Kara Goucher Interview on Anti-Doping

Kara Goucher Interview on Anti-Doping  HERE

Proposal to Rewrite the T&F Records

Proposal to Rewrite the T&F Records HERE

Commentary: Show Me the Money?

There has been plenty of conversation recently about when, not if, watching sport in the US will become predominantly  "pay per view."  For running and track and field that time is now as NBC is offering a $69.99 "pass" to watch these sports on all things digital.  

As Alan Abrahamson writes HERE: "This is the future, people. You want it? Here it is:The Boston Marathon (this weekend). The London Marathon. The Berlin and Amsterdam Marathons. The IAAF World Relays from the Bahamas (next weekend). The highest profile USATF events, including USA vs. the world at the Penn Relays. The Drake Relays. The Pre Classic. The USA Outdoor Championships. All 14 Diamond League stops. All 10 days of the IAAF world championships from London."

This is the "spoils" of NBC's purchase of the rights to "broadcast" these events.  NBC hopes to recoup the money they have spent on these rights despite the fact that many die hard track fans are probably tearing their hair out now as they view the broadcasts the network has delivered on US track & field and marathons as wanting.  The announcers do not measure up to their standards and events that last  longer than four minutes get chopped up and much of the strategy, tension, and drama of the long distance and field events are  reduced to a summary and an interview with the winners.  

Where is Carrie Tollefson when you need her?

More important perhaps is what is done with all the money being generated by the sports and the efforts of the athletes who perform on the Athletics "stage."  Nicole Sapstead the CEO of UKAD, the UK's version of USADA, proposed this week something that has also been advocated as necessary for sport. Stopping the spread of doping, the "addiction"of modern sport.  

WADA, UKAD, USADA and others have been noting for decades the lack of adequate financial support for the agencies tasked with attempting to snuff doping out of sports. Their argument being that some of the billions of dollars collected by those who get paid  for the rights and those who profit from the broadcast of these events should allocate some of that money in an attempt to give the anti-doping agencies a fighting chance of attacking the problem.

The seemingly never ending doping scandals have damaged sport by supporting the dopers sales pitch that "everybody is doing it(doping)."  Why not spend some of that sports generated money to fighting doping?  Deliver "clean"sports to their "fans" so that parents won't have to worry about their children buying into the belief that elite athletes have to dope to rise to the top in their respective sport?

Most elite athletes are livid that not enough of the revenues generated by them are devoted to adequately policing the problem.  The unsavory rift between the IOC and WADA has illustrated that those with the money(IOC) are very reluctant to spend it on what they acknowledge is a threat to their product.  The IOC has always treated doping as a public relations problem.  The result being that doping has expanded throughout all sport and the scandals continue as the depth of this problem has become a rapidly expanding plague.

If we want sports to have the role for which it was intended, not the freak show of pharmacological battles many believe they have become. Those organizations who have been created to fight doping need more financial support.  Lots more. 

High level sport has become an entertainment product that is no longer just entertaining. Do we encourage the win at all costs philosophy  promoted by the countries who win the most medals?  Or look the other way as professional teams push their expanding revenues for the owners by winning games and championships with athletes who are bigger, faster, and stronger.

Elite sport has become all about money.  The money paid to sell the product, be it professional or Olympic sports.  The sports where a coach can go from the NFL to collegiate sport and get a pay raise in his multi-million dollar contract.  For highly talented high school athletes there awaits a college scholarship that is, in essence, a lucrative job that pays the bills for their often six figure college costs.  It's safe to say that the benefits of being a top of the podium athlete are financially greater than ever.  

Sports aren't about physical education any more.  They're entertainment, a revenue source for the athletically gifted.  With the stakes so high the temptation to cheat to get ahead, like the money involved, have escalated.  The motto is no longer the Olympic quest of higher, faster, stronger, but rather "show me the money."

The bright side to this is that the vast majority of athletes are not Olympic caliber or are on the "gravey train" of the financial rewards there for the potential champions.  Most enjoy the physical benefits, not the monetary rewards.  The social experience of working hard with like minded teammates to test one's limits in a game or in a race.  Pushing each other to discover what you can train your mind and body to accomplish. They see sports as uplifting, rather than corrupting.  

Thus the challenge is to not reward those who will do anything to "win."  Defeating an opponent is not the ideal of sport it is the self discovery of how one can get the most out of themselves.  A true athlete wants to win, yes, but not at all costs.  Morality and ethics are part of the equasion .I've always defined doping as individuals striving to be the best they could be who give in to the temptation to sink to whatever level necessary in order to "succeed."

As the doping scandals illustrate success is measured in terms of the financial, social, often fake accomplishments.  Australian distance runner Ron Clarke said it best when he noted that it wasn't a victory if you beat someone who wasn't at his best.  He said he wanted his opponents to be the best they could be when he raced them.  Winning was beating an opponent at his best.  Two men testing themselves at the top of their game.  

Under those conditions taking a pill that gave you an advantage was not winning.  You didn't win, the pill did.   

A famous quote said to be from Earl Warren, a former chief justice of the Supreme Court, was: “I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people’s accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man’s failures”

Not any more.----by Jim Ferstle

Kara Goucher's Mixed Feelings About Her Silver Medal

Kara Goucher Writes What if Feels Like to Win a Medal in Worlds and Later Learn that Medal was Upgraded because a runner who finished in front of her was doped.

Clean Sport Formula

Today on the Collective Voice is from the powerful voice of @Scienceofsport https://t.co/uJKvpR9XyS #cleansport #antidoping pic.twitter.com/CPD7EJUJHK

— CleanSportCollective (@CleanSportCO) April 7, 2017

Full article HERE.

BBC Podcast: Winner or Cheat? Doping in Sport

BBC Podcast: Winner or Cheat? Doping in Sport
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p04k5kr0
(download podcast)

Athletes Want Action on Doping Issues

Athletes Want Action on Doping Issues HERE

The Illusion of Restitution for Clean Athletes Deprived of Prize money and Medals by Convicted Dopers

The Illusion of Restitution for Clean Athletes Deprived of Prize money and Medals by Convicted Dopers  HERE and HERE

Doping and Masters Athletes

Doping and Masters Athletes  HERE

Bribes, Extortion, and Cover ups of Positive Drug Tests: “This crisis is far from over.”

Bribes, Extortion, and Cover ups of Positive Drug Tests: “This crisis is far from over.”

English version of @hajoseppelt Doping documentary showing Russian and IAAF Bribery: https://t.co/0ltBzm6gMq

— Steve Magness (@stevemagness) November 27, 2016

Outside asks the question; Can the Clean Sport Collective have an impact on deterring doping in sports

Outside: Can the Clean Sport Collective have an impact on deterring doping in sports? HERE.

UK Play that Focuses on the Pressure on Elite Athletes to Dope

 Deny, Deny, Deny  UK Play that Focuses on the Pressure on Elite Athletes to Dope

The Fate of Doping in Sports

COMMENTARY

By Jim Ferstle

The fastest Women’s 10K Olympic final ever run has been transformed from what it was, a great race where the top competitors actually raced for the full distance, into a Did They or Didn’t They Dope question.  In the past this performance by the top runners at least would have been hailed as a historic event, a new era in women’s distance running.  Instead it has become a headline item for doping in sports.  Instead of celebrating the world, country, and/or personal records people want to know how many of them doped.

                What it illustrates is the fact that organizations, such as the IOC, see the doping problem within sports as a public relations issue. It's a problem that requires more effort to contain instead of rhetoric that attempts to misdirect those who ask legitimate questions of why the necessary resources have not been raised for anti-doping organizations, such as WADA, which the IOC created for the express purpose of tackling the doping problem.  Yes, the IOC contributed an extra $10 million during the past four years to help with research on discovering ways to detect dopers.  

That seemingly large sum is about a tenth of what should have been allocated within the budget.  As it is, that tenth has been effective as the retest of stored samples from the 2008 and 2012 Games showed.  Record numbers of dopers were caught, but the IOC admits that the exercise is primarily to attempt to minimize the number of athletes who fail a drug test during the Games, not as a strategically planned use of the resources and funds to make testing a viable tool to deter athletes from giving in to the temptation to dope.

                As the Russian doping scandal has grabbed headlines and drown out much of the traditional pre-Olympic rhetoric much time and energy have been wasted in counterproductive finger pointing and posturing by the IOC and WADA about whose fault it is that doping is becoming more of a problem, not less, as the days, months, and years pass. 

There is enough blame to go around, not only for the two agencies, but to other actors in the equation, such as the athletes themselves.  But when some athletes became pro-active by being openly critical of athletes who have doped and are returning to competition the IOC basically tells them to shut up even though the athletes have a legitimate concern as to what the proper punishment is needed to deter the tempted.  To establish a new motto about doping.  

Right now the mantra is that athletes have to dope because “everybody is doing it.” Everybody doesn’t dope, but nobody really knows who is or isn’t.  It would be safe to say that there are more dopers now than there were when WADA was created, and continues to be "handled" as a public  relations problem, not as it is a public health issue.

The IOC has ordered WADA to hold a meeting to talk about the problem and what can be done.        Who will fund this?  What is the agenda?  How transparent will the process be, and who gets to take part in this exercise?  

Will it just be more of a finger pointing and a blame fest, or will the participants be able to define the tools necessary to really address what needs to be done?  If so, where will the money come from to fund this transformation? All serious and necessary questions that must be answered.  

There is little trust in the system right now, and that trust must be restored.  It won’t be solved with press releases and rhetoric.  It won’t be solved by the athletes calling each other names.  All the “stakeholders” have to leave their vitriol at the door and come prepared to draft an action plan that is properly funded and able to develop the systems to combat what has become the “cancer” in sports.  

Will Rio be seen years down the road as the beginning of being able to deal with doping, or the tipping point toward turning sport into a freak show rather than a stage for the World’s best athletes? 

The Path to Clean Swimming

The Path to Clean Swimming
By John Leonard 

       We see admirable courageous stances by athletes from multiple nations in Rio with regard to the immediate and important need to protect our sport.
        This comes about because the IOC and its subsidiary International Federation Puppets such as FINA in our sport, have abdicated their moral responsibility to protect and preserve the sanctity of Olympic Ideals and Values. They have revealed themselves as simply a financial machine generating BILLIONS of dollars while sharing pittances with the Athletes on whose backs those dollars are generated, AND THEN, they are so arrogant as to ask the athletes to protect their private money generating circus by not  protesting the prostitution of clean sport, as FINA and the IOC have done by allowing the dopers to swim.
      Which leaves us with “WHAT TO DO”?

Here are the SIMPLE (not easy, but SIMPLE) steps:
1) The real power in sport is with the athletes. Read that again three times. As athletes, you have become so used to the mindset of “big brother IOC will take care of all” that now that that trust has been betrayed, you have not realized ITS ALL ABOUT YOU. Your heart, soul, passion and BODY are what the IOC is getting rich on, and all the IF’s underneath them as well, (Read FINA, with their 100 Million in the bank while you starve.)

2) ATHLETES MUST UNITE, form your own organization and TELL THE IOC under WHAT CONDITIONS YOU WILL PARTICIPATE IN THEIR CIRCUS. (Suggestions on conditions to follow.)


3) And PS. You can run your own Swim Circuit without them, earn REAL money, and be in control of your destiny. See GOLF and TENNIS. I am here to help you do it, when you are ready and I have a team in place to help you do it. And I won’t accept an American nickel to do it. No money for me.
This is about you and generations to follow.  I want my children who coach, to be able to coach CLEAN ATHLETES and aspire to win in the generations ahead. That’s my personal motivation for the cynics to understand.

4) Once you have a viable option to the IOC and their Circus, you are in control. Yes, keep the Olympics, but have it drug free, have it the way you dreamed of it when you were a child and emerging elite athletes. Not the cynical freak show of today, all marketing, no soul. Value your Dreams. They can be real. They can be real. They can be real.

5) What conditions do you want? Here are “suggestions”.

A) WADA must be rebuilt with a REAL anti-doping reformer at the helm. (I suggest Travis Tygert, of USADA, the ONLY administrator in all sport to truly SPEAK UP for you. He’s real. He’s at odds with the USOC because they are just more fakers hiding behind nonsense like “Zero Tolerance.”
The only ZERO TOLERANCE they recognize is for anything that threatens their bank account. Note to the USOC – why hold an Olympics in Los Angeles when it’s just another corrupt operation serving no clean athletes…..? When you cave in to the IOC on everything, to get the Games in LA, YOU STAND FOR NOTHING!  ATHLETES, DEMAND A REBUILD of WADA. And real power for WADA to set rules, test for doping and ENFORCE RULES FOR ALL OF OLYMPIC SPORT.

B) A thing called “HIGH THROUGHPUT TESTING” which exists TODAY, can find the doping needle in the haystack that current testing can’t. It can immediately create CLEAN SPORT. Why don’t “they” use it now? Because they don’t want clean sport, they want the charade of “Zero Tolerance” rhetoric.  The Science EXISTS NOW. ATHLETES, INSIST WE USE 2016 Science to catch 2016 cheats, NOT 1950’s technology which is what is used now.

C) MONEY – It’s all about the money right now, isn’t it? Why are the IOC making BILLIONS while you struggle to get the money to eat and keep a roof over your head? ATHLETES, insist on a fair distribution of revenue to keep YOU at the center of the picture. How? See number two above.

Athletes, every problem that frustrates you and your coaches and the entire world that wants CLEAN SPORT, can be solved by YOU. Unite. OWN YOUR SPORT.  Many of us are here to help you. Fix swimming for your generation and hundreds of generations to come. You have the power to do it. Use it. Please.

John Leonard
American And World Swimming Coaches Association.
JLeonard@swimmingcoach.org

The Whole Russian Thing Leaves Me Like a Limp Rag--Dr. Don Catlin

The Whole Russian Thing Leaves Me Like a Limp Rag--Dr. Don Catlin HERE

AAP Finds Increase in Use of Performance Enhancing Substances among Middle and HS Students

 American Academy of Pediatrics  Finds Increase in Use of Performance Enhancing Substances among Middle and HS Students   HERE

Questions About 2014 Fargo Marathon Champion

Questions About 2014 Fargo Marathon Champion HERE.

Maria Sharapova and Retrospective TUEs

If you're a tennis fan or someone who follows the myriad of doping issues, you've undoubtedly heard of the doping case of Maria Sharapova.  One of the issues raised by Sharapova's lawyer is that she could pursue a retroactive Theraputic Use Exemption(TUE).  A TUE is an option for athletes who have a medical condition that requires use of a substance that is also on the WADA banned list.

The following is the opinion of Dr. Ken Fitch, an Australian professor who has extensive experience with setting up the rules for TUE's within the Olympic movement. This topics relevance to all sports is the requirements that must be met to be granted a TUE in any sport. 

The following was submitted by Dr. Ken Fitch, an Australian doctor and Professor, School of Sports Science, Exercise and Health, Faculty of Life Science University of Western Australia. Dr. Fitch also wrote the rules for TUEs in 1991 for the IOC, chaired the IOC's TUE Committee for 20 years, chaired WADA's interim committee (2001-2003) that established the initial International Standard for TUE (2004) and chaired my national TUE Committee for 22 years. 

Maria Sharapova’s lawyer exploring a possible TUE to exempt a sanction

The ludicrous suggestion by Sharapova’s lawyer that she might seek a retroactive Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) to avoid a sanction for testing positive to meldonium demands a response.  Ignoring whether the 2016 World Anti-Doping Code and the 2015 International Standard for TUEs does or does not make a retroactive TUE a possibility in her circumstances, if anybody examines the criteria that must be met to grant a TUE, he/she would understand that no respectable TUE Committee could approve any such application.

WADA states that there are four criteria, all of which must be met to grant a TUE.

• The drug is necessary to treat an acute or chronic medical condition and the athlete would experience a significant impairment to health if it were to be withheld

• The therapeutic use of the prohibited drug is highly unlikely to produce any additional enhancement of performance beyond what might be anticipated by a return to the athlete’s normal state of health following the treatment

• There is no reasonable therapeutic alternative to the use of the prohibited drug.

• The necessity to use of the prohibited drug is not a consequence of prior use of a prohibited drug or method

Would Sharapova’s health be significantly impaired if she was denied a TUE? 

The Latvian makers of meldonium advise that it should be taken in intermittent courses of 4-6 weeks and for what period of time Sharapova administered meldonium during the past 10 years, has yet to be disclosed.  As the only acceptable medical indications are for ischemic cardiac and ischemic cerebral conditions, it is unthinkable that Sharapova has either.  Hence any claim that should she be denied the right to take meldonium would impair her health is simply fanciful.  Any TUE application must fail criterion 1. 

The second criterion was introduced because some athletes had an essential need to take a prohibited drug.  For example, an insulin dependent diabetic would die if denied insulin which has been prohibited in sport since 1998 and their daily insulin injections that are permitted with a TUE do not enhance performance.  Whether meldonium actually enhances performance in humans has yet to be demonstrated.  That WADA has advised that in less than two months since it was added to the Prohibited List, 99 athletes have tested positive for meldonium would appear to indicate that many athletes and their advisors believe that it does.  No athlete could claim that meldonium was essential to restore their health back to normal levels.  To claim that without it, a person’s health would be less than normal is surely fictitious.  Fails criterion 2

There are many drugs that have been demonstrated in scientific trials to be valuable in cardiac ischemia and the vast majority would be far superior to meldonium.  The few meldonium studies performed in humans have been on persons who recently had experienced a myocardial infarction or an acute coronary syndrome.  That the makers of meldonium recommend that it is administered only in intermittent courses in contrast to most of the widely acceptable, prescribed alternatives that are to be taken daily, is further evidence of the non-essential status of meldonium to treat cardiac ischemia.  As the drug is marketed in only 10 countries globally and Sharapova has lived in USA for much of her life where meldonium is not approved for human use, this poses further questions for the tennis player. 

Drug therapy for cerebral ischemia is generally ineffective and less frequently used than for cardiac ischemia but those patients on whom meldonium was trialled had had either a recent stroke or evidence of deteriorating brain function.  As Sharapova could not possibly demonstrate that she has either of these or indeed significant cardiac or cerebral ischemia, and if she could, alternative permitted drugs are at least as effective if not more so, she fails criterion 3. 

Hence Sharapova fails 3/3 and the fourth criterion has no relevance.

 Finally, should an unscrupulous or ignorant TUE Committee happen to grant Sharapova a retroactive or even a prospective TUE for meldonium, WADA would be certain to appeal to CAS and the decision would be or should be overturned.

IAAF Athletes Commission Supports Paula Radcliffe's Petition for Return of Ill Gotten Prize Money from Banned Athletes

IAAF Athletes' Commission Vice Chairperson, Paula Radcliffe are seeking IAAF Council approval of a petition that would require Russia to repay the prize money, appearance fees--all ill gotten gains from athletes convicted of doping.  That includes "whistleblowers," such as Lilia Shobukova HERE and HERE.

Top Trail Runners SignNew Anti-Doping Pledge

 Top Trail Runners sign new Anti-Doping pledge  HERE

Our leaders in #cleansport are coming forward...trails and ultra thank you. Can a track and field athlete sign?! https://t.co/wXotEh25WZ

— Lauren Fleshman (@laurenfleshman) December 22, 2015