Any chance you give a link to the IQ-test where you got your genius 165 diploma, Juan Torena? If YOU got 165 no doubt I will get a record 300. You should be really gladful that your boys are named like Coe, Cram, Kerr, Mills, West, Scott, Keen, Davis, Lay, Grant, Axe, Cook, Robb, Hill, Hart, Lobo - btw, Axe...
A series of irrelevant questions. If the drug is banned then using it is doping. A Kenyan athlete incurs a violation every week. That tells us where they are with their sport.
So, you are saying that it is a banned substance, but not a known PED?
These are relevant questions to answer in the affirmative, as part of the fight against anti-doping includes determining whether these violations are based on myths, or facts.
Doping violations will continue to rise, if the myths are allowed to persist and grow without any reality checks.
An athlete isn't banned unless they have used a prohibited drug. It isn't prohibited because of any "myths". Antidoping is guided by science. Unlike you.
So, you are saying that it is a banned substance, but not a known PED?
These are relevant questions to answer in the affirmative, as part of the fight against anti-doping includes determining whether these violations are based on myths, or facts.
Doping violations will continue to rise, if the myths are allowed to persist and grow without any reality checks.
An athlete isn't banned unless they have used a prohibited drug. It isn't prohibited because of any "myths". Antidoping is guided by science. Unlike you.
They can be. They can be banned for three whereabouts violations.
An athlete isn't banned unless they have used a prohibited drug. It isn't prohibited because of any "myths". Antidoping is guided by science. Unlike you.
They can be. They can be banned for three whereabouts violations.
True. Because of the likelihood they were taking banned drugs.
So, you are saying that it is a banned substance, but not a known PED?
These are relevant questions to answer in the affirmative, as part of the fight against anti-doping includes determining whether these violations are based on myths, or facts.
Doping violations will continue to rise, if the myths are allowed to persist and grow without any reality checks.
An athlete isn't banned unless they have used a prohibited drug. It isn't prohibited because of any "myths". Antidoping is guided by science. Unlike you.
But the question is, what guides the "doping"?
It looks like there is no relevant science on Trimetazidine and endurance performance. In other words, the "doping" is guided purely by myths and rumors and faith. Like you.
Background Currently, there is no evidence to support TMZ administration aiming to enhance any parameter of physical performance or post-exercise recovery in healthy individuals of the general population and athletes. Objecti...
It looks like there is no relevant science on Trimetazidine and endurance performance. In other words, the "doping" is guided purely by myths and rumors and faith. Like you.
"Results Two trials examining the effect of TMZ on healthy members of the general population that were published in 2017 and 2019 were analyzed. Athletes were not recruited for this type of research."
Non sequitur: no published data on athletes (even if true!) does not mean that TMZ doping "is guided purely by myths and rumors and faith". It could also be guided by positive experiences within the training group and beyond. In fact, its wide use would suggest exactly that.
The guy above has been threatening and stalking me for a number of years now. He used to post drug-fuelled rants during the middle of the night (he is British) making violent and obscene threats to not only myself, but also young UK athletes. The last couple of days have reminded me that he clearly is unhinged and I do need to take him seriously, and I will take concrete steps to deal with the threat that he poses to me.
An athlete isn't banned unless they have used a prohibited drug. It isn't prohibited because of any "myths". Antidoping is guided by science. Unlike you.
But the question is, what guides the "doping"?
It looks like there is no relevant science on Trimetazidine and endurance performance. In other words, the "doping" is guided purely by myths and rumors and faith. Like you.
There isn't any question as to what guides doping, except to someone ignorant of a global practice that has existed for decades. The only myths and rumours are yours. Unlike the athletes, their coaches, trainers and physicians, you have no experience of the drugs they use, no medical knowledge that would enable you to understand the properties of the drugs, and no acquaintance with any athlete who admits to doping. But what tops it off is that you arrogantly presume to know what the drugs do (which you think is nothing - on no data of any kind) better than those who use them - and the widespread use of these drugs is the most convincing data we will have that the drugs are performance enhancing.
The guy above has been threatening and stalking me for a number of years now. He used to post drug-fuelled rants during the middle of the night (he is British) making violent and obscene threats to not only myself, but also young UK athletes. The last couple of days have reminded me that he clearly is unhinged and I do need to take him seriously, and I will take concrete steps to deal with the threat that he poses to me.
Are you stupid? I "warned" you about reporting your post to the mods. Get a grip.
It looks like there is no relevant science on Trimetazidine and endurance performance. In other words, the "doping" is guided purely by myths and rumors and faith. Like you.
"Results Two trials examining the effect of TMZ on healthy members of the general population that were published in 2017 and 2019 were analyzed. Athletes were not recruited for this type of research."
Non sequitur: no published data on athletes (even if true!) does not mean that TMZ doping "is guided purely by myths and rumors and faith". It could also be guided by positive experiences within the training group and beyond. In fact, its wide use would suggest exactly that.
The question was not what "could be", but what "is" guiding the athletes. I didn't say what "no data" "means", but what "it looks like". I'm happy to update what "it looks like" based on legitimate responses.
Who suggested that there was "wide use"? I did initially say "so many", but this is just a handful last year and this year. The same link above tells us that it wasn't even prohibited until 2015, and that "it is fair to conclude that TMZ application has always been scant", as late as 2019. TMZ has been "known for decades", but the uptick in busts has been quite recent, in the last couple years.
Armstronglivs assures me that anti-doping prohibiting drugs is guided by science -- where is the science that led to banning the drug in 2015?
It looks like there is no relevant science on Trimetazidine and endurance performance. In other words, the "doping" is guided purely by myths and rumors and faith. Like you.
There isn't any question as to what guides doping, except to someone ignorant of a global practice that has existed for decades. The only myths and rumours are yours. Unlike the athletes, their coaches, trainers and physicians, you have no experience of the drugs they use, no medical knowledge that would enable you to understand the properties of the drugs, and no acquaintance with any athlete who admits to doping. But what tops it off is that you arrogantly presume to know what the drugs do (which you think is nothing - on no data of any kind) better than those who use them - and the widespread use of these drugs is the most convincing data we will have that the drugs are performance enhancing.
So what you are saying is that you don't really know anything. You said anti-doping was guided by science. That doesn't appear to be true.
They are training as hard as their body and genetic gifts allow and cannot improve further. They can then train harder and race faster. (those on the fringes eg Mo Farah)
They can earn money which they otherwise would not earn clean. (eg those from the Third World. Any busted African)
They don't care about cheating and fraud and want to win at all costs. (Lance)
They are training as hard as their body and genetic gifts allow and cannot improve further. They can then train harder and race faster. (those on the fringes eg Mo Farah)
They can earn money which they otherwise would not earn clean. (eg those from the Third World. Any busted African)
They don't care about cheating and fraud and want to win at all costs. (Lance)
This is not science, but faith. Nor does it answer the question.
Why "Trimetazidine", and why only recently, as it has been known for decades? It wasn't even banned before 2015. Apparently WADA banned it without any science.
There isn't any question as to what guides doping, except to someone ignorant of a global practice that has existed for decades. The only myths and rumours are yours. Unlike the athletes, their coaches, trainers and physicians, you have no experience of the drugs they use, no medical knowledge that would enable you to understand the properties of the drugs, and no acquaintance with any athlete who admits to doping. But what tops it off is that you arrogantly presume to know what the drugs do (which you think is nothing - on no data of any kind) better than those who use them - and the widespread use of these drugs is the most convincing data we will have that the drugs are performance enhancing.
So what you are saying is that you don't really know anything. You said anti-doping was guided by science. That doesn't appear to be true.
I didn't say that I don't really know anything but it is to be expected you will say something as stupid as that. The drugs are created by science - by medical and pharmacological experts, and antidoping will be guided by what such experts tell them about the effects of the drugs on human physiology - which all remains in the field of science. What is added to that is the advice antidoping receives that healthy athletes are using these drugs not for medical purposes but to enhance performance, since - unlike you, of course - they are aware of how the drugs can change human physiology to increase strength and aerobic endurance, for example. And by using the drugs the athletes are able to see the results - which you don't. But all of this is pointless to discuss with you - you think like a member of a cult, beyond reason and reality.
They are training as hard as their body and genetic gifts allow and cannot improve further. They can then train harder and race faster. (those on the fringes eg Mo Farah)
They can earn money which they otherwise would not earn clean. (eg those from the Third World. Any busted African)
They don't care about cheating and fraud and want to win at all costs. (Lance)
This is not science, but faith. Nor does it answer the question.
Why "Trimetazidine", and why only recently, as it has been known for decades? It wasn't even banned before 2015. Apparently WADA banned it without any science.
The drug was created by science. It would have been banned on the scientific advice WADA would have received about its physiological effects and that athletes are using it - which they will do for only one reason if it isn't genuinely medical. You are wasting your time here: you would be more at home on anti-vax and fake moon-landing threads, which is how you think about "science".
The guy above has been threatening and stalking me for a number of years now. He used to post drug-fuelled rants during the middle of the night (he is British) making violent and obscene threats to not only myself, but also young UK athletes. The last couple of days have reminded me that he clearly is unhinged and I do need to take him seriously, and I will take concrete steps to deal with the threat that he poses to me.
Why would he do that? he couldn't possibly know who you are.Also how do you know hes drug addled,and not mentally ill?
I didn't say that I don't really know anything but it is to be expected you will say something as stupid as that. The drugs are created by science - by medical and pharmacological experts, and antidoping will be guided by what such experts tell them about the effects of the drugs on human physiology - which all remains in the field of science. What is added to that is the advice antidoping receives that healthy athletes are using these drugs not for medical purposes but to enhance performance, since - unlike you, of course - they are aware of how the drugs can change human physiology to increase strength and aerobic endurance, for example. And by using the drugs the athletes are able to see the results - which you don't. But all of this is pointless to discuss with you - you think like a member of a cult, beyond reason and reality.
How to say it without really saying it. So you are suggesting that WADA doesn't follow the scientific advice of their own scientific experts, but rather the scientific advice inferred from the athletes?
What you describe sound impressive, but is it real? "Popular Science" describes a much less scientifically rigorous WADA guidance process:
"the ban seems to be the result of World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) precautions"
"The process of the trimetazidine ban reflects some of that uncertainty. In 2014, the WADA initially listed the drug as a banned stimulant, but it’s now categorized as a "hormone and metabolic modulator.""
"Scott Powers, a physiologist at the University of Florida who studies the effects of exercise on the heart explained how trimetazidine was included in WADA list. "I've been involved in roundtables with the International Olympic Committee, and I think their policy is: When in doubt, ban the drug," says Scott Powers. "I guess they're just trying to err on the possibility that this drug may be an ergogenic aid.""
These are not ringing endorsements of a rigorous scientific consensus process. Rather, it looks like yet another drug added to the banned list based on a non-scientific consensus of a theoretical "potential to enhance performance".
The best scientific endorsement I can find is that "in theory it could work".
Note that it was available since the 1970's, and scarcely used by athletes. Do we have any athlete anecdotes before it was banned?
Trimetazidine, which has mired Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva in an Olympic doping scandal, is banned in international sports. But it's not clear if it's a performance enhancing drug.
We've updated our BetterRunningShoes.com web site to make it easier to find good deals on the best shoes. To keep it great we need new shoe reviews from you.
