The Doping Dilemma
03-21-08, 06:37 PM
#1
Full Member
Thread Starter
The Doping Dilemma
Has anybody else read the latest Scientific American? Great article by Michael Shermer about doping in sports, how teams got around the 50% hemocrit etc. If anybody believes that doping [I]wasn't[I] rampant and used by everybody in the 1990's needs to see the chart on page 87. 1991 - 2007 will go down with baseball as the pharmaceutical era.
03-21-08, 09:17 PM
#2
Burning Matches.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 9,714
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4077 Post(s)
Liked 1,002 Times
in
676 Posts
Hmmm... $5, no thanks.
__________________
ElJamoquio didn't hate the world, per se; he was just constantly disappointed by humanity.
03-22-08, 03:20 AM
#3
Look 555 fledgling
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Oahu
Posts: 313
Bikes: Vitus road bike, I bought used, graduated to a LOOK 555
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'd like to see that.
I know that they look at Testosterone ratios and if Bioidentical Hormones are used in the correct ratios, how could they ever detect that? if they tag all production maybe.
At some point, especially if one is replacing a natural hormone (think insulin, for example) to some "normal" (varies widely, in men) range.....I don't understand how they can ever control this.
I realize this is a different form of doping. Personally, I think high crits are dangerous.
I know that they look at Testosterone ratios and if Bioidentical Hormones are used in the correct ratios, how could they ever detect that? if they tag all production maybe.
At some point, especially if one is replacing a natural hormone (think insulin, for example) to some "normal" (varies widely, in men) range.....I don't understand how they can ever control this.
I realize this is a different form of doping. Personally, I think high crits are dangerous.
Last edited by catherine96821; 03-22-08 at 03:27 AM.
