"Tom Kunich" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<%Z%
[email protected]>...
> "chiefhiawatha" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
Chiefhiawatha and T Kunich:
Really shooting from the hips in frustration when you claim to have some knowledge about my
background to state I am not trained to arrive at certain conclusions. You would be marked down in a
debate with that line without producing evidence.
Thomas, why do you think the IOC was reluctant to provide funding to trial hGh anti doping tests to
have it available for the last Olympics? The same reason why the EPO blood test was made ineffective
by including the urine test and an athlete had to fail both. If the hGh test came through trials
successfully it would have been the cause of a lack of new records or near records in power events
and the possibility of increased DQ's and athletes despatched personae non grata. The IOC is in the
game for profit and top class performances means more bums on seats, greater interest equating to
higher value sponsorships and sale of TV rights.
In you last post, Thomas, you claimed there were no known (to you) detrimental side effects to hGh.
You were corrected.
Now you go off and claim that hGH provides no benefits to athletes. Maybe you can tell that to the
Chinese swimming team with their Amazonian world record holding female sprinters who were caught
with phials of hGH before the World Championships several years ago.
Johnson was not smart to use a traceable and banned performance enhancing drug. The smarter athletes
were using hGh. In athletic circles it was so prevalent in Atlanta in 1996 that those games became
known as the hGH games.
In relation to the changing portrait of Carl Lewis, tell us the before and after years you are using
as the basis to refute the claim of change. Or is this another unsubstantiated claim from you that
characterizes your posts.
>
news:[email protected]...
> > In article <
[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Veloflash)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > It was a talking point in athletic circles for years, Chief, how Carl's features had changed
> > > slightly over the years. I suppose it would be fair game to make reference to Ben Johnson or
> > > Lindford Christie but not to a fellow American.
> >
> > Actually, it wouln't be fair for YOU to do that to Christie, or Johnson, or Lewis, or Sammy
> > Sosa. The reason is that you are not trained in that field. You have received no training to
> > diagnose facial changes supposedly brought on by human growth hormone abuse.
>
> But he has carefully trained himself to abuse others. If you look at Carl's face there's no such
> distortions as he has claimed. All it takes is a look at the pictures.
>
> hGH has never shown to actually achieve what the claims of the body builders. Sure, no one was
> stupid enough to design a controlled study with the sorts of dangeous overdoses of hGH that body
> builders use, but body builders have always had absolutely fantastic claims for all sorts of
> medications that are absolutely known not to have any effects at all.
>
> It should be noted that the material that supposedly tripped the "doping" string was ephedrine and
> we discussed that at length before and my opinion then as now was that A) It has no effect on
> performance and 2) it is easy to detect and 3) it is accidently available from many sources
> ranging from marked bottles of cold remedies to UNMARKED "vitamin" tablets and herbal teas. This
> article was nothing but a crude attempt to discredit the Olympic Committee and probably for a
> political reason.
>
> Johnson should have been talked about. Not only was he using an extremely potent and dangerous
> steroid but he was so stupid that he was using it in competition. Just how dumb can you get?
