Doping in Sport

[hemingway 7,633]

On SBS at 8.30. Might be worth a look. Post Tour, Pre Olympics, AFL. 

Discusses the health implications of doping. A reminder of the dangers from a health perspective. 

[old dee 24,028]

Just now, hemingway said:

On SBS at 8.30. Might be worth a look. Post Tour, Pre Olympics, AFL. 

Discusses the health implications of doping. A reminder of the dangers from a health perspective. 

Sadly that does not seem to deter them Ernest.

Drug taking has ruined my joy of watching sport.

[hemingway 7,633]

25 minutes ago, old dee said:

Sadly that does not seem to deter them Ernest.

Drug taking has ruined my joy of watching sport.

Heading the same way Old. 

[Lucifers Hero 40,574]

1 hour ago, hemingway said:

On SBS at 8.30. Might be worth a look. Post Tour, Pre Olympics, AFL. 

Discusses the health implications of doping. A reminder of the dangers from a health perspective. 

Very timely! 

The hue and cry is that it is all WADA's fault!! 

No not from EFC or its sycophants and not from the AFL nor AFLPA. 

Its is from the mouth of none other than the IOC President:  " Thomas Bach snapped at suggestions the committee's response to the crisis had been a huge failure, claiming it was "very obvious" where responsibility lay as a result of the "timing" of the WADA-commissioned report, which found Russia guilty of state-sponsored doping and a cover-up on a staggering scale".   http://www.theage.com.au/sport/olympics/rio-2016/russian-doping-scandal-threatens-to-turn-rio-olympics-launch-to-chaos-20160731-gqhzbw.html

Oh!  Bach said "...the IOC's decision not to ban the whole Russian team hasn't damaged the credibility of the Games and he denies his longstanding close personal ties with Russian officials influenced the outcome."

And we were worried that the AFL Tribunal was biased towards the players - small fry stuff in comparison to the IOC!

Absolutely shameful for him to deflect the IOC's incompetence and gutlessness onto WADA and he has totally trashed its credibility.  Shoot the Messenger!  Works every time. 

Bach has rung the death knell on clean sport, forever more. 

[hemingway 7,633]

8 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Very timely! 

The hue and cry is that it is all WADA's fault!! 

No not from EFC or its sycophants and not from the AFL nor AFLPA. 

Its is from the mouth of none other than the IOC President:  " Thomas Bach snapped at suggestions the committee's response to the crisis had been a huge failure, claiming it was "very obvious" where responsibility lay as a result of the "timing" of the WADA-commissioned report, which found Russia guilty of state-sponsored doping and a cover-up on a staggering scale".   http://www.theage.com.au/sport/olympics/rio-2016/russian-doping-scandal-threatens-to-turn-rio-olympics-launch-to-chaos-20160731-gqhzbw.html

Oh!  Bach said "...the IOC's decision not to ban the whole Russian team hasn't damaged the credibility of the Games and he denies his longstanding close personal ties with Russian officials influenced the outcome."

And we were worried that the AFL Tribunal was biased towards the players - small fry stuff in comparison to the IOC!

Absolutely shameful for him to deflect the IOC's incompetence and gutlessness onto WADA and he has totally trashed its credibility.  Shoot the Messenger!  Works every time. 

Bach has rung the death knell on clean sport, forever more. 

Not sure about that Lucifer but I share your emotional and strong reaction. It is a blow to clean sport but reflects the sordid reality of professional sport and the inherent conflicts of the umbrella organisations running their businesses with all the corporate and individual interests and self interest and the filter feeders at the bottom of the food chain, the individual athletes and those whose livelihoods depend on their success. Sorry I do the athletes a disservice, the filter feeders have to be the media and sports journalists most of whom can't speak the truth. However, it is the people in positions of power who pay lip service to the call for clean sport that should be condemned and called out for their hypocrisy. We see them at international level and we see them at the local level mouthing their platitudes and humbug. And we see the lies and deception at the coal face where coaches and athletes coexist in an unholy alliance. 

[Macca 17,120]

4 hours ago, hemingway said:

On SBS at 8.30. Might be worth a look. Post Tour, Pre Olympics, AFL. 

Discusses the health implications of doping. A reminder of the dangers from a health perspective. 

Learned very little from the show Hemingway but that doesn't mean the show wasn't of value to those who are totally ignorant of PED use.  So the show probably appealed to a very large audience

Good thread all the same H.  We needed a thread like this although it may not get a lot of traffic - that's just how things work with these sorts of issues.

Anyway, if the show was a 26 part series it might have scratched the surface but I saw the one hour show as quite unenlightening.  I'm tipping there are a huge amount of people who must have led very sheltered lives if they didn't already know about most of what was addressed in the show.  The health risks of using steroids?  What don't we know! East Germany anyone?

The focus being on 'athletes' instead of sportspeople in general was terribly misleading.  The presenter made very few references to the professional sports where the real PED issue is quite widespread (as outlined in the link below)  I suppose we should be thankful that he mentioned the 39 union & league players and the 50 NFL players (all in one year)  But it's a lot bigger than that. 

Many would have come away with a firm focus on the Olympics only.  My view is one of fairness - spread the pointed finger of guilt I say - and don't let any sport off the hook!

Drugbuster Pound says doping is so widespread that he no longer has faith in sport at the top

[Go the Biff 3,474]

11 minutes ago, Macca said:

Learned very little from the show Hemingway but that doesn't mean the show wasn't of value to those who are totally ignorant of PED use.  So the show probably appealed to a very large audience

Good thread all the same H.  We needed a thread like this although it may not get a lot of traffic - that's just how things work with these sorts of issues.

Anyway, if the show was a 26 part series it might have scratched the surface but I saw the one hour show as quite unenlightening.  I'm tipping there are a huge amount of people who must have led very sheltered lives if they didn't already know about most of what was addressed in the show.  The health risks of using steroids?  What don't we know! East Germany anyone?

The focus being on 'athletes' instead of sportspeople in general was terribly misleading.  The presenter made very few references to the professional sports where the real PED issue is quite widespread (as outlined in the link below)  I suppose we should be thankful that he mentioned the 39 union & league players and the 50 NFL players (all in one year)  But it's a lot bigger than that. 

Many would have come away with a firm focus on the Olympics only.  My view is one of fairness - spread the pointed finger of guilt I say - and don't let any sport off the hook!

Drugbuster Pound says doping is so widespread that he no longer has faith in sport at the top

A documentary following up the Iron Curtain athletes of the '70's would be fascinating. What the long term health effects were. What the rate of early deaths were etc. What was actually taken & what the doping regime was - from childhood ?

Doubt it could ever happen though - I'd expect few records survived. Now we're probably just left with a few old ladies scratching their balls

[beelzebub 23,390]

5 hours ago, old dee said:

Sadly that does not seem to deter them Ernest.

Drug taking has ruined my joy of watching sport.

Stop taking them !! 

[Adzman 2,154]

Drugs are bad mmmkay. You shouldn't use drugs mmmkay. 

 

[Macca 17,120]

1 minute ago, Go the Biff said:

A documentary following up the Iron Curtain athletes of the '70's would be fascinating. What the long term health effects were. What the rate of early deaths were etc. What was actually taken & what the doping regime was - from childhood ?

Doubt it could ever happen though - I'd expect few records survived. Now we're probably just left with a few old ladies scratching their balls

Ha! ... most of the previous stuff will go unreported for the reasons you outlined GtB.  Also, because there is no real thirst for the truth from the general public.  And that includes the happenings up until now.

Most either don't want to know about it or they simply have no interest in the behind the scenes goings on.  Oddly enough I came to terms with it all a long time ago and just continue to watch the sports regardless. 

[hemingway 7,633]

47 minutes ago, Macca said:

Learned very little from the show Hemingway but that doesn't mean the show wasn't of value to those who are totally ignorant of PED use.  So the show probably appealed to a very large audience

Good thread all the same H.  We needed a thread like this although it may not get a lot of traffic - that's just how things work with these sorts of issues.

Anyway, if the show was a 26 part series it might have scratched the surface but I saw the one hour show as quite unenlightening.  I'm tipping there are a huge amount of people who must have led very sheltered lives if they didn't already know about most of what was addressed in the show.  The health risks of using steroids?  What don't we know! East Germany anyone?

The focus being on 'athletes' instead of sportspeople in general was terribly misleading.  The presenter made very few references to the professional sports where the real PED issue is quite widespread (as outlined in the link below)  I suppose we should be thankful that he mentioned the 39 union & league players and the 50 NFL players (all in one year)  But it's a lot bigger than that. 

Many would have come away with a firm focus on the Olympics only.  My view is one of fairness - spread the pointed finger of guilt I say - and don't let any sport off the hook!

Drugbuster Pound says doping is so widespread that he no longer has faith in sport at the top

Agree Macca, a disappointing program. Some useful points. First, that the long term health effects of doping can be life threatening. Two, that many PED are untested and unregulated. Three, that there is a strong link between the criminal drug dealers and those pedalling PED. Four, that there are ever increasing ways to improve performance legally, as shown by the stimulation of brain cells to dull pain during exertion. It may be legal but is it ethical? It may be seen as a legal way to cheat! The admission that this technology was being used. Five, that science is finding increasing ways to boost performance legally (but ethically?). For someone who has loved sport and loved competitive sport, it was depressing. In regard to AFL, the EFC saga is a reflection of an out of control culture that permeates sport. 

[Macca 17,120]

1 hour ago, hemingway said:

Agree Macca, a disappointing program. Some useful points. First, that the long term health effects of doping can be life threatening. Two, that many PED are untested and unregulated. Three, that there is a strong link between the criminal drug dealers and those pedalling PED. Four, that there are ever increasing ways to improve performance legally, as shown by the stimulation of brain cells to dull pain during exertion. It may be legal but is it ethical? It may be seen as a legal way to cheat! The admission that this technology was being used. Five, that science is finding increasing ways to boost performance legally (but ethically?). For someone who has loved sport and loved competitive sport, it was depressing. In regard to AFL, the EFC saga is a reflection of an out of control culture that permeates sport. 

The after effects of these PED's is not something that I've ever given enough thought to but perhaps if the sporting bodies were all hell-bent on stopping their cheats then it wouldn't be another issue to add to the whole messy affair.  I just assumed that these PED's are always going to have long term health effects based on what we already knew. 

But again, it's not an issue that many are interested in 'H' ... if it was of high interest there would probably be a lot more information available.  As it stands, there's very little information available and that tells me a lot. 

The secretive world of PED use has a huge abundance of drug cheats, is 'virtually' sanctioned by the sporting bodies that these sportspeople are connected to, has very few if any whistle-blowers, so therefore, the public is kept in the dark.  It's the cover-up that makes it worse in my eyes. 

If people here want to look at 2 documentaries on PED use click on the following ... as I said, considering how big the issue is,  there's been surprisingly few exposés on the subject matter.  It's as if we've all collectively turned our backs on the whole affair. 

Cycling's Greatest Fraud - Lance Armstrong

Al Jazeera Investigates - The Dark Side of PED use

 

[old dee 24,028]

10 hours ago, beelzebub said:

Stop taking them !! 

I have you cut off my supply!

[hemingway 7,633]

1 hour ago, old dee said:

I have you cut off my supply!

Supply of single malt no doubt OD.

[hemingway 7,633]

10 hours ago, Macca said:

The after effects of these PED's is not something that I've ever given enough thought to but perhaps if the sporting bodies were all hell-bent on stopping their cheats then it wouldn't be another issue to add to the whole messy affair.  I just assumed that these PED's are always going to have long term health effects based on what we already knew. 

But again, it's not an issue that many are interested in 'H' ... if it was of high interest there would probably be a lot more information available.  As it stands, there's very little information available and that tells me a lot. 

The secretive world of PED use has a huge abundance of drug cheats, is 'virtually' sanctioned by the sporting bodies that these sportspeople are connected to, has very few if any whistle-blowers, so therefore, the public is kept in the dark.  It's the cover-up that makes it worse in my eyes. 

If people here want to look at 2 documentaries on PED use click on the following ... as I said, considering how big the issue is,  there's been surprisingly few exposés on the subject matter.  It's as if we've all collectively turned our backs on the whole affair. 

Cycling's Greatest Fraud - Lance Armstrong

Al Jazeera Investigates - The Dark Side of PED use

 

One can understand the inducement of the professional athlete and in fact sympathize to some degree because doping in all its forms has been normalized and accepted by those within sport. The financial inducement and the desperate desire of athletes to have contracts signed and endorsed, in short, to succeed, is huge. We have to accept that doping in many sports has been around for 50 to 100 years. It has waxed and waned but it has been around. We love our footy but anabolic steriods have been used since the 1970s in the weight rooms. So whilst not condoning EFC, the use of doping agents was predicated on the assumption that it was okay because everyone was doing it and that it was required to get a competitive edge on the opposition.  Perhaps an exaggeration but the assumption has some truth although perhaps not in the systemic program used by the EFC. 

However, the doco last night did elevate my consciousness to a new level. Clearly, the challenge now is dealing with the legal cheats. As more and more money comes into professional sport, there is now a major focus on research labs and scientists to legally find ways to obtain a competitive advantage. This is a whole new ethical and philosophical discussion. Is it cheating? What is cheating? In cycling, Team Sky has double the budget of any other world team. This gives them an enormous advantage over other teams. Is Chris Froome and his team clean? I suspect that technically they are because they would have so much to lose by doping given their public stance and the attitude of British Governments and that of the British cycling federation. However, the performance of Froome and his team looks very much like the past performances of Lance and his teams. But are they doping? I think not, but I suspect that they are way ahead in the area of research and sports science. They will have "trade secrets" that provide a competitive advantage to their cyclists and athletes. The performance of British athletes at the London Olympics suggested that they had a significant competitive advantage due to the money spent on preparation. This money is spent on the athletes, on facilities, on equipment, and on the most scientific methods of preparation.

So increasingly, there will be athletes that may not break the rules and avoid being outed as cheats, but nevertheless still gain a competitive advantage by using a substance or method that is outside the accepted norms of training and preparation. The use of new substances and methods is exploding as the pressure to succeed increases and more and more money is spent on sport.

 

[Macca 17,120]

1 hour ago, hemingway said:

One can understand the inducement of the professional athlete and in fact sympathize to some degree because doping in all its forms has been normalized and accepted by those within sport. The financial inducement and the desperate desire of athletes to have contracts signed and endorsed, in short, to succeed, is huge. We have to accept that doping in many sports has been around for 50 to 100 years. It has waxed and waned but it has been around. We love our footy but anabolic steriods have been used since the 1970s in the weight rooms. So whilst not condoning EFC, the use of doping agents was predicated on the assumption that it was okay because everyone was doing it and that it was required to get a competitive edge on the opposition.  Perhaps an exaggeration but the assumption has some truth although perhaps not in the systemic program used by the EFC. 

However, the doco last night did elevate my consciousness to a new level. Clearly, the challenge now is dealing with the legal cheats. As more and more money comes into professional sport, there is now a major focus on research labs and scientists to legally find ways to obtain a competitive advantage. This is a whole new ethical and philosophical discussion. Is it cheating? What is cheating? In cycling, Team Sky has double the budget of any other world team. This gives them an enormous advantage over other teams. Is Chris Froome and his team clean? I suspect that technically they are because they would have so much to lose by doping given their public stance and the attitude of British Governments and that of the British cycling federation. However, the performance of Froome and his team looks very much like the past performances of Lance and his teams. But are they doping? I think not, but I suspect that they are way ahead in the area of research and sports science. They will have "trade secrets" that provide a competitive advantage to their cyclists and athletes. The performance of British athletes at the London Olympics suggested that they had a significant competitive advantage due to the money spent on preparation. This money is spent on the athletes, on facilities, on equipment, and on the most scientific methods of preparation.

So increasingly, there will be athletes that may not break the rules and avoid being outed as cheats, but nevertheless still gain a competitive advantage by using a substance or method that is outside the accepted norms of training and preparation. The use of new substances and methods is exploding as the pressure to succeed increases and more and more money is spent on sport.

 

I don't have a problem with a sportsperson or a team gaining a competitive advantage as long as it doesn't 'cross the line'  ... most would tend to agree but could differ on the 'cross the line' interpretation.  Drugs are out in my book and so is salary cap cheating. 

It's up to the sports & sporting bodies to enforce a level playing field and many sports at least try keep things on an even keel ... but many sports don't.  We could break down every sport but putting the drugs aside,  I reckon the NFL gives all it's clubs a reasonable shot at it but baseball doesn't.  The richer baseball teams don't always feature but they definitely have an advantage because they can pay their players more (soccer is very similar) 

Soccer has an almost zero chance of ever having a level playing field unless all the leagues got together and worked out a fair system - won't happen though as there are far too many vested interests and the big clubs are just far too powerful.

In footy our club had very little money in the 70's & 80's and our zones weren't very fruitful ... the money issue was almost certainly our own fault but the zones were definitely an issue.  So in comes the salary cap and the draft and suddenly we were in the mix again - a coincidence? Maybe.

Cycling has an issue with the Sky team but the UCI could bring in measures to make them weaker and therefore make the other teams stronger.  There was talk of grading the cyclists and only allowing the teams to have a certain amount of the better cyclists ... a salary cap (of sorts) could be brought in too.

Despite what many might think, I'm not sure that footy is that lopsided ... the big 4 clubs in Victoria are all struggling to win games and most of our misfortune has been of our own doing.  Clubs of our size can still have  excellent coaching and creating an excellent list of players is always quite feasible.  We've seen the transition in the last 3 years (in both areas)  Our training facilities are first rate too.

The Hawks do it better than most and good luck to them but ... but I'm not sure that the better performed AFL clubs should have access to free agents.  The NFL has restrictions on free agency for the better performed clubs and it works reasonably well.

The biggest problem in sport is always going to be the doping ... I honestly can't see the use of these PED's being reeled back in and can only see the problem getting far worse.  And most of it won't be visible ...

Don't test = don't catch = clean sport (in the eyes of many) 

 

[hemingway 7,633]

1 hour ago, Macca said:

I don't have a problem with a sportsperson or a team gaining a competitive advantage as long as it doesn't 'cross the line'  ... most would tend to agree but could differ on the 'cross the line' interpretation.  Drugs are out in my book and so is salary cap cheating. 

It's up to the sports & sporting bodies to enforce a level playing field and many sports at least try keep things on an even keel ... but many sports don't.  We could break down every sport but putting the drugs aside,  I reckon the NFL gives all it's clubs a reasonable shot at it but baseball doesn't.  The richer baseball teams don't always feature but they definitely have an advantage because they can pay their players more (soccer is very similar) 

Soccer has an almost zero chance of ever having a level playing field unless all the leagues got together and worked out a fair system - won't happen though as there are far too many vested interests and the big clubs are just far too powerful.

In footy our club had very little money in the 70's & 80's and our zones weren't very fruitful ... the money issue was almost certainly our own fault but the zones were definitely an issue.  So in comes the salary cap and the draft and suddenly we were in the mix again - a coincidence? Maybe.

Cycling has an issue with the Sky team but the UCI could bring in measures to make them weaker and therefore make the other teams stronger.  There was talk of grading the cyclists and only allowing the teams to have a certain amount of the better cyclists ... a salary cap (of sorts) could be brought in too.

Despite what many might think, I'm not sure that footy is that lopsided ... the big 4 clubs in Victoria are all struggling to win games and most of our misfortune has been of our own doing.  Clubs of our size can still have  excellent coaching and creating an excellent list of players is always quite feasible.  We've seen the transition in the last 3 years (in both areas)  Our training facilities are first rate too.

The Hawks do it better than most and good luck to them but ... but I'm not sure that the better performed AFL clubs should have access to free agents.  The NFL has restrictions on free agency for the better performed clubs and it works reasonably well.

The biggest problem in sport is always going to be the doping ... I honestly can't see the use of these PED's being reeled back in and can only see the problem getting far worse.  And most of it won't be visible ...

Don't test = don't catch = clean sport (in the eyes of many) 

 

Agree with most of your comments. In regard to doping, the challenge will be to keep up with the drug cheats as mentioned on the doco. How they use them, when they use them and the nature of the drugs themselves. At the end of the day, you can only do so much. We have to accept that there will be sophisticated dopers in all sports that will get away with doping and others who soon or later will be found out. 

 

[Macca 17,120]

1 minute ago, hemingway said:

Agree with most of your comments. In regard to doping, the challenge will be to keep up with the drug cheats as mentioned on the doco. How they use them, when they use them and the nature of the drugs themselves. At the end of the day, you can only do so much. We have to accept that there will be sophisticated dopers in all sports that will get away with doping and others who soon or later will be found out. 

 

The gap is getting bigger by the day H ... there is no challenge in my eyes.  That ship has sailed.  I'm no pessimist either ... on the contrary, I'm a positive person but have an unquenchable thirst for the truth in sport.  No bs and no spin.

WADA & the other drug agencies have little or no hope of curtailing things and the sporting bodies have no real interest in catching their own drug cheats.  They're not interested in clean sport. 

Far too much emphasis is placed on the Olympics & cycling ... the professional sports are filthy with PED use and in my opinion soccer is the worst.  You'd never know it though because soccer never seems to catch any drug cheats so the public then thinks the sport is clean. 

There are literally hundreds of PED's that will help a sportspersons endurance or leg speed - don't be thinking steroids necessarily.  How can the biggest sport in the world (by a long stretch) be clean when numerous other sports are laden with PED use?  It doesn't make sense.  Are all soccer players squeaky clean?  FIFA does virtually nothing to catch its drug cheats and none of the leagues do much of note either .,. the A-League does a token amount of testing but in the whole scheme of things, the A-League doesn't count.

Sports signing up to the strongest WADA code doesn't mean those sports are going to do much testing and it also doesn't mean that the testing will be rigorous either.  There are a lot of misconceptions out there H.

There is so much below the surface - it's 'Iceberg-like' x 100. 

[hemingway 7,633]

4 minutes ago, Macca said:

The gap is getting bigger by the day H ... there is no challenge in my eyes.  That ship has sailed.  I'm no pessimist either ... on the contrary, I'm a positive person but have an unquenchable thirst for the truth in sport.  No bs and no spin.

WADA & the other drug agencies have little or no hope of curtailing things and the sporting bodies have no real interest in catching their own drug cheats.  They're not interested in clean sport. 

Far too much emphasis is placed on the Olympics & cycling ... the professional sports are filthy with PED use and in my opinion soccer is the worst.  You'd never know it though because soccer never seems to catch any drug cheats so the public then thinks the sport is clean. 

There are literally hundreds of PED's that will help a sportspersons endurance or leg speed - don't be thinking steroids necessarily.  How can the biggest sport in the world (by a long stretch) be clean when numerous other sports are laden with PED use?  It doesn't make sense.  Are all soccer players squeaky clean?  FIFA does virtually nothing to catch its drug cheats and none of the leagues do much of note either .,. the A-League does a token amount of testing but in the whole scheme of things, the A-League doesn't count.

Sports signing up to the strongest WADA code doesn't mean those sports are going to do much testing and it also doesn't mean that the testing will be rigorous either.  There are a lot of misconceptions out there H.

There is so much below the surface - it's 'Iceberg-like' x 100. 

sad but true macca

 

[Macca 17,120]

1 minute ago, hemingway said:

sad but true macca

 

Thanks for the thread H ... you've given me a free license to rant away

My opinions aren't necessarily facts but I'm confident that I'm close to the mark ... the levels of awareness is my goal.  I'm not sure anything is going to be fixed in the near future but open dialogue about the subject matter can't hurt.

So many times these discussions turn into a competition of sorts but open discussion without angst is entirely possible.

[daisycutter 29,920]

the thing that would might scare many athletes is if the authorities (pref independent like wada) were to keep data banks of things like hair, urine, blood for 20 years, with all top finishing athletes having multiple samples archived each year. as you heard in the doco 30 samples from the last 2 olympics of medal winning athletes who had original negative tests, ended up being positive with later technology used in recent re-tests (and were stripped of medals). A bigger data bank of more frequent samples and more different types of samples would only catch more. of course someone has to pay for it and wada's revenue is actually decreasing as many sports scramble to keep it more in house whilst spouting platitudes of how serious they are but at the same time decreasing transparency using all sort of excuses like confidentiality and privacy

[hemingway 7,633]

7 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

the thing that would might scare many athletes is if the authorities (pref independent like wada) were to keep data banks of things like hair, urine, blood for 20 years, with all top finishing athletes having multiple samples archived each year. as you heard in the doco 30 samples from the last 2 olympics of medal winning athletes who had original negative tests, ended up being positive with later technology used in recent re-tests (and were stripped of medals). A bigger data bank of more frequent samples and more different types of samples would only catch more. of course someone has to pay for it and wada's revenue is actually decreasing as many sports scramble to keep it more in house whilst spouting platitudes of how serious they are but at the same time decreasing transparency using all sort of excuses like confidentiality and privacy

agree daisy. but you have nailed it. the cost is prohibitive and sports want to self-regulate. the more successful WADA/ASADA are in outing cheats, the more the sports bodies want out. as we found in the AFL/EFC scandal.

 

17 minutes ago, Macca said:

Thanks for the thread H ... you've given me a free license to rant away

My opinions aren't necessarily facts but I'm confident that I'm close to the mark ... the levels of awareness is my goal.  I'm not sure anything is going to be fixed in the near future but open dialogue about the subject matter can't hurt.

So many times these discussions turn into a competition of sorts but open discussion without angst is entirely possible.

they are close to the mark. 

[old dee 24,028]

5 hours ago, hemingway said:

Supply of single malt no doubt OD.

Now that I think about it Ernest that maybe the reason I consume after an event.

[Macca 17,120]

On 8/2/2016 at 3:45 PM, daisycutter said:

the thing that would might scare many athletes is if the authorities (pref independent like wada) were to keep data banks of things like hair, urine, blood for 20 years, with all top finishing athletes having multiple samples archived each year. as you heard in the doco 30 samples from the last 2 olympics of medal winning athletes who had original negative tests, ended up being positive with later technology used in recent re-tests (and were stripped of medals). A bigger data bank of more frequent samples and more different types of samples would only catch more. of course someone has to pay for it and wada's revenue is actually decreasing as many sports scramble to keep it more in house whilst spouting platitudes of how serious they are but at the same time decreasing transparency using all sort of excuses like confidentiality and privacy

WADA, the Olympic sports & cycling can do as you say and keep samples for 20+ years whilst having numerous tests and rigorous testing.  But what about all the professional sports who do very little testing? ... the testing in a lot of these sports isn't rigorous and most of these sporting bodies don't have any sort of agreement with WADA. 

There is a lot of money at stake and these pro sports do not seem to be interested in slowing down the flow of money.  Transparency with regards to PED use has a cost.

That's the issue right there ... and who cops the angst? The Olympic sports & cycling. 

I'm more interested in broadening the view ... I tend to look at PED use in every sport as a matter of course.  This issue is about as complicated & complex as it gets.  We could fix the Olympics & Cycling and almost certainly still be left with a much bigger problem.  We'd just be shifting the focus to the next sport.

But it's all academic anyway ... from a big-picture point of view we're miles away from fixing anything of any note.  We'll still be talking about this in the same way in 5, 10 or 20 years.  Or longer.  We need a buy-in from big sport with regards to cleaning up sport but so far, big sport has been more than a little reluctant to do so.

[Macca 17,120]

The other issue is how all these sportspeople get hold of these PED's ... my reckoning is that they're mostly getting hold of these drugs independently from different sources and in different ways from many other sportsperson.  In any sport.  In other words, they're not necessarily acting in cahoots.  Their motto might be that if they're going to cheat, as few people as possible need to know about the cheating.

It's entirely possible that there isn't necessarily a common source for these PED's as well.  State sponsored drug programs, baseball (Balco) and the EFC & Cronulla are one thing but most drug cheats would probably act independently.

Which means finding a paper-trail or a whistle-blower is a bit of a futile exercise ... it largely explains why there aren't many paper-trails or whistle-blowers unless it's a state sponsored exercise or its baseball, the EFC or Cronulla.