Androgen gel defended by trackster who may forgo nationals
A gentleman wrote me the other day about his experience with androgen gel, “under the direction of my physician, [which] is totally legal under general law. If I were to just buy it on the black market, and use it without a doctor’s control, it would be illegal. Medical advancements, especially when it comes to issues of aging, have made it possible to correct conditions that were untreatable in the past. As Mr. Robbins points out, the rules of track and field with regard to masters, are still stuck someplace in the 20th century.” The athlete, who didn’t want to be identified for fear of putting a “target on my back,” shared a chronology of sprint marks along with another man he ran with. They both slowed down the same over the years. So he contends the gel didn’t help him. He also wrote me a long note (see below). What do you think of his arguments?
Products like this raise questions in masters track, despite their health value.
My correspondent writes:
I guess I had hoped for a more in depth report about the effects of PED’s from Pete Magill in his Running Times column, but he only seemed to rehash what has already been debated within your blog. I’m not sure if he spoke to any other experts in the field besides Dr. Brown, but other doctors that have commented on your blog site seem to agree that using androgen gels, to bring testosterone deficient athletes levels to a normal-low normal range, does not give the athlete an unfair advantage.
I’m still amazed reading the replies from people with the anti-PED bias, of how the mere ingestion of such drugs somehow turns you into a superhuman competitor.
I’m not a scientist and I understand that our testosterone levels decrease as we age, but most men in masters track will likely still fall in the 350-500 ng/dL range. Testosterone deficient individuals such as myself are in the 50-100ng/dL range. With the use of androgen gels my doctor has me back in the 275-350 ng/dL range. This increase allows me to function better in work, sport, and my daily life. It allows me to train again which is good for my overall health, but doesn’t seem to have given me the super performances that some think I would have.
My doctor also tests me every 3 months to monitor the level of my
testosterone, but to also watch for any side effects from the drug, or the other drugs he has me on (anti-gout medication and cholesterol medication).It’s true that people could abuse the drug. I could boost my levels to above the 500ng/dL to gain an advantage, but if rules were in place to allow us to compete, I’d gladly take a blood test either prior to, or at the meet, to verify my level of testosterone.
I totally disagree with Dr. Brown’s statement that any use of testosterone
supplements provides an unfair advantage. I have not seen any increase, either minor or major in my own personal performances.I guess until clearer thinking people examine this issue in more detail, and come up with a fair solution, I’ll need to stay away from the national meets where they test. I think as I’ve gotten older, I’m losing the desire to compete nationally anyway, so I’ll stick to mainly local meets and road races and probably go back to age-group soccer. After all, this is about health and having fun, not winning at all and any cost.
46 Responses
The true measure of the effects of the testosterone is not a comparison between the anonymous user of testosterone and someone in his age group over the years, but a comparison of the anonymous user with himself with and without the testosterone supplementation. The difference between the performance with and without supplementation is the advantage gained by supplementation. If the user stopped taking the testosterone and saw no performance decline then his argument that the testosterone gave him no advantage would be correct. Until anonymous user performed this test, they have no basis to say that the testosterone suppplementation gave them no advantage other than the fact that they disagree with proven scientific evidence.
I must say I have to disagree with Terry. I believe the argument for or against needs to be a little more nuanced. If I follow Terry’s reasoning properly, there should be no need for TUEs for chronic conditions, as it’s straight forward, if you need (prescription) medications that “might” aid your living (and your athletic performance)you shouldn’t be allowed to compete. If I’m asthmatic, and I take prescribed medication (with a TUE) that contains drugs that would “normally” enhance performance, I can’t compete. I see nothing unfair in bringing someone’s testosterone to “normal” levels. It is just another medical condition that is addressed and “should” be covered through a TUE.
I was not making an argument for or against the use of testorone, but rather trying to show how the anonymous user’s reasoning that testorone use had no effect on his performance is specious.
Ducan you are making a lot of assumptions that are simply not in my post. I simply argue that to not to believe that testorone has no effect on performance cannot be supported by sound reasoning.
Ken asked what we thought about the person’s reasoning, so that is what I wrote about.
TUE’s are the joke of the sporting world. Pro Athletes suffer “conditions” at ten times the rate of the general populations for those afflictions.
While it is nice that so many medically disadvantaged people wish to participate in sport, it seems to me that it is one more instance where people want there cake and eat it to. If you need the medication participate on your own. I know plenty of people who participate in sport without entering competition. If you want a medal so bad, go buy one. Realistically it will have the same value…
Terry, I apologize if I misinterpreted or misconstrued your post, but I did not read what you apparently did in “Mr Anonymous'” comments. Clearly he acknowledges it helps him ” … allows me to function better in work, sport, and my daily life…” And Bob, TUEs in the elite world vs Masters is a whole other discussion. I certainly believe there is a legitimate place for them in Masters. I consider myself extremely fortunate that at my age (63) I am on no prescription meds and don’t require a TUE. One day, this may change. But I would like to think there would be room for me to continue to participate (fairly) even if I should need some medication that in the elite world would be considered unethical.
Bob nailed it right on the head!
…and by the way Ken, why so many posts in the last couple of weeks over PEDs? Are you secretly lobbying to allow androgel and such products into Masters Track and field? Such a Giraldo Rivera style interview using an unidentified source, locked up in a safe house somewhere as if the Masters mafia were after him. I have to give Mr. Stephen Robbins credit in one thing. He is not shy about his passion and support for this arguement and doesn’t hide behind any veil or curtain in doing so. I may not agree with him at all, but I’d have a beer with the guy for having chutzpah. Just because one is losing their morning chub doesn’t justify using androgel. If the medical condition is way more serious than that like a lot are making it to sound, you then have bigger things to worry about than competing in masters track meets. I would argue a thousand times more for dropping Marijuana from the banned substance list for Masters as I’ve seen it help countless of older people dealing with physical pain and there is zero performance enhancement, or boost in testosterone…Oh crap, I’m anonymous too!!….just using Milton Girouard as my nom de plume ;~)
Just a quick note regarding post #2,
“If I’m asthmatic, and I take prescribed medication (with a TUE) that contains drugs that would “normally” enhance performance…”
The majority of prescribed medications for asthma treatment are no longer on the “prohibited” list and do not require a TUE.
Please see the latest details on the USADA website and their Global DRO
I know you were just trying to provide an example, but I thought this point deserved clarification as not to confuse athletes getting ready to participate in Bloomington.
Thanks Ace, I wasn’t aware of that. Quite proper for you to point that out.
And I agree 100% with Terry’s points…..the true measure of “enhanced” performance can only be measured against how that athlete would have performed without the drugs.
His acknowledgement that it helps him perform better in “work, sport, and my daily life…” but my times are declining at the same rate as my friends does not and cannot prove that his performance was not “enhanced” by the drug.
It’s a slippery slope that the sport cannot afford to enter – not even for Masters athletes…as the definition of normal testosterone levels can vary tremendously. Not to mention those Masters athletes that would take advantage of the rules and simply cycling on and off the drugs based on the National competition schedule (See Eddy Hellebuyck about 4 stories below). And the argument that “oh but it’s prescribed by a doctor” would not hold any water because anyone can find a doctor to support their “low testosterone” TUE.
I know this is a tough issue and it sucks, but the bottom line is you cannot compete at the National level if you are taking PED’s. The anonymous athlete has it right – probably best to continue competing in local and regional meets – if the love of sport and staying healthy are truly his goals.
Happily we have a gentleman like Bubba Sparks with very low testorone, no medicines and jumping a tremendous 3.81 with the pole.
The discussion started with someone saying the medicines help him in sport but do not help him in his running times. That’s logically a mess.
I just wanted to add something while i agree with Terry & Ace.
To try to measure yourself against someone else and then say you have gained nothing because your rate of decline is similar is ridiculous.
Every individual is different. In my case i do alot of cycling and it is easy to measure ones progress or decline. Although i train as hard as i ever have when i do a time trial on the same course as used in a local time trial race my times with age have dropped at a far greater rate than others my age. I was far better before and now i am far worse. I know most of these athletes and the greater part of them are not on drugs and neither am I.
So if i were to take drugs just so i could have a similar rate of decline as these other men i would be cheating and no one would know.
But that is not right! Just because i was better than they were years ago,i should not have the right to cheat to maintain my advantage over them.
I don’t care if it is 1st place or 55th place cheating is cheating.
Lets perform clinical studies on the effect of testosterone on the performance of aging athletes somewhere els , not on the master track. If testosterone would not improve performance, people would not take it.
After sliding slowly down the scales on my weight I went to the Dr. and he diagnosed me with Hypogonadism. My testosterone level was at 89ng. I lost 27 lbs over a four month period and was working out and eating like a mad man. i wasn’t losing body fat,I was losing muscle mass like crazy. After getting started on androgel it took me about six months to get my weight back. I am also monitored every 3 months and keep my levels around 325-350ng. My competition numbers have slowly fallen as I would expect with age. What people don’t realize is that continued low testosterone levels can lead to early heart attacks,alzheimers and strokes. This is a very serious problem for men. It is estimated that up to 4 million men suffer from this condition. I’m not cheating…I’m saving my life.
For the last time, serum testosterone levels are NOT an indicator of whether you have “too much,” “too little” or the “just right amount.”
There are people with high levels who exhibit symptoms of low testosterone, and people with low levels who are asymptomatic.
How your body USES testosterone is as, if not more, important than how much you have.
“Low Testosterone” is NOT a diagnosis, it’s a statistical statement that gets attached to an opinion.
LOL at Milton G!!!!
“Just because one is losing their morning chub”
Hahahaha!!!
Jim good for you on saving your life
that is the number one priority.
Now recognize there are just some things that you can/should no longer do. If it is a life threatening condition as you describe i am sure there is a TUE. However i question why would you want to compete against others.You can run a time trial and compare your times you know if it purely for the love of running. Thats what i do and i am not on medication.You might think it is harsh but why would you if your life is threatened by your condition?Is saving your life not worth the sacrifice of National competition? I am sure there are alot of things you should not do, focus on what you can do. Train like a madman, just do not try to line up against someone who is trying to compete without any assistance whatsoever.
We do not allow blind people to drive even if they are blind through no fault of their own.
I am sorry about your condition but be glad you are alive and make the most of it
Bob: The quest for medals is not the only reason someone might want to compete in meets rather than partake of a time-trial at home. There’s the social aspect (meeting up with old friends and making new ones); having goals (the joy of a good challenge–like making the finals at Nationals); regaining your youth (the opportunity to relive our experiences from high school or college); and travel (going to new places).
You’re correct that we don’t allow blind people to drive even if it is through no fault of their own; but would you deprive those blind people of a patch or shot that would allow them to regain their sight and drive again?
I continue to think that we need to be more sensitive to older individuals (particularly those 75 and up), with low-T levels, who want to compete, but whose doctors recommend that they take a supplement to raise their T-levels into the low-normal range.
Just in case I haven’t angered Terry, Milan, Milton, Ace et al enough, let me ask: Where is your compassion for others less fortunate? We need to stop holding 75-year old masters’ athletes to the same standards as 25-year old Olympians. Contrary to Milan’s comment, not everyone taking testosterone supplements is trying to improve athletic performance. As you’re seeing in some of these postings, it can be for health and quality-of-life. Isn’t there some middle ground we can agree on? Could we start by saying that men over 75 who test positive for a testosterone supplement, if under a doctor’s recommendation and prescription, get a pass as long as their test reading is within the norm for their age?
@Stephen-
No offense taken. As I stated, it’s a less than ideal situation for which resolution will not be easy. This is precisely the reason that WADA, USADA, USATF and all other governing bodies have taken the “black & white” approach. But if you exempt M75 athletes, you better believe that it will only be a matter of time before M70, and then M65, and then M60, etc., etc., will be seeking the same relief.
I would be all for the “self-declare” clause that would allow these athletes to declare use via the TUE process and if approved – be allowed to compete with the noted exception that they cannot medal, score points for a team, set records, etc.
Tough topic, but one for which the slippery slope must be avoided.
I agree with the statement ” is a nationals medal really worth it?”, but how about having that logic coming from the point of view of the person who does not need / want a TUE or PED? What I mean is who cares who else is out there and how roided up they are – we are masters athletes and all that really matters is how we do compared to ourselves. The medals, team scores, A-A awards and all of that are nice, but are they really the reason we go to a national meet? I will be LUCKY to run within 2.00 seconds of the 200 meter time I ran in 2006 at Reggie, yet I am going to Indy to run as fast as I can (due to a medical condition – and I am going to load up on Advil!!) but mostly to get into a meet and get that feeling you get when you compete. I will also enjoy the social aspect of the meet. Time trials just don’t cut it and can’t compare. Sorry I disagree with most of y’all.
I agree with you, Dan. Especially this point:
“What I mean is who cares who else is out there and how roided up they are…”
You can only control yourself. Why worry about others?
Sure, the next post will be about not getting a record due to someone else setting it while being “on something”. Come on!!! How many potentially legitimate records are not ratified as it is?! You’ve got a MUCH better chance of not getting a record ratified by USATF for *any* reason than you do of losing it to someone who may have cheated.
Let’s get back to the basics here. If any individual has permission to use forms or steriods for health reasons and is also allowed to compete in Masters Track competitions for records and medals, that individual has an advantage over non-users. He/She can abuse the prescriptions at times to elevate his training treshold and performance level. When it is close to the time to compete, He/She can back off the drugs to pass tests at competitions. There simply cannot be pairity in sports competitions when some indiviuals are allowed to use PEDs and others or not (REGARDLESS OF THE REASON(S) FOR USING THE P.E.D.S) it is an advantage.
I’m against banning athletes using PEDs from competitions, I just want all to acknowledge that it is an advantage. It gives the users performance power over the non-users.
Is this you, Terry Parks? If so, 54.42 is smokin’ for having low testosterone levels. Great job!
Event 17 M45 400 Meter Dash
===================================================================
Name Age Team Finals H#
===================================================================
1 Lawson, James M47 Unattached 53.93 2
2 Parks, Terry M47 Foster City, CA 54.42 2
3 Barlow, Jeff M48 Unattached 57.58 2
4 Kalman, Donald M47 Davis, CA 1:00.17 2
5 Ols, Joseph M47 Los Gatos, CA 1:01.67 2
6 Holland, Doug M47 Union City, CA 1:02.53 3
Ok…I’ll meet Stephen and others in the middle if… you will also legalize the use of Pineapple Express (aka, Canibus) for athletes and I’ll back you on the HRT …deal?? P.S. Here in Colorado, we can get a doctor’s note as well saying we need to smoke the sticky bud as well…
as long as you don’t inhale…! ha…ha…!
@Stephen
you can enjoy the social aspect of track without competing, you can have goals , you can travel do almost everything you mention without competing.
Your analogy is all wrong,and you missed the point completely. Life is not divided equally in any way shape or form. But the rules we live by must be.
Sometimes we have to be adults and realize we cannot have everything we desire.Sometimes what you desire would come at the expense of others. How selfish to want to compete with assistance. It cheapens the efforts of other people who might have a greater deficiency than yourself but choose to play by the rules agreed to.
The rules say You have the opportunity to compete, you have the opportunity to take drugs, but you are forced to make a choice between the two. Life is not always fair, the point that you totally missed. You want tp have your cake and eat it too.Tough. Play by the rules or find other ways to participate.
one last thing
lets say i have gender identity issues
i would like to compete in womens events at nationals and i want my times recognized as records in those events.
Should i be allowed to compete as a woman and have any records recognized? Why not? that’s what i want and its not fair to have me compete as a man just because my body looks like one.
All the arguments aside for a moment…. My first response when seeing the post with it wonderful graphics is that It was a terrible day when the Pharm Industry was allowed to direct billion dollar ad campaigns against a public that seems to be afaid of everything .
No question , if you need testosterone for health reason – take it, but you will have an advantage over the athletes who do not take it. 99% of masters the competitions do not have drug testing. Compete there and do your social stuff there. Don’t compete at the nationals and world championships and do not submit records. That is just basic fairness.
I will hit the weight room 3-4 times a week and will try to increase my testosterone level that way.
Why is the Cenegenics/testosterone add appear on the mastertrack page when it is illegal in the competition? Is Cengenics paying money to masterstrack to have discussions like this?
I am with Milan, just heading to the weight room……also sunshine – Vit D helps raise males hormone levels so I have heard….From The Sunshine State Arizona, Sully
I think it’s great we’re having this discussion. But I also think it’s imperative we operate with a better understanding of the issue:
1. 90% of men (according to Dr. Brown, one of the top sports endocrinologists in the USA) diagnosed with low testoserone aren’t producing enough testosterone because of some other underlying condition. Prescribing testosterone treats the symptom, not the condition. So using testosterone isn’t a matter of improving one’s health; it’s the opposite. The condition must be diagnosed and treated, and then we can produce testosterone again.
2. While everyone seems to understand the vast range of what’s “normal” for testosterone levels (from around 300 up to 800), we seem to get off track from there. This doesn’t mean that setting a level of “300-350” would be a safe, low-end figure that would be fair to everyone. Some athletes would get a 100% benefit at that level, since it’s their normal maximum. Others, whose “normal” maximum might be 500, would operate at less than 100% (if suffering from low testosterone and using gel to reclaim “normal” levels). Still others, whose “normal” is less that 300, would get a boost that elevates their testosterone above their normal maximum level.
3. Those who use testosterone gel would get a continual boost of testosterone even while doing workouts that lower a non-user’s testosterone levels; as Dr. Brown noted in another article I did on hormones and training, “If you look at male hormone levels before, during, and after a very stressful run, they go down. The pituitary turns off the stimulation. To turn it back on, you have to recover. And the quicker you recover, the quicker you get male hormone levels back up.” With gel, you can boost your levels immediately. Given that the need for longer recovery post-workout is a hallmark of aging athletes, this gives anyone using gel (even those who produce zero testosterone on their own) an advantage over everyone who isn’t.
4. If “low” testosterone is an acceptable reason to use testosterone gel, then why shouldn’t someone whose “normal” level is 500 be allowed to raise their level to 500? And if so, what’s to stop someone whose normal level is 300 from also raising his to 500? There isn’t a meter that automatically tells you what your “normal” reading should be. Until there is, it’s impossible to set an upper limit for a “normal” low end of the testosterone range.
It is indeed a “slippery slope” when it comes to testosterone replacement, far more so than with many other drugs used by masters athletes.
With testosterone, we pretty much either accept its usage – or we don’t. If we accept it, some athletes will get a performance boost. If we don’t, the few athletes who actually need it are excluded from a sport that prides itself on inclusion.
Personally, I’m 100% against testosterone supplementation for athletes competing in championship meets. But I’m of the opposite opinion when it comes to other life-saving and health-enhancing therapies.
And I’m also this: willing to change my mind based upon better arguments and new evidence.
Pete,
I have some questions:
Re: your #1. Does this 90% refer to all men or only those above a certain age?
#2. Doesn’t the “normal” drop with age? So 500 might be normal for a 40-year old but 400 might be normal for a 60-year old?
#4. I thought “normal” referred to “relative to one’s age.” Or is normal held against some individual standard rather than age norms?
I personally think testosterone supplements should be illegal for anyone 65 or younger for reasons cited throughout this discussion. Given what I’ve read, natural decline really hits at 75. So I would argue that is where the rules should be changed. The area between 65 and 75 seems equivocal.
here we go again…
it’s illegal…period!!
we don’t compete under general law…
and beating dead horses makes no sense…
Stephen – You’re looking for a uniformity in testosterone range (based on age) that simply doesn’t exist. That’s the problem. It varies between men at every age. “Normal” for men is a range, not a stable ratio of testosterone to age. “Normal” for one man at age 30 might be only half (or less) the testosterone level of what’s “normal” for another man at the same age. It’s also “normal” to lose testosterone as we age. That’s not abnormal. And it’s not even always a bad thing.
Your assumption seems to be that testosterone supplementation is a healthy thing for all aging males. But I certainly haven’t seen any long-term studies to back that up. We do know that 17% of males will develop prostate cancer, and we know that testosterone supplementation would at best make that worse, and at worst prove deadly. It also raises LDL (bad cholesterol).
There’s no way to introduce a drug or supplement into our system and not affect the entire system in ways that go well beyond our target effect. We can make our long-term health much worse, not better.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, here’s yet another piece I did on hormone supplementation – this time directly targeting masters – with Dr. Brown as my go-to guy:
http://runningtimes.com/Article.aspx?ArticleID=20745
Look, I’m neither a doctor nor a research scientist. I’m not an expert. And I don’t pretend to be.
But we don’t have to be experts to realize that testosterone is a performance-enhancing drug. Or that it’s being over-prescribed to an aging population that either doesn’t need it or should be seeing a doctor whose willing to treat the actual cause of the testosterone decline. Or that it’s also a godsend to that small percentage of men who really can’t produce it and whose health is put in danger by that lack of production.
But as far as championship athletics are concerned, we don’t have to go beyond it being a PED. Until the rules are changed, competing while on testosterone supplementation without a TUE makes you a cheat. Do not pass GO. Do not collect a Gold Medal.
Pete- I hear you. And I don’t disagree with most of what you’re saying. My whole argument is focused on your sentence “…it’s also a godsend to that small percentage of men who really can’t produce it and whose health is put in danger by that lack of production.” Also, as I’ve noted previously, my concern is with a small subset of masters–those over 75. At 75+, the risks you mention may well be less important than the potential improvement in quality-of-life.
No argument also with the fact that anyone who currently uses a T-supplement is a cheat. As Shorter Than Frank noted, “It’s illegal, period!” But to STF, I say: times change. At one time, it was illegal to sell alcohol in bars and for women to vote.
Pete, I think you have outlined the situation very succinctly – that should be helpful to everyone.
I have three thoughts:
1. Even with the facts as you outlined them in your points #2 and 4 in post #34, I would like to think it would be possible to designate an acceptable level of supplementation (say to 200 in the 60-69 age group, 150 in the 70 and above age group) for which a TUE could be granted. I don’t have any problem competing against someone who needed a supplement to get their testosterone up to that level. People who get to higher levels than that with supplementation would be disqualified; people who get there on their own good luck are fine. The major problem sounds like use in between competitions to accelerate healing and muscle growth that might not be detectable at the time of competition. And as you noted, another problem might be just treating the symptom of a low testosterone level without getting a full evaluation to see if some more serious medical problem was the cause of that. So I think you have convinced me that as nice as it would be to allow those who are truly just trying to stay healthy to compete for medals, it can’t currently be done in a way that could prevent cheating or assure that good health was really the outcome of supplementation.
2. Any reason not to let folks who choose supplementation for any reason to self-declare that they are using a banned substance and still compete, but not be eligible for medals/records?
3. Any reason not to still pursue the idea of liberalizing the TUE process for drugs such as insulin and diuretics which might be PEDs or used to veil PED use in elite athletes but are eseential for health in many older athletes?
I have a feeling that most of the master athletes are against use of steroids in competition. A reminder (quoting Ken):
“online entry deadline for indoor masters nationals in Bloomington, Indiana, is 4 p.m. Eastern time Friday, Feb. 17. And: “Drug testing will be conducted at this event. Please review the information on drug testing on the meet website so you learn whether any medications you are taking may require a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) or are banned.”
Well, here we go again…
AMR!!! Welcome back! I had a feeling that Milton’s comment about the “morning chub” would force you out of retirement.
Hahaha!!
Milton’s request:
“if… you will also legalize the use of Pineapple Express (aka, Canibus) for athletes and I’ll back you on the HRT …deal??”
Dude, I’m all for the full legalization of weed. No big deal here.
It gives an unpleasant feeling that we cannot trust rankings to be free of artificially helped results. There are athletes who put their physical health above honesty and openness, a pity I think.
Medicines improve health and so improve athletic performance, but a few kinds of medicine can improve health to a level above your genetical possibilities. Steroids, EPO and some more. When using these ones do not compete, or compete and tell officials to keep you out of the official results.
Meeting friends while on steroids or so will never be forbidden, of course. In stead of competing you can also coach, film colleagues and place it on youtube, help officiating, the sport is there to join in in some way.
Robbins: “The quest for medals is not the only reason someone might want to compete in meets rather than partake of a time-trial at home. There’s…regaining your youth (the opportunity to relive our experiences from high school or college)”
Well, what can I say. That statement says it all.
“We need to stop holding 75-year old masters’ athletes to the same standards as 25-year old Olympians.”
Pete Magill: “With testosterone, we pretty much either accept its usage – or we don’t. If we accept it, some athletes will get a performance boost. If we don’t, the few athletes who actually need it are excluded from a sport that prides itself on inclusion.
Personally, I’m 100% against testosterone supplementation for athletes competing in championship meets.”
I agree regarding exclusion, but I think it should be extended to any sanctioned event where masters compete against non-masters athletes. The reason I favor exclusion is that I disagree with the implicit suggestion that the sport’s inclusiveness dimension is somehow its defining characteristic (see my rambling comment on another thread).
Pete, I see that you have now switched to a more rational basis for your opinions–and not surprisingly, that your opinions now accord more or less with my own, as expressed months ago on these boards. This is a welcome development.
Like me, you no doubt understand that the concepts that we are dealing with–including health, fitness, accommodation, discrimination, and others–must be balanced in some meaningful way, and that this requires an approach as near to first principles as we can reasonably get.
I think it should be stressed to everybody listening that neither Pete’s position, nor mine, is a simple knee-jerk emotional reaction to a perceived injustice, but instead the product of rational deliberation and considered thought.
After all, we are fully aware of the fact that WE will also be subject to these rules.
This is where the contrast with Stephen Robbins is particularly evident–statements of his like “”The quest for medals is not the only reason someone might want to compete in meets rather than partake of a time-trial at home. There’s…regaining your youth (the opportunity to relive our experiences from high school or college)” seem to me to come from a deep emotional place, that is well outside the province of rational thought.
I love T&F as much as anybody, but that statement is a cry for help. We’ve all got our problems, but they shouldn’t be allowed to guide policy.
And yes, I DO mean to isolate you, Stephen. Given your background, I assume that you wrote what you meant, and I wouldn’t be so ready to accept that you meant something else, or that your thoughts were poorly-expressed. I think that you said precisely what you meant to have said.
As for me, I don’t have such problems. I’m fine for now. Should the day come when I am faced with a decision that may constitute a rule violation, I can assure everybody that the T&F competition rules will have absolutely no bearing on what decision I will reach. If that decision constitutes a rule violation, then so be it–I will respect the other athletes in the sport and my own history of involvement, and will go gently into that good night, until such time as I am able to again comply with the rules–if ever.
Life is beautiful. My attitude toward you, Stephen, has changed remarkably–from that of initial incredulity, to disappointment, and now ultimately to pity. I actually feel sorry for you.
But that doesn’t change my attitude toward the issue of PED usage.
Hi Pete Magill… your go-to guy is not reliable.
#3 “…as Dr. Brown noted in another article I did on hormones and training, “If you look at male hormone levels before, during, and after a very stressful run, they go down. The pituitary turns off the stimulation. To turn it back on, you have to recover. And the quicker you recover, the quicker you get male hormone levels back up.” ”
This isn’t true, if you look at the published research. He may need to define “stressful”. Testosterone goes down after a marathon event/ultra run etc. It (typically) goes UP with sprint and interval type training. They count as “stressful” to me. It’s a similar mechanism at play with heavy resistance training – stimulates T.
Leave a Reply