Drug Testing at BiRC?

[TomR]

Testosterone is said to increase libido, thus for us grown-ups, the right dope could improve the two most important things in life, sex and erging.

Tom

[Ray79]

Given the amount of chocolate I eat, I have wondered if this would somehow make me fail a drug test if I were ever tested, especially when you keep hearing how ones fail tests

You should be alright Jon, Caffiene was taken off the WADA list this year I believe, so as much coffee as you can drink and as much chocolate as you can eat is fine.

Just as well cause I love both too much

[Chad Williams]

removed

[Ray79]

Removed - Wrong thread

[Chad Williams]

removed

[hjs]

What dope would you suggest for a 2K race? And what to mask it?

Tom

It is no good doping for a one single race, it is more beneficial to dope while training, be clean for races.

This coming from experience or knowledge? Perhaps inference from the "Live high, train low" theory of altitude training?

I'm certain that the highest levels of performance can be achieved without all of what we are finding out goes on, but perhaps the "I want it now." mentatlity has taken over from good old fashioned "hard work".

Sad.

]

epo can increase your cv around 10 %. This on top of your max. performances. It is how it is.

[hjs]

My understanding is that steroids/testosterone speed recovery and thereby enable the doper to train harder. You would want to use these substances in the months preceding the race. I have no idea how quickly the system clears steroids or what masking agents are effective. I didn't realize they could test for synthetic testosterone until the Landis story broke.

A stimulant like ephedrine presumably could be used on race day, but would surely show up in a piss test. I've no idea how much improvement it could produce. Psuedoephedrine is common in cold medicines, which is why you don't want to take cold pills if you're going to be tested.

Tom

testosterone makes you more "manly" Therefor woman gain the most. There are all sort of testosterone esters. some can be detacted for weeks others (who are less dangerous) for month's.
Your naturall abilitie to produce will suffer. In the longer run You will almost 100 % certain suffer severe side effect's. Only moderate and very well monitered use can be relative safe.

[rowan]

I'm certain that the highest levels of performance can be achieved without all of what we are finding out goes on, but perhaps the "I want it now." mentatlity has taken over from good old fashioned "hard work".

]

epo can increase your cv around 10 %. This on top of your max. performances. It is how it is.

I was also under the impression that doping (epo, anabolic steroids etc) can produce performances far in excess of a person's genetic potential, depending on the sport in question.

Remember Ben Johnson running 9.79 in 1988 (the record today is 9.77) for the 100m at the Olympics? He destroyed the rest of the field, the guy in number two spot (Carl Lewis) was way off.
Johnson tested positive for anabolics after the race and was banned for a couple of years, and then came back to competing but never reached his best form again.
He tested positive for steroids again a couple of years after his failed comeback.

[hjs]

I'm certain that the highest levels of performance can be achieved without all of what we are finding out goes on, but perhaps the "I want it now." mentatlity has taken over from good old fashioned "hard work".

]

epo can increase your cv around 10 %. This on top of your max. performances. It is how it is.

I was also under the impression that doping (epo, anabolic steroids etc) can produce performances far in excess of a person's genetic potential, depending on the sport in question.

nono. doping doesn,t do that much on the fast event's. Jonhson ran close to 10 flat clean. a few % slower only.
in 1936 Berlin Jesse owens ran close to 10.0 on clay. In does days doping didn,t exist so 100 % clean. he would still be among the very best.
Doping does help, yes but only for the last few %.
The role op doping is far less then ,Joe sixpac lying on his couch, thinks
Talent and smart hard work is the most important factor.

Remember Ben Johnson running 9.79 in 1988 (the record today is 9.77) for the 100m at the Olympics? He destroyed the rest of the field, the guy in number two spot (Carl Lewis) was way off.
Johnson tested positive for anabolics after the race and was banned for a couple of years, and then came back to competing but never reached his best form again.
He tested positive for steroids again a couple of years after his failed comeback.

[row4life]

Do the organisers at BiRC & WiRC arrange for medal winners and/or random competitors to be drug tested before/after the event?

Whaddya worried? Get off the juice putz.

[Chad Williams]

Do the organisers at BiRC & WiRC arrange for medal winners and/or random competitors to be drug tested before/after the event?

Whaddya worried? Get off the juice putz.

They can test away, they wont find any in my system.

[nkoffler]

My comments on an interesting but characteristically provocative question by Chad.

1) It doesn't sound as if there is testing at any of the major indoor events.

2) One likely reason for the absence of this is cost. Also, if competitors were to be tested, consent forms would be needed along with entry waivers.

3) Any national level OTW rower is already within the testing universe for rowing competition and the Olympics.

4) Anyone outside of #3 who actually is doping would be beyond pathetic.

5) Anyone who is concerned about being beaten by a pathetic doper in this context should take a step back and re-examine their reasons for erging.

[Rockin Roland]

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ COST is what's stopping C2 from drug testing.

My wife is a forensic scientist and tells me all about the drug testing she does at work at the dinner table every night.

It's too involved and cost prohibitive for C2 to do it on any grand scale. You need qualified people to be present at the venue during the initial urine samples. Samples have to be accurately labelled and transported to a lab for testing. A basic screen test in a lab will cost $75.00. If that proves positive then further testing processes are carried out which blow the cost out to $300.00. No point just testing the winner and passing the trophy/medal onto another drug cheat (that wasn't tested).

In the meantime the race winner has boarded a plane for home with their Crash B Hammer and the race results are seen all around the world via the C2 website. How would C2 go about breaking the news of a positive test, null the result and get the hammer back for the 2nd place getter.

Then there could be an appeal protest against the drug test finding meaning further testing and further cost blow out.

In order to cover the cost of drug testing C2 would either have to cover it out of their own pocket or increase the cost of race entries. If race entries became too expensive the number of people attending may drop.

To be fair you would have to test all the different age categories including the "Mickey Mouse" over 50s lightweight categories. It would be wrong to assume that those in the Open categories are the only ones with any desire to cheat.

At the moment there is nothing to stop a Chad or a Dwayne from loading up with drugs and rocking up to an event and blowing the World record away. Especially with their rivalry being so well publicised whose going to make sure that they compete on a level playing field.

The World swimming championships will be held in Australia next year. However the lab that did the testing for the Sydney Olympics will not be doing the drug testing there due to cost. The samples will be sent to another country for testing to save money.

[danwho]

Well, you were going along fine until you got to
[color=red]including the "Mickey Mouse" over 50s lightweight categories[/color]
Them's fighting words - I'm sure unintended.

[mpukita]

Who started this thread, and why? Just curious.