In addition to the impact on younger athletes, I can foresee a chilling effect where prospective/developing athletes (juniors or otherwise) look ahead at what it would take in order to succeed in a doping-sanctioned sport, and decide not to participate at all.
My perspective is not entirely logical or straightforward, and I do acknowledge that there will always be differences in individual ability, genetics, sponsorship, opportunity, luck, equipment etc…
If doping is permitted unchecked though, it would be as interesting for me to watch as some sort of self-driving humanless car racing series.
They restested the sample based on the blood passport results. What did they see there exactly? In any case, they dug up that old sample because they presumably knew where to look. It didn’t randomly turn positive.
Edit: Reading the cyclocosm article now, they make this point even more bluntly.
My worry with the anything goes approach is mortality rates. Even if stuff becomes legal that doesn’t mean it’s safe. Heck, we can’t get herbal supplements fully FDA approved-what are the chances that mega PEDs would be super safe? I get that even today supplements can be dangerous, but transfusions and crazy steroids don’t come across as healthy and are likely, on average,orr dangerous than ketones, caffeine, and sodium loading. Yes, people can and do as they please to their bodies…but the average age of a tour winner would be 18 because 90% of the peleton would be dead by 28. This is all purely speculation, but if most vitamins are not supported by the FDA or equivalent, what’s to say the crazy stuff that’s illegal now would be safer just because it’s legalized?
FDA approved is the generalized term to describe regulated. I don’t mean to imply any sort of absolute authority or accuracy-just a reference for example.
And what’s wrong with smoking? I only do four packs a day, but that’s just to be cool at the casino.
This has been stuck in my head and bothering me. To the point that I am coming back days later to seriously say Whiskey Tango Foxtrot.
If I read this right - Mark is alleging that:
This sample was stored in ‘known to be tamper-able’ bottle
Mark & KFC made complaints to an anti-doping agency about someone in the UCI
The sample was re-tested after that complaint using the more enhanced method
He is driving at either
Someone could have tampered with her sample - making her appear dirty when she was clean
They only tested her after we complained about someone in the UCI. Presumably using a more strict test.
Which leads to believe that if #1 is true, the anti-doping agencies and samples are meaningless and could be tampered with or if #2 is true, they go after the dirty riders they want to, and leave the others alone.
EIther way - and anything in between just makes me sick. Real sick, to the point of what is believable in this sport.
I am inclined to say Mark’s claims here are BS. If these were true - I would think of a handful of lawyers who would take this pro-bono. Discovery alone would prove out what he is claiming here…it wouldn’t take years of fighting or even testing samples and supplements to prove she didn’t consume a tainted product.
If someone tampered with her sample there is likely a digital trail of instructions being sent to do so. Same with the second possibility - she was dirty all along and they chose to re-test after a complaint. The timing Mark claims above should be able to be backed up by a digital paper trail of instructions after the complaint was registered.
Just because the KGB could tamper with a bottle doesn’t mean that the average person could do it.
This article:
said this:
However, when compared across seven years of data, different values stood out: a peak of androsterone and etiocholanolone - both of which are metabolites of testosterone.
The unusual peak raised flags on Compton’s passport, leading USADA to investigate further.
So basically the biological passport worked. That’s good news, IMO.
I just find it hard to believe that the UCI, USADA, and the labs are all in cahoots to purposely wreck the careers of riders they don’t like or who complain.
Needed to be careful typing storied in that article 'truncating her storied career" could have quite easily been “steroid career” . (i have no opinion either way).
Back to tainted meat, are there any studies showing that this is a thing? I know people have claimed successfully (and unsuccessfully) that it is. But is it?
That’s not how that actually works at all. First of all there aren’t 22, there are 14. If you look at the list, all but three of those have half-lives in the seconds, e.g. they essentially do not exist. An abundance of 14C was created in the atomic age, and therefore is also usable for evaluation of things in more recent decades, but 14C dating is slowly becoming harder.
The number refers to the number of protons and neutrons in atoms. What is usually done is that the ratio of carbon isotopes is compared, as the amount of 13C in relation to 12C can be used a tracer for what food groups and processing your body goes through. For example, in CO2 you would expect a ratio of X, but when a plant performs photosynthesis and converts that CO2 into sugar, some alteration in the ratio of X occurs, where for example 13C binds better to an enzyme, so you can calculate a ratio of Y. As you trace these through the food chain you will see these ratios adapt further and further.
I suspect, but do not know for sure, is that they are evaluating the ratio of synthesized compounds versus those produced within the body, and can estimate whether something was made in the lab versus made biologically.
. (i have no opinion either way).
Surely not. Or maybe if Russia and China were included