Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kristi Anderson, 51, tells reaction to USADA suspension

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Kristi Anderson, 51, tells reaction to USADA suspension

    I wrote Kristi, a 51-year-old mountain runner, about her year's suspension after a DHEA positive test at Pikes Peak Marathon. She's a fun runner "bewildered" about the situation. She's not even a USATF member.

    Why should USADA care if she's taking DHEA under doctor's care?

    My Q&A with Kristi (who keeps her sense of humor):
    http://masterstrack.com/2014/12/33461/

    K E N

  • #2
    An interesting article. As a fairly severe asthmatic I am on daily doses of Serevent and Flixotide as well as a regular user of Ventolin. 2 or 3 times a year I am prescribed with a course of Prednisone. I imagine if I was tested by the drug authorities I would be positive for banned drugs.

    As a Master's athlete 60+ I suppose this would jeopardize my ability to compete and display my recently discovered talents in the discus, shot, hammer and weight events. This would be terrible of course as I am now a legitimate threat to winning the NZ national title for junior women (under 16) with my humungous 42.16 with the 1kg.

    Comment


    • #3
      Wow way to go USADA, nailed it, again *eyeroll*

      Comment


      • #4
        The testing was done, apparently, per the organizer of the event. So when they catch someone it shouldn't be shocking. While this woman and other master's athletes would seem to have legit reasons for using banned substances, I'm not sure anyone wishes to get into individualized post test result justification for using said substances.

        Comment


        • #5
          I imagine a large number of master's athletes, especially those in the over 60 age groups would probably fail a drug test.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Tuariki View Post
            I imagine a large number of master's athletes, especially those in the over 60 age groups would probably fail a drug test.
            I still compete and have NEVER been tested (yes, thank you, I HAVE won national medals). I wouldn't fail a test now, but I also would not hesitate to take something my doctor prescribes, USADA or no USADA.
            The sad part is that anabolic steroids are EXACTLY what the doctor COULD prescribe to ANYONE that is getting over a significant muscle injury!
            Not to mention testosterone therapy that many 'menopausal' men get.

            Comment


            • #7
              Interesting article. The part that is scary is where she says, "USADA says they can come to my house now. I feel like I’ve been abducted by the circus.” That's crazy! Unless she enters an event that USADA has jurisdiction over, Kristi could care less about them. If USADA ever comes to her house, I trust she will tell them to put it where the sun don't shine.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by bobguild76 View Post
                Interesting article. The part that is scary is where she says, "USADA says they can come to my house now. I feel like I’ve been abducted by the circus.” That's crazy! Unless she enters an event that USADA has jurisdiction over, Kristi could care less about them. If USADA ever comes to her house, I trust she will tell them to put it where the sun don't shine.
                She is certainly within her legal right to tell them to go to hell. She only has to go along with it if she wants to get unbanned. If she has no intention in competing in sanctioned events in the future, she doesn't have to play by their rules.

                But if she likes competing, at some point that will probably cause her problems, she can't say for sure she'll never want to compete in a sanctioned event again.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Atticus -- question re anabolic steroids for a significant muscle injury. Can you comment further? I had no idea. I have had one significant muscle injury the recovery of which was facilitated by prednisone, but I did not know that anabolics might be prescribed for such injuries. Not trying to argue -- just interested to know more.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Master Po View Post
                    Atticus -- question re anabolic steroids for a significant muscle injury. Can you comment further? I had no idea. I have had one significant muscle injury the recovery of which was facilitated by prednisone, but I did not know that anabolics might be prescribed for such injuries. Not trying to argue -- just interested to know more.
                    To quote good old Wikipedia:
                    "Anabolic steroids were first made in the 1930s, and are now used therapeutically in medicine to stimulate muscle growth and appetite, induce male puberty and treat chronic wasting conditions, such as cancer and AIDS. The American College of Sports Medicine acknowledges that AAS, in the presence of adequate diet, can contribute to increases in body weight, often as lean mass increases and that the gains in muscular strength achieved through high-intensity exercise and proper diet can be additionally increased by the use of AAS in some individuals."

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Yes, but Master Po asked about anabolic steroids. "Good old Wikipedia" says that prednisone is a corticosteroid, not an anabolic steroid. They seem to be different categories of drugs with different effects. I'm not going to bother cutting and pasting from the article.

                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prednisone

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by tandfman View Post
                        Yes, but Master Po asked about anabolic steroids. "Good old Wikipedia" says that prednisone is a corticosteroid, not an anabolic steroid. They seem to be different categories of drugs with different effects. I'm not going to bother cutting and pasting from the article.
                        No, I was just talking about the irony that the #1 PED bad-guy, i.e., ABs, is something INTENDED for therapeutic uses.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I suspect that most of the substances on the banned list have therapeutic uses. I'm not, however, about to spend the time going through the tedious process of checking that out by going down the list substance-by-substance and Googling each one.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by tandfman View Post
                            I suspect that most of the substances on the banned list have therapeutic uses.
                            Thus the existence of a Therapeutic Use Exemption or TUE.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by NotDutra5 View Post
                              Thus the existence of a Therapeutic Use Exemption or TUE.
                              My point being, of course, that if a professional athlete is dependent on his muscles for his livelihood, and he then tears a muscle, which prevents him from earning that livelihood, then his first recourse SHOULD be to seek medical counsel on regenerating that muscle post-haste, anabolic steroids being an excellent course of treatment, so he can get back on the 'job', but we're telling him, "no, you can't do that - good luck, though."
                              As always, it is the people looking to ABUSE the substance that ruins it for everyone. If some is good, LOTS more should be even gooder . . . sigh . . .

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X