G.I. JOEEEEEE! [Tsunami of USADA cases against cyclists]

[Dr. Maserati]

You'd certainly expect less doping in the amateur ranks. But I wonder if we shouldn't be surprised to see a lot of doping in the master's classes. At a certain age, there starts to be lots of medical intervention intended to make up for the declining physical abilities we had in our youth. And I'm talking about for everyone - athletes and couch potatoes alike.

I wonder if the pervasiveness of this in our society leads some master's riders to look differently at their doping than they might have when they were in their 20s. After all, in one's 20s at his physical peak, doping is clearly boosting one's ability past typical human capabilities: but doping in the 40s or 50s is seen as a replacement for abilities one has lost because of medical issues and/or aging (which is itself a medical issue, ha!). It must be tempting to seek medical help, for example, if one trains just as hard but gets slower because of declining hormone levels and the like.

I'm not a competitive racer, but at my age, I'd happily take any medicines my doctors see fit, in an attempt to make me feel more like I used to feel! I've already improved my vision and stepped up the asthma meds and if they'd offer me something to get my hematocrit back into the "normal" range, I'd take it without hesitation, just to improve the quality of my daily life. I wonder how many master's racers feel the same way and don't really see their "doping" as being about getting an unfair advantage against their competitors?

Or how about just having a seperate category for these over 40 people so they are in competition with people of similar ability?

We could give them a catchy name like 'fasters' or 'laster' or something similar.

 

[Anonymous]

You'd certainly expect less doping in the amateur ranks. But I wonder if we shouldn't be surprised to see a lot of doping in the master's classes. At a certain age, there starts to be lots of medical intervention intended to make up for the declining physical abilities we had in our youth. And I'm talking about for everyone - athletes and couch potatoes alike.

I wonder if the pervasiveness of this in our society leads some master's riders to look differently at their doping than they might have when they were in their 20s. After all, in one's 20s at his physical peak, doping is clearly boosting one's ability past typical human capabilities: but doping in the 40s or 50s is seen as a replacement for abilities one has lost because of medical issues and/or aging (which is itself a medical issue, ha!). It must be tempting to seek medical help, for example, if one trains just as hard but gets slower because of declining hormone levels and the like.

I'm not a competitive racer, but at my age, I'd happily take any medicines my doctors see fit, in an attempt to make me feel more like I used to feel! I've already improved my vision and stepped up the asthma meds and if they'd offer me something to get my hematocrit back into the "normal" range, I'd take it without hesitation, just to improve the quality of my daily life. I wonder how many master's racers feel the same way and don't really see their "doping" as being about getting an unfair advantage against their competitors?

That pretty much discounts your last paragraph.

Cholesterol meds are very different than EPO. I don't think Joe Papp is a M.D., so those amateurs on his client list were/are CHEATING.

You should race your bike sometime. It might bring some clarity to your position.

 

[blutto]

You'd certainly expect less doping in the amateur ranks. But I wonder if we shouldn't be surprised to see a lot of doping in the master's classes. At a certain age, there starts to be lots of medical intervention intended to make up for the declining physical abilities we had in our youth. And I'm talking about for everyone - athletes and couch potatoes alike.

I wonder if the pervasiveness of this in our society leads some master's riders to look differently at their doping than they might have when they were in their 20s. After all, in one's 20s at his physical peak, doping is clearly boosting one's ability past typical human capabilities: but doping in the 40s or 50s is seen as a replacement for abilities one has lost because of medical issues and/or aging (which is itself a medical issue, ha!). It must be tempting to seek medical help, for example, if one trains just as hard but gets slower because of declining hormone levels and the like.

I'm not a competitive racer, but at my age, I'd happily take any medicines my doctors see fit, in an attempt to make me feel more like I used to feel! I've already improved my vision and stepped up the asthma meds and if they'd offer me something to get my hematocrit back into the "normal" range, I'd take it without hesitation, just to improve the quality of my daily life. I wonder how many master's racers feel the same way and don't really see their "doping" as being about getting an unfair advantage against their competitors?

...very interesting post ...as much as anything because it makes a connection between "our" cycling centred reality and that bigger societal reality of which "our" reality is but a small sub-set...and lets not beat around the bush around the fact that we are a drugged society...yes we have in most cases the necessary medical permission but as a society we are seriously drugged...

...in that vein it would be interesting then to ask the question... is the cycling drug culture an accurate or a perverted reflection of a drugged society ???...

Cheers

blutto

 

[Dr. Maserati]

...very interesting post ...as much as anything because it makes a connection between "our" cycling centred reality and that bigger societal reality of which "our" reality is but a small sub-set...and lets not beat around the bush around the fact that we are a drugged society...yes we have in most cases the necessary medical permission but as a society we are seriously drugged...

...in that vein it would be interesting then to ask the question... is the cycling drug culture an accurate or a perverted reflection of a drugged society ???...

Cheers

blutto

In sports when discussing drugs it is Performance Enhancing Drugs.

 

[stephens]

In sports when discussing drugs it is Performance Enhancing Drugs.

But most drug use in society at large is for performance enhancing as well. What percentage of medication prescribed is a matter of life and death and what percentage is to "improve" quality of life or ability to do better at certain tasks? The latter has got to be 90%+ of all medical intervention in the 1st world today.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

But most drug use in society at large is for performance enhancing as well. What percentage of medication prescribed is a matter of life and death and what percentage is to "improve" quality of life or ability to do better at certain tasks? The latter has got to be 90%+ of all medical intervention in the 1st world today.

Most drugs consumed are for treatment, cure and prevention - not performance enhancing, which is done to gain an advantage.

 

[stephens]

Most drugs consumed are for treatment, cure and prevention - not performance enhancing, which is done to gain an advantage.

I guess it's going to depend on how you define your terms. The general public "treats" and "prevents" all sorts of things which are not going to limit their lifespan. They "treat" these physical/mental deficiencies in order to enhance their performance as human beings, as teachers, cops, chefs, lovers, you know, to be able to do the things they need to do better/easier. Some folks carry this attitude into their bike racing.

 

[Berzin]

You'd certainly expect less doping in the amateur ranks. But I wonder if we shouldn't be surprised to see a lot of doping in the master's classes. At a certain age, there starts to be lots of medical intervention intended to make up for the declining physical abilities we had in our youth. And I'm talking about for everyone - athletes and couch potatoes alike.

I wonder if the pervasiveness of this in our society leads some master's riders to look differently at their doping than they might have when they were in their 20s. After all, in one's 20s at his physical peak, doping is clearly boosting one's ability past typical human capabilities: but doping in the 40s or 50s is seen as a replacement for abilities one has lost because of medical issues and/or aging (which is itself a medical issue, ha!). It must be tempting to seek medical help, for example, if one trains just as hard but gets slower because of declining hormone levels and the like.

I'm not a competitive racer, but at my age, I'd happily take any medicines my doctors see fit, in an attempt to make me feel more like I used to feel! I've already improved my vision and stepped up the asthma meds and if they'd offer me something to get my hematocrit back into the "normal" range, I'd take it without hesitation, just to improve the quality of my daily life. I wonder how many master's racers feel the same way and don't really see their "doping" as being about getting an unfair advantage against their competitors?

Uh huh. Problem is, normal hormone levels should not be in one's 40s what they were in one's 20s. It's called the natural aging process.

Yuppies don't want to hear this, and there are unscrupulous doctors out there feeding this patently warped sense of what should be healthy parameters for men approaching middle age.

This is why anti-aging clinics, run for the most part by quacks and medical frauds have become a multi-million dollar (if not more) industry in the US.

It is the ultimate sense of entitlement for people to believe they should remain young forever. But I challenge you on your first statement that one should expect less doping in the amateur ranks. There is probably more, seeing as the amateur ranks are the wild west when it comes to the "anything goes" atmosphere promised by almost no comprehensive dope testing.

If one trains harder and is getting slower due to declining hormone levels, that's called getting older. You make it sound as if declining hormone levels are the root cause, when it's a naturally occurring physiological response that all life forms go through.

Once you begin isolating it and calling it something else, this is where people cross the line and convince themselves they're not cheating when they are.

I know many guys who dope in the local amateur ranks who see absolutely nothing wrong with it. It's because of the rationalizations you list. In fact, the ones who do well feel entitled to their success. They see the hard work they're able to put in as a justification to prance about feeling good about themselves.

What most people who either don't know or don't want to believe is the ease of access to these drugs once one has an established network. The yuppies who go to anti-aging clinics think they have an advantage because they can afford to pay doctors and the exorbitant US prices for medically prescribed hormones, but even the most humble working-class slob can get in on the action.

All you need is one cat traveling back and forth to any place in either Central/South America or certain countries in the Caribbean. The stuff is even less expensive if one travels and gets it without involving a middle man.

Case in point-the Dominican Republic. I know guys who sell Sildenafil, which is the generic version of Viagra for $10 a pill here in the states. They pay the equivalent of $1 US dollar per pill at any pharmacy in Santo Domingo. And there is no clandestine pipeline one has to infiltrate.

All you need is to speak enough Spanish to walk into a pharmacy and order it over the counter. That's it. That also goes for stuff like testosterone and HgH. EPO is a bit more difficult and may involve one getting in good with a pharmaceutical rep in said country, but all that takes is an introduction to the right person and a night out with dinner, drinks and a prostitute included on your tab. That's how you grease that particular wheel.

Joe Papp raced in South America, he should be able to cooberate this information if anyone thinks I'm lying.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I guess it's going to depend on how you define your terms. The general public "treats" and "prevents" all sorts of things which are not going to limit their lifespan. They "treat" these physical/mental deficiencies in order to enhance their performance as human beings, as teachers, cops, chefs, lovers, you know, to be able to do the things they need to do better/easier. Some folks carry this attitude into their bike racing.

I don't define the terms - the anti-doping authorities do.

In sport, if someone has a legitimate deficiency they can apply for a TUE.
Other than that it is Performance Enhancing to gain a competitive advantage.

 

[stephens]

Uh huh. Problem is, normal hormone levels should not be in one's 40s what they were in one's 20s. It's called the natural aging process.

Yuppies don't want to hear this, and there are unscrupulous doctors out there feeding this patently warped sense of what should be healthy parameters for men approaching middle age.

But of course our perceptions on these issues change over time. Once upon a time people just accepted that one is not supposed to be able to see as well in their 40s as in their 20s. And we used to accept that we're not supposed to be able to walk well or hear well or remember well as we get older. But now we get all that stuff fixed up, and consider it quite legitimate medical treatment.

All I'm saying is that we are accustomed to repairing our deficiencies and improving our abilities with medical intervention and I think this is influencing the likelihood that masters racers will accept pharmaceutical solutions.

 

[Anonymous]

I guess it's going to depend on how you define your terms. The general public "treats" and "prevents" all sorts of things which are not going to limit their lifespan. They "treat" these physical/mental deficiencies in order to enhance their performance as human beings, as teachers, cops, chefs, lovers, you know, to be able to do the things they need to do better/easier. Some folks carry this attitude into their bike racing.

I don't think you understand the difference between private life and sport. You cannot define the term "performance enhancing" without contextually ascertaining the conditions under which you are enhancing. While some people may see life as a "sport." That still does not contextually frame what we are talking about. Life has government by legal authorities, and still that does not contextually frame the discussion in honest discourse. Sport is a separate entity from life, and therefore is going to be governed by rules that are logical to its context. To limit the usage of drugs that enhance performance in a sporting context is not analogous regardless of how many similarities you can draw to "life."

The reasons behind excluding performance enhancing drugs such as EPO from sport are clear and easy to understand. Simply because you decide to obfuscate the issue by comparing sports to the world outside of sport does not mean your point is any less erroneous.

Also note that, at some point, a line has to be drawn because of the principle of infinite possibilities or scenarios in any given situation in which rules must be made. Yes there are things in sport that are performance enhancing that are legal. However, someone has to judge the substantive difference between what is and is not legal at some point in any rule making process. Cycling has done that, and all of the whining in the world about why doesn't change the fact that the most important person in a sporting position IS the person who wants to compete without ingesting substances that will artificially increase his or her natural abilities. (an no, replacement of electrolytes and other necessary components used by the body for physical activity are not the same as performance enhancing drugs.)

You may believe that a sporting freak show is entertaining, but anyone with a sense of ethics sees the major problem. A person should not be required to ingest substances foreign to their body to compete at any level of sport. Because of that, those who do employ those substances are cheaters. You can not like the idea, or want to see sport where anything goes, but I would suggest that you are in a minority of people. Though I am sure a lot of Uniballer fans are with you on this right about now. Nobody likes to face having supported a complete fraud because that reflects upon them also.

Keep up the "everyone does it everywhere" all you want. It does not change the fact that there is a fallacy to your argument.

 

[stephens]

Just to be clear, I don't care about the Uniballer. I also am not making the argument in order to excuse rule breaking behavior: I was just suggesting a reason why masters riders may be more likely to "dope." Their behavior in their private life as far as accepting medical help makes it easier to carry along similar behavior for cycling.

 

[Cobblestoned]

Doping is not a problem of sports - doping is a problem of society

 

[Anonymous]

Just to be clear, I don't care about the Uniballer. I also am not making the argument in order to excuse rule breaking behavior: I was just suggesting a reason why masters riders may be more likely to "dope." Their behavior in their private life as far as accepting medical help makes it easier to carry along similar behavior for cycling.

I don't disagree with that. It does however appear that you condone the behavior because of that reasoning. If that is not the case, I apologize for misconstruing your words.

 

[Anonymous]

Doping is not a problem of sports - doping is a problem of society

No, not in this context. This is a cycling forum, not a forum on society. We are not trying to ascertain the solution to the problems of the world regardless of subject. We talk about cycling here. If you look at the top of the page, you can easily see why I am drawing this conclusion.

Therefore, to bring "society" into the discussion is to obscure the actual point of the discussion. This is done for many reasons, almost none of them good.

 

[Cobblestoned]

No, not in this context. This is a cycling forum, not a forum on society. We are not trying to ascertain the solution to the problems of the world regardless of subject. We talk about cycling here. If you look at the top of the page, you can easily see why I am drawing this conclusion.

Therefore, to bring "society" into the discussion is to obscure the actual point of the discussion. This is done for many reasons, almost none of them good.

A cyclingpeloton is an imaging of the society

What "ends" in the peloton grew up in our corrupt and cheating society and not on planet Mars.
You can find everything you need in a peloton.
Small people, tall people, straight people, gay people, small cheaters, big cheaters, playboys, adulterers, liars, honest people, faithful familyguys, lazy guys, hard working guys, dealers, dopers, psychos....

If society will ever get better (I doubt that 100%) - cycling will be cleaner, too

Believe that or not. Notice that or not. Think about it or not. Add that to your thoughts or not. - I don't care what you will do with that. I just say what I want to say, whenever or whereever I want.

Cheating is trend - everywhere and everytime.

 

[Oldman]

But most drug use in society at large is for performance enhancing as well. What percentage of medication prescribed is a matter of life and death and what percentage is to "improve" quality of life or ability to do better at certain tasks? The latter has got to be 90%+ of all medical intervention in the 1st world today.

I think most drug development and advertising was for preventative aids up to the 90's where wealthy societies looked to reclaim lost youth. They had the means and the pharmaceutical industry is happy to oblige on any front. It is the major expenditure for medical treatment in the US, I'll bet. Doctors became dispensaries rather than medical analysts in many cases. My personal medical experience has included the offer of inhalants for lungs, testosterone enhancement for rejuvenation. The doctors themselves phrase the treatment as an "equalizing" contribution to competition; knowing my aversion to regular prescriptions. Ten years ago I'd never have heard those treatments being offerred, particularly in that manner.

While it is a societal Thing for now it wasn't always the case. The Masters I see flirting with race PED's are younger-late 30's/early 40's that have no f*cking medical condition to justify what they intend to ingest. Crossing that line ends any real justification to compete. It begins a lie about each of our actual genetic potential and suggests engineering a new "us" is a legitimate offshoot of medical progress. Your argument would confuse a natural evolution with justification and that's what some amateur riders do.

 

[kielbasa]

You'd certainly expect less doping in the amateur ranks. But I wonder if we shouldn't be surprised to see a lot of doping in the master's classes. At a certain age, there starts to be lots of medical intervention intended to make up for the declining physical abilities we had in our youth. And I'm talking about for everyone - athletes and couch potatoes alike.

I wonder if the pervasiveness of this in our society leads some master's riders to look differently at their doping than they might have when they were in their 20s. After all, in one's 20s at his physical peak, doping is clearly boosting one's ability past typical human capabilities: but doping in the 40s or 50s is seen as a replacement for abilities one has lost because of medical issues and/or aging (which is itself a medical issue, ha!). It must be tempting to seek medical help, for example, if one trains just as hard but gets slower because of declining hormone levels and the like.

I'm not a competitive racer, but at my age, I'd happily take any medicines my doctors see fit, in an attempt to make me feel more like I used to feel! I've already improved my vision and stepped up the asthma meds and if they'd offer me something to get my hematocrit back into the "normal" range, I'd take it without hesitation, just to improve the quality of my daily life. I wonder how many master's racers feel the same way and don't really see their "doping" as being about getting an unfair advantage against their competitors?

One of the effects of aging is greater maturity. Those masters who think they are entitled to feel like 20-year olds are failures both physically and emotionally. IOW, they're stupid punks.

 

[BikeCentric]

...which makes domestic American doping sad and especially so for Masters or Cat 3 amateurs looking for false bragging rights.

Exactly. I really have no idea if any of my Cat 3 competitors in my District are going to get busted and frankly I doubt it. Most are "career" Cat 3's and the rare super talented (or perhaps doped) guys get their Cat 2 points pretty quickly. A few of my friends and I do have a little betting pool going on which Masters 1/2 riders we think are going to get busted though. There are several really aggro M1/2 guys around here that are always tearing people legs off and frothing at the mouth year round, whether it be a race, a group hammer-fest or a 'cross race. Interestingly enough, they are always angry a-holes as well.

 

[kielbasa]

Many on this thread have all but concluded that "the list" contains a bunch of names of masters riders. I would venture that it probably consist mostly of NRC pros and amateurs with just a couple of prominent masters.

I think the aforementioned conclusion is partly due to the fact that many here are indeed masters racers and would love to see that one dominating local guy that everyone hates show up on that list. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but chances of that happening are very remote. He's still gonna show up and kick your behind next year. He's probably in the pain cave right now whilst everyone else is trolling the clinic looking for an excuse.

 

[Berzin]

Their behavior in their private life as far as accepting medical help makes it easier to carry along similar behavior for cycling.

Your whole premise is skewed. "Accepting" medical help (a very strange way of putting it, and purposely disingenuous methinks) for treating age-related conditions is not what these guys go to anti-aging clinics for. It is for the purposes of pure vanity.

They want to purposely turn back the hands of time and ride like they never rode before in their lives. Big difference.

I'm sure the feeling must be euphoric, and even on the local ham-and-egger curcuit it must feel nice to strut around the local LBS and be considered one of the heads of state within one's cycling peer group, regardless of how inconsequential said peer group is.

We are not talking about physical maladies, deformities or chronic conditions. When the speeds of master's races rival those of Cat I-II races, there is something wrong. Wrong as in "cheating" wrong.

 

[Oldman]

Many on this thread have all but concluded that "the list" contains a bunch of names of masters riders. I would venture that it probably consist mostly of NRC pros and amateurs with just a couple of prominent masters.

I think the aforementioned conclusion is partly due to the fact that many here are indeed masters racers and would love to see that one dominating local guy that everyone hates show up on that list. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but chances of that happening are very remote. He's still gonna show up and kick your behind next year. He's probably in the pain cave right now whilst everyone else is trolling the clinic looking for an excuse.

That has been my experience. Most Masters 1/2 riders got to Cat 2 in a hurry because they had natural talent and a work ethic. It's the guys that toiled for years that suddenly got much better that sends up the red flags. Some explain it as riding less because they were "overtrained"-while looking larger and leaner than before. They also tend to get twitchy and angry as you've noted. The other give-away is the dude that suddenly drops 3 minutes on his 40K time.

 

[BikeCentric]

Many on this thread have all but concluded that "the list" contains a bunch of names of masters riders. I would venture that it probably consist mostly of NRC pros and amateurs with just a couple of prominent masters.

I think the aforementioned conclusion is partly due to the fact that many here are indeed masters racers and would love to see that one dominating local guy that everyone hates show up on that list. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but chances of that happening are very remote. He's still gonna show up and kick your behind next year. He's probably in the pain cave right now whilst everyone else is trolling the clinic looking for an excuse.

Where I live there are 2 really dominating local Masters and everyone loves them because they are really nice guys. I would hate it if they are on the list.

Regardless, I really don't like it when people try to draw jealousy and hard work into the doping discussion as you've done here. It merely obscures the issue. As we're all aware, all bike racers like to work hard as it's a prerequisite for the sport. Anyone who doesn't like to work hard chooses not to race. And the reality is that doping allows one to work more and work harder than they could clean, that's a big part of why it makes you faster. So while you might be jealous of dopers that win, it isn't fair for you to ascribe that to the forum as it's a silly generalization.

 

[Berzin]

I think the aforementioned conclusion is partly due to the fact that many here are indeed masters racers and would love to see that one dominating local guy that everyone hates show up on that list. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but chances of that happening are very remote. He's still gonna show up and kick your behind next year. He's probably in the pain cave right now whilst everyone else is trolling the clinic looking for an excuse.

Funny how when it comes to master's racing we have all these genetic freaks kicking mucho posterior in mass quantities, but over the last 15 years we haven't been able to send one pro to Europe who hasn't done well without doping.

And these master's racers-always hitting that genetic renaissance in their late 30s-early 40's...sort of like a rich white man's second puberty.

Quite the geographical and physiological oddities, I must say.

Must be that North American pain cave.

 

[Oldman]

Funny how when it comes to master's racing we have all these genetic freaks kicking mucho behind in mass quantities, but over the last 15 years we haven't been able to send one pro to Europe who hasn't done well without doping.

That seems to be quite the geographical oddity, I must say.

Must be that North American pain cave.

My experience included the 80's and 90's where there were few doped Masters and natural talent was identifiable. Now, I'm not so sure as you've noted. Still, there is room for the mutants like Thurlow, Stetina and the regional guys that have done it for years and don't drop off in ability in a huge way. They also don't compete in extremely long stage races.
On the other hand the reports of Euro Master's racing makes it sound worse than any pro event. It's definitely not isolated to North Am.