Radcliffe says she's not releasing blood values

What if you run 160 miles a week at 6,000 feet elevation? What should your values be? What if you are a strong responder to altitude?

Not that I don't think that everyone in an Olympic finals isn't doped, but does anyone here really know what the exact biological markers could be?

Thanks for the thoughtful post, Robert.

Yeah, it would be nice if everyone came clean, but...

I would rather spend energy finding out about current runners, or recent runners. Not waste energy on someone who has not been relevant for 10 years.

fred wrote:

What if you run 160 miles a week at 6,000 feet elevation? What should your values be? What if you are a strong responder to altitude?

Not that I don't think that everyone in an Olympic finals isn't doped, but does anyone here really know what the exact biological markers could be?

Unfortunately this is something that only really really smart scientists can explain. So like Paula said, you can't prove your clean. All releasing the values will do is give unsmart people ammo against you, while the real cheaters are simultaneously deriving from those released blood values better, sneakier, and more efficient ways to cheat. Such a catch 22.

Bro - Mama wrote:

Yeah, it would be nice if everyone came clean, but...

I would rather spend energy finding out about current runners, or recent runners. Not waste energy on someone who has not been relevant for 10 years.

She's the world record holder. That makes her relevant every day until it gets beaten (or, heaven forbid, struck off).

The Scot wrote:

Something more has to yield to convince a sceptical audience. Andrew Baddeley was interviewed on the tv earlier and said athletics needs some kind of Armstrong moment to convince everyone they are moving on. That probably means they will have to bust a big Western name not a Russian.

First they need a suitable person to bust. It can't be a woman. It can't be a minority star. And it definitely cannot be someone working in mainstream media. Andrew Vernon would have been perfect, but he's too slow.

Best thing for MSM would be some bad white American guy, ideally from the south, say, from Texas.

Jesus - you're the sort of hard man with nipple rings and a chain between them saying ego cheats out. Nobody could take a man like you on

Go USA go USA

fred wrote:

What if you run 160 miles a week at 6,000 feet elevation? What should your values be? What if you are a strong responder to altitude?

Not many chances of "naturally abnormal blood values". Read this.

I think that this thread (especially rojo's post) and the "Paula's silence is DEAFENING" thread are two of the best, bravest actions (at least in leaving them up) that the brojos have ever taken, showing that even their personal heroes are not above questioning. As far as I can tell, this is the only place on the internet that is actively inquiring into this sordid affair.

Two thumbs and two big toes up on this.

I'm not sure our sport can be saved at the top level, but at least we can put up a fight from the trenches and the sidelines. If you have kids who run or coach, you should take an interest in their future by keeping these threads alive, and the pressure on.

Med School Dropout wrote:

fred wrote:

What if you run 160 miles a week at 6,000 feet elevation? What should your values be? What if you are a strong responder to altitude?

Not that I don't think that everyone in an Olympic finals isn't doped, but does anyone here really know what the exact biological markers could be?

Unfortunately this is something that only really really smart scientists can explain. So like Paula said, you can't prove your clean. All releasing the values will do is give unsmart people ammo against you, while the real cheaters are simultaneously deriving from those released blood values better, sneakier, and more efficient ways to cheat. Such a catch 22.

So release the scores and let some really really smart people look at them. Then we can read what they say about her scores in the press and on the internet. She can even release them with explanations of any odd scores to help the experts.

I find it slightly insulting that apparently the world isn't clever enough to understand these results, so they've got to do everything in private.

I'm not sure the article in the Telegraph is quite saying that she want's the scores in the public domain, just for them to be handed over to the IAAF. However she did say this in 2002

"If I could go somewhere and say test me for everything you can, then I would be quite happy to publish (the results). But we don't have any place that can do that"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-132091/Im-drugs-cheat--Paula.html

Galen Rupp and all other Americans athletes have all done the same thing as Ratcliffe I.e not released their blood data. Where is the campaign to have all the US runners data published.

"The absence of bad is not good"

You sound like defenders of the Holocaust orthodoxy who, besides calling everyone who questions them an anti-Semite, actually proclaim that "the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".

You know what? Usually it is.

Pilgrim_S wrote:

I'm not sure the article in the Telegraph is quite saying that she want's the scores in the public domain, just for them to be handed over to the IAAF. However she did say this in 2002

"If I could go somewhere and say test me for everything you can, then I would be quite happy to publish (the results). But we don't have any place that can do that"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-132091/Im-drugs-cheat--Paula.html

From someone like Paula Radcliffe, the world anti-drug movement leader, the "EPO cheats out" woman, this BBC article It's like to say "I support the legalization of marijuana, but hey!!! not in my neighborhood!!!".

Med School Dropout wrote:

fred wrote:

What if you run 160 miles a week at 6,000 feet elevation? What should your values be? What if you are a strong responder to altitude?

Not that I don't think that everyone in an Olympic finals isn't doped, but does anyone here really know what the exact biological markers could be?

Unfortunately this is something that only really really smart scientists can explain. So like Paula said, you can't prove your clean. All releasing the values will do is give unsmart people ammo against you, while the real cheaters are simultaneously deriving from those released blood values better, sneakier, and more efficient ways to cheat. Such a catch 22.

No, actually the reply is false. With scores and some logistical information you can develop a very good idea of whether or not the athlete was doping.

Altitude training camps are VERY popular with doping because it throws the values the bio-passport tracks way off, even for a clean athlete. Which, means it's the perfect time to dope, or withdraw some blood, or ...

Research on Altitude providing some training benefit to non-doping athletes still has conflicting data.

Here's another quote from 2002. She really was sure back then that she'd be happy for her results to be published:-

One of the blood tests was conducted at the Flora London Marathon, and Radcliffe, who is involved in setting up a new website for the International Association of Athletics Federations educating young competitors about the dangers of drug abuse, has put in a request to UK Sport to publicise the details. "I have absolutely no objection to my test being released," she said. "I would like to know it myself."

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/general/athletics-hard-work-not-drugs-the-secret-of-radcliffes-success-172526.html

Exactly, Ben.

Interesting how she deems the public incapable of understanding the 'science bit' on doping when, in explaining the reasons for some of her race failures, she thought nothing of boring us all to death with the minute details of her underlying medical conditions.

Med School Dropout wrote:

Unfortunately this is something that only really really smart scientists can explain. So like Paula said, you can't prove your clean. All releasing the values will do is give unsmart people ammo against you, while the real cheaters are simultaneously deriving from those released blood values better, sneakier, and more efficient ways to cheat. Such a catch 22.

Ha, this is a funny post. I think people are missing the satire here.

It's because Paula is the British version of Lance Armstrong, prior to him getting into trouble.