Also I am unaware of a performance enhancing property of thyroid hormones. Those drugs are usually used for fat loss. Can anyone explain to me the mechanism by which they improve the performance?
- Sep 29, 2012
- 12,197
- 0
- 0
Re: Re:
Hyperthyroidism is a thing, which nets the same effect as taking hypothyroidism medication when you do not have hypothyroidism.
You do not want it, trust me.
TheSpud said:
Hyperthyroidism is a thing, which nets the same effect as taking hypothyroidism medication when you do not have hypothyroidism.
You do not want it, trust me.
- Mar 25, 2013
- 5,389
- 0
- 0
Re:
Said yesterday he's going back for testing. Has no problem publishing it.
http://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/cycling/9926995/froome-to-share-test-results
Whether he does it remains to be seen.
Benotti69 said:
Said yesterday he's going back for testing. Has no problem publishing it.
http://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/cycling/9926995/froome-to-share-test-results
Whether he does it remains to be seen.
No, you can't it's a prescription drug and a very serious one that will shut down your own thyroid production.
I don't think anyone needs a drug for fat loss but there are much cheaper and safer alternatives: ephedrine (I think somewhere you can still get it without prescription) and clenbuterol. Then there are the legal ones which are much less effective like caffeine.
They all work the same way, they increase your metabolic rate so you end up burning more calories.
I don't think anyone needs a drug for fat loss but there are much cheaper and safer alternatives: ephedrine (I think somewhere you can still get it without prescription) and clenbuterol. Then there are the legal ones which are much less effective like caffeine.
They all work the same way, they increase your metabolic rate so you end up burning more calories.
- May 26, 2010
- 28,143
- 5
- 0
Re: Re:
If it is not done independently there is no point.
edit: it also points to Sky's lies about 'marginal gain's and 'leaving no stone unturned', Brailsford 'master of details' in their quest to get as much out of every 'clean' gain they can. Froome is there 5 years and they still need to do tests to find his 'natural' ability???????
DOPERS.
gooner said:
If it is not done independently there is no point.
edit: it also points to Sky's lies about 'marginal gain's and 'leaving no stone unturned', Brailsford 'master of details' in their quest to get as much out of every 'clean' gain they can. Froome is there 5 years and they still need to do tests to find his 'natural' ability???????
DOPERS.
- Mar 15, 2011
- 2,760
- 71
- 11,580
Re: Re:
That's not true. Let's back up.
Thyroidism, hypo or hyper is a hard topic because it is not an x causes y, or alternatively, pretend to have x, so you can take y, and get z effects.
No doper only takes thyroid hormones. No clean athlete who wants to dope will start with thyroid hormones.
A few scenarios: Genuine hypothroid athlete feels tired, achy, and sick. Diagnosed, prescribed, but it isn't a cure. The hormones make you feel less bad, in general, but of course can make you feel good.
People see that case though, and misinterpret thyroid hormones as an anti-overtraining drug.
It is not.
A healthy person taking thyroid hormones does not feel less tired, less fatigued and less sick; it is not an extension of it's role as a medicine to the role of PED. A healthy person taking thyroid hormones will be agitated, jittery and anxious. There is more risk of overtraining because your body never settles down after exercise; you are in a constant state of arousal (for lack of a better word). There are more severe side effects, but I bring that up because it is thought of as a cure for overtraining. It is not.
The body is too complicated. Very few things are x -> y -> z. EPO for examples, as a hormone, causes y and z, but also a, b, c, to your endocrine system. Which cause e, f, and g, to your organ function, metabolism, and other processes. Yes, catabolism can increase with thyroid hormones, but not in a good way.
Instead, in the doper's regimine, Thyroid is the balancing act. If you take HGH, Testo, EPO, and other substances that mess with your hormone profile, the beat way to bring everything back to some normalcy is thyroid medication. Doping itself screws you up, and you genuinely need medicine to bring your hormone profile to healthy levels.
Thyroid hormones should not be thought of as a PED, but the cousin of a masking agent: it doesn't directly affect performance, but a doper needs it to keep doing what they do.
Catwhoorg said:
That's not true. Let's back up.
Thyroidism, hypo or hyper is a hard topic because it is not an x causes y, or alternatively, pretend to have x, so you can take y, and get z effects.
No doper only takes thyroid hormones. No clean athlete who wants to dope will start with thyroid hormones.
A few scenarios: Genuine hypothroid athlete feels tired, achy, and sick. Diagnosed, prescribed, but it isn't a cure. The hormones make you feel less bad, in general, but of course can make you feel good.
People see that case though, and misinterpret thyroid hormones as an anti-overtraining drug.
It is not.
A healthy person taking thyroid hormones does not feel less tired, less fatigued and less sick; it is not an extension of it's role as a medicine to the role of PED. A healthy person taking thyroid hormones will be agitated, jittery and anxious. There is more risk of overtraining because your body never settles down after exercise; you are in a constant state of arousal (for lack of a better word). There are more severe side effects, but I bring that up because it is thought of as a cure for overtraining. It is not.
The body is too complicated. Very few things are x -> y -> z. EPO for examples, as a hormone, causes y and z, but also a, b, c, to your endocrine system. Which cause e, f, and g, to your organ function, metabolism, and other processes. Yes, catabolism can increase with thyroid hormones, but not in a good way.
Instead, in the doper's regimine, Thyroid is the balancing act. If you take HGH, Testo, EPO, and other substances that mess with your hormone profile, the beat way to bring everything back to some normalcy is thyroid medication. Doping itself screws you up, and you genuinely need medicine to bring your hormone profile to healthy levels.
Thyroid hormones should not be thought of as a PED, but the cousin of a masking agent: it doesn't directly affect performance, but a doper needs it to keep doing what they do.
- Sep 29, 2012
- 12,197
- 0
- 0
Re: Re:
I realise, but as More Strides intimates - the results are icky
and the response is read by more than just you - consider it a PSA
I've seen hyperthyroidism first hand and it's unpleasant.
TheSpud said:
I realise, but as More Strides intimates - the results are icky
and the response is read by more than just you - consider it a PSA
I've seen hyperthyroidism first hand and it's unpleasant.
Re: Re:
whats a PSA??
I'll be doing it the good old fashioned way - better diet & more exercise ...
Dear Wiggo said:TheSpud said:
I realise, but as More Strides intimates - the results are icky
and the response is read by more than just you - consider it a PSA
I've seen hyperthyroidism first hand and it's unpleasant.
whats a PSA??
I'll be doing it the good old fashioned way - better diet & more exercise ...
I understand your point although you don't explain why they need it Strides, I also found something:
Thyroid hormone induces erythropoietin gene expression through augmented accumulation of hypoxia-inducible factor-1.
Thyroid hormones enhance hypoxia-induced erythropoietin production in vitro.
So I guess this is why they use it.
Thyroid hormone induces erythropoietin gene expression through augmented accumulation of hypoxia-inducible factor-1.
Thyroid hormones enhance hypoxia-induced erythropoietin production in vitro.
So I guess this is why they use it.
TheSpud said:
It looks to initiate the cascade by activating hypoxia-inducible factor 1 which triggers the natural production of EPO.
Great comments & discussion: have followed this thread for awhile & probably angle more towards the "they're mostly (75%) geared up, most of the time" and Froome/Sky are the only latest iteration of team wide or state sponsored/facilitated activities. One can call it US Postal 2.0 but, IMHO, it's really no different from many other teams since the 1990's in terms of dominance. I hadn't seen anyone else post this in these pages (did a quick forum search), so thought I'd add to the discussion by posting links. for example: http://veloclinic.com/comparing-performances-across-grand-tours/ . What is interesting about Froome's data in this link is that he's able to maintain a ~6w/kg output at ~50min which is only bested by one other podium finisher (prob Contador or ?) which suggests as others have previously pointed out, that Froome displays an incredibly high anaerobic threshhold (right?). His power decay is certainly much shallower than Nibali's and would be interesting how it compares to Quintana's.
Sure, one can point to the problems encountered by Movistar / Astana/Saxo in the early stages of the 2015 TDF where their big guns were 1-several min+ down by the end of the first week, but I was struck by Sky's dominance & Porte/Thomas' ability to reel in Quintana/Valverde as well as Froome looking like he was about to reach escape velocity by the end of the stage. It was ...uhh... impressive. The subsequent release and/or discussion of Froome's power data relative to others didn't really, as others have pointed out, clarify things and, in many cases, raised more questions than answers.
I recently came across some blog post by veloclinic that, in a very simplistic manner, attempts to illustrate how power and relative perceived percentages of doping can be illustrated by a probability curve illustrating the probability of doping.
Link 1: http://veloclinic.com/estimating-the-probability-of-doping-as-a-function-of-power/
Link 1a: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-YgGROA3ZPtZ_kycr4UIwdqOL1S85NRTpb3zDTQ3Tuw/edit?pli=1#gid=1114692435
While not interested in provoking wider debate, I was just interested in folks comments. Depending upon what numbers (perception of % peloton doping, etc) one can change in the spreadsheet (taking Sky's or Vayer's or others numbers), you can get a 'likelihood of doping' (at ~6.1w/kg) idea which is generally >60% if we're assuming that ~25% is doping (how likely is this?) or you don't reach a 60% likelihood until 6.4w/kg if one assumes only 5% are doping.
Thus, I think that the “they’re all dirty crowd” would skew the % doping to >>25% and the “Sky/Froome is clean crowd” would lower the bar somewhat to 5-10% doping with evidence of doping only entering the picture when you have Armstrong or Pantani 6.5-7w/kg power numbers.
Sure, one can point to the problems encountered by Movistar / Astana/Saxo in the early stages of the 2015 TDF where their big guns were 1-several min+ down by the end of the first week, but I was struck by Sky's dominance & Porte/Thomas' ability to reel in Quintana/Valverde as well as Froome looking like he was about to reach escape velocity by the end of the stage. It was ...uhh... impressive. The subsequent release and/or discussion of Froome's power data relative to others didn't really, as others have pointed out, clarify things and, in many cases, raised more questions than answers.
I recently came across some blog post by veloclinic that, in a very simplistic manner, attempts to illustrate how power and relative perceived percentages of doping can be illustrated by a probability curve illustrating the probability of doping.
Link 1: http://veloclinic.com/estimating-the-probability-of-doping-as-a-function-of-power/
Link 1a: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-YgGROA3ZPtZ_kycr4UIwdqOL1S85NRTpb3zDTQ3Tuw/edit?pli=1#gid=1114692435
While not interested in provoking wider debate, I was just interested in folks comments. Depending upon what numbers (perception of % peloton doping, etc) one can change in the spreadsheet (taking Sky's or Vayer's or others numbers), you can get a 'likelihood of doping' (at ~6.1w/kg) idea which is generally >60% if we're assuming that ~25% is doping (how likely is this?) or you don't reach a 60% likelihood until 6.4w/kg if one assumes only 5% are doping.
Thus, I think that the “they’re all dirty crowd” would skew the % doping to >>25% and the “Sky/Froome is clean crowd” would lower the bar somewhat to 5-10% doping with evidence of doping only entering the picture when you have Armstrong or Pantani 6.5-7w/kg power numbers.
- Sep 29, 2012
- 12,197
- 0
- 0
Re:
Nah Wiggo in 2012 did a couple of TTs for around an hour at around 450W - his publicly admitted watts, which averages out to around 6.4W/kg.
Penultimate stage of the 2012 TdF was 63 minutes at 6.4W/kg.
FullRetardRacing said:
Nah Wiggo in 2012 did a couple of TTs for around an hour at around 450W - his publicly admitted watts, which averages out to around 6.4W/kg.
Penultimate stage of the 2012 TdF was 63 minutes at 6.4W/kg.
- Sep 29, 2012
- 12,197
- 0
- 0
- Sep 29, 2012
- 12,197
- 0
- 0
- Jul 17, 2015
- 774
- 0
- 0
Re:
It helps to put that quote into context by reading the full article. Thezé seems to be saying that Froome was devoid of cycling skills but had huge athletic potential.
Don't know about the huge athletic potential, but he certainly was devoid of cycling skills until recently
Dear Wiggo said:Bernard Hinault could only place 2nd at the Anatomic Jock race?
Thanks for the article.
It helps to put that quote into context by reading the full article. Thezé seems to be saying that Froome was devoid of cycling skills but had huge athletic potential.
Don't know about the huge athletic potential, but he certainly was devoid of cycling skills until recently
Re: Re:
Yeah, but that doesn't suit The Clinic rhetoric ...
wendybnt said:Dear Wiggo said:Bernard Hinault could only place 2nd at the Anatomic Jock race?
Thanks for the article.
It helps to put that quote into context by reading the full article. Thezé seems to be saying that Froome was devoid of cycling skills but had huge athletic potential.
Yeah, but that doesn't suit The Clinic rhetoric ...
- Aug 2, 2012
- 4,999
- 130
- 17,880
tour
so how did he get round the tour with barloworld?.................
wendybnt said:Dear Wiggo said:Bernard Hinault could only place 2nd at the Anatomic Jock race?
Thanks for the article.
Don't know about the huge athletic potential, but he certainly was devoid of cycling skills until recently
so how did he get round the tour with barloworld?.................
TRENDING THREADS
-
World Championship 2025: Men’s RR, September 28- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 2K
-
Il Lombardia 2025, monument, October 11- Started by Krzysztof_O
- Replies: 792
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 35K
-
European Championship 2025: Men’s RR, October 5- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 854
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 40K
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 13K
-
World Championship 2025: Men’s ITT, September 21- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 942
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram