The AIU does tells us there is a whole lot of other data, as they don't include NADOs and RADOs in their testing or annual reports.
Are you so stupid to think the World Athletics do have access to a list of all the doping positives in the sport? NADOs and RADOs share their results with WADA, not with the AIU or World Athletics.
World Athletics didn't publish any claim. Coe made the claim in a press conference, without much context.
So Coe just made up 40% off the top of his head? You are ludicrous. None of the information about doping positives is the private property of the various antidoping agencies. If WADA has it then it is available to all. Nor is anyone waiting for doping results to come through months later. Coe is not such an idiot as to make a 40% claim that will really turn out - on the basis of yet to be obtained data - to be closer to your much preferred lower figure from 2019. All that shows is how much Kenyan doping has increased in 3 years.
I guess you are. Coe didn't make up 40%. It is you making up all the rest.
But you might be on to something by suggesting Kenyan doping was much decreased as recently as 3 years ago. This fits well with your inability to find significant evidence of East African doping before 2012, when Australian scientists found that East African blood doping was less than the global average. We can find out in a couple years when WADA produces its ADRV report, what the true evolution was.
What seems to be new for 2022 is WADA's change in WADA status of "Triamcinolone acetonide", increasing the Kenyan positive test figures up significantly (at least 10 positives, again according to the AIU).
Like you said, "not nearly one in two". In 2019, the ADRV percentage of Kenyans, using WADA's published data, was 12%. Are you suggesting that now, in 2022, this will be found to be 40%, and that the problem has not increased recently?
40% in 2022 is higher than 12% in 2019. Testing has not increased 4-fold. Kenyan doping has increased and the more recent data shows it.
Interesting hypothesis. We'll have to wait a couple years for WADA to publish more complete data including test results from NADOs and RADOs, and which positives tests become ADRVs, in order to make an apples to apples comparison.
On the contrary, I'm arguing that the data is incomplete, because the AIU tells us that their testing data is both incomplete and does not from a statistically representative cross-section of sport.
When you say "there is no data that shows that", you are coming to my side of the argument.
Your idiocy knows no ends. Not every single athlete is or can be tested every year - bit that does not make testing data "incomplete". What the 40% figure shows is that amongst the higher tier of athletes who are tested Kenya far outstrips any other nation for testing positives. No one has any interest in the occasional juiced hobby jogger. But more significantly, NO KENYAN AT AN OFFICIAL LEVEL DISPUTES THE 40% FIGURE. Your arguments are your fantasies.
You are right -- that is not what makes it incomplete. What makes it incomplete is that the AIU doesn't include data from NADOs and RADOs.
Before you can compare Kenya to other countries, you need to normalize the data.
Rekrunner never stops parrotting the idea that Kenya's xcountry teams of the 80's prove that they are an offshoot of Homo Sapiens. This depite Ngugi being one of the first Kenyan doping cases, and two other members of their winning team having immediate family members later busted for EPO.
Here's another discovery I made today. The winner of the 88 world junior xcountry championships was also the very first Kenyan doping bust, and the first bust at the World Crosscountry Championships.
Cosmas Ndeti (born 24 November 1971) is a three-time winner of the Boston Marathon. He was the winner of the 1993, 1994, and 1995 races. He set the course record in 1994 with a time of 2:07:15, which was also the best maratho...
Did anyone see the World Cross Country championships yesterday. Only one phenotype took the top-10 in every single race. That is a weird coincidence considering the OP doesn't think genetic traits such as limb length, body type, etc. are meaningful.
In the men's race, the first non-East African runner was in 21st place. That should be considered the most shocking bit of good luck ever. Wow! What are the odds of that?
Did anyone see the World Cross Country championships yesterday. Only one phenotype took the top-10 in every single race. That is a weird coincidence considering the OP doesn't think genetic traits such as limb length, body type, etc. are meaningful.
In the men's race, the first non-East African runner was in 21st place. That should be considered the most shocking bit of good luck ever. Wow! What are the odds of that?
Why did zero Kenyans feature in the top 300 marathon times ever as late as 1988? Why did only one Kenyan (barely) break 2:09 before EPO? Why were there more Japanese, Brits, and Australians than East Africans in the top 10/ top 100/ top 300 marathon times of all time in 1988?
So from up until the early 1990s, there is exactly one known Kenyan endurance running doping case, and this "smoking gun" case was related to a substance (ephedrine) very common ingredient in various cold, cough and asthma medicines in many over the counter self-medication products.
There were many cases in the 1970s and 1980s when athletes tested positive for it and the related substance pseudo-ephedrine, and on many instances, doping testers were very lenient because they considered the substance to be only moderately beneficial and/or the substance being consumed accidentally.
This amount of Kenyan doping of the magnitude of a rounding error is in essence nothing vs. the widespread doping R&D and application that took place e.g. in the Soviet Union, Finland or Italy in the 1970s and 1980s.
Rekrunner never stops parrotting the idea that Kenya's xcountry teams of the 80's prove that they are an offshoot of Homo Sapiens. This depite Ngugi being one of the first Kenyan doping cases, and two other members of their winning team having immediate family members later busted for EPO.
Here's another discovery I made today. The winner of the 88 world junior xcountry championships was also the very first Kenyan doping bust, and the first bust at the World Crosscountry Championships.
I want to ignore you but there are just too many factual errors that deserve fact checking:
- I give the example of Kenyan and Ethiopian world dominance in the 1980s because it completely disproves your often repeated but historically ignorant claim that East Africans only became world dominant after EPO (which apparently no non-Africans anywhere, anytime ever took).
- There is no case that Ngugi ever doped.
- I thought one of your "family members" was Kisorio -- busted for steroids, and not EPO. So did you, back on page 31.
- It is WADA legal, and also not generally considered performance enhancing, for an athlete to have immediate family members busted for doping. This reeks of desperation.
- Cosmas Ndeti did not win the 1988 World Junior Cross-country championships. The winner, Wilfred Kirochi, beat him.
- Athletes taking "ephedrine" will not bring world dominance.
And there was exactly one Kenyan who ran faster than 2:09 before EPO (2:08).
Does it surprise you that Kenyans weren't getting busted so much when they were behind Japan, Britain, the USA, Australia, New Zealand, Tanzania, as a distance running nation?
Did anyone see the World Cross Country championships yesterday. Only one phenotype took the top-10 in every single race. That is a weird coincidence considering the OP doesn't think genetic traits such as limb length, body type, etc. are meaningful.
In the men's race, the first non-East African runner was in 21st place. That should be considered the most shocking bit of good luck ever. Wow! What are the odds of that?
Why did zero Kenyans feature in the top 300 marathon times ever as late as 1988? Why did only one Kenyan (barely) break 2:09 before EPO? Why were there more Japanese, Brits, and Australians than East Africans in the top 10/ top 100/ top 300 marathon times of all time in 1988?
This is also reeks of desparation, while simultaneously historically ignorant, observation.
The reason is the same as why they didn't succeed in the '70s and '60s. In order to succeed at something you need to try. Not that many Kenyans (nor Ethiopians) were running marathons until towards the end of the 1990s.
In any case, we know that doping can't be all that important in the marathon because 1) not many Japanese, Brits, and Australians, and all non-Africans worldwide, have run faster than the 1980s times of Carlos Lopes and Steve Jones, and 2) the Australian scientists found that the marathon was the "least suspicious" event by far, at least with respect to suspected blood doping, in the years between 2001-2012, when East Africans started creating a significant performance gap from both North Africans and non-Africans.
Why did zero Kenyans feature in the top 300 marathon times ever as late as 1988? Why did only one Kenyan (barely) break 2:09 before EPO? Why were there more Japanese, Brits, and Australians than East Africans in the top 10/ top 100/ top 300 marathon times of all time in 1988?
Kenyan all-time positions in the men's Marathon at the end of 88 (incl. Boston): 16 - 44 - 48 - 55 - 66 - 79 - 94 Gold and Silver at the 87 Worlds and 88 Olympics isn't that bad also.
Kenyans before 1980 have set 10 World Records in the long distances (3000m - 10000m incl. steeple). Coevett's attempt to show that Kenyans are just not good in Marathon running because of no good times in this period is not to beat in it's sheer ridiculousness (OK, he himself and Armstrong have set the bar very high just in this thread).
It would be interesting to hear some experts (Canova, malmo?) about this. But I think the Marathon just became little bit more popular in Kenya in the mid 1980s (and even then was not the first priority).
Does it surprise you that Kenyans weren't getting busted so much when they were behind Japan, Britain, the USA, Australia, New Zealand, Tanzania, as a distance running nation?
Before 1980? In the 1980s? From 1964 - 1979 Kenya without any doubt was the most successful nation in track distance running. Including the Marathon it might be the USA.
In the 1980s?
The 83 Worlds were the worst global champs for Kenya since 1964 up to today (following the two boycotts of 76 and 80).
84 Olympics: 1 Gold and many top placings - no. 2 behind Great Britain
87 Worlds: 3 Gold
88 Olympics: 4 Gold - 2 Silver - 1 Bronze
Behind Great Britain, Kenya was the no. 2 nation in the 1980s (adding Cross Country and much more global outdoor titles, some might argue they were no. 1).
Kenya was never behind Japan or Tanzania. And after around 1964, Kenya never was behind Australia and New Zealand.
Well, almost no humans broke 2:09 before EPO, so that is sort of a slam against humanity, not East Africa.
I agree with you that loads of people dope and people who are not tested as much certainly dope more than folks who are tested. We don't disagree.
But it is a huge reach to say there is no genetic advantage to being built like Salomon Barega, for example (who ran 60 flat in the Half on a whim). He was 21 and training for the 5km. How do you think he runs the way he does? The answer is genetic talent. If he were to also dope, that would make him even faster.
But one does not cancel out the other. He can have a genetic advantage and dope as well. This goes for all of East Africa.
In any case, we know that doping can't be all that important in the marathon because 1) not many Japanese, Brits, and Australians, and all non-Africans worldwide, have run faster than the 1980s times of Carlos Lopes and Steve Jones, and 2) the Australian scientists found that the marathon was the "least suspicious" event by far, at least with respect to suspected blood doping, in the years between 2001-2012, when East Africans started creating a significant performance gap from both North Africans and non-Africans.
This is also reeks of desparation, while simultaneously historically ignorant, observation.
Did you seriously just write that doping can't be important in the marathon because some people in the 80s were almost as fast?
And because other disciplines may be even dirtier?
In any case, we know that doping can't be all that important in the marathon because 1) not many Japanese, Brits, and Australians, and all non-Africans worldwide, have run faster than the 1980s times of Carlos Lopes and Steve Jones, and 2) the Australian scientists found that the marathon was the "least suspicious" event by far, at least with respect to suspected blood doping, in the years between 2001-2012, when East Africans started creating a significant performance gap from both North Africans and non-Africans.
This is also reeks of desparation, while simultaneously historically ignorant, observation.
Did you seriously just write that doping can't be important in the marathon because some people in the 80s were almost as fast?
And because other disciplines may be even dirtier?
"we know"??? Hahahahahahahahahahaha!
Come on, at least pretend to be a serious poster.
Careful, I said 1980s performances were almost as fast as the fastest non-Africans and North Africans of all time, within about 1 minute, more or less, of the fastest top-5, but the 1980s are not nearly as fast as the fastest East Africans, who were some 4 minutes faster, before supershoes. Recall this thread is about East African superiority, and the inferiority of the non-Africans in the marathon is already given.
Rather than historically ignorant, these are the conclusions of looking at three decades of all of the fastest worldwide marathon performances, up until 2018, and the conclusions derived from two well-known Australian researchers looking at the results of 12 years of more than 12000 blood results from more than 5000 athletes.
Thanks to Lance Armstrong and his charismatic ability to persuade, EPO is widely believed to have powerful endurance enhancing effects which should allegedly favor the marathon. And yet, by 2018, compared to the best of the '80s, only 6 non-Africans had run faster, and 12 non-Africans had run faster -- a combined population representing 90% of the world population -- in the entirety of the EPO-era spanning nearly three decades, and then, only by about a minute. By comparison there were 183 East Africans, with the fastest more than 4 minutes faster.
If EPO-era doping, in any combination, could significantly help the marathon -- Coevett says up to 10 minutes -- and some people believe that doping prevalence was likely greater than 44% in a World Championship in 2011 -- at least some non-Africans and North Africans should be able to replicate the high quality of East African performances.
Also significantly relevant, was the analysis of 12 years of blood data of 5000 athletes from 2001-2012, when East Africans started creating a performance gap. 8 out of 9 World Championship medals and Olympic medals were won by athletes who were never "suspicious" of blood-doping over that entire period.
I generously say "we know", knowing full well that some of you lack the knowledge.
I would be happy if anyone could rebut these statements with conclusively contradictory facts and evidence, but most are posters like you, who just want to laugh.
Thanks to Lance Armstrong and his charismatic ability to persuade, EPO is widely believed to have powerful endurance enhancing effects which should allegedly favor the marathon. And yet, by 2018, compared to the best of the '80s, only 6 non-Africans had run faster, and 12 non-Africans had run faster -- a combined population representing 90% of the world population -- in the entirety of the EPO-era spanning nearly three decades, and then, only by about a minute. By comparison there were 183 East Africans, with the fastest more than 4 minutes faster.
You are a complete imbecile (or a skillfull paid troll).
In the one paragraph, you claim that the universal belief, accepted by the scientific community, the anti-doping community, the athletic community, that EPO aids performance in distance running, is all down to Lance Armstrong. Then you follow that with a conclusion based on the unstated premise that all nations dope equally, despite 200 doping busts in Kenya compared to a handful elsewhere (outside of Russia).
Your idiocy knows no ends. Not every single athlete is or can be tested every year - bit that does not make testing data "incomplete". What the 40% figure shows is that amongst the higher tier of athletes who are tested Kenya far outstrips any other nation for testing positives. No one has any interest in the occasional juiced hobby jogger. But more significantly, NO KENYAN AT AN OFFICIAL LEVEL DISPUTES THE 40% FIGURE. Your arguments are your fantasies.
You are right -- that is not what makes it incomplete. What makes it incomplete is that the AIU doesn't include data from NADOs and RADOs.
Before you can compare Kenya to other countries, you need to normalize the data.
The AIU draws on data from WADA, which includes data from all sources on testing.
But the fact remains you can produce no data that shows Kenya has not incurred 40% of doping positives over 2022. No source has contested the 40% figure or claimed that it misrepresents Kenya's position - and NO ONE FROM KENYA, who would have every reason to do so if it was misleading.
If there is any other data that might be included you don't know what that data might show. Ultimately, however, your intention is to suggest that Kenyan doping is far less than what the 40% figure represents. You can produce nothing that shows that.
This is also reeks of desparation, while simultaneously historically ignorant, observation.
Did you seriously just write that doping can't be important in the marathon because some people in the 80s were almost as fast?
And because other disciplines may be even dirtier?
"we know"??? Hahahahahahahahahahaha!
Come on, at least pretend to be a serious poster.
Careful, I said 1980s performances were almost as fast as the fastest non-Africans and North Africans of all time, within about 1 minute, more or less, of the fastest top-5, but the 1980s are not nearly as fast as the fastest East Africans, who were some 4 minutes faster, before supershoes. Recall this thread is about East African superiority, and the inferiority of the non-Africans in the marathon is already given.
Rather than historically ignorant, these are the conclusions of looking at three decades of all of the fastest worldwide marathon performances, up until 2018, and the conclusions derived from two well-known Australian researchers looking at the results of 12 years of more than 12000 blood results from more than 5000 athletes.
Thanks to Lance Armstrong and his charismatic ability to persuade, EPO is widely believed to have powerful endurance enhancing effects which should allegedly favor the marathon. And yet, by 2018, compared to the best of the '80s, only 6 non-Africans had run faster, and 12 non-Africans had run faster -- a combined population representing 90% of the world population -- in the entirety of the EPO-era spanning nearly three decades, and then, only by about a minute. By comparison there were 183 East Africans, with the fastest more than 4 minutes faster.
If EPO-era doping, in any combination, could significantly help the marathon -- Coevett says up to 10 minutes -- and some people believe that doping prevalence was likely greater than 44% in a World Championship in 2011 -- at least some non-Africans and North Africans should be able to replicate the high quality of East African performances.
Also significantly relevant, was the analysis of 12 years of blood data of 5000 athletes from 2001-2012, when East Africans started creating a performance gap. 8 out of 9 World Championship medals and Olympic medals were won by athletes who were never "suspicious" of blood-doping over that entire period.
I generously say "we know", knowing full well that some of you lack the knowledge.
I would be happy if anyone could rebut these statements with conclusively contradictory facts and evidence, but most are posters like you, who just want to laugh.
In all your "data", who outside Armstrong do you rely upon to observe the effects of EPO? It appears you are doing exactly what you accuse others of, which is to come to conclusions about the effects of a drug based solely in how fast they ran - or didn't - without knowing who was using the drug. You have absolutely no data on who was doping and who wasnt - yet you claim to know EPO's effects in the marathon. Very scientific.
Thanks to Lance Armstrong and his charismatic ability to persuade, EPO is widely believed to have powerful endurance enhancing effects which should allegedly favor the marathon. And yet, by 2018, compared to the best of the '80s, only 6 non-Africans had run faster, and 12 non-Africans had run faster -- a combined population representing 90% of the world population -- in the entirety of the EPO-era spanning nearly three decades, and then, only by about a minute. By comparison there were 183 East Africans, with the fastest more than 4 minutes faster.
You are a complete imbecile (or a skillfull paid troll).
In the one paragraph, you claim that the universal belief, accepted by the scientific community, the anti-doping community, the athletic community, that EPO aids performance in distance running, is all down to Lance Armstrong. Then you follow that with a conclusion based on the unstated premise that all nations dope equally, despite 200 doping busts in Kenya compared to a handful elsewhere (outside of Russia).
Wrong on all counts.
To be fair, Lance, and cycling, just helped sell it to a persuadable public -- the real credit belongs to pioneers like Conconi and Ferrarri, who convinced Lance.
What is this weird unstated premise again -- why do you keep repeating your fabricated lie? I don't need "all nations", but just one, or even a few athletes. We know testing in the 1990s could not detect EPO, blood transfusions or HGH -- WORLDWIDE, and afterwards, before the ABP, was easy to beat -- WORLDWIDE. We saw that Kenyan and Ethiopian blood doping, over a 12 year period, was below the global average -- non-Africans are doping more!
But among non-Africans, and North Africans, we have "too few and by too little" fast marathon performances. Historically Russia outdoped Kenya by far, yet did not outperform Japan, one of the least suspicious nations. And Morocco's and Spain's reputation for doping far exceeds its reputation for the marathon. Even if you want to believe 40% of doping athletes are Kenyans in 2022, that means the rest of the world is the remaining 60%. And we saw that, according to WADA, Kenyan ADRVs was 12% in 2019, meaning the rest of the world comprised 88% of WADA ADRVs.
Your stated, yet baseless, premise is that only East Africans are doping, and they are doping more, while all non-African and North African marathon runners cannot dope enough to beat the 1980s performances, with only a dozen and a half exceptions.
Your long list sounds like you believe you are on the side of experts who share your beliefs. Recall:
- the scientific community has never studied doping performance effects in the marathon. Not on experts, and not on amateurs. Not ever. Any scientific suggestion of benefit is speculation based on some other metric, like VO2max, or increased Time to Exhaustion, as if these things will necessarily improve elite real world marathon times.
- the anti-doping community is more concerned with creating and enforcing rules, than establishing performance benefit. They are content with a subjective assessment of "potential to enhance performance" -- never quite establishing that any PED even exists for these elite marathon runners. Perhaps that explains why WADA funded studies attemping to establish such a peformance benefit are of such poor quality, often lacking controls, and control groups, performed on the wrong subjects in the wrong states under the wrong conditions, measuring the wrong things.
- the athletic community, as well as tabloids and the public, is easily persuaded by the word of mouth beliefs of other athletes, like Lance Armstrong, not waiting for robust scientific confirmation.
The bottom line is that, notwithstanding expert theoretical speculation, in practice, in the real world, among non-Africans and North Africans, we haven't seen significantly better marathon performances from nations which are known to dope.