Setting aside the acknowledgements while not diminishing them in any way, that is an eloquent overview of the doping situation over time and between the sexes.Galic Ho said:It's closer to four fold, but it doesn't matter. Muscle takes up less volume than fat does.
Also Blackcat and Tyler's Twin, you two are right about anabolic steroids and women. It wasn't my intention to suggest that female's do not get a bigger boost than men, only that time wise, they hadn't caught up to the roaring 80s.
You explanation for why that hasn't happened Blackcat was good. Less testing on women like Flo Jo, more opportunity to go the whole hog and also newer drugs like HGH and IGF-1 may benefit men more. I only wanted to highlight that men are doping better than they have ever done so in track and field and women are not. But what you both said stands. I was trying to understand why it was that men are peaking time wise now and why women are still way behind the records. Your explanation was sufficient enough given the lack of investigation into what was going on back in the 70 and 80s versus today in the new millennium.
It is peculiar how the perception that 'women would never do that' persists.