sam1196 wrote:
i didn't find the correct thread or subforum for this, but I have a few questions:
A doping topic, I hate those topics.
sam1196 wrote:
1: are there sports who are totally clean? except for sports like Darts, etc...
Philosophically, you can never prove the non existence of something. So nobody can seriously tell you that a sport is totally clean. Or that person is a blatant liar, or merely a misguided or misinformed person.
Darts ? It's like shooting, you need to focus, you must reduce your heart rate, you mustn't shiver or you'll miss your movement and your dart or bullet will miss its target. Beta-blocking products and other products affecting the functioning of the nervous system are a first choice product for a benefit in these sports.
sam1196 wrote:
2: Is football (soccer) clean? Are players tested afer each match?
No, definitely not. And no either. Top leagues in most countries have antidoping tests, but it's only 2 players or 2 players per team and per match. And, of course, as in every doping test, they can't test for every single product on Earth, so they target a couple of them only. Depending on how much you trust them, feel free to think they're searching for EPO or for products whose production ended 30 years ago. They don't have the bio passport or Adams system (location system) either. They refused it.
sam1196 wrote:
3: Is there doping in sports who don't require physical action like Horse riding or F1? I mean where you have to control something.
Same thing as darts or shooting above. Plus, of course, F1 or motor sport is a very physical sport. Word was that Alonso was a Fuentes customer. Which wouldn't surprise me that much if the guy can ride for 3 hours with the pros at Cervelo or do stuff like that. If you've ever cycled with someone half competitive that'd give you an idea of his physical ability.
Plus when you're more comfortable physically you think better and control better. It's easier to make the right decision when you're not wanting to throw up or spit your lungs out.
I know it's only a half good example, but Google for Thomas Enge, that should learn you a few things.
sam1196 wrote:
4: Is there doping for horses in horse riding and are they tested?
Docteur Mabuse (there's a pun in his name/nickname, Mabuse sounds like "m'abuse" which means "abuses me" in French) was a specialist in horses doping before he taught cyclists a few things. You don't want to know how far some cyclists are ready to go to gain an unfair advantage at the expense of their health (trying products meant for horse doping, etc.).
sam1196 wrote:
5: Is GenDoping already active?
Unsure. 12 or 15 years ago (damn, I'm old now), it was rumoured to be around already, and surely the first cases would soon be known. 15 years later the same rumours are around, but nothing has been shown yet.
When there's a big doping scandal involving big names, what we see is that the products are still more or less the same, it's only the method to use them that has improved, and of course the dosing that has been reduced because of better controls.
sam1196 wrote:
6: Is it true that the use of growth-hormones indeed improving balance? I've read somewhere that that is one of Messi's secrets.
"No, he's pure talent, he can't be doped, plus there's no doping in football, it's useless there." Just kidding (yes that couldn't be serious, sorry...).
I don't think you can tweak your inner ear with doping (HGH or something else), but to keep your balance you need strength, which comes from muscles, which you may grow much more easily with HGH (human growth hormone).
Look at Messi's muscles, plus at the fact that he was so short he was stuffed with loads of HGH in his youth, plus at the large doping use and abuse in football and/or in Spanish sport, and that doesn't draw such an idyllic picture...
Levi4life wrote:
Don't growth hormones have health consequences?
Like most hormonal tweaking. You know what's going to happen on the short term, but you can't be certain about what happens on the long term. I mean you could develop some weird diseases, cancers or such things.
Of course there's other consequences, such as having your bones growing again when you're not supposed to, having your cheek bones, chin, forehead, jaws, etc. become massive (French swimmers, hello), your feet growing, etc.
That doesn't range as health consequences strictly-speaking, but it's close to.
Kinda sad to hear all this.
Is there a solution than, i mean it looks like an athlete can just take some kind of legal medication which does increase his performances. And to me it now looks like there's a drug for every possible aspect in sports.
Could it be a solution to do some kind of a zero-tolerance, that you may not compete if there's someting not natural in your blood? Even if it's a product that is used for an injury orso, just ban him untill hes blood is clean?
Yes you can argue with the Contador-case now, infected cows etc. but that wouldn't be a problem with a zero-tolerance i guess?
I'm afraid it's not that simple.
Some products cannot be detected, so how would a zero tolerance policy work on those ? It wouldn't.
Many, if not all, products keep having effects long after their detection window is done, so how are you going to use a zero-tolerance policy on that ? It doesn't apply there.
Then there's the problem of hormones or physiological parameters that are known to fluctuate between some thresholds, but as pro cyclists or athletes are exceptional people how are you going to apply a zero-tolerance policy on them if they go above a certain number ? There'd be a risk of mixing the cause and the consequence.
About keeping a rider out of competition if he has to be healed, it's already case if the product is a corticosteroid and the rider's team belongs to the MPCC. For other products it's not case, as far as I know, but there are amounts of products that are tolerated (like for asthma). You can't prevent asthmatics from starting races because practising endurance at a high level makes many people develop asthma. Of course there are riders abusing it or claiming a non existing asthma (that's just one example).
I'm afraid we'll have to live with what we have or an improved version of it, I can't see a magical solution against doping.
About horseracing, a Norwegian horse tested positive in the olympics. Had some kind of cream on it's feet to make it jump higher. Remember it since my sister is a big horsegirl :-p
Jesleyh wrote:
I don't know all the answers, but I'll try to answer some of them...
1: Yeah, I read a story about a sport with a great testing system etc... I think it was Tennis. So yes, a clean sport is possible...
2: No, football is not clean. Although I'm sure it's cleaner than cycling. There are tests sometimes I think, but not after each match...
4: Yes, there is dope for horses, not sure about tests etc...
6: Maybe they do slightly increase balance, but seriously, It's not Messi's secret, his secret it talent
There may well be a sport with a great testing system but it's definitely not tennis
Just kidding (yes that couldn't be serious, sorry...).
