Doping among masters athletes

This idea of PED use is distressing … a while back one of our great 70+ year old sprinters stated that 2 masters swimmers admitted to him of taking PED’s to “level the playing field” and then within this thread another discussed admitted PED use of USMS swimmers on a PED site. I spent a couple of hours sweeping thru those sites the other day and recognized 2 names as as probable usms swimmers … distressing With the inability of the world sports authorities to prevent this I doubt we would make a much dent in our problem. It might make us feel better if we did something, maybe a “position” statement in relationship to this issue or even random testing. Our problem is how do we convince current PED users not to use. They are convinced its improving there lives and certainly improving times ( me i’d just like to recover from day to day like the old days). They can ignore the health risks that will come further down the road, they feel good now ! Myself I actually enjoy the struggle, despite my complaining. I love swimming and I will remain a “Natural” swimmer. ( a term i’m borrowing from weight lifters who don’t use )

Want to get on your high horse and be "natural." So be it. You really think it's being on a "high horse" to be against doping?

You really think it's being on a "high horse" to be against doping? I think she was on her "high horse" regarding jack black's blanket comments about "enjoying the struggle" and denouncing people on potentially medically necessary "PEDs" as "convinced it's improving their lives." Obviously, as in the case of jpetyk, many masters would qualify for TUEs.

A position statement can't hurt. Want to test record setters? Fine. How are you going to govern the folks in the rest of the world who are setting records? Want to get on your high horse and be "natural." So be it. I know the prescriptions I take DO improve my quality of life. I started them BEFORE I joined USMS. Don't judge the majority of us that are swimming to stay fit, and taking prescriptions to get out of bed in the morning. So 1 or 2, maybe a handful of people are "cheating." Just like in age group swimming when someone would complain to the coach that someone was cheating on a set, the reply was always "they're only hurting themselves." I don't think doping in competition is anything at all like age groupers cheating on a set. The former can make you faster in competition while the latter will likely make you slower, or at least provide a lesser training benefit than those doing the set as prescribed. While there might not be any financial gains for winning a USMS National Championship or setting a Master's WR (or maybe there could be, I do see a number of USMS'ers on advertisements for things like P2Life) if somebody is winning by way of cheating, that is effectively hurting the person who finished behind them.

Our problem is how do we convince current PED users not to use. They are convinced its improving there lives and certainly improving times ( me i’d just like to recover from day to day like the old days). They can ignore the health risks that will come further down the road, they feel good now ! Myself I actually enjoy the struggle, despite my complaining. I love swimming and I will remain a “Natural” swimmer. ( a term i’m borrowing from weight lifters who don’t use ) A position statement can't hurt. Want to test record setters? Fine. How are you going to govern the folks in the rest of the world who are setting records? Want to get on your high horse and be "natural." So be it. I know the prescriptions I take DO improve my quality of life. I started them BEFORE I joined USMS. Don't judge the majority of us that are swimming to stay fit, and taking prescriptions to get out of bed in the morning. So 1 or 2, maybe a handful of people are "cheating." Just like in age group swimming when someone would complain to the coach that someone was cheating on a set, the reply was always "they're only hurting themselves."

This article from masters track talks about how they address the issue, in the form of suspension. Thanks for posting that link, quicksilver. I found this statement by Rex Harvey interesting, but think he got some details wrong: The current system of convicted dopers being given a certain period of suspension from competition does not serve masters athletes well at all. It is well-known that aging beyond a certain age results in a loss of muscle mass at an ever increasing rate.The Age Grading tables (Sheahen style not Repenning style) show this very clearly. So if I dope and increase my muscle mass at any point in my life, I have not only an immediate increase in strength but also a bump-up in my normal aging muscle mass curve. And even if I then completely stop doping for the rest of my life and start the normal muscle loss curve again, I am starting at a higher muscle mass and therefore remain at a relatively higher muscle mass than someone who never doped. And this effect I feel is longer termed than most imagine. It is almost like “once a strength doper, always a strength doper.” ... Are the 2- and 4-year penalties appropriate? I don’t think they are long enough to dissipate the advantage gained. While he's correct that at the point where the athlete stops taking PEDs, s/he will have higher performance in some dimension (oxygen uptake, muscle strength, whatever), the body is going to fairly quickly return to its baseline values. (How "quickly" will depend on which dimension(s) increased.) For instance, someone taking EPO is probably going to return to their "normal" levels in the time it normally takes to replenish your red blood cells. EPO itself will disappear from the bloodstream very quickly, with a half-life of about five hours. If I remember correctly from my college days, red blood cells have a lifespan of about 120 days. So, after stopping EPO treatment, the athlete's hematocrit should be back to normal within a couple months. I believe anabolic steroids work by enhancing recovery of muscles from overload, allowing the athlete to exercise again after a shorter rest, and to exercise at higher levels while still retaining the ability to recover in a reasonable amount of time. There are so many different natural and synthetic anabolic steroids that it's probably impossible to state a precise half-life for them in your system, but they will eventually get metabolized or excreted, and fail to offer positive effects during recovery. (Besides, they and their metabolic byproducts have to disappear from the blood and urine rather quickly so as not to be detected by USADA and the like.) The doping athlete's ability to recover from overload will return to normal, and their muscle mass will as well. This might take longer, as the doping athlete can continue to provide some overload stimulus, but sooner or later the loss of the anabolic steroid's benefits will catch up to the no-longer-doping athlete and s/he will fail to preserve their artificially large muscle mass and/or injure themselves trying to maintain the overload levels they attained while taking drugs. To support my contention that these benefits are short-lived, I offer comment #3 in the Master's Track link from Randy Harris (emphasis mine): When I began my 6 week cycle, I weighed 200 lbs,and my max bench press was 275 from about 2 years of weight lifting. After 6 weeks of the juice, I weighed 220 and my max bench was 330! I was thrilled, but I wanted to stop the drugs and keep what I gained from it. I ate like mad, ingested 200 grams of protein per day, and worked out hard 3 days a week. No matter, I continued to get weaker every workout until My weight had fallen back to 200, and my max bench actually went down to 265 which was 10 lbs lower than my starting max! Just my two cents...

This idea of PED use is distressing … a while back one of our great 70+ year old sprinters stated that 2 masters swimmers admitted to him of taking PED’s to “level the playing field” and then within this thread another discussed admitted PED use of USMS swimmers on a PED site. I spent a couple of hours sweeping thru those sites the other day and recognized 2 names as as probable usms swimmers … distressing With the inability of the world sports authorities to prevent this I doubt we would make a much dent in our problem. It might make us feel better if we did something, maybe a “position” statement in relationship to this issue or even random testing. Our problem is how do we convince current PED users not to use. They are convinced its improving there lives and certainly improving times ( me i’d just like to recover from day to day like the old days). They can ignore the health risks that will come further down the road, they feel good now ! Myself I actually enjoy the struggle, despite my complaining. I love swimming and I will remain a “Natural” swimmer. ( a term i’m borrowing from weight lifters who don’t use ) The previous thread was the discussion that ensued after this SFF Tip forums.usms.org/showthread.php Where Rich Rich Abrahams Commented: "If you're diagnosed with Low T and take testosterone or HGH or any substance on WDAs list and continue to compete, you're probably cheating unless you can get a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUEs)." Andy, I'm glad you brought this up. I know two masters swimmers (both world record holders) who take testosterone. Their justification is that their natural level is low and they need it to "level the playing field." I have told them I strongly disagree. Take it if you want, but then don't compete. It is cheating. Masters Track and Field tests, especially those setting records. I wish Masters Swimming would as well. forums.usms.org/showthread.php Then we had in interesting discussion on Doping that transformed into USRPT forums.usms.org/showthread.php Personally, I think the majority of Masters are clean and swim fair.

I think she was on her "high horse" regarding jack black's blanket comments about "enjoying the struggle" and denouncing people on potentially medically necessary "PEDs" as "convinced it's improving their lives." Obviously, as in the case of jpetyk, many masters would qualify for TUEs. Right. Thank you.

At SC Nationals a few years ago, we observed a younger female swimmer who was obviously "pumped up." We thought she would blow away the competition handily, but the results were surprising. She was pretty average in terms of the competition. So extraordinary muscle mass may not necessarily make a difference.

I think this is an excellent idea on the surface. Drug testing for the majority of us would be an unnecessary waste of money; however, I would hate to see record-holders lose a record to a cheater. Here's the problem, though: For drugs that are typically banned but medically necessary for some Masters swimmers, where do you draw the line as to which drugs should be allowed? :confused: Elainiak there are Therapeutic Use Exemptions for medically necessary drugs.