my request: please do not post about this. at all. not until the poll has been sufficiently populated. this, because i’m trying to gauge what people think and know about this before they’re given any data to sway their current level of knowledge.
here’s a short glossary of terms to make this easier:
TUE: therapeutic use exemption. you ask USADA, or your world governing body (in our sport’s case the ITU) for an exemption to a medication on the banned list. you either are or aren’t granted an exception.
retroactive/proactive: USADA defines you and and is as “level-2” athletes, and this is more less analogous to “age group” athletes. there are provisions for retroactive TUEs for level-2 athletes in USADA’s rules, that is to say, while a pro athlete might need to obtain a TUE prior to competition, an level-2 athlete might need only to apply for a TUE after a positive result.
i’m going to lock this thread. this, because i don’t want anybody to write anything that might serve as a hint, regardless of whether or not he thinks it is a hint. i’ll unlock this thread after we’ve got a few hundred responses, and we can talk about it.
please don’t start another thread to talk about this. not yet at least.
if you don’t know the answer to this poll, please just take your best guess.
I admit to being one of the folks that responded never. Seems like every one of the “rich guy” magazines is full of add for anti aging “clinics” that seem little more than outfits that will sell you things like HGH and testosterone if you are willing to pay. If you go to the sites for these places they ask things like “are you willing to travel for the initial diagnosis” etc. I think I saw one add touting that you could get involved with just a phone consultation. Accordingly I think that a prescription is just a formality as would be any TUE based on the findings of the same dr or that prescription. I will admit to not fully understanding the TUE process as I have never had the need to look into it.
I am not judging anyone who it taking an anti aging regimen, who does not want stuff like less body fat, a better sex life, better eyesight, etc. I think it is seriously something to consider as I get older. That said, I think it is horse shit to be racing against someone on such a regimen whether someone you are paying $300-$1000 a month feels it is “medically indicated” or not.
Wow. I didn’t understand the question at all. Read it as ‘in what case ‘should’ testosterone be legal for AG use’. Wouldn’t be surprised if many people read it the same way.
Dan, no offense but I don’t think the results are reflective of what people actually know.
The question was phrased in a way that could lead someone to think you asked ‘what is
your opinion of when we should allow the use of testosterone for AGers’. I understood the
question this way.
You say: the correct answer is…So I gather you were really asking what is the current legal
stance by USA Triathlon when it comes to testosterone use. My answer would have been
different had you phrased the question differently. I’m pretty sure I’m not the only one.
Wow. I didn’t understand the question at all. Read it as ‘in what case ‘should’ testosterone be legal for AG use’. Wouldn’t be surprised if many people read it the same way.
I didn’t respond on that one but agree, when I first read it I figured it meant do you think it should be allowed under said conditions, not what is the current rule in place for it.
I’m with you Frenchy, I was not factoring in the 1 in a million that really do have this hypogonadism. I looked at it from the 99,9% of AG’ers that are taking T just because they have been told their levels are low by some longevitity doctor, and now they have their 19 year old levels back. SUre they have a doctors prescription, but I’m not sure that is legal? Hell, I’m not sure the governing bodies or testing agencies know if it is going to be legal or not, so I do not accept the question and answer. It was waaay too broad, and there are most likely two answers that are completely opposite, but both right…
Wow. I didn’t understand the question at all. Read it as ‘in what case ‘should’ testosterone be legal for AG use’. Wouldn’t be surprised if many people read it the same way.
Dan, no offense but I don’t think the results are reflective of what people actually know.
The question was phrased in a way that could lead someone to think you asked ‘what is
your opinion of when we should allow the use of testosterone for AGers’. I understood the
question this way. .
Same here, although I got the answer correctly because what is the current rule is what I think the rule should be.
I admit to being one of the folks that responded never. Seems like every one of the “rich guy” magazines is full of add for anti aging “clinics” that seem little more than outfits that will sell you things like HGH and testosterone if you are willing to pay. If you go to the sites for these places they ask things like “are you willing to travel for the initial diagnosis” etc. I think I saw one add touting that you could get involved with just a phone consultation. Accordingly I think that a prescription is just a formality as would be any TUE based on the findings of the same dr or that prescription. I will admit to not fully understanding the TUE process as I have never had the need to look into it.
I am not judging anyone who it taking an anti aging regimen, who does not want stuff like less body fat, a better sex life, better eyesight, etc. I think it is seriously something to consider as I get older. That said, I think it is horse shit to be racing against someone on such a regimen whether someone you are paying $300-$1000 a month feels it is “medically indicated” or not.
Dan, no offense but I don’t think the results are reflective of what people actually know.
The question was phrased in a way that could lead someone to think you asked ‘what is
your opinion of when we should allow the use of testosterone for AGers’. I understood the
question this way.
You say: the correct answer is…So I gather you were really asking what is the current legal
stance by USA Triathlon when it comes to testosterone use. My answer would have been
different has you phrased the question differently. I’m pretty sure I’m not the only one.
Furthermore, the post “explaining” the poll was incomprehensible.
I say never. It is especially not fair if someone depletes their levels through excessive training and then gets a doctor to write a prescription. However, I think if someone takes it with a prescription, they should still be allowed to participate in the race, but they must inform the race director and their results do not count.
On a somewhat related note, I am a lawyer, and while I was in the waiting room at the local jail the other day, there was a magazine geared towards corrections officers that I picked up. Anyway, every single ad in the magazine was for a longetivity doctor or other ways to increase testosterone levels. If the side effects of this stuff are as bad as I read, very disturbing if it is so prevelant amongst law enforcement officers. And if it is that easy to get, maybe it there is a bigger problem with age groupers doping than I think there is.
“Dan, no offense but I don’t think the results are reflective of what people actually know.
The question was phrased in a way that could lead someone to think you asked ‘what is
your opinion of when we should allow the use of testosterone for AGers’. I understood the
question this way.”
no offense taken. however, i didn’t write should. i wrote would. i’m quite confident that this sentence means what i wanted it to mean.
“So I gather you were really asking what is the current legal stance by USA Triathlon when it comes to testosterone use.”
no. that’s not what i’m asking. USA Triathlon has nothing to do with drug testing. but if you replace USAT with USADA, then, yes, that is what i’m asking or, at least, was asking.
i see that a fair number of folks misunderstood the question. however, i don’t see how you could twist the sentence to mean “what do you wish the rule would be?” rather than what the rule currently is.
I say never. It is especially not fair if someone depletes their levels through excessive training and then gets a doctor to write a prescription. However, I think if someone takes it with a prescription, they should still be allowed to participate in the race, but they must inform the race director and their results do not count.
On a somewhat related note, I am a lawyer, and while I was in the waiting room at the local jail the other day, there was a magazine geared towards corrections officers that I picked up. Anyway, every single ad in the magazine was for a longetivity doctor or other ways to increase testosterone levels. If the side effects of this stuff are as bad as I read, very disturbing if it is so prevelant amongst law enforcement officers. And if it is that easy to get, maybe it there is a bigger problem with age groupers doping than I think there is.
I read it as a hypothetical should statement as well. Thought the wording was confusing but didn’t want to ask about it as per your instructions.
If I knew there was actually a correct answer, I would have answered differently. As I read it, I gave you my opinion of what I thought the answer should be.
i see that a fair number of folks misunderstood the question. however, i don’t see how you could twist the sentence to mean “what do you wish the rule would be?” rather than what the rule currently is.
Yet there are those who did just that. While being Australian means English isn’t his native language, I’m pretty sure Francois is quite intelligent and still made the same reading mistake I did.
I didn’t have any issue with the interpretation of the poll question. After I asnwered (“never”, incorrectly), I went to the USAT site to check the rules. That directed me to WADA, and after wading through the legalese, I saw that the proactive TUE was the legal route.
One of the guys I train with is a doctor, and he explained that he has had patients that require testerone shots once per month because their body doesn’t produce the hormone. Folks like that would certainly be good candidates for a legal TUE. Without such an exemption, they wouldn’t be able to compete legally.