IAAF: "road running industry is approaching a doping scandal... worst in sport"

Holy sh@#! 76% weren't tested without in the six months leading up to the race.

No wonder 2:03-2:04 has become commonplace.

Identified wrote:

Holy sh@#! 76% weren't tested without in the six months leading up to the race.

No wonder 2:03-2:04 has become commonplace.

Road running has become what cycling was in terms of doping...the king of doping sports.

I may be way out of my league here, but perhaps part of the problem is limited resources for testing at each and every event.

Look numerous posters have been pointing out that the dirty runners from the epo era switched to the roads. If they aren't being tested and they are winning gold label events you all need to assume that they are dirty, sadly not the other way around, not given the times they are running. Road running is currently undergoing a PED extravaganza.

Subway Surfers wrote:

Look numerous posters have been pointing out that the dirty runners from the epo era switched to the roads. If they aren't being tested and they are winning gold label events you all need to assume that they are dirty, sadly not the other way around, not given the times they are running. Road running is currently undergoing a PED extravaganza.

I understand the purpose of EPO, but what are they taking to help with shin splints?

Wiskfbfnr wrote:

Subway Surfers wrote:

Look numerous posters have been pointing out that the dirty runners from the epo era switched to the roads. If they aren't being tested and they are winning gold label events you all need to assume that they are dirty, sadly not the other way around, not given the times they are running. Road running is currently undergoing a PED extravaganza.

I understand the purpose of EPO, but what are they taking to help with shin splints?

This might trigger Jon Orange and rekrunner, but because it improves the amount of oxygen to your muscles. This increases your aerobic capacity, therefore you can run faster at aerobic events.

Wiskfbfnr wrote:

Subway Surfers wrote:

Look numerous posters have been pointing out that the dirty runners from the epo era switched to the roads. If they aren't being tested and they are winning gold label events you all need to assume that they are dirty, sadly not the other way around, not given the times they are running. Road running is currently undergoing a PED extravaganza.

I understand the purpose of EPO, but what are they taking to help with shin splints?

Good old T maybe?

And it's not just at the elite level. I'm convinced cheating is rampant at the local road racing level. Just think of all the masters runners abusing testosterone treatments. It's sad to cheat to win a turkey trot, but it happens, and they're never tested.

This is something I like to call "argument from ignorance" Lack of testing is an anti-doping problem -- we do not "need to assume that they are dirty", simply because we haven't looked yet. Even at 24% OOC testing, if use is high, it would eventually be detected across 6 podium finishes per 50 Gold Label races per year.

Subway Surfers wrote:

Look numerous posters have been pointing out that the dirty runners from the epo era switched to the roads. If they aren't being tested and they are winning gold label events you all need to assume that they are dirty, sadly not the other way around, not given the times they are running. Road running is currently undergoing a PED extravaganza.

randomness wrote:

And it's not just at the elite level. I'm convinced cheating is rampant at the local road racing level. Just think of all the masters runners abusing testosterone treatments. It's sad to cheat to win a turkey trot, but it happens, and they're never tested.

I agree with you. I think there's a contingent of runners who believe that if it's not EPO, and/or if it's prescribed by a doctor, it's not doping. Anything from taking HGH for menopause symptoms to falling in a patch of poison ivy the day before a race and going on prednisone.

I'm fast enough that I sometimes get comped for races and/or win prize money - I'm not an elite by LR standards, but I'm unquestionably subject to the doping regs since I meet USADA's definition of a "non-national athlete." I also have health issues that require medication, and so I check Global DRO each time I'm prescribed something new to confirm that the proposed medication is allowed. I've declined meds twice because they were not allowed.

When discussing this point with my running friends, I am always shocked how many think I'm really worrying about this too much, and should just take whatever the doctor tells me to and not worry about it, since it's extremely unlikely I'll ever be tested. And these are people that don't think of themselves as unethical or cheaters.

There's a cultural shift that needs to happen at the local racing level but hasn't. It does seem to have happened to some extent in triathlon and cycling - there are unquestionably dopers in those sports, but it is seen as doping. So I'm hopeful that with actions like NYRR announcing that they would be testing top finishers at their races that the culture will shift over time.

rekrunner wrote:

Even at 24% OOC testing, if use is high, it would eventually be detected across 6 podium finishes per 50 Gold Label races per year.

The less the testing, the smaller the detection rate.

randomness wrote:

And it's not just at the elite level. I'm convinced cheating is rampant at the local road racing level. Just think of all the masters runners abusing testosterone treatments. It's sad to cheat to win a turkey trot, but it happens, and they're never tested.

That explains that 49-year-old’s outburst. Roid rage. ?

For the newbies:

There is a 49 year old in our running

community who does nothing but run. Well, he works, but he had no other interests, no children and is a total jerk.

At a race last summer, he didn't too well and was passed the last 200 meters by a female Kenyan. At the awards banquet, he was pounding the table in frustration, saying how he was going to "train his brains out and pound her in the ground next year."

If he only saw the people laughing at him. What a joke.

Wiskfbfnr wrote:

Subway Surfers wrote:

Look numerous posters have been pointing out that the dirty runners from the epo era switched to the roads. If they aren't being tested and they are winning gold label events you all need to assume that they are dirty, sadly not the other way around, not given the times they are running. Road running is currently undergoing a PED extravaganza.

I understand the purpose of EPO, but what are they taking to help with shin splints?

Carbon fiber springs.

It's a murky area. I'm not sure I agree with your running friends and I'm not sure I don't. If someday there's a drug that literally makes, say, a 70 year old the physical equivalent of 40 again, even to the point of extending life spans by 20-30 years, but is banned as a PED is it unreasonable to expect a 70 year old to not take it so s/he can compete legally? Maybe the route here is to get a TUE but what if there is no TUE for that drug? At some point legitimate medical aids also enhance performance.

atrackandfieldfan wrote:

I may be way out of my league here...

Thanks for self identifying.

Not even a little bit surprised. But hey, they never failed a drug test so they must be innocent, right?! Someday the clowns who run road racing will realize how toxic it is when dopers take over. Baseball figured it out after Sosa, Bonds, McGwire etc made a mockery of their record books. Cycling and track got rid of the most egregious doping, which is about the best you can hope for in this age of microdosing.

Seriously, who cares?

Let em “supplement”. Some of you act like you would be beating these runners if they weren’t doping. Stick to local cherry picks and 15:xx wins.

HRE wrote:

If someday there's a drug that literally makes, say, a 70 year old the physical equivalent of 40 again, even to the point of extending life spans by 20-30 years, but is banned as a PED is it unreasonable to expect a 70 year old to not take it so s/he can compete legally?

I think it's reasonable to ask the 70 year old not to take it. A 70 year old that takes a drug that makes him/her the physical equivalent of 40 shouldn't be competing against the other 70 year old athletes.

I think where things get tough is where you have someone, not competitive at all, who has to take a PED to treat a major illness. Imagine the person fighting cancer (and thus on EPO) who wants to walk-run the BAA 5K. There's no place under the USADA regs for that person to participate, as I read the rules. And that seems cruel.

What I'd really like to see is a system where every participant in a race checks a box when they enter a race - they either select "competitor" or "participant." If you pick competitor, you're subject to all the rules about headphones, no outside assistance, and doping. In exchange, you're also eligible for awards, and to qualify for Boston, NYC, etc. If you pick participant, then you can take your ADHD drugs, have a friend hand you a water bottle, etc. But, though you get a time, you can't win anything.

I really think that's the best way to handle this stuff - much better than the current system of International/National/non-National/recreational athletes, which is really hard to decipher.

I believe any prednisone excuse that involves poison oak. If you have a serious case of poison oak, you would murder someone to get relief and prednisone is the only thing that works. And if you told me I would win an olympic gold if I voluntarily gave myself poison oak, I would turn down the offer.