benefits of stimulants? [split]


This Forum was created to divert traffic from Current Events at the height of the BALCO scandal. It comes and goes as "needed"; it's back to being locked.

Re: 5 More Jamaican positives [Simpson & Powell big names]

Postby Pego » Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:56 am

Blues wrote:It turned out that the increase in blood pressure from the stimulants had blown a bubble in my ascending aorta.


Let me play psychiatrist for a moment :wink: . Do not feel guilty about causing an aortic aneurysm by drinking stimulants. I bet those drinks did not cause it :D .
Pego
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: 5 More Jamaican positives [Simpson & Powell big names]

Postby Blues » Mon Jul 15, 2013 9:07 am

batonless relay wrote:Though bursting with greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy, and gluttony it seems that my wrath will have to be permanently excised. :lol:

Blues, I only suggest that it be either/or; what is in place is NOT working. And, the calls for the IAAF to do something are silly; this isn't IAAF's call to make unless they decide to secede from WADA/CAS and it's code/rulings. The reason why I can't get on the Pego bandwagon, though I respect his view, is that you're expecting athletes/coaches NOT to self-medicate; it's not going to happen. They're going to over use anything "legal", just like a FEW are doing with Steroids, HGH, etc.

Also, like Pego, I believe we need to STOP ATHLETES FROM USING SUPPLEMENTS. The extent to which they show any positive performance, according to Pego's standard, is negligible and the extent to which those positives continue to damage the reputation (or what's left of it) of track and field is enormous! Why continue to take the risk as a sport. Make Supplements as illegal as steroids, hgh or a false start. But let's stop ******* around with "respect for the athletes rights" and concentrate on the for the right of the sport to exist.


Okay, but what's so hard about athletes having a policy of not taking ANY supplement starting about 4 days prior to a competition? Heck, they can just mark their calendars four days prior to meets and they won't have a problem, and they can still use pre-workout supplements during training up until that point if they feel it necessary.

I'd be curious to know how athletes would vote on the subject, if they had a choice of keeping it the way it is now (banning stimulants in-competition only), or being prohibited from ever using stimulants, to help avoid any inadvertent positives. It's possible that positive tests due to the use of legitimate medications out of competition for valid reasons like sinus, bronchial, and allergy problems might increase if stimulants are banned at all times though. I'm not so sure that that's a better option than having an athlete test positive because he or she forgets not to take a stimulant for at least a few days prior to a competition.
Blues
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: 5 More Jamaican positives [Simpson & Powell big names]

Postby batonless relay » Mon Jul 15, 2013 9:35 am

Blues wrote: Okay, but what's so hard about athletes having a policy of not taking ANY supplement starting about 4 days prior to a competition? Heck, they can just mark their calendars four days prior to meets and they won't have a problem, and they can still use pre-workout supplements during training up until that point if they feel it necessary.

Because eventually you'll have another "Ohurougu" claiming early onset dementia as to why they did it 3.5 days instead of 4. Why get into all of that? Just say you can't use it...there doesn't even have to be a reason. Whatever happened to "because I said so"?
batonless relay
 
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:40 am

Re: 5 More Jamaican positives [Simpson & Powell big names]

Postby tm71 » Mon Jul 15, 2013 11:37 am

Pego wrote:
Blues wrote:It turned out that the increase in blood pressure from the stimulants had blown a bubble in my ascending aorta.


Let me play psychiatrist for a moment :wink: . Do not feel guilty about causing an aortic aneurysm by drinking stimulants. I bet those drinks did not cause it :D .


haha you are trying to do my job ! people believe what they want to believe regardless, but some people are much more suggestible than others especially if they think they can trust you. then again i am getting into work stuff and i am only on my lunch break !
tm71
 
Posts: 2301
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: 5 More Jamaican positives [Simpson & Powell big names]

Postby 26mi235 » Mon Jul 15, 2013 11:40 am

batonless relay wrote: Make Supplements as illegal as steroids, hgh or a false start. But let's stop ******* around with "respect for the athletes rights" and concentrate on the for the right of the sport to exist.


I agree with you up to this point. This point does not follow from the prior argument; one reason is that supplements are not a 'thing' that can be banned. Almost any definition you come up with would have either idiotic implications (no Vitamin D in milk) or allow loopholes that will create a whole new round of essentially the same problems. Also, I suppose that I am too much of a libertarian (did not think I would write that phrase) for such a step. WADA or whomever would probably be sued, likely successfully in some jurisdiction, although not one with the power to do anything, for doing this. Finally, WADA's process would probably include a number of people (i.e., the experts) that would not go along with this policy step.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16318
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: benefits of stimulants? [split]

Postby Pego » Mon Jul 15, 2013 11:44 am

tm71 wrote: people believe what they want to believe regardless


Many do, indeed, but Blues is a highly knowledgeable scientist. I hold him in the highest esteem.
Pego
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: benefits of stimulants? [split]

Postby sjm1368 » Mon Jul 15, 2013 2:33 pm

It would be great if we could perform medical grade studies, but that's not how it works in exercise science research for the most part.

And to say that there are NO studies showing stimulants work, that's ludicrous.

Caffeine- It's a stimulant- tons of studies showing improved performance in wide range of disciplines.
Here;s one on caffeine showing improvement in best sprint time: http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/ijes/vol5/iss1/6/

Amphetamines- GO all the way back to the 1950's for one fo the 1st studies on stimulants and performance (Smith and Beecher, 1959) and they found 4% improvement in weight throw.

Ephedrine- Probably most studied stimulant besides caffeine.
Improved 10k times here: http://hbe.mcgill.ca/docs/bell_mclellan_sabiston.pdf

The problem is in athletics there are a tons of variables. and you have responders/non-responders, dose-response curves that are individual, etc. So add that in with the fact most studies have low numbers (10 if you are lucky) and you get a lot of contrasting info. It's the summation of it all that makes sense.

This was just off a quick search of google scholar.

Most stimulants are one of the few things that work. THat's why they are banned, or tons of people use it (caffeine for example). It works for most people.

Stimulants are CNS modulators for the most part. In endurance or events where fatigue plays a role, it modulates the "reserve capacity".
sjm1368
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Tx

Re: benefits of stimulants? [split]

Postby Pego » Mon Jul 15, 2013 3:29 pm

sjm1368 wrote:It would be great if we could perform medical grade studies, but that's not how it works in exercise science research for the most part.

And to say that there are NO studies showing stimulants work, that's ludicrous.

Caffeine- It's a stimulant- tons of studies showing improved performance in wide range of disciplines.
Here;s one on caffeine showing improvement in best sprint time: http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/ijes/vol5/iss1/6/

Amphetamines- GO all the way back to the 1950's for one fo the 1st studies on stimulants and performance (Smith and Beecher, 1959) and they found 4% improvement in weight throw.

Ephedrine- Probably most studied stimulant besides caffeine.
Improved 10k times here: http://hbe.mcgill.ca/docs/bell_mclellan_sabiston.pdf

The problem is in athletics there are a tons of variables. and you have responders/non-responders, dose-response curves that are individual, etc. So add that in with the fact most studies have low numbers (10 if you are lucky) and you get a lot of contrasting info. It's the summation of it all that makes sense.

This was just off a quick search of google scholar.

Most stimulants are one of the few things that work. THat's why they are banned, or tons of people use it (caffeine for example). It works for most people.

Stimulants are CNS modulators for the most part. In endurance or events where fatigue plays a role, it modulates the "reserve capacity".


These two studies are the first ones I have seen that indicate PED effect of stimulants, one on sprints, one on distance. The first one on caffeine leaves some questions unanswered, but it does show some effect. If these results could be successfully reproduced, it would be the evidence I am looking for.
Pego
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: benefits of stimulants? [split]

Postby cladthin » Mon Jul 15, 2013 4:52 pm

This will probably be uninteresting to some maybe all but I'll tell it anyway. This is in regards to caffeine as a stimulant. The study (Thomas Hoke) took place about 20 years ago and involved determining if and to what degree caffeine ingestion had on a 1RM (1 rep. max.) for the back squat-probably published in the JSCR. Over two weeks we were to attempt a maximum back squat though neither week were we told if we had received the crystal light solution with caffeine or not. The squat was done to parallel or below. These were strictly judged and not to the nsca's definition of parallel. These were done to the point where there was straight line between the knee and the crease of the hip though I was told I was below on both days.

I had such a significant history with caffeine that I thought during week one if I had it in the solution I might not even know it so I did work up to my max for that day. Week two rolled around and within about 3-5' of consuming the drink I definitly knew this was the week I had received the caffeine as I was certainly "wired"!

My squat went up 33 lbs. and I improved by 6.8%. There is little doubt in my mind it made a difference. The results of the study showed, though it was small group as I recall, the caffeine did postively impact performance though I could not tell you to what degree as I've not seen the write-up for that in years-believe it was. While I do believe that maxing the previous week did serve as a learning experience that to a degree did help to set up the higher number the following week, I believe it was a small part of the improvement and the caffeine really carried the day.
cladthin
 
Posts: 1669
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Right there.

Re: benefits of stimulants? [split]

Postby mrbowie » Mon Jul 15, 2013 7:59 pm

FYI, a better case can be made for the use of a tranquilizer than a stimulant for sprinters, because a stimulant can take a runner out of his game, whereas a tranquilizer will allow a runner to relax and allow his speed to come out. This is why the drug of choice among cheaters in equine sports choose Ace, a tranquilizer, rather than a stimulant.
mrbowie
 
Posts: 1474
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Lexington, Kentucky

Re: benefits of stimulants? [split]

Postby gh » Tue Jul 16, 2013 4:41 am

cladthin wrote:......
I had such a significant history with caffeine that I thought during week one if I had it in the solution I might not even know it so I did work up to my max for that day. Week two rolled around and within about 3-5' of consuming the drink I definitly knew this was the week I had received the caffeine as I was certainly "wired"!

My squat went up 33 lbs. and I improved by 6.8%. There is little doubt in my mind it made a difference. ....


classic cause and effect! There is little doubt in my mind that the difference was mental; you "knew" you were going to get a benefit and your brain ran with it.
gh
 
Posts: 46321
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: benefits of stimulants? [split]

Postby cladthin » Tue Jul 16, 2013 5:24 am

gh wrote:
cladthin wrote:......
I had such a significant history with caffeine that I thought during week one if I had it in the solution I might not even know it so I did work up to my max for that day. Week two rolled around and within about 3-5' of consuming the drink I definitly knew this was the week I had received the caffeine as I was certainly "wired"!

My squat went up 33 lbs. and I improved by 6.8%. There is little doubt in my mind it made a difference. ....


classic cause and effect! There is little doubt in my mind that the difference was mental; you "knew" you were going to get a benefit and your brain ran with it.


While I knew I was jittery, wired, I did not know to expect a benefit as I'd never lifted so heavy in my life as the previous week was also a p.r.
cladthin
 
Posts: 1669
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Right there.

Re: benefits of stimulants? [split]

Postby Pego » Tue Jul 16, 2013 7:06 am

mrbowie wrote:FYI, a better case can be made for the use of a tranquilizer than a stimulant for sprinters, because a stimulant can take a runner out of his game, whereas a tranquilizer will allow a runner to relax and allow his speed to come out. This is why the drug of choice among cheaters in equine sports choose Ace, a tranquilizer, rather than a stimulant.


This reinforces my skepticism of stimulants' PED effects. While humans are highly susceptible to a placebo effect, the horses are fairly immune to it.
Pego
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: benefits of stimulants? [split]

Postby cladthin » Tue Jul 16, 2013 7:19 am

I think there have been some caffeine studies done with respect to the influence they might have on endurance performance. One I was told of yesterday was apparently a double blind experiment done with collegiate CC runners that showed caffeine did have a performance boost though it was mentioned it a fairly small experiment in terms of subjects.

One I can also recall (some of you guys with access to a lot of research journals online could probably find) which showed the positive effects with cyclists and endurance performance. I think part of the theory as to the reason caffeine might be beneficial was due to the mobilization of free fatty acids as substrate though possibly it had a neural stim. effect as well. It's been a long time since I reviewed some of these.
cladthin
 
Posts: 1669
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Right there.

Re: 5 More Jamaican positives [Simpson & Powell big names]

Postby Blues » Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:19 am

Pego wrote:
Blues wrote:It turned out that the increase in blood pressure from the stimulants had blown a bubble in my ascending aorta.


Let me play psychiatrist for a moment :wink: . Do not feel guilty about causing an aortic aneurysm by drinking stimulants. I bet those drinks did not cause it :D .


What happened to me was unusual, but it's the consensus of experts that it did involve the caffeine and energy drinks to some extent and was probably a perfect storm. The onset involved a sudden, severe searing electrical shock type chest pain that lasted for about 10 seconds, followed by a localized moderate throbbing pain with each pulse, that persisted. PVCs suddenly occurred every few beats as well, and persisted. Once that happened, there was routine increased localized throbbing pain upon significant exertion or exercise which my aortic surgeon later attributed to the aneurysm stretching as BP increased, in part based on the location of the pain. Upon presentation to the cardiologist a few days after the incident happened at work, my BP, both systolic and diastolic, was elevated for the first time in my life as well and remained elevated (but controlled with metoprolol, no longer required) until I had surgery. Stress test preceded aneurysm diagnosis and was normal with no blockages.

Anyway, the combination of about 800 to 1000mg of caffeine over 2 to 3 hours immediately prior to the symptoms beginning, which was the most I'd ever consumed in that time period, along with any other ingredients that the energy drinks included, along with a normal 60mg dose of pseudoephedrine for nasal congestion due to allergies, along with an unusually hectic and stressful work shift that night, combined with the fact that I was already predisposed due to having a very efficient but still bicuspid aortic valve along with a father who also had an ascending aortic aneurysm, seems to have led to the compromise of a portion of the aortic wall. (That might be the longest run-on sentence in history.) Heavy caffeine use at work but at lower dosage over the previous few months may or may not have played a part too. I know that's not the way aneurysms generally occur, but my case was considered rare.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it, despite any new psychiatric diagnoses you guys choose to add to my chart... :wink:
Last edited by Blues on Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
Blues
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: benefits of stimulants? [split]

Postby Pego » Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:34 am

Blues wrote:That's my story and I'm sticking to it, despite any new psychiatric diagnoses you guys choose to add to my chart


I wish nobody had more psychopathology than you do 8-) .
Pego
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Previous

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest