Olympic Eligibility

LaShawn Merritt, a champion. Or is he? I read an article about his eligibility being reinstated. This was originally in the New York Times. What are your thoughts about this? Do you think that once an athlete pays his/her dues they should be eligible to compete again or do you think once a cheater, always a cheater?



The Olympic 400-meter champion LaShawn Merritt of the United States and possibly dozens of other athletes had their eligibility for the 2012 London Games restored Thursday when a doping punishment put in place by the International Olympic Committee was struck down as overly severe.


The Court of Arbitration for Sport, based in Switzerland, nullified a 2008 I.O.C. rule that barred athletes who had served a doping suspension of six months or longer from competing in the next Olympics, even if they had completed their original sanctions.


In its ruling Thursday, the sports appeals court called the I.O.C.’s rule “invalid and unenforceable” and said it violated the statutes of the World Anti-Doping Agency, which was created to bring about uniform handling of cases involving banned substances. Essentially, a Court of Arbitration for Sport panel ruled that athletes were being penalized twice for the same offense.


The most visible beneficiary of the ruling Thursday is Merritt, who won a gold medal in the 400 at the 2008 Beijing Games. He was later suspended from competition for 21 months after testing positive for a steroid found in a male-enhancement product.


Although Merritt’s suspension ended in July, he would have still faced a ban from the London Games had the I.O.C. rule not been overturned, even though the substance he took was designed to enhance sexual performance, not athletic performance.


“LaShawn is really happy with the result,” his lawyer, Howard Jacobs, said in a telephone interview. “If you serve your suspension, you should be able to return to competition, and that is all competition.”


Merritt will be among the favorites as he tries to repeat as 400-meter champion next summer. At the recent world track and field championships in Daegu, South Korea, he finished second in the open 400 and helped the United States win the 4x400-meter relay.


Thursday’s ruling could also affect the British Olympic Association, which has a rule that bars its athletes from the Winter and Summer Games for life if they commit a serious doping offense. Now the chances for the British sprinter Dwain Chambers and the cyclist David Millar to compete in the London Games could have gained newfound traction.


About 50 track and field athletes had their chances of competing in London elevated by the ruling, according to the I.A.A.F., the sport’s governing body.


The I.O.C. rule had not been met with uniform acceptance in the Olympic and antidoping worlds. Both the United States Olympic Committee and the United States Anti-Doping Agency had supported the restoration of Merritt’s eligibility. The I.O.C. and the U.S.O.C. had taken the case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, seeking clarity on eligibility issues.


“This decision does not diminish our commitment to the fight against doping, but rather ensures that athletes and national Olympic committees have certainty as they prepare for London,” Scott Blackmun, chief executive of the U.S.O.C., said in a statement.


The I.O.C. said in a statement that it “fully respects” the ruling of the arbitration panel but expressed disappointment at the outcome. The Olympic committee also said it would attempt to have the rule restored when the World Anti-Doping Agency bylaws are revised in 2013.


“The I.O.C. has a zero tolerance against doping and has shown and continues to show its determination to catch cheats,” the committee said in a statement. “We are therefore naturally disappointed since the measure was originally adopted to support the values that underpin the Olympic movement and to protect the huge majority of athletes who compete fairly.”

Steroids

Today I was on the stairmill at the end of my workout, it was Saturday so I had time to walk for 30 minutes.I was next to a much younger woman, I see her on occasion, we talk only briefly, we are both very serious about our training, she looks great. She is obviously an athlete, a sleek gazelle like body. The first time I saw her on the stairmill she was going at such an amazingly fast pace for so long, when she finished I had to ask how long she had done it.

45 minutes. I mean she was pushing hard, and sweating, but not puffing, she does this quite a bit. I told her she was in amazing condition, she slowly looked me up and down and said "you're not in such bad shape yourself", we both smiled, laughed and have exchanged knowing smiles ever since.

She was there today before me, and there after me too.

A fellow stopped by to talk to me about my vacation, we stay in the same hotel each year, he at Christmas time for two weeks, me in February for one. At some point in our lives we must have stayed there at the same time, that's how I know him.

We were talking about the location, and the new restaurant at the hotel. I said that the chef was quite accommodating, willing to make any changes if we requested them, and some how I brought up the fact I ended up sitting on the beach drinking water and eating tuna out of a can. I believe I was telling him how I would get hungry in between meals, and am prepping for a competition so I really needed the protein.

He asked what I compete in, I said "Figure, it's sort of like Bodybuilding, but you don't get as big and muscular, you don't take all the steroids." Then I added, "well, actually lots of Figure gals take steroids too."

He looked at me and said "Are you sure you don't?"

I looked down and right in his eyes and said "If I did I would look a hell of a lot better than this!"

He said "You look pretty good to me now."

Conversations  like this happen on occasion, and it gets me thinking a bit.  I know that drugs are rampant in the industry, and those who tell you it is not either don't want to admit it or they are naive. Everyone does not take drugs, but many do, many want so desperately to have that freaky unobtainable body that they are willing to harm themselves. Some even get prescriptions, and then justify it by saying it is a necessity as their doctor prescribed it, well I have news for you, if it is on the banned list from the IOC (International Olympic Committee), they don't care who prescribed it or why, it is still banned.

Not all bodybuilders take drugs, but many do, women just don't have the testosterone that men do, so to get as big as a big bodybuilding man, they have to take drugs, simple as that.

Figure gals will take them for different reasons, not necessarily to get big, but those drugs are just as harmful and expensive.

I was pleased to listen to Erin Stern recently on Natural Bodybuilding Radio (a podcast  for drug free athletes) discuss how she is natural, and she won the 2010 Figure Olympia! It's the episode on 10/19/2010 and she discusses her training with Olympic lifts!

I actually feel good that people think I look like I do! That means they think I look unnaturally big, or muscular, just the look I have been working towards for years.

But, it's all in the eye of the beholder. Minutes later, as I was leaving the locker room, I ran into a woman I met recently, Marni. She said "You look great! You look so small!"

hmmm...two different opinions huh?

I thanked her and told her things are a little odd. My weight has plateaued, I am right about the same, but I can see the body fat is slowly melting away, and my arms? They are getting bigger! The muscles are full, really full even though I am restricting my starchy carbs a bit. The skin is tight, I feel good. Just take a look at those arms in the picture, it was taken at 6:00 p.m. and today was leg day way back at 6:00 a.m, so they aren't pumped full of blood from any heavy curls. (I guess it could have been the 5 sets of 10 deadlifts I did with 135 pounds), that was just the start of my morning, I know that's not heavy, but that was 50 reps, I am going for some volume right now!

I mentioned I have changed my training and my diet. The training has been a pretty significant change, the diet not so much, but enough that my body is changing, taking a different shape.

I may find that in 8 weeks I cannot compete, I won't have the look the judges want, but I may have the look I want, and that's all that matters.

Interesting times are ahead! I see a fork in the road, and each path looks inviting and filled with excitement, which one I end up taking will be as much a surprise to me as it will be to you.

New EPO Like Drug

I think you can tell that I am pretty anti-drug. I just find it hard to believe that people would jeopardize their health for a trophy, or a photo-shoot, a paycheck, it's crazy.

It is one thing if people are stupid enough to mess with their own bodies, but when they bring it into a competition or sporting event, it makes me angry.  What right do they have to cheat and steal from the people who are really working hard to achieve their lifetime dream?

 Runners have been one of the most notorious drug abusers over the years, and I am not just talking about Olympic level runners, but National and even recreational level. Their drug of choice? EPO. Mild mannered little "Susie" probably does all sorts of drugs so she can run so far and so fast, and no one even guesses.

Here is an article I found particularly interesting that just shows how cheaters will continue to do whatever they can to get what they want.

By EDDIE PELLS, AP National Writer Eddie Pells, Ap National Writer Wed Sep 22, 1:22 pm ET
COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. – A drug that mimics EPO as a way to help patients with kidney problems is in the late stages of development, one in an long list of new pharmaceuticals that anti-doping authorities are monitoring as they struggle to keep sports clean.

The drug, called Hematide, is in Stage 3 development, meaning it could be on the market by 2012. Anti-doping authorities say there's a chance some version of the blood-boosting drug could already be available on the black market.
"It speaks to the length people will go to try to cheat," said Larry Bowers, the lead scientist at the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency. "You get drugs with perfectly beneficial health purposes and it gets diverted for use by people who shouldn't be doing it."

Almost every drug on the World Anti-Doping Agency's banned list, including human growth hormone and steroids, have legitimate medical purposes.
Hematide's arrival is the latest development in a long-running cat-and-mouse game between the drug police and the athletes who find ways to use drugs to improve their performance. Cases involving track athletes Marion Jones, baseball players Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens and an investigation into seven-time Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong have centered around whether they used human growth hormone, EPO or designer steroids, all of which have proven more difficult to detect than traditional steroids.
EPO (short for erythropoietin) is a hormone that boosts the body's production of red blood cells, which carry oxygen — and more oxygen helps athletes perform better, particularly endurance athletes in sports like cross-country skiing and cycling. In 1989, the Food and Drug Administration approved EPO for legitimate medical purposes, mainly to treat anemic conditions in patients with kidney diseases and cancer.

Before Hematide, the most significant development in the line of EPO products was CERA, a version of EPO that stays in the blood for longer periods of time. There was no test available for CERA at the Beijing Olympics, but the International Olympic Committee holds onto doping samples for eight years so it can analyze them later if new testing methods become available.

Using a new test in 2009 is how the IOC retroactively caught five Beijing Olympians for using CERA. This year, the IOC said it was retesting some samples from the 2006 Turin Olympics — strong indicators of how patient anti-doping authorities are willing to be to catch cheaters.

One of the newer drugs on WADA's radar, Hematide essentially does the same thing as EPO — helps produce more red blood cells — but, much like CERA, it stays in the body longer so patients don't have to go through as many treatments.
Still, Hematide is not EPO, and so it must be detected using different methods than were used for the original blood booster. Anti-doping authorities are strategically vague when talking about whether a test is already in place for developing drugs, not wanting drug cheats to know what solutions have been found or perfected. At an anti-doping conference last year, WADA said it was studying a new method that would allow wider testing of EPO.

And in yet another attempt to counter possible new EPO-like substances — as well as all other developing drugs that haven't hit the market yet — WADA recently added a category of "non-approved substances" that covers developing products that are not included in other sections of the list and not yet approved for use.

Hematide, however, is already specifically named on the banned list, said Gary Wadler who leads the WADA committee that determines the banned-substances list.

Earlier this year, WADA signed an agreement with a group representing pharmaceutical companies that gets the companies to voluntarily share information with drug police when they're developing new products. It was considered a breakthrough, giving anti-doping authorities a window into what's out there. In return, WADA has to agree not to share proprietary information between competing companies.

"The mission is to be good citizens here," said Anne-Marie Duliege, chief medical officer at Affymax, the company developing Hematide. "We clear it with the professional agencies who know how to do this. The idea is not to replace WADA. We're just delighted to work with WADA, so they can see what's out there and what they might need to prevent down the road."

It's too early to tell how big a factor Hematide

"We work with the people involved with it. It's not like it came out of nowhere," Wadler said. "We all follow the literature on what's being developed. Something like this does not surprise you at all."

Are you Natural?

 That question can mean a zillion things, but for me I am talking about bodybuilding and the use of anabolic steroids , growth hormone, illegal drugs.

The question has been on my mind quite a bit lately.  Unless you compete, or know someone who does, you probably were not aware that there are two types of bodybuilding organizations. There are  "competitions" (non-drug tested) and there are "Natural Competitions".

The non-tested competitions don't drug test, the naturals do. They usually require each competitor to take a lie detector test prior to the competition. Those who place high, and a few random competitors will be tested with urinalysis.  If you are caught with evidence of drugs in your system, you are stripped of your title, banned form the organization, labeled as a "cheater" and you may even get your picture plastered all over the promoters website! They typically test for anything banned by the IOC (International Olympic Committee).

Now just because the non-tested shows don't test, it doesn't mean all the competitors are taking drugs. I have been competing in the non-tested shows for two years, and I don't take drugs.  I know many other competitors who do not take drugs either. It just so happens that there are a lot more non-tested competitions than tested ones. It is expensive to have everyone take a lie detector test, and then the urinalysis is even more expensive.

Now the bodybuilding industry has been notoriously involved in drugs forever, this does not mean that all individuals who compete take drugs, but there are quite a large number that do.

People always asume that a woman with an amazing physique takes drugs, this is not so. Most of us are just busting our butts at the gym and carefully monitoring  what we eat. We also employ nutrient timing, when you eat is just as important as what you eat.

One of the most common comments I hear after a woman starts competing, or gets ready to is that they never knew the food was such a huge factor.  Look around the gym, you will see many people working very hard, every day. They may not look that great, and that is because they may have the mindset that "I have worked hard at the gym, so I can eat whatever I want!"

Big, big mistake.

Now as far as "bulking up" and a woman getting so big she looks like a man, well that is quite difficult to do. I have tried it countless times! They can get big, sure, real big, but not that huge look, similar to a bodybuilding male.

Consider the fact that a woman simply cannot build muscles like a man without the testosterone, unless she has consierably more testosterone in her system than most women. Look at Caster Semenya, the poor thing had to submit to a gender test to prove she was legit! She is not the norm though.

For most women, they can lift all the heavy weights that they like and without drugs, they just cannot look like Arnold Schwarzenegger. It is almost impossible. Speaking of Arnold, it is even impossible for HIM to look like himself! Here are some quotes of his regarding his past steroid use:

1974. "I take steroids because they help me an extra 5 percent. Women take the (contraception) pill.
They are somewhat similar. I do it under a doctor's supervision."

1977: "Yes I have used them, but no, they didn't make me what I am. Anabolic steroids were helpful
to me in maintaining muscle size while on a strict diet in preparation for a contest."

1987: "I don't worry about it, because I never took an overdosage."

1992: "In those days you didn't have to deal with the black market.
You could go to your physician and just say, 'Listen, I want to gain some weight,
and I want to take something.' Then the physician would say, 'Do it six weeks before
competition, then it will be safe.' And that's what you would do. The dosage that
 was taken then versus taken now is not even 10 percent. It's probably 5 percent."

1996: "I used steroids. It was a risky thing to do, but I have no regrets.
It was what I had to do to compete. The danger with steroids is overusage.
I only did it before a difficult competition – for two months, but not for
a period of time that could harm me. And then afterward, it was over.
I would stop. I have no health problems, no kidney damage or anything like that from using them."

When you read about a successful Natural Bodybuilder, you will notice that they ALWAYS ensure that the word NATURAL proceeds their title and name. There just are not that many natural, successful bodybuilders. It's hard to get that big naturally.

I do want to repeat, that many competitors don't rely on any drugs to get where they are, the work hard, diet smart and train day after day. It's the ones using drugs who give the rest of us the bad rap.

The one group of people you would imagine to be the healthiest are often the least healthy. I do think that drugs will be the death of the sport eventually, and that's unfortunate.