• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Listening to music = doping

the big ring

BANNED
Jul 28, 2009
2,135
0
0
Visit site
LauraLyn posted the following in the evidence thread

LauraLyn said:
http://dopingjournal.org/9/4/

An interesting read regarding the Austin Armstrong vs. USADA case.

It could be interesting to know more about Alexei Koudinov.

He basically claims the EPO test is based on fake science, and the USADA - CAS - Swiss courts process is rigged. :eek:

Here's another example of Alexei's work:

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/spo...g/2008/08/does_music_give_phelps_an_unfa.html
Did you notice that Michael Phelps wears earphones and is listening music just before his every Olympic start, at Beijing’s Olympiad Water Cube pool deck, be it finals or semifinals? I first noticed that before his first gold swim on August 10: Phelps removed earphones 2 minutes before the start, and he was the only swimmer who worn earphones at the pool deck. Intriguing scientific evidence testifies: Listening to music improves blood oxygen capacity and is a performance enhancement.
 
Jul 30, 2012
79
0
0
Visit site
the big ring said:
LauraLyn posted the following in the evidence thread



He basically claims the EPO test is based on fake science, and the USADA - CAS - Swiss courts process is rigged. :eek:

Here's another example of Alexei's work:

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/spo...g/2008/08/does_music_give_phelps_an_unfa.html

The guy is a bit thick. USADA's claim that Armstrong's blood data is consistent with EPO use does not rely on an EPO urine test at all. We know this because USADA has presented its case as being of the non-analytical variety.

His arguments are also poorly articulated, illogical (WADA's test procedures for EPO are unreliable so the CAS appeals procedure must be unfair) and irrelevant (science is a club that does not permit outsiders to publish in journals).

His "other work" concerning Michael Phelps's pre-competition routine shows just how facile he is. Even were it the case that listening to music prior to a competition increased performance during that competition, it would not implicate Michael Phelps in the use of illegal performance enhancement. Music -- no matter how inspirational -- is not prohibited.

This guy is crank, and not a particularly clever or interesting one at that.
 

the big ring

BANNED
Jul 28, 2009
2,135
0
0
Visit site
KayLow said:
The guy is a bit thick. USADA's claim that Armstrong's blood data is consistent with EPO use does not rely on an EPO urine test at all. We know this because USADA has presented its case as being of the non-analytical variety.

His arguments are also poorly articulated, illogical (WADA's test procedures for EPO are unreliable so the CAS appeals procedure must be unfair) and irrelevant (science is a club that does not permit outsiders to publish in journals).

His "other work" concerning Michael Phelps's pre-competition routine shows just how facile he is. Even were it the case that listening to music prior to a competition increased performance during that competition, it would not implicate Michael Phelps in the use of illegal performance enhancement. Music -- no matter how inspirational -- is not prohibited.

This guy is crank, and not a particularly clever or interesting one at that.

That was my summary also. I thought it needed saying as LL introduced the "evidence" in the evidence thread, where you can't discuss things. Personally would not have posted that in the evidence thread due to the slightly crack-pottery nature of it all.

I think he'd be far more believable if I could more easily read what he wrote - but his ESL style makes it difficult.
 
Jul 30, 2012
79
0
0
Visit site
In another article about music and oxygen uptake, he argues that listening to music violates the WADA code. His argument begins with a recitation of the WADA code's prohibition on substances that enhance oxygen transfer.

The WADA code provides:

"The following are prohibited: (1) blood doping, including the use autologous, homologous or heterologous blood or red blood cell products of any origin; (2) artificially enhancing the uptake, transport, or delivery of oxygen, including but not limited to perflurochemicals, efaproxil (RSR13) and modified haemoglobin products (e.g. haemoglobin-based blood substitutes, microencapsulated haemoglobin products)."

He then underlines the prohibition on "artificially enhancing the uptake, transport, or delivery of oxygen." If listening to music enhances the uptake, transport, or delivery of oxygen, then, according to this crank, it is against the WADA code.

The key question is whether listening to music "artificially" enhances performance. Although he does not address this, it is evident from context that "artificial" as used here in the WADA code means man-made or man-modified and that only artificial substances ingested, injected or absorbed through the skin are prohibited by this provision. We know this because WADA lists two categories of prohibited oxygen boosters. The first is blood doping, which covers the administration of natural blood and its constituent parts. The second is artificial, which covers the administration of man-made or man-modified substances. Although the list of prohibited means of oxygen boosting is not exhaustive, in every case the examples are of substances that are ingested, injected or absorbed through the skin. WADA apparently felt the need to divide up the list into two categories to make it clear that both natural and artificial substances used as a means to enhance oxygen uptake, transfer or delivery are prohibited.

Music, not being a substance that can be ingested, injected or absorbed through the skin, does not "artificially" enhance oxygen uptake, transport or delivery of oxygen under the meaning of the WADA code any more than sleeping in an altitude tent does.

In his defense, this section of the WADA code falls under the "prohibited methods" category rather than the "prohibited substances" category. It could be argued that this categorization is intended to broaden the list of prohibited artificial oxygen boosters to cover things other than the administration of substances.

This would be wrong, however. As is apparent from the examples, all of which are of the administration of substances, WADA did not intend for this to cover anything other than administration of substances. All of the other "prohibited methods" -- excluding tampering with tests -- involve the administration of some type of substance. Even the examples in the gene doping group all involve the administration of some type of substance.

The primary reason WADA has separated "prohibited substances" from "prohibited methods" is that WADA sees a distinction between substances, which typically give rise to a positive test based on their presence or levels in a person's body and methods, which generally do not give rise to a positive test based on their presence or levels in a person's body. For example, autologous blood transfusions cannot be detected through the presence of red blood cells or the level of red blood cells in the body. Suspicions of blood doping may exist when a person's hematocrit is higher than normal, but an athlete is not considered to have violated WADA code's prohibition on blood doping merely by having a high hematocrit. The same is not true of testosterone, which, at high enough levels, generates a positive test that can give rise to sanctions under the code.

This distinction between methods and substances is breaking down as athletes and their medical teams invent new ways to cheat, but it has historical resonance and so WADA still uses it.
 

the big ring

BANNED
Jul 28, 2009
2,135
0
0
Visit site
KayLow said:
In another article about music and oxygen uptake, he argues that listening to music violates the WADA code. His argument begins with a recitation of the WADA code's prohibition on substances that enhance oxygen transfer.


He actually argues it in the link I provided in OP. It's why I provided it. His input should be disregarded, IMO. His "evidence" in the evidence thread should be removed, IMO.
 
Mar 26, 2009
342
0
0
Visit site
the big ring said:
He actually argues it in the link I provided in OP. It's why I provided it. His input should be disregarded, IMO. His "evidence" in the evidence thread should be removed, IMO.

Technically speaking, eating food and drinking water can be classified as "ingesting a substance to enhance oxygen transfer".

The logical next step to leveling the playing field is thus to ban eating and drinking.
 

the big ring

BANNED
Jul 28, 2009
2,135
0
0
Visit site
silverrocket said:
Technically speaking, eating food and drinking water can be classified as "ingesting a substance to enhance oxygen transfer".

The logical next step to leveling the playing field is thus to ban eating and drinking.

And breathing, surely? :rolleyes:
 
Jul 30, 2012
79
0
0
Visit site
the big ring said:
And breathing, surely? :rolleyes:

The WADA code actually now excludes "supplemental oxygen" from the list of prohibited methods. I guess ordinary breathing doesn't count either. Good thing, that.
 

TRENDING THREADS