed at all, meaning it is subject to banning if WADA decides that someone took it in an attempt to enhance performance.

The 11% is work output, and not time improvement.

Randy Oldman wrote:

If it improves performance by 11% we should see a sub 24 10K soon.

The claims of 11% improvement from an amino acid would be the first tip that the study/studies or claims by the manufacturer were whack.

Per Dirk Pearkson and Sandy Shaw's books on supplements and health and life extension, I used to take various amino acids for recovery, and appetite suppression / to keep weight on / build muscle.

Ate like a fiend for a month, after a badly sprained ankle, couldn't run... And managed to not pork up.

Later I read that taking amino acids, individual ones in dietary form were likely useless as they'd just "collaborate" with other amino acids in one's food and just become protein and have no special or isolating effect. --No idea if that is correct. Could explain the need for injections.

Lots of athletes used to get vitamin b injections. Is that doping?

A Duck wrote:

Lots of athletes used to get vitamin b injections. Is that doping?

According to WADA rules, yes, in some circumstances it is.

I'm not so sure about that statement. When is a b12 injection under the legal dose of 50 ml illegal? Perhaps I'm clueless on that. Nevertheless, we can go around and around on whether l carnitine is doping like EPO or whether it is the same as taking beta alanine or drinking Gatorade in a marathon. People draw their lines on how it suits them. It's been debated tirelessly on the other thread about the NOP and carnitine. The story to me right now is the issue of USADA misleading the NOP.

A Duck wrote:

Lots of athletes used to get vitamin b injections. Is that doping?

According to WADA rules, yes, in some circumstances it is.[/quote]

Live by the sword....

Even assuming they weren't doing stuff like the testosterone microdosing and HGH that John Smith thought that Victor Conte was doing, if you play these as-close-to-cheating-that-you-can-get-away-with games, sooner or later somebody's going to make a mistake (Ben Johnson, Justin Gatlin, Trevor Graham) and you're going to get burned. Couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch, unless it was the Jamaicans (again).

I hope that out of one of these minor mistakes,Travis Tygart gets a chance to put Steve Magness on the stand (so the NDA he signed no longer applies) to testify about what was REALLY going on there.

1) alvina Begay might be one of the worst names I've ever heard

2) an infusion (quotedword used by Salazar in article) and injection are two significantly different means of administration. Infusion is directly into a vein (think iv), and an injection is just given subdermal (under the skin) or intramuscular (think insulin shot or flu shot)

3) this dr brown guy in Houston might be the American version of Ferrari

4) people seem to forget that Salazar was on victor conte's "list"

I understand that they're trying to improve as much as possible... but really, it seems like they are just forcing these unnatural things way too hard.

Injections to boost performance just sounds like cheating no matter what you're using. What ever happened to the good ole days when everyone just trained hard to get better results? Guess that's in the past.

Thoughts:

1) Salazar should release all his emails

2) The Gold & Silver medals can now be considered somewhat gray

Does it work like that? WADA prohibits substances, and categories of substances. I think it is rare that WADA (or any organisation) explicitly approves legal supplements. If so, I seem to be unaware too.Here the IAAF, in a nutritional guide (2007, updated in 2013) to athletes, discuss Carnatine, among other supplements. If there was a risk of exposure to a "retroactive ban", it seems the right place for the IAAF to warn athletes. Instead they issue just general precautions about supplements: they might not work, the labels could be wrong, the supplements could be contaminated, etc.http://www.iaaf.org/download/download?filename=81e9220a-5905-4040-b486-734de9c4ee67.pdf&urlslug=Practical%20Guide%20to%20Nutrition

Neva Legal wrote:

You do not seem to be aware the L-Carnetine is NOT listed as "legal" by WADA. It is not listed at all, meaning it is subject to banning if WADA decides that someone took it in an attempt to enhance performance.

The observed 11% was the total power output of a cycling time trial of 30 minutes of a group of athletes, with an average of 51 VO2max, after 24 weeks. It's not easy to translate this 11% cycling power observation for medium athletes to time improvements for a national level athlete in the marathon. (For example, 11% of 2:10:00 is 00:14:18)What's interesting to me:- that in the study, after 12 weeks, there was no observed improvement. What mechanism would produce an improvement after 24 weeks, but not 12?- that no one has been able to repeat this observation (except for the third party hearsay passive voice belief about assistant coach Steve Magness and 8-9% of something improvement)The rest of the athletes said they tried it and saw no improvement.

Randy Oldman wrote:

If it improves performance by 11% we should see a sub 24 10K soon.