I could partly agree with an opinion, that Alex Hutchinson as a journalist, was irresponsible, except that this was just his tweet, and not a researched article. He responded to another tweet, from Jordan Santos-Concejero, who has a PhD in Exercise Physiology, who in my opinion, bears two counts of irresponsibility (except again, it was just a tweet): 1) He repeats a phrase often attributed to Renato, that Renato never said: "EPO doesn't work on Kenyans", joining the club of mis-quotations like "Beam me up Scotty", or "Play it again, Sam", or "Why don't you come up and see me sometime?" 2) As a PhD in Exercise Physiology, he endorses a study, at least among his Twitter followers, that, as we have seen, has some pretty severe limitations, as admitted by the study authors. Putting all those issues aside, the main invalidating issue I see is that, according to the PBs of the Kenyan athletes, they essentially tempo'd the 3000m time trials, at 85-90% of their predicted clean potential. This is confirmed by the low RPEs recorded in the study, compared to the Scots. But this does not excuse the irresponsibility of those who decided to publish the time trial results as a study. The primary purpose of the Scot and Kenyan study was something completely different, connected to finding genetic markers as a result of EPO injections. One can only guess, what was the point of including time trial performances, that lacked a laundry list of flaws noted by the study authors, if not for producing headlines about the powerful 5% effectiveness of EPO, common to both sea-level Scots (half with a running history, half not), and borderline elite Kenyans who tempo'd the 3000m time trials. Even moreso, because the 2018 study just looks like another chance to repeat the headlines from 2013, based on the same time trial data, drawing the same conclusions that the Kenyans were similar to the Scots, as if they needed to renew the headlines.