The full USADA report on Alberto Salazar has been leaked - Here it is

Geezus, the more I read this thing the more it reads not like a finished report but a legal document designed for a fishing g expedition.

If USADA presented this to a court, they need to recuse themselves and hire an independent investigator.

So many cases of speculation...

We can all speculate. Sloppy (scribbles) record keeping intended as much as a reminder to oneself as a medical record.

So, this was aimed at the Texas Medical Board. If USADA had what they insinuate in this -- the should have brought violations on the athletes immediately and before RIO.

If you read the language it reads like putting ideas in someone's head.

Brown was Salazar's doctor too. Ergo a special testo cream for him. If you're knowledgeable about his health struggles, it fits.

ahemmmmm wrote:

Geezus, the more I read this thing the more it reads not like a finished report but a legal document designed for a fishing g expedition.

If USADA presented this to a court, they need to recuse themselves and hire an independent investigator.

So many cases of speculation...

We can all speculate. Sloppy (scribbles) record keeping intended as much as a reminder to oneself as a medical record.

So, this was aimed at the Texas Medical Board. If USADA had what they insinuate in this -- the should have brought violations on the athletes immediately and before RIO.

If you read the language it reads like putting ideas in someone's head.

Brown was Salazar's doctor too. Ergo a special testo cream for him. If you're knowledgeable about his health struggles, it fits.

You are clueless how the process works. Nike/NOP legal obstruction allowed their athletes to compete in Rio.

This is the reason for hard / out of this world workouts after races. Peepee test is done. A little testo massage after a race and workout, jump on the plane back to Oregon - no knocks on the door while the testo clears the system.

nothing here wrote:

a few pages back, benevolent dictator wrote:

2) Why did Alberto - who possesses Androgel and knows how much can trigger a positive test - give Rupp massages before races when the team had its own massage therapist?

that makes no sense to me.

a microdose of pre-race testosterone is not going to allow someone to run faster. and if the gel had any meaningful potency, i've got to believe it would show up in a post-race piss test.

the reason for a runner to use testosterone during training is to promote faster recovery after workouts, which allows for more and longer and faster workouts, which leads to improved performance.

testosterone isn't rocket fuel taken on race day for extra speed.

perhaps i'm wrong about that. if so, cite the literature, pls.

Any chance someone can post the document on something other than google products? I am in China for work with some down time coming up and would love to have some reading.

No where in this report it mentions Kara or Adam??? That makes no sense to me.

Muffy wrote:

Any chance someone can post the document on something other than google products?

Someone has already done that. If you skim through 3-5 pages back, you should see the link.

kjhkh wrote:

No where in this report it mentions Kara or Adam??? That makes no sense to me.

What are you talking about? They are mentioned over 50 times before p. 50.

IVing drugs isn't a normal part of normal training for any professional sport.

The issue is units. There are about 10grams per 50mls in a vial of L-c. The blood value is measured in molar concentration expressed as micromol per liter. So you could possibly go from 50 to 2000+ if given just under 45mls if given L-c via IV infusion.

The violation occurs with the additional saline fluid bolus (the remaining 'drip' in the 100ml bags) which exceeds the 50ml limit.

smd wrote:

It's consistent with his try-anything approach in general--pre-race cryosauna, equestrian harness to improve form, the altitude simulator he used to wear on his back as a college runner.

Don't forget Ritz's thumb placement. Maybe Alberto had just finished watching the episode of "Seinfeld" where Elaine does her dancing thing, and wanted Ritz to avoid similarly lethal mistakes in form.

Wow, Salazar is crank. Not about actual running---he clearly knows his stuff about workouts and races and the like. But his quest for "an edge" would be comic if not for the health risks. I don't know what he majored in at the U of O, but he obviously never learned how to evaluate claims in a rational and skeptical manner. In my reading, he comes across as a sucker, a rube in the world of biochemistry, willing to believe almost any "expert" touting some drug/supplement/etc. Regardless of whether Salazar crossed the ethical/legal line or not, he comes across as pretty dim (again, actual running excepted).

Most of the stuff he was pushing is, in my opinion, the equivalent of Dumbo's feather. That's not to let Salazar off the hook at all ... robbing a bank is still a crime even if you only net $20. But I'd be willing to bet that the NOP athletes would have performed basically the same if Salazar had resisted the temptation to play at being a biochemist/physiologist. Sad, really.

In his interview with USADA Salazar admitted using testosterone near the end of his competitive career in the mid-1990s. Testosterone was a banned doping substance in the sport of track and field at this time and has been a banned substance in sport continuously since before the start of Salazar’s running career.

Those of you who were of reading and running age in 1994 might remember an interview of Salazar in which he credited Prozac (fluoxetine) with his revitalized training, which included a landmark 6 x mile workout he hadn't been able to do in years and of course culminated in his Comrades Marathon win that year.

At the time, on a far-less-developed Internet and mainly in the everyday world, this naturally spawned a lot of discussion about the potential effects of SSRIs on endurance exercise, and in fact this discussion has never managed to completely fade. Some of the comments in observations in these and similar threads and articles are entertaining to consider in light some of the few things that appear indisputably true now:

"Been on fluoxetine for nine years. I feel the exact same in every way I did before I was on it ... I wouldn't be surprised if Salazar's improvement during that period had absolutely nothing to do with Prozac."

"Letters to the editor of this and other running magazines were divided between those who thought that running performance was enhanced while taking this medication and those who felt that performance was impaired."

Salazar, of course, neglected to mention that he was apparently taking testosterone at the time along with Prozac.

This has a couple of easily identified implications. One is that, while it's never advisable to run out and start gobbling down supplements or actual medications in response to someone else's apparent success while using that preparation, it's especially dangerous to do this when you have the slightest reason to believe that the person touting substance X (which has no known connection to performance in the sport in question) might also be taking substance Y (which is illegal and does in fact have well-established benefits. And these days, it's safe to say that you should always have at least that slight level of suspicion if not more. But by all means, run out and overdose on fat-soluble vitamin D if you want -- at least you won't get rickets.

The other is that unless the ethics of Salazar the super-driven, try-anything coach are markedly different from those of Salazar the super-driven, try-anything athlete, then there might just be something to all of that chatter about those "gray-area" things Salazar does cheerfully disclose, or at least admit to under duress, being a purposeful screen for things he has very good reasons not to ever disclose.

The real pity of this kind of thing is the influence it can have on the credulous and hopeful masses. Assume that Salazar is not actually guilty of any doping violations as coach of the NOP. In fact, if you prefer, pretend there was never any such thing as the NOP, and that Salazar himself was abducted by aliens on New Year's Eve, 1994 and never heard from by Earthlings again. The fact that he, in a nationally circulated running magazine, attributed a major set of specific benefits to a prescription medication that, while not addictive, is far from benign when he knew damned well those benefits -- at least most of them -- were coming from something else represents an almost sociopathic disregard for the health of the general running public or the general public, period, He knew damned well what the response would be to his Prozac talk. It would have been sketchy enough had he actually been telling the truth, but given all the variables that have surfaced today, it's indicative of a personality type that really shouldn't be coaching people -- unless those people, too, honestly don't care about much besides winning at whatever cost. And I have a difficult time believing that a 16-year-old Galen Rupp was capable of making so monumental a decision for himself.

Also, it seems like Salazar provided his athletes with the worst of both worlds: enough grey-area supplements to put their reputations and perhaps even health at risk, but not enough to get the real performance increases seen with full-on doping.

stds wrote:

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Most doctors take a complete medical history and often exchange records with other doctors.

Nope. Not true at all.

Yes it is true.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

A 50mL limit is a joke because how much that is depends on how concentrated the solution is.

This method is prohibited (rather specifically) in the WADA code because it is a way to mask doping, not because it is a way to infuse high amounts of vitamins, minerals, supplements[/quote]

How does it mask doping? I could see IV drips (lots of them) or other forms of overhydration, but my digestive organs tell me this is BS. .05 liters of extra fluid is not likely to mask anything, particularly outside the context of what precisely is in the fluid and how much.

This all fits my big picture of anti-doping as nothing but a foil for the doping culture. They are just there to look busy to improve the sport's image. The only people who get popped are disposable nobodies or those who fail to pay bribes.

So I predict nobody gets sanctioned because of this.

[quote]gulpgulp wrote:

The issue here is that they willingly injected something in order to have a performance enhancing effect that normally would NOT occur. [quote]

+1

but why wrote:

before anyone goes and destroys their kidneys with Vitamin D overdose, results of three independent serious studies

https://i.imgur.com/NFuHQmS.jpg

Hey, wait one minute - you only copied & pasted one page of the site you're referencing. There's other RCTs referenced that showed vitamin D supplementation can increases T levels:

Bad Wigins wrote:

How does it mask doping? I could see IV drips (lots of them) or other forms of overhydration, but my digestive organs tell me this is BS. .05 liters of extra fluid is not likely to mask anything, particularly outside the context of what precisely is in the fluid and how much.

This all fits my big picture of anti-doping as nothing but a foil for the doping culture. They are just there to look busy to improve the sport's image. The only people who get popped are disposable nobodies or those who fail to pay bribes.

Overhydration is the classic way to beat any drug test. That looks for amount of drug in the system -- so like all of them.

Presumably you'd take more than 50mL but you just have to get your [drug] under the threshold.