USADA bans middle-aged recreational runner

[MrBond]

Have we gone too far....?

http://runningmagazine.ca/usada-bans-mi ... al-runner/

[Tori]

Bizarre and why would she have had a urine sample at the race? She isn't a professional or sounded like she won anything.

[drghfx]

It was probably a race sanctions by the USADA and they probably take random samples as well as test the winners. It sure sounds like this was not a person trying to get a competitive advantage.

[ngcaper]

Sounds like a group with a little authority overstepping their bounds...or they had budget to burn!!!

[Jwolf]

The articles and this thread seem to downplay her running ability calling her a "middle-aged recreational runner", but she is fast enough to be winning at the masters level. She placed third in the masters division at Pike's Peak, so I am assuming that they tested all of those who placed. She's fast enough to be placing in the road races she's running.

While the hormone treatment (which includes testosterone-like hormones) wasn't taken to give a competitive advantage, it definitely would give her and advantage vs. not taking it. Most masters women will naturally slow down because of changing hormone levels. So where do you draw the line?

eta: interesting discussion on letsrun about this: http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read. ... ad=6216106

Apparently Pike's Peak announced in March that they would have drug testing, and would be testing the top 10 male and female finishers. She placed seventh. She might be genuinely surprised that she got caught, but I think she should graciously admit that she should have excluded herself from the competition.

[Dstew]

Someone who wins the ascent and overall would win $4,000 and so some motivation to keep the race clean. The person in question would have won a trophy and free enter for next years race so even better on them for protecting the field. A child of a poor farmer in Kenyan, I get PEDs even if I may not approve of the us. Some rich age grouper taking PEDs is something I do not understand but nor would I expect anyone to spend the time and effort to weed out the very few who would have both the opportunity and resources to cheat.

[purdy65]

I dare say that if they tested many post menopausal women for various hormone levels - they would find wonky results. Millions are treated in this manner. Strange story though.

[purdy65]

I dare say that if they tested many post menopausal women for various hormone levels - they would find wonky results. Millions are treated in this manner. Strange story though.

[Jwolf]

I dare say that if they tested many post menopausal women for various hormone levels - they would find wonky results. Millions are treated in this manner. Strange story though.

And if they are in contention for winning races shouldn't they get an appropriate medical exclusion or not compete?

[jonovision_man]

I dare say that if they tested many post menopausal women for various hormone levels - they would find wonky results. Millions are treated in this manner. Strange story though.

And if they are in contention for winning races shouldn't they get an appropriate medical exclusion or not compete?

It's an odd story...

On one hand, I can see how someone would think "I'm just an age grouper" and not really think about or bother with exemptions and such.

On the other hand - amateur cheating is a growing trend. Certainly it's been seen in cycling for many years, you have dentists and accountants doping to win their little local race for a whopping $100 prize... To most of us that makes no sense whatsoever, but if someone has the right blend of competitive nature and lack of perspective, who knows?

Edit: Bicycling Magazine article about the issue :
http://www.bicycling.com/training-nutri ... -next-door

"Based on my experiences, in the U.S. the majority of athletes seeking doping products on the black market are amateurs, and believe it or not, they're masters athletes," says Papp. "I think that's in part because older athletes can afford these products, but it's because of ego as well. People don't want to let go of their youth. Say you're 41 years old and you want 10 percent of your threshold power back. If you can get by the ethics of doping, and don't think it's going to kill you, it's a no-brainer."

The question to me is whether it's worth USADA's time and effort to go after these people. They're cheating, but it's such small potatoes... there has to be some other ill in the world worth taking on that's more important than this, doesn't there?

jono

[jonovision_man]

Also, regarding DHEA:
http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/news.php ... apr17news3

DHEA is a natural hormone released by the adrenal glands and the synthetic form is primarily marketed as an anti-aging drug, an anti-depressant and for muscle growth. It is one of the only steroids in the USA not classified as a controlled drug and does not need FDA approval to be sold over the counter. According to Scott, it is banned by the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) and USADA because it is an andro-related substance. Technically, however, DHEA has very little performance-enhancing effects on the body.

"There is no scientific evidence or basis for this steroid to be a performance enhancer," said Scott. "It is fair to suggest that the probability of DHEA having a performance effect on anyone, at any amount taken is inconceivable. There is no good reason to take DHEA, this is a very foolish drug to take because it is readily detectable, but it has no performance enhancements."

And yes, everything I know about doping I learned from following cycling.

jono

[ian]

The question to me is whether it's worth USADA's time and effort to go after these people. They're cheating, but it's such small potatoes... there has to be some other ill in the world worth taking on that's more important than this, doesn't there?

Thanks for the article link. It makes me reconsider whether my "prizes for amateurs are stupid" mindset would be any sort of solution here.

I'm also on the fence about the efficacy of testing amateurs. I think there's an analogy to be made with conventional law enforcement: every ticket that's ever written for speeding, jay-walking, noise bylaw infractions, et cetera, is a diversion of finite police resources away from more significant crime. On the other hand, the occasional enforcement of minor laws might just be enough to keep a large number of people from breaking them.

[Dstew]

The question to me is whether it's worth USADA's time and effort to go after these people. They're cheating, but it's such small potatoes... there has to be some other ill in the world worth taking on that's more important than this, doesn't there?

Thanks for the article link. It makes me reconsider whether my "prizes for amateurs are stupid" mindset would be any sort of solution here.

I'm also on the fence about the efficacy of testing amateurs. I think there's an analogy to be made with conventional law enforcement: every ticket that's ever written for speeding, jay-walking, noise bylaw infractions, et cetera, is a diversion of finite police resources away from more significant crime. On the other hand, the occasional enforcement of minor laws might just be enough to keep a large number of people from breaking them.

Taking away the prizes may discourage some younger runners who are doping to win those prizes but for the vast majority it sounds like they want to "win" whether that comes with a prize or not.

To use the police analogy, doping is in effect a murder for the governing powers as far as crime goes and so how does one turn a blind eye. But then we get back into the situation that someone with enough money and motivation to cheat is likely going to follow protocols to avoid detection. As an amateur, random testing does not seem like a viable option so only race day testing can be done and there is mounds of evidence how ineffective that is. Thus how much of the testing is for show and to give the appearance that the governing body is concerned enough to do something about it? How depressing it must be for these officials who know that it does not seem to matter what they do, the cheaters are one step ahead of them and it is more a matter of luck then skill to catch any of them.

[Jwolf]

The question to me is whether it's worth USADA's time and effort to go after these people. They're cheating, but it's such small potatoes... there has to be some other ill in the world worth taking on that's more important than this, doesn't there?

jono

In this case, the race (Pike's Peak marathon) paid for the testing.

Personally I'd rather not be racing if it gets to the point where amateur races are being won mostly by small-potatoes cheating. It would be nice to know, but you're right-- no one cares enough to pay for it all.

[Spirit Unleashed]

Rich middle age rich people aside, I'm pretty sure this woman thought she was taking hormone replacement therapy and didn't connect the dots with an age group win dope test. Women don't take HRT for performance enhancement but for mental and emotional reasons.

[La]

Rich middle age rich people aside, I'm pretty sure this woman thought she was taking hormone replacement therapy and didn't connect the dots with an age group win dope test. Women don't take HRT for performance enhancement but for mental and emotional reasons.

Based on her comments in the article, I tend to agree with you. If I were in the same situation, I'd do the same thing. My health and quality of life are far more important than whether I am using a banned substance from the perspective of WADA. If I was taking something like that and ever found myself in an award position at a race, I'd ask to be recused (if that was even possible). Or have a doctor's note as to why I was taking it.

[Jwolf]

Rich middle age rich people aside, I'm pretty sure this woman thought she was taking hormone replacement therapy and didn't connect the dots with an age group win dope test. Women don't take HRT for performance enhancement but for mental and emotional reasons.

Based on her comments in the article, I tend to agree with you. If I were in the same situation, I'd do the same thing. My health and quality of life are far more important than whether I am using a banned substance from the perspective of WADA. If I was taking something like that and ever found myself in an award position at a race, I'd ask to be recused (if that was even possible). Or have a doctor's note as to why I was taking it.

Except that she has background in biology, works as an athletic therapist and in the health field. She had to know there was a performance-enhancing effect and that it is banned.

[jonovision_man]

Rich middle age rich people aside, I'm pretty sure this woman thought she was taking hormone replacement therapy and didn't connect the dots with an age group win dope test. Women don't take HRT for performance enhancement but for mental and emotional reasons.

Based on her comments in the article, I tend to agree with you. If I were in the same situation, I'd do the same thing. My health and quality of life are far more important than whether I am using a banned substance from the perspective of WADA. If I was taking something like that and ever found myself in an award position at a race, I'd ask to be recused (if that was even possible). Or have a doctor's note as to why I was taking it.

Except that she has background in biology, works as an athletic therapist and in the health field. She had to know there was a performance-enhancing effect and that it is banned.

She may well have known it was banned (I think she conceded as much?) but at best the jury is still out with respect to the performance-enhancing effect, far more likely it's a complete dud. The doctor I quoted above believes it has absolutely no performance impact:

the probability of DHEA having a performance effect on anyone, at any amount taken is inconceivable

I haven't found a single study that says it has any positive impact on performance, just a lot of claims by the people selling it (since it's an over-the-counter drug).

jono

[MichaelMc]

So she is well educated enough to understand the effects of the drug she is taking, she is a competitive Masters runner, she was sent a warning they were testing, she did in fact place in her division and she's shocked she was banned?

She didn't have to go off the drugs, she could have gotten a doctors note and been allowed to compete.

I've seen PLENTY of cheating at all sorts of levels, and everyone claims innocence. I don't think the fact that most of us WOULDN'T cheat for such small payoff has relevance. In her place I'd blame myself for being an idiot and forgetting to get clearance, giving her the benefit of the doubt that it wasn't purposeful.

She's not going to jail or getting fined, she's banned from competing in an association whose rules she violated.

[Pat Menzies]

Its performance enhancing in that it lets an older woman perform like a younger woman.

[Jwolf]

Its performance enhancing in that it lets an older woman perform like a younger woman.

Exactly.

And +1 to Michael's comments too.

[drghfx]

Its performance enhancing in that it lets an older woman perform like a younger woman.

Well where do you draw the line between something that treats a biological issue? You could say an aspirin improves your performance if you have a headache on race day. Geez, my glasses could be called a performance enhancer since I probably couldn't run as fast if I didn't wear them. Running shoes make you faster than when you are wearing boots. Pasta makes you run faster due to the carbs etc.

[jonovision_man]

Its performance enhancing in that it lets an older woman perform like a younger woman.

Are you sure? I don't think it's efficacy has been proven, haven't found a study to support that.

Here is a meta-analysis:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21649617

Overall, the benefit of DHEA on muscle strength and physical function in older adults remains inconclusive. Some measures of muscle strength may improve, although consensus was not reached. DHEA does not appear to routinely benefit measures of physical function or performance. Further large clinical trials are necessary to better identify the clinical role of DHEA supplementation in this population.

jono

[Jwolf]

It won't bring you back to where you were when you were 20 but it will help SOME women slow the hormonal effects of aging on performance. All women are different and not all will have the same effects, but people take hormones for various lifestyle enhancing effects. There is definitely effect on performance for many women- and they will all tell you that. This doesn't mean it's going to help the average 50-year-old woman compete like an Olympian, but it will help her compete better than she could without it for sure.

Yes, the jury is still out on whether or not there is a consistent performance-enhancing effect of taking it, but until then it IS a banned substance by USADA. I just don't buy Krisi Anderson's "shocked" response. She could have graciously admitted that she made the mistake and bowed out.

[jonovision_man]

It won't bring you back to where you were when you were 20 but it will help SOME women slow the hormonal effects of aging on performance. All women are different and not all will have the same effects, but people take hormones for various lifestyle enhancing effects. There is definitely effect on performance for many women- and they will all tell you that. This doesn't mean it's going to help the average 50-year-old woman compete like an Olympian, but it will help her compete better than she could without it for sure.

I don't know how you end that statement with "for sure" when faced with scientific studies that find no effect on performance. If they can't even measure a consistent performance benefit, it can't be all that significant, if it exists at all (which is starting to look doubtful). The fact that people think it's a benefit doesn't matter - when they go to study it, it isn't there.

Yes, the jury is still out on whether or not there is a consistent performance-enhancing effect of taking it, but until then it IS a banned substance by USADA. I just don't buy Krisi Anderson's "shocked" response. She could have graciously admitted that she made the mistake and bowed out.

This I agree with.

jono