-
"A number of countries have banned or heavily restricted the use of methylhexanamine as a dietary supplement, due to serious concerns about its safety. These countries include the U.S., Canada, New Zealand, Sweden, Australia, the United Kingdom, and Brazil."
" In August 2012, the U.K. Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has ruled that the popular DMAA containing sports supplement Jack3D is an unlicensed medicinal product and that it and all other methylhexanamine containing products need to be removed from the UK market amid concerns of potential risks to public safety.[45]"
If the US military pulls a product you have to wonder about its safety vs. usefulness.
-
I find doping in sports hugely interesting. In fact, I'd probably say that reading Tyler Hamilton's book was a huge factor in getting myself a road bike and getting some miles under my belt.
I've also read David Millar's book and have virtually finished Bjarne Riis'. Amazon never fails to recommend another one for me to read on the subject either.
EPO or no EPO, Hamilton's lone breakaway TdF stage win when riding for Riis' CSC Tiscali team is epic (stage 16 2003 I think).
I met some of the Jamaican athletic coaches at work the other week - they weren't keen to talk about their sprinters at all!
-
I got nerged on the Vuelta thread for being flippant and suggesting Horner's performance could be good old fashioned blood doping.
Reasons to be suspicious that Horner might risk blood doping at this point in his career;
1/ A rider with Horner's profile (not much recent racing, even less winning) will have had relatively few tests through training.
2/ He may see his career ending. He may (like Hincapie did) foresee a few truths about to surface and want to go out with a bang.
3/ With no contract for next year, poor results and being a bit long in the tooth his future is looking uncertain and the mortgage needs paying. -
Reasons to be suspicious that Horner might risk doping
Those are not reasons to be suspicious, they are just really obvious explanations for why he might do it. Anybody who knows anything about cycling could have come up with that list, and indeed most of them did.
Reasons to be suspicious would be Horner doing a performance relative to his rivals which could not easily be explained by anything other than doping.
-
Vaughters on Twitter reminding people that nice guy Horner is such a cunt he chased down Hincapie for talking to USADA on the Champs Elysee after Sky let him lead the peloton in for his last TDF.
At 6:50 you can see Wiggo telling him to fucking leave it.
-
^ broke even faster in the Vuelta thread ;-)
but here's the latest, he notified them about a hotel change in the whereabaouts system
-
Rookie year and already on the sauce...
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/agostini-returns-adverse-analytical-finding-for-clostebol -
It does not mention whether cancer rates are any different among the cyclists - I would expect them to be at least slightly lower, although the substance abuse might well outweigh any beneficial effects of the exercise.
Nutrition and physiology are way too complex, and largely still unknown in details to be discussed at any length and certitude in an internet forum, but with that proviso in mind I shall add a few remarks.
You should actually expect the various forms of cancer to be on an increase among pro cyclists, or among any other pro sportists with similar level of substance abuse, and with that level of unphysiological physical overload. Physical overload and continuous mental distress in fact compromise the immune system, which is responsible for early detection and destruction of cancer cells (cancel is thought to be a natural phenomena where some cells "go mad" and start to multiply for no reason; that process become an illness when the immune system lose control over the natural occurrence of cancer. That is one of the hypotheses).
The other important point is that, from what I read published, pros' regimes are largely based on pseudo science: evidently deep down they are regarded as disposable, and prescribed anything that works in the short term. For instance the energy (glucose/fructose) drinks used in the sport are extremely harmful as not only they do not provide any benefit (several hours - four or more - are necessary for the ingested drinks to get to the muscle tissue in a form ready to use; therefore they do not fulfil the advertised role of "replenishing" the energy levels), but long term they wreak havoc in the insulin system; and they provide, figuratively speaking, an avalanche of energy that the body find very difficult to use in the most efficient way. The detailed step by step of the cancer process is still unknown, but one think is certain: cancer cells to multiply need a lot of energy (cutting the energy supply to cancer cells was - or perhaps still is - one of the lines of research for treatments). With this circumstantial information in mind it is not entirely baseless to speculate that energy dense supplements and medications/supplements aimed to influence body's hormonal balance and push it into overdrive, on and off repeatedly, may have an indirect canceronenic effect.
Sorry for the (relatively) long post.
-
Thank you hippy!
If the US military pulls a product it's probably not safe to overdose on.They are going to ban it here and all the stores stopped selling it. :(. First Ephedrine, then mushrooms, now this? What's next?
You can still get ephedrine. "Chesteze" is the brand of choice.
Arawn
Lynchman
hippy
pauly1978
dubtap
miro_o
gbj_tester
jb000
beseku
peter_v
Mickie_Cricket
Ghibli
French_Touch-
Post a reply
About
Doping
Posted by
@rpm
You wish you knew. Until that time, you'll just stay a mouthbreather up alpine climbs. :)